this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
203 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

58012 readers
2962 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
203
Oxford scientists are generating solar power without panels (electrek.co)
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Sounds like it's still a solar cell though, they just figured out how to make it thinner and flexible. By the time you stack them into a cell, is there really any difference?

"By stacking multiple light-absorbing layers into one solar cell (known as a multi-junction approach), a wider range of the light spectrum is harnessed, allowing more power to be generated from the same amount of sunlight.

This thin-film perovskite material has been independently certified by Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) to deliver over 27% energy efficiency. It matches the performance of traditional, single-layer silicon PV for the first time."

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Wow though - 27% is no small feat

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For sure. Coat buildings with this and we all win

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

And if they coat the insides too we’ll have free energy forever!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

27% is just matching the efficiency of current solar panels though.

So unless it's significantly cheaper there may not be a point here.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

One of the main advantages here is that this can be applied to almost any surface because of how thin it is.

From the article:

We can envisage perovskite coatings being applied to broader types of surfaces to generate cheap solar power, such as the roofs of cars and buildings and even the backs of mobile phones. If more solar energy can be generated in this way, we can foresee less need in the longer term to use silicon panels or build more and more solar farms.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Back of a cell phone won't work because people put those into bulky cases.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Dang, too bad there aren't insanely smart engineers who have figured out how to make your little hand rectangle go brrrrr to figure out a way to make it work.

[–] shortwavesurfer 3 points 1 month ago

So put it on the case with one of those wireless charging coils in the case, or at absolute worst, a tiny, tiny connector that plugs into your USB-C port

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But if you have to stack the layers to get the 27% efficiency then it's no longer thin. :)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It might not be as thin as before, but is several microns of thickness not thin?
It was nice if they gave more details about exactly how thick it is at 27% efficiency though.
I'll look around to see if I can find more information about it.

Edit: And by the way, I'm actually not aware of any 27% solar panels currently in production.
Other than the ones Ofxord PV has recently begun manufacturing (established by the same Prof. leading this research).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Just quoting the article:

"from around 6% to over 27%, close to the limits of what single-layer photovoltaics can achieve today."

But I guess it depends too on how many layers we're talking about which isn't specified.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You're misrepresenting what they say:

During just five years of experimenting with our stacking or multi-junction approach, we have raised power conversion efficiency from around 6% to over 27%, close to the limits of what single-layer photovoltaics can achieve today.

We believe that, over time, this approach could enable the photovoltaic devices to achieve far greater efficiencies, exceeding 45%.

"6% to over 27%" isn't the range of what they can achieve now. 6% efficiency was where the technology was at 5 years ago, and now they get 27%.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

27% is the highest PV efficiency we have achieved with our first round of solar-electric generation. It has taken generations of reiteration to get there.

It's a really impressive feat for this new material to start at 27% efficiency. Of course it has drawbacks but everything does. I wonder if we'll be using perovskite based solar in 80 years

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you can lay flexible material directly onto the roof, perhaps it can just be the roof, replacing traditional shingles.

It'll be expensive at first until it's in wide production, assuming it gets that far without a big flaw being found.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Like Tesla's solar roof? Those replace shingles as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There is always a catch.

in this case I'll bet its the price

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Or a brand new set of DNA altering forever chemicals.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hooray!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Does that mean we'll all become the Flash?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

I’m guessing it’s more likely to be “the Flesh”.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Another perovskite hype piece. You'll know that they've got something that's commercially viable once they're making these sorts of efficiency claims and not omitting information about cell degradation.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

From the article:

Oxford PV, a UK company spun out of Oxford University Physics in 2010 by Snaith to commercialize perovskite photovoltaics, recently started large-scale manufacturing of perovskite photovoltaics at its factory in Brandenburg-an-der-Havel, near Berlin, Germany. It’s the world’s first volume manufacturing line for “perovskite-on-silicon” tandem solar cells.

https://doi.org/10.1039/D2SE00096B

By adapting the formulation and synthesis of the perovskite and the cell design and encapsulation optimization, Oxford PV succeeded in mitigating stability-related deficits and aims at providing future buyers of their modules with the industry-standard 25 year performance guarantee

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Oxford PV this year no?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We could generate solar power before we even had solar panels. You just used the sun to heat up water. Solar panels made solar power generation more effective.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nah, that's just solar collection.

The generation you're talking about happens in the star.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Well, that's older than water!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

This will bring new meaning to the idea of a burner bag.