What do you think? Is perovskite going to take over the market? If you liked this video, be sure to check out The Future of Solid State Wind Energy - No More Blades: th-cam.com/video/nNp21zTeCDc/w-d-xo.html
If they are sold at 50% less per watt with a 10 year warranty why wouldn't you buy them? The manufacturer could replace them twice since they cost 8 times less.
I worked on this technology in my first masters a couple of years ago, so of course I'm biased but I believe the encapsulation to protect from all kinds of degradation will be critical and as you say because of their less intensive processing they will be the future once the kinks are ironed out (not literally). Recyclability may be a more difficult problem but again there is headway being made on that front then toxicity and waste become much less of a problem. On the other hand with much cheaper materials there could be less incentive to recycle as there won't be much profit made from it. Perhaps we'll need government support of it.
@@orangehatmusic225 The "carbon footprint" of the manufacturing process refers to how much CO2 is put into the air by the manufacturing process, not how much carbon is in the product itself. In other words, how much energy does it take to make it. And for the most part (for now), that energy is comming from oil or natural gas, or coal. If we want to prevent (or mitigate) global warming, then we need to care about how much CO2 we put into the air.
Some questions arise: a) what the 100% efficiency stands for? All photons spectrum? Only visible light? b) What percentage of all earth surface radiation by sun corresponds to visible light and/or that 100% efficiency? c) All that said.. can we expect to see multilayered perovskite cells that has efficiency higher that 100%? That would be cool.
@@RudeAlert If it's any consolation the tech is going commercial in rather short timelines. Keep an eye on graphene, we finally have some useful production methods, and it's really starting to go into everything where the use of lower quality sheets are useable. Once we can make mass consistent and pure sheets of the stuff it's game over for the norm in almost every industry. Till then it's good for mixing with other materials to add electrical condutivity, strength, and corrosion resistance.
I’m speechless with how much research, analysis and supporting material you manage to cram into each episode and puns too. Fabulous channel. Thanks Matt.
I've been looking forward to this tech for many years, now. One of the first articles I read about it, was how caffeine was included in the construction process, as a half joke, but actually made the structure better.
@@esecallum There are literally dozens of products to make your windows non-stick on the market right now. Where have you been looking? Have you tried the internet?
@@filonin2 really? why so many window cleaners everywhere. the products you mention are so over priced and unreliable or wear off... this new solar panel is the same line of crap.
@@esecallum All non-stick window coatings don't work and are overpriced? Sounds like someone needs some mental professional attention. You're wrong, be quiet.
Another great video. In engineering, every choice is a compromise. The real science is in finding the balance between the compromises. You do a superb job of outlining the positives, negatives, and possible improvements.
We self installed 10.5KW on all of our buildings on our property. We did this over the past 4 years. I was banking on better panels for when its time to replace these in the next 20 years. These look promising
@@SamBassComedy It cost us out of pocket $8,000 roughly. The federal government and state govt refunded us 80% of the cost so around $1600 out of pocket. We have EVs so that is primarily where the electricity goes. In 4 years we have made just shy of 8 Megawatts of power. We staggered our installation (only doing 1 roof on our property a year). 8 Megawatts of power is around 1120 worth of electricity generated. We are almost ready to break even, sometime in the next year or so we will be free and clear of the initial costs.
We're sailors of a small cruising sailboat, so are off-the-grid much of the time. Wind provides direct propulsion some part of the time we are moving, while a 12 Watt Solar cell provides/most of our electricity. Perovskite seems very interesting as we *could* go for electric propulsion with more powerful solar cells. Thus perovskite formulations sound pretty interesting.I've found that cruisers, particularly sailors, are early-adopters; of solar and windmills for energy production, as primitive as the current windmills for 'individual' use currently are.
This tech looks like it would be an interesting way to reach a “temporary” or “inexpensive” market for field trials; phone chargers, eco-friendly RV enthusiasts, or young homeowners wanting to try solar for the first time without a massive investment. This leaves the long term/industrial market to the long lasting silicon panels while they work out some of the issues.
Depends. If longevity came to say 30% of the longevity and stayed at 5% of the cost, it could be worth it for long-term/industrial uses. The combined increase in efficiency plus cost factor would make it economically attractive even with replacement.
In solar systems the solar panel cost is already quite low, the installation is actually a large part of the cost, roof work is expensive generally. In europe one can buy a 380W EU made solar panel for 150€(almasolar i'm solar panel)
This sounds more like a scheme to make junk solar panels that won't last and will just consume the market while they kill off silicon solar panels. If something is break easily and can make a profit from it companies will choose that as that will be a better source of income vs a one and done deal.
I bought a solar panel for my van recently and it blows my mind! I’ve got a 50a portable battery with an inverter built in. I haven’t had to pay for electricity all year - charges my phone, laptop, internet and heated blankets as well as a fridge. Solar is fucking amazing. This video has me excited!
@@rogerstarkey5390 Well, that takes care of the silicon replacement. But what about the rest of the panel? If this becomes as cheap as that, then the market will balloon, and then there will end up being a replacement market like for light bulbs. As if we need even more waste due to short life span stuff.
@@rogerstarkey5390 How thin the material is, adversely affects recycling. For example, aluminium is very recyclable but the aluminium in mylar is so thin that it is not practical to recycle the aluminium in mylar hence mylar products such as juice boxes are downgraded as aggregate in plastic structures rather than recycled.
I live in Australia, and I've been off grid with solar PV for 30 years. If perovskite has a durability problem, the key is to limit its exposure to UV, to peek gathering times. The shade screen application solves this problem. But a simple motorised cover blind does also.
Thank you to everyone that has made solar power possible, and to those who continue to make it even better as each month passes. And thank you Matt for this excellently-made video.
Very interesting , we clean solar farms in uk for nearly 7 years now using a sun brush machine it’s very reliable , our biggest problem is the layout of the farms the access at the ends of panel runs etc , also the layout of the tables the most efficient set up is 4 high laying down thats about 4 to 5 mtr panel height this means a brush that needs a lighter tractor to carry it , this would translate to the ability to multi wash more than twice a year at conceivably single pence per panel opening up higher out put all year round ,some companies do already wash twice others don’t think wash is needed , there’s a lot to do particularly outing the early investors who refuse to wash, we have seen farms in very bad state of operation, on other hand many are getting there act together who value our reports after each wash and much appreciate there efforts to put things right 👍👍👍 to them it’s not all bad .
Even if they lasted 10 years instead of 20, if their carbon footprint (sum of greater efficiency and less impact during production ) was smaller than the silicon panels it would already be a victory.
I think the most important advancements in solar technology are those that make them easier to make with more common elements especially moving away from lanthanides and difficult engineering processes that require large specialized factories like places that make silicon wafers. The easier they are to make, the more useful and adoptable they will be even if they don't last as long. I think non-poisonous will also be a necessity, so no lead...
Good intro on it. Regardless of what types, one of the larger expressed arguments against solar panels is the end of life treatment, fears of toxic waste - where it's going to go, water tables etc... maybe another video to make centers on the recycling of solar panels, potential mechanisms to do it high and low volumes, at low costs etc as part of the total life cycle. Same issue with batteries, which seem further ahead right now with companies like Redwood Materials and Li-cycle well into the game. Somehow, there needs to be a collection mechanism that bundles them up in a way that they can fill railroad cars or trucks with them and take to designated sites for reduction to primary materials again. I'd like to hear who is planning for an going after that sort of issue, what they expect to see as recovery and lost in process. thx.
Even with a shorter lifespan sounds like they could be more cost-effective relatively soon for situations like solar farms where replacing panels would be a lot easier than say having panels either on a roof or part of the roof. I wonder how recyclable the panels will be?
@Jamie problem is you are adding more carbon foot print by transporting them so they can be recycled or tossed out. Recycling would help more but I can bet they will not be recyclable and will just add to the trash heaps.
@@fasddfadfgasdgs these materials our pulled OUT of the ground, there is zero harm in returning them to said ground. You are right about recycling being useless. ALL recycling is a scam. 90% of materials create more carbon output in their recycling process than they "save". Responsible disposal is INFINITELY better than recycling in almost all cases.
@@williameldridge9382 Depends very much on what you mean by to the ground. Soil and solid rock are two different things. And you can't dig a hole in rock and seamlessly seal it off in the same manner it was originally.
Matt - it’s a pity you failed to understand what is trully going on regarding perovskites and the factory in Poland. The girl you see at the factory opening ceremony (Olga Malinkiewicz) is a Polish scientist and a shareholder and founder of Saule - she made the breakthrough possible for perovskites to be produced commercially and Saule signed a contract with her to produce perovskites en masse - the condition was that the factory is built in Poland. Fixed it for you! Also first buildings in Warsaw and Lublin have been equipped with perovskites commercially - they can produce energy regardless of the angle that the sun is shining at them so they are much better than anything we’ve known and also as they are fully transparent - can be applied to windows of modern skyscrapers!
Valid point! Can’t argue that. Although the possibility of efficient cells could open more opportunities where current cells are useless. Like on vehicles?
Matt, EXCELLENT video. I´m a metallurgist and appreciate all of this incredible information in all its splendor. Just diminishing the cost to a fraction of the silicon SPs will ditch the fact of not being so durable. Numbers will talk here. I believe that, indeed, there is a market for this, and a huge one. I´d love some of the manufacturers send me some of their products to test them in real world conditions in our extreme weather, with 10 Celsius degrees of temperature differential between night and day, 85% humidity 24/7 and 12 hours of sunlight.
“The problem is that in most of the halide perovskites lead can dissolve in water. This water solubility and solubility in other solvents is actually a great advantage, as it makes building perovskite solar panels simpler and inexpensive -- another perk along with their performance. But the water solubility of lead can become a real environmental and health hazard when the panel breaks or gets wet, e.g. when it rains.”
Sure lead CAN dissolve in water. You CAN be killed jumping into traffic, but- just don't DO it! The safety factor IS a controllable variable. starting with- you'll notice plumbers no longer melt lead over gasoline blow torches. ( I plumb AND have three). ;-)
I actually work with some perovskite cells, in their native state they are stupidly hard to work with because they are extremely fragile and does not stick to anything well. Spotweld cracks it, solder comes right off. The pure forms are actually available relatively cheaply (under 100USD for a stack of 50 10cm x 5cm rectangles) even on e-bay but at least 80% will have fracture on arrival. These have a GREAT potential but as you mentioned, very few companies are packaging them but at a huge drop in efficiency. Right now the packaging is the biggest issue. Also one of the craziest advantage of perovskite cell is that it works fairly well when the piece is broken.
Matt it would be very interesting to determine the lifetime costs (says 25 years) of using any of these solar products to determine the tipping points of when it is more cost-effective to either stay the course with a given technology or switch to another. TOC is typically the holy grail in mass adoption. Thank you for providing a quality insight/education in every video.
Perovskite Solar Cells certainly have potential to have a huge impact. If the cost can be reduced significantly, then this opens up the market for a lot of people that can't afford solar today. Broader adoption is the best tech driver. It also appears to have a greater practical use model (solar glass, paint, ...) creating new opportunities.
It would be great if we can get organic/plastic solar cells to a competitive level with the other types. The best reason to pursue the organic cells over the other is the ease of recycling it, as you can likely just melt or thermally degrade it instead of needing to treat it like electronic waste.
Considering this can be "printed" I wonder if we could coat the outside of everyday objects like phones, laptops, planes, cars, etc, and then cover them with some kind of clear coat. Sure, maybe it will not last the entire life of a car, but maybe it would be a useful feature of more "disposable" electronics.
Phones are often in someone's pocket and laptops are almost exclusively used inside. So I don't think it would be a good use of resources there. Cars could possibly be efficient enough, but the efficiency needs to go up more to make it a viable option. I think planes may be a good place to put them since they are generally outside. I'm not sure how they can make it safe enough from an overcharging point of view. I'm not ruling out the idea of coating everyday objects with these solar cells. But I think it would be more efficient to put them in places where they will generate power whenever there's enough light. And with better batteries in the future and more wireless charging I don't think that it would make much sense to coat everyday objects in these cells. But I don't mind if I'm proven wrong 😊
@@AnimilesYT yeah but I'd still like to have that option. Imagine you're stranded in the middle of nowhere, having a device that would charge itself by the sun would be useful.
Great overview, first i've heard of Perovskite, as a current solar home owner, very interested in lower cost, higher performane system to motivate others to adopt
Thank you for the information! I have been waiting on true multi spectrum solar cells for a long time, as had my brother (God rest his soul). Applying Perovskite solar shingles to every rooftop in America would be an option. With each cell having the ability to be replaced would be key (Or at least small segments), but only if we can keep the efficiency up over 80% for 20 years and the cost fairly low. It would also bring a much needed refresh to a trade craft that is starting to suffer here in the U.S
Welll. Very cool I think tech that directly harvests solar energy into electricity has a constant issue, it always suffers from UV damage and electron migration ect, so a thin film tech like perovskite could see more widespread use even with a reduced lifespan because it can be easier to replace, becoming a simple chore done every few years with proper engineering. Something like a roller system with a stabilized paper leader just tape the new roll on, and crank the rollers till the old roll is off. And that can give it an large market advantage if the costs are low enough and if there is a core trade in to further reduce costs and reclaim the gold used. So perhaps it is far to soon to tell the future but in any future it seems this tech has a future at least in some applications.
I love how you tell us that perovskite solar cells will be great, then you tell us about how there are tons of drawbacks and we're years away from seeing useful results!
Our company specializes in R & D and production of perovskite materials. From the current industrial production, perovskite materials such as MAPbI3, FAPbI3, CsPbBr3, etc. are cheaper than silicon. Perovskite solar energy is an ideal new energy
You are talking over my head but thank you for introducing me to this subject. This awareness means that I will learn enough to value the use of these panels and that is the start to save our world!
an update on this technology, they manage to use tape like material to keep leakage of lead to beyond 99.9% retention. It would still be a problem over time but they are getting there. They have also achieved almost 30% efficiency for the next generation so perovskite might not be so far from commercial break now.
Reminded me of sputtered thin film technology for hard drives, though obviously very different technologies. Well researched and produced video. Thank you.
IMHO increased performance, more than a decrease in overall cost will prove to be the tipping point at which perovskite completely replaces silicon as the primary component in solar cells. When it comes to conductivity and conversion, I feel as though silicon has reached it's ceiling, whereas perovskite might still have room to grow.
With such thin structures, I could see this having applications in aerospace. You could basically paint or laminate this onto the top side of the many electric aircraft that are under development. While it likely would not achieve a power balance, it would extend the range of these aircraft.
A Japanese group put out a study they did on some perovskite cells that they exposed to a radiation source. They were trying to replicate the effects of long term radiation exposure similar to high orbit space flight. The Perovskite outperformed Silicon by a significant margin. I think we are likely to see these cells used on satellites before they see wide adoption on planes.
Starter solar panels for RVs, applications where installation is not costly or difficult, then if they are cheap enough, they can be switched out when their efficiency drops to low. Then there's portable panels for solar generators. I can definitely see a market.
The challenges and limitations listed in this video remind me a lot of early lithium batteries, but without the high cost. I remember the concerns of technicians (including myself) when presented with the first LiIon laptop batteries and their properties. Most of us were skeptical. Now, lithium dominates the battery market. Of course, I also remember the technologies that didn't work so well. NiCd, for example. In short... maybe perovskite could take over, if only for niche purposes like flexible panels, transparency or high efficiency applications. If not this, then probably some other technology. Between the plateau of silicone solar cells and the increasing demand for green energy the need for better solar tech is great, and nothing drives innovation like need.
The efficiency that matters is Watts/$. Watt/Msquare does feed into that, especially in places where the price of real estate is extremely high (like inside a payload fairing on orbital launch vehicle), so anything that can get a few more Watts out of a given area is likely to find a niche. Whether it takes over broader market remains to be seen.
You must also consider the cost of the supporting technology: the motorised frame that the panel mounts into, the alternator and power regulators. A solar panel that generated 2x the power at 2x the price would be a good investment.
In terms of mass adoption by homeowners? Definitely. Higher Watts/$ means faster return on investment. For more complex arrangements, such as giant fields of solar panels that track the sun? The added investment of the equipment and the land probably do push the balance more in favour of higher watts/m^2 It's still going to be a balance of course
@@alsmith20000 Mounting and tracking hardware does become more cost efficient with a higher efficiency panel, so even if the cost goes up slightly more than the efficiency, the savings down the chain might make it worthwhile. Life cycle costs also come into play, so we are going to need to calculate levelized cost for the whole stack as well. Regardless, it is good to see more promising solar technologies take steps towards real world applications, and we will find out where it is or is not more cost effective.
@@alsmith20000 Incorrect... 2x the power at 2x the price is a wash from an investment perspective. You would need 2x the power at less than 2x the price in order to realize any cost savings. For instance, if perovskite cells last half as long, but cost 1/4th as much as Silicon then you would collect 2x the power for the same costs.
@@jeremygoodall7799 I think the point has been missed here. The solar panel itself is only a component of the overall solar installation. I think that there is also a difference in terminology. Power is the rate of change of energy but I believe you've used it as total lifetime electrical energy generated. You are of course right to consider he longevity as this affects the total energy that the panels absorb. In any case, the current short life time of these panels does seem to be an important factor, preventing them from being rolled out en-mass.
The inventor of modern technology for the production of flexible photovoltaic cells based on perovskites is Polish physicist Olga Malinkiewicz. The Polish company Saule Technologies, in May in Wrocław, launched the first factory of these panels.:)
@@rogerstarkey5390 2040. Since I became an engineer in the early ‘80s, fusion unfortunately has always been 20 years away for the big breakthrough. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hoping for fusion.
@@glasshalffull8625 with the recent breakthroughs it is possible it is actually now within 2 decades until the first test that actually produces more than it consumes but i still don't exactly have a lot of hope to see any real production plants within the next 2 decades let alone fusion gaining enough of a share in power generation to make a difference when it still counts What we really need to do is invest heavily into the technologies we already have to displace coal oil and natural gas now as fast as possible fission might not be perfect but we already have it today and know how to make it more or less safe, we really need to get more nuclear fission plants operational instead of holding out for fusion coming soon™ And of course, expanding solar wind and geothermal where applicable
I still think the biggest holdback for solar is not being able to produce more power than you need at the homeowner level. Utility companies only allow you to produce as much as you typically consume. I think more people would be on board with solar if there was a fixed payback price for energy produced above what a typical home uses. The payback period for the initial investment would go down and people would try to be more conservative with energy usage if they could make money back. The system we have now is causing people to want to be independent of the grid with battery banks and triple power inverters. Utility companies need to focus on energy storage instead of putting caps on energy produced. Make better use of the extra energy produced during the day like producing green hydrogen or running more seawater Desalination plants with green energy.
Those machines for separating valuable materials from electronic waste already exist. They use mechanical force, and shaker decks, and water with additives, magnets, and all kind of different methods to separate the materials. They crush and mill everything to a fine powder, and while traveling through the machine various processes separate the materials in various stages. For example they can separate the lighter particles from the heavier particles by using a solution of water with soap that attaches to the lighter particles and that makes the lighter particles float, and then they skim of the lighter particles, and the heavier particles move on to the next process, and so on. It is one machine that does all the separation until all the various materials are separated from each other as much as possible. They do that because on average they can recover more gold out of one ton of E waste compared to a ton of gold ore. And then there is also the other valuable materials that are recovered from the E waste. Such as platinum and other precious metals, but also copper and less valuable materials, but that are still useful and profitable. And yes that machine consumes a lot of energy, but compared to the energy that is used to mine and refine new materials it is absolutely only a fraction of the total energy that is used for mining and refining new materials.
I know that a Duch company is very good at building these machines, but it is not a wide spread knowledge, because they don't really want to show how those machines work, because they don't want too many people to know that E waste is actually a very valuable product. I once watched a documentary about recycling E waste, and they even stated that at some point in time there will be so much E waste on a yearly bases that for some materials it will no longer be needed to mine for it in nature, if we make the processes that makes it possible to recover the valuable materials as efficient as possible with an infrastructure that makes it possible to do that. Meaning that it should be easy for people to offer their broken products to a recycling station, and so on. In my country you can offer your broken product to the delivery guy that brings you the new device that you bought online. Given the fact that it is a similar device. So if your TV is broken and you buy a new one they take your old TV if you want that. It is not obligated for the consumer to do that, but it is a service, and the delivery guy is obligated to offer that service.
Standard silicon panels are already pretty cheap. I have a 410 Wp panel right here for around 140 US. It sure is a nice idea when that cost could drop to say 80 US. But these panels should last about 20 years so it's not really that big of a deal anymore. I think for most people installation costs are the major factor. I believe cheap local energy storage will be the next biggest advancement with solar. When you can store the energy from your own panels and use it at night the grid stops being a limiting factor. Energy grids are already suffering from capacity limits. Cheap long lasting batteries can overcome this problem. Perovskite can still be great for people who don't have a lot of space to put panels. When you have plenty of space however a panel's efficiency doesn't matter much. Because then you don't install a certain surface of panels but a combined number of Watts (peak) to cover your daily energy needs.
I think it needs 20 year warrenty, with it being like teslas roof. So that the barrier to entry is less for a great roof. That and mechaninical connections instead of wires. So it can be a slide on then braced. A standard size like shingles is vital.
Depends on who is using it, and whether it is integral to a structure. In a dedicated solar farm switching out every module every 2 years could easily be viable if the cost is low enough and they are designed to make the job easy. Even if they were roof mounted, switching them out could be viable. If you have to tear off the whole roof, not so much. I'm not a fan of the window idea for that reason too, but replacing the blinds every 2 years wouldn't be that big a deal. Either way, I think the biggest barrier currently is the lack of good energy storage, not the difficulty of collection. The next barrier is the cost of the inverters to get solar energy to the grid. Even if the cells themselves were free, it would only reduce the cost of a system by 50% because the electronics are already half the cost.
If it ends up 1/4th the cost, a five year warranty would be plenty. Such a thing would be great for self-financing installs. Every five years get more, and continue to monitor where the old ones aren't providing value.
My undergraduate thesis study was about "Simulation study of Perovskite-Perovskite tandem junction solar cell". Soon it will be publish in a journal. Perovskite solar cell has potential but the only major problem is it’s stability.
Should be interesting to see where this goes in the near future. The longevity of the cell is going to be the big hurdle, no matter the cost as man hours in installation and replacement are a big concern.
It depends. If the cost is 10x less and the longevity is 10 years instead of 25 years then the tech is still viable. Especially that this market is still developing and in 10 years you may want to switch to another or this improved tech for even better results anyway.
I want to hear about solar cells that will work in low light or cloudy conditions, also moonlight and also solar cells that can gather energy from radio waves.
Okay, so standard solar cells (silicon) practically require silver (Ag). On the other hand, the perovskite solar cell requires gold (Au). Nothing is easy.
@@rogerstarkey5390 commercial solar in eu including everything (mounts, inverters, transformer) is about 0.7$ / watt. Even lower if talking Gigawatt scale. So basically cost per watt just for the panels is around 0.50$
Tech industry starting to feel like the gaming industry; "This game is gonna be really super cool we promise, but its still in alpha/beta/early access and wont be available for 2 years from whenever you see this message even if you see it 2 years after its posted"
As far as I know, you can get up to 40% performance of a solar cell by using a "micro-pyramid patterned surface". This is applicable to several materials
I think videos like this. Personal Solar projects. Commercial Solar projects etc will also play an important role in better and less expensive technologies for producing electricity. Keep the video coming you're making a difference.
I saw a video on this topic about 4 years ago. The issues they faced were the same as you discribed here so its good to see that progress toward developing efficiencies and stability for long term energy conversion. Im not scientificie but the cost of this tech compared to present systems is what makes it appealing and perovskite can be found everywhere.
We should definitely review this technology again in 5-10 years, while some sales as well as further financial investment provide increased R&D to improve upon the technology. Maybe it will be ready for primetime by then.
THANK YOU for Posting. THANK YOU for being so technologically astute. I applaud you on learning and teaching at the high level you are !!! My comment: Have they tried sandwiching the Perovskite material inside two layers of PlexiGlass. NO air in there. So when the material flexes, so does the plexiglass. The plexiglass is coated with the backing AND the Perovskite layer and plexiglass layered on turning the whole unit into ONE PIECE, with 2 color-coded insulated wires coming out at a corner. This SHOULD eliminate cold, hot, hail & shifting damage & degradation.
Matt, thank you for all your videos. You are the source of all the info I want on leading tech, particularly with your overlying concern for the environment. I love this channel!!
these videos are awesome. wonderful insight. i find that the overly cautious fear of lead as an element in any paticular product a bit paranoid. its not going to harm you unless you enjoy licking your solar panels as a hobby.
I worked with pervoskite solar cells in a lab for a while. What came out of my experience is that it's dirty, unstable, the reproducibility is very low. In my opinion this material is the proof that it's no longer the pure need to know that is leading research, but fashion trends. It does look good on the paper, I admit, but I just wish we spent as much money on decreasing consumption than in new energy sources. It would be easy : by stopping designing items with high-tech unecessary features and come back to our good old fridges that are also our shrinks and coffee makes, we would save money and energy. No need of other energy sources if we stop consuming it like it's abundant.
Won't compare much to the billions of up-and-coming middle class in India and China by simply trying to conserve a bit. Nothing wrong with that, but we need real breakthrough solutions.
Let's put solar panels on every home, business and covered parking rooftop and switch to electric vehicles making nearly everything we do solar powered while completely decentralizing our power supply and empowering everyone as power generation owners. Solar power is CHEAPER and electric vehicles are soon to be CHEAPER to make and already are considerably CHEAPER to maintain and operate, especially if charged from your own solar power. A 3-5 year ROI (return on investment) for a solar array that will generate power for decades is a no-brainer and the panels can even be made locally too. #EndFossilFuels #SwitchToSolar #SwitchToElectric #GreenNewDeal #EmpowerEveryone
The math does not add up! Solar panels will not be efficient enough to charge a car and power a air conditioner. Its just physics. Solar has a place, but it is not for major power gird energy, well at least in most States or places around the world. There are places that Solar will work, but those places are small compared to the rest of the world. Nuclear is the only real option other than coal for powering the electric grid. All those wind farms are a drop in the bucket compared to what a Nuclear plant can do... It is just political now... If we get the fusion reactor to work, ALL OTHER ENERGY SOURCES ARE USELESS!!!
@Sod White We have to end citizens united, get ALL money out from controlling our politicians and switch to a ranked choice popular vote for an actual democracy of, by, and for the people. #DEMEXIT #StillSandersPlatform #TooFarLeft Education is a good investment from an individual, family, community or national perspective and tuition free education will reduce the burden from the root on our medical expenses too for example. Healthcare for all is actually CHEAPER with the insurance industry off of the table along with most of the time lost due to billing among many other reasons. A universal basic income (UBI) is CHEAPER than all of the thousands of individual federal, state and local social safety net programs including things like Social Security and unemployment insurance, etc with all of their budgets, overhead expenses and inefficiencies eliminating the humiliating need for people to lose time to prove their poverty to qualify for aid. Internet for all is a great and necessary investment to give everyone the opportunity to study, search for work, work remotely, etc online. Solar power is CHEAPER and electric vehicles are soon to be CHEAPER to make and already are considerably CHEAPER to maintain and operate, especially if charged from your own solar power. What do you think will happen to crime rates, peace and equality in general after we launch universal healthcare, a universal basic income, universal education and internet for all, raising the starting point of capitalism from zero, we’ll let you die with no money, to a level of life with dignity, reducing societal daily fears on a massive scale and freeing us to welcome the automation revolution with open arms rather than with fear and great harm? 😃 #EqualityMovement #BLM Call me overly positive, but I think we’re leaving the era of ‘greed is good’ and celebrating wealth and entering an #EraOfAltruism and equality. Let’s #AutomateEverything and #SkipToAbundance.
@@johnjay6370 Oh grow up you ridiculous fossil fuels TROLL!! Of course most homes can go 100% solar power with less than half of their roof space, including vehicle charging. And of course most businesses can also get to 100% solar powered, including the use of solar covered parking, including electric vehicle charging. Idiot / troll.
@@sanjuansteve Nope! Do the math my friend!!! The lie of Solar and wind turbines. Nuclear is by far the cleanest and BEST solution. IF they get Fusion working Solar, wind, coal, fission Nuclear will all be dated and not needed. We should be throwing our money in nuclear not green tech, because it is not really green...
As a user, I dont want a solar cell that is anything less than proven and reliable. This stuff sounds good and perhaps in ten years it will meet that criteria.
Great content as usual!! I'm actually undecided with the whole idea of going solar or not, I got 3 quotes and waiting for 2 more to see if I finally decide to for it, if I go for it I will be able to get 2 different incentives from my government (1 federal and 1 provincial) that basically covers 1/3 of the total cost, and the close to 14 kW system will offset 111% of my energy needs, so would you recommend going solar, I think it's important to start helping the planet in every way possible but for some reason I have my doubts, maybe you can enlighten me a bit.
Power density is a huge factor. The thin film would be great for solar powered bicycles and portable solar chargers. Bicycle tourers, bike packers and hikers have a big problem charging their devices without carrying a lot of extra weight.
When concerned about the 20% efficiency of commercial photovoltaic cells, remember that the photosynthesis of modern plants are between 0.5% to 1% efficient and only a small fraction of biomass gets trapped geologically to form fossil fuels over millions of years.
@@the_roadbites Sure photosynthesis figuratively grows in trees but remember, if you are expecting photosynthesis to provide the energy that we use, we already have that in fossil fuels. Are you really insisting we just continue with fossil fuel use? I'm simply saying the efficiency of solar photovoltaics isn't as terrible as people seem to think it is, it's actually quite impressive compared to our current method of using energy from the Sun which is fossil fuels.
Even with the small efficiencies of photosynthesis, forests are often 10-20 degrees cooler than the surrounding farmland. It makes you wonder if high efficiency solar cells will eventually have an effect on the local climate, as silicon absorbs energy in IR bands quite well.
@@macroman91 Most vegetation on Earth is green because they purposely reflect green light. There's actually too much light intensity in sunlight for the most common form of photosynthesis in use and as most of the energy of sunlight is green (yes, we really have a green sun), it is green that is reflected and hence not absorbed to become heat. Vegetation does have less albedo than say snow and ice but it does reflect far more energy than a lack of vegetation and that reflection is more likely to be the reason for cooler temperatures, not the relatively small percentage of energy converted to chemically stored energy by photosynthesis.
@@macroman91 In addition to what John Wang said, the energy carried down the wires would make it cooler by the solar panel, but it just comes out somewhere else when the electricity is used, so if you're using the energy locally it would have no net effect.
Saule S A is a company from Poland. I know about this, but didn't know that they opened a factory! Great news - thanks for the info! btw a lot of science about perovskite was done in last 10years in Poland. Regards!
Well Matt I have an extremely difficult science question for you, How does the efficiency of any type of solar panel compare to the hydrocarbon cycle of self replicating plants? Mix sunlight water Co2 and soil, and an entire planet is storing energy without manufacturing required, however without abundant Co2 this proccess will cease, any thoughts?
Photosynthesis is actually less efficient at converting sunlight into energy about 3-6% compared to Solar panels in the 17-23% range. Plants don't need that much sunlight to covert soil nutrients and CO2 into energy stored in food, so evolved to only use a small percentage of it. Solar panels are specialized for a singular purpose of electricity generation and have been optimized for such. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetic_efficiency
@@tonamiplayman4305 Wasn`t aware solar panels could self replicate, plants efficiency is dependant on available Co2 and its a multiple because they replicate, so 3 to 6 percent is for the individual not the collective amount which greatly exceeds solar panels
@@crabbyr6929 Multiple research teams have calculated this to account for the energy generated from photons hitting the leaves and its low. Not because plants are poorly designed, just that they don't need that much. Most of the light is lost to reflection and moisture from the leaves.
@@tonamiplayman4305 You seem to be missing the point of everything I said. Solar panels do not replicate, Solar panels are not edible and solar panels do not depend on abundant Co2. However we are totally dependant on plants, Which due to their ability to replicate and produce hydrocarbons, their energy capture dwarfs solar panels and probably always will, As long as Co2 levels dont fall too l;ow, Then we asphyxiate plants and kill ourselves
Nice video. I was previously unaware of the current state of solar tech. Now I am informed. Cheaper, more efficient, less poisonous, less durable. Way to go scientists and engineers. Keep going.
Thanks for making a very complex subject (somewhat) understandable. At age 78 my head absorbs knowledge like concrete absorbs water - not. But, again, thanks.
After watching "Planet of the Humans" on Amazon Prime, I don't know what to think about all the supposed "Green" energy. THANK YOU for calling attention to the inefficiencies and huge manufacturing footprint of silicon cells. This technology seems like a real alternative.
It is surely a great possibility for perovskite to com in the market given the circumstances and the efficiency rate greater than silicon...but the main issue is going to be use of lead.......if the problems regarding lead can be solved then it will be the biggest breakthrough in solar industry..love from india
Very interesting and well researched video, great quality as always, Matt. BUT I sometimes have difficulties to cheer with the crowd and hail the glorious (potentially?) great discovery. I see a lot of problems here in the real application. And there is nothing near the efficiency to the old solar horse. Why don't we spend more time and ressources to work with the same enthusiasm on improving the weaknesses of Silicone: DIRTY, really ? Matt just put it this way without elaborating it further. Old fashioned silicone panels don't contain Lead or other really toxic stuff., like perovskite cells. Silicone is just dirty because the Chinese burn low grade and polluting coal to melt the cheap silicone then sell super cheap solar panels. Cleanly produced solar panels are not competitive on the market. We should use solar energy to make more solar panels. Build forward better. Efficiency, really? Where is the problem to pack a few more solar panels and enjoy something below 30% efficiency, but for really long time. Perovskite cells are a long way from being "lasting". We don't need thin, light and toxic throw-away cells which last just a few years, then replace. A nightmare. Future? A commercially adept as a fusion reactor. Similar multi-generation project.
I've been lucky enough to have a tour of the research and development labs in South Wales near Swansea. There's some fine work going on there regarding solar power.
Scientists in Australia have made a more efficient solar panel built using copper rather than silver. A huge leap in efficiency. Admitadely still something like .2 or .3 jump but an advance!
the reason why we afrent seeing this on the market is they want to be the only one to have this techology so there is no competition on the market. Thus when these come out, they will costs thousands of dollars.
Perovskite is a great step in moving away from silicon based products. While it has been used for many years to create fast reliable products, just like everything, it has its limits. In terms of solar cells, that limit would be its efficiency as well as cost. In terms of other technologies, it would be its instability at a molecular level. Great video!
If it can't last as long as silicon, then we are looking at a situation where it's usual to get your solar panels re-layered every few years. Which is perfectly fine, especially if the re-layering company also manages recycling and anything toxic. So that's what they should be looking to design. A modular system where you cycle out the panels. Ring up the company, they take your old ones, clip in some new ones, and back to the shop for reconditioning. Or even better - the franchisee who does the installation work ships the old panels back to the parent company and clips in some new ones, ad the parent company deals with the slurry.
I think since perovskite cells are temperature sensitive, they could be improved by incorporating a solar water heating system to stabilize the temperature that the cell is subjected to.
I don’t see so positive to solar industry yet, compare to new wind energy techs btw, info is gold, thanks for you to keep providing high quality info in future.
![[FULL EP.16] เซียนพาลุย "เผือก-ฟรอยด์" กรี๊ดลั่น จนปูหนี | เฮ็ดอย่างเซียนหรั่ง | One Playground](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FsqUvwS3b-Y/mqdefault.jpg)
What do you think? Is perovskite going to take over the market? If you liked this video, be sure to check out
The Future of Solid State Wind Energy - No More Blades: th-cam.com/video/nNp21zTeCDc/w-d-xo.html
If they are sold at 50% less per watt with a 10 year warranty why wouldn't you buy them? The manufacturer could replace them twice since they cost 8 times less.
Only if it's profitable.
I worked on this technology in my first masters a couple of years ago, so of course I'm biased but I believe the encapsulation to protect from all kinds of degradation will be critical and as you say because of their less intensive processing they will be the future once the kinks are ironed out (not literally). Recyclability may be a more difficult problem but again there is headway being made on that front then toxicity and waste become much less of a problem. On the other hand with much cheaper materials there could be less incentive to recycle as there won't be much profit made from it. Perhaps we'll need government support of it.
@@orangehatmusic225 The "carbon footprint" of the manufacturing process refers to how much CO2 is put into the air by the manufacturing process, not how much carbon is in the product itself. In other words, how much energy does it take to make it. And for the most part (for now), that energy is comming from oil or natural gas, or coal. If we want to prevent (or mitigate) global warming, then we need to care about how much CO2 we put into the air.
Some questions arise: a) what the 100% efficiency stands for? All photons spectrum? Only visible light? b) What percentage of all earth surface radiation by sun corresponds to visible light and/or that 100% efficiency? c) All that said.. can we expect to see multilayered perovskite cells that has efficiency higher that 100%? That would be cool.
I just want one of these kinds of videos to be like "This thing got worked out, and it's better, and everyone is actually going to start using it".
I know right! Just once! Just once I'd like it to be something that's actually worked out and functional and ready to change the world RIGHT NOW.
Then the channel wouldn't be called 'Undecided' 🤦♂️
@@RudeAlert If it's any consolation the tech is going commercial in rather short timelines. Keep an eye on graphene, we finally have some useful production methods, and it's really starting to go into everything where the use of lower quality sheets are useable. Once we can make mass consistent and pure sheets of the stuff it's game over for the norm in almost every industry. Till then it's good for mixing with other materials to add electrical condutivity, strength, and corrosion resistance.
@@wes9451 lol.. Graphine is the poster child of Craig's complaint about these future possibilities videos vs reality.
Same bro. But how greedy the government and the elites are, we know this is wishful thinking.
I’m speechless with how much research, analysis and supporting material you manage to cram into each episode and puns too. Fabulous channel. Thanks Matt.
@Sunday who asked?
Spot on. I tried to post about this on Reddit years ago and it was rejected as speculative or some such bs. Matt keep wrangling amazing information.
agree!
“I guess I should have ‘led’ with that.”
I've been looking forward to this tech for many years, now. One of the first articles I read about it, was how caffeine was included in the construction process, as a half joke, but actually made the structure better.
Sounds like more nonsense like non stick windows coatings. never seen a single one since 1975 on tomorrows world tv. Where can get I these. NOWHERE.
You want fries with that?
@@esecallum There are literally dozens of products to make your windows non-stick on the market right now. Where have you been looking? Have you tried the internet?
@@filonin2 really? why so many window cleaners everywhere. the products you mention are so over priced and unreliable or wear off... this new solar panel is the same line of crap.
@@esecallum All non-stick window coatings don't work and are overpriced? Sounds like someone needs some mental professional attention. You're wrong, be quiet.
Another great video. In engineering, every choice is a compromise. The real science is in finding the balance between the compromises. You do a superb job of outlining the positives, negatives, and possible improvements.
We self installed 10.5KW on all of our buildings on our property. We did this over the past 4 years. I was banking on better panels for when its time to replace these in the next 20 years. These look promising
Do you save a lot of money on power bills? How long for it to pay off for you?
@@SamBassComedy It cost us out of pocket $8,000 roughly. The federal government and state govt refunded us 80% of the cost so around $1600 out of pocket. We have EVs so that is primarily where the electricity goes. In 4 years we have made just shy of 8 Megawatts of power. We staggered our installation (only doing 1 roof on our property a year). 8 Megawatts of power is around 1120 worth of electricity generated. We are almost ready to break even, sometime in the next year or so we will be free and clear of the initial costs.
@@geekdomo , Nicely done. This is the dream.
get back to me when IT HAPPENS.
Otherwise shut up already...thanks.
@@LUNA-fx2ud that’s a rather long to break even on a solar installation
We're sailors of a small cruising sailboat, so are off-the-grid much of the time. Wind provides direct propulsion some part of the time we are moving, while a 12 Watt Solar cell provides/most of our electricity. Perovskite seems very interesting as we *could* go for electric propulsion with more powerful solar cells. Thus perovskite formulations sound pretty interesting.I've found that cruisers, particularly sailors, are early-adopters; of solar and windmills for energy production, as primitive as the current windmills for 'individual' use currently are.
This tech looks like it would be an interesting way to reach a “temporary” or “inexpensive” market for field trials; phone chargers, eco-friendly RV enthusiasts, or young homeowners wanting to try solar for the first time without a massive investment. This leaves the long term/industrial market to the long lasting silicon panels while they work out some of the issues.
Honestly it makes a good material for making short life span stuff, which is what companies do with electronics.
Depends. If longevity came to say 30% of the longevity and stayed at 5% of the cost, it could be worth it for long-term/industrial uses. The combined increase in efficiency plus cost factor would make it economically attractive even with replacement.
In solar systems the solar panel cost is already quite low, the installation is actually a large part of the cost, roof work is expensive generally. In europe one can buy a 380W EU made solar panel for 150€(almasolar i'm solar panel)
@@miragept batt bank is the biggest cost if you install your self
This sounds more like a scheme to make junk solar panels that won't last and will just consume the market while they kill off silicon solar panels. If something is break easily and can make a profit from it companies will choose that as that will be a better source of income vs a one and done deal.
I bought a solar panel for my van recently and it blows my mind! I’ve got a 50a portable battery with an inverter built in. I haven’t had to pay for electricity all year - charges my phone, laptop, internet and heated blankets as well as a fridge. Solar is fucking amazing. This video has me excited!
So if the lifespan is considerably shorter, I hope that someone is looking into recycling the materials into new panels.
@@rogerstarkey5390 Still, unless they have infinite lifespans, there will be more waste. Figure out how to reuse all of the materials going in....
He did say the process that degrades them could be reversed, so you might just have to send your panels in for regeneration every 10 years.
@@rogerstarkey5390 Well, that takes care of the silicon replacement. But what about the rest of the panel? If this becomes as cheap as that, then the market will balloon, and then there will end up being a replacement market like for light bulbs. As if we need even more waste due to short life span stuff.
@@ancapftw9113 Or trade them in like an alternator and others can purchase the “refurbished” panels at a reduced price.
@@rogerstarkey5390 How thin the material is, adversely affects recycling. For example, aluminium is very recyclable but the aluminium in mylar is so thin that it is not practical to recycle the aluminium in mylar hence mylar products such as juice boxes are downgraded as aggregate in plastic structures rather than recycled.
I live in Australia, and I've been off grid with solar PV for 30 years. If perovskite has a durability problem, the key is to limit its exposure to UV, to peek gathering times. The shade screen application solves this problem. But a simple motorised cover blind does also.
Shade screens or cover blind limit the power of the cell. The problem is the durability . My solar cells are from 2009 so approx 12 years.
Thank you to everyone that has made solar power possible, and to those who continue to make it even better as each month passes. And thank you Matt for this excellently-made video.
Solar Cells Could Be the Future of Energy? No. Never. Stop this nonsense.
Very interesting , we clean solar farms in uk for nearly 7 years now using a sun brush machine it’s very reliable , our biggest problem is the layout of the farms the access at the ends of panel runs etc , also the layout of the tables the most efficient set up is 4 high laying down thats about 4 to 5 mtr panel height this means a brush that needs a lighter tractor to carry it , this would translate to the ability to multi wash more than twice a year at conceivably single pence per panel opening up higher out put all year round ,some companies do already wash twice others don’t think wash is needed , there’s a lot to do particularly outing the early investors who refuse to wash, we have seen farms in very bad state of operation, on other hand many are getting there act together who value our reports after each wash and much appreciate there efforts to put things right 👍👍👍 to them it’s not all bad .
Even if they lasted 10 years instead of 20, if their carbon footprint (sum of greater efficiency and less impact during production ) was smaller than the silicon panels it would already be a victory.
Installation and Transport probably makes that difficult if they are notably shorter life
Nope, 25 years guarantee for silicon. Don't forget installation, removal, multiple times for perovskite.
Add to that recyclability. If materials can be recovered, reconstiuted and remade into new cells it will be a win !
But it's not
I don't know if it's really a problem with green-house in manufacturing because there is only about 1.25kg of silicon in 20 roof panels.
I think the most important advancements in solar technology are those that make them easier to make with more common elements especially moving away from lanthanides and difficult engineering processes that require large specialized factories like places that make silicon wafers. The easier they are to make, the more useful and adoptable they will be even if they don't last as long. I think non-poisonous will also be a necessity, so no lead...
Exciting technology, Matt. The cells in glass idea for buildings would be incredible if they can keep the costs down.
Good intro on it. Regardless of what types, one of the larger expressed arguments against solar panels is the end of life treatment, fears of toxic waste - where it's going to go, water tables etc... maybe another video to make centers on the recycling of solar panels, potential mechanisms to do it high and low volumes, at low costs etc as part of the total life cycle. Same issue with batteries, which seem further ahead right now with companies like Redwood Materials and Li-cycle well into the game. Somehow, there needs to be a collection mechanism that bundles them up in a way that they can fill railroad cars or trucks with them and take to designated sites for reduction to primary materials again. I'd like to hear who is planning for an going after that sort of issue, what they expect to see as recovery and lost in process. thx.
Even with a shorter lifespan sounds like they could be more cost-effective relatively soon for situations like solar farms where replacing panels would be a lot easier than say having panels either on a roof or part of the roof. I wonder how recyclable the panels will be?
Shorter lifespan generally means larger negative environmental impact, so that has to be kept in mind, not just the cost.
@Jamie problem is you are adding more carbon foot print by transporting them so they can be recycled or tossed out. Recycling would help more but I can bet they will not be recyclable and will just add to the trash heaps.
@@fasddfadfgasdgs these materials our pulled OUT of the ground, there is zero harm in returning them to said ground. You are right about recycling being useless. ALL recycling is a scam. 90% of materials create more carbon output in their recycling process than they "save". Responsible disposal is INFINITELY better than recycling in almost all cases.
If they're cheap, they won't be recyclable in practice. There needs to be a high enough price to mining and refining for recycling to be competitive.
@@williameldridge9382 Depends very much on what you mean by to the ground. Soil and solid rock are two different things. And you can't dig a hole in rock and seamlessly seal it off in the same manner it was originally.
Matt - it’s a pity you failed to understand what is trully going on regarding perovskites and the factory in Poland. The girl you see at the factory opening ceremony (Olga Malinkiewicz) is a Polish scientist and a shareholder and founder of Saule - she made the breakthrough possible for perovskites to be produced commercially and Saule signed a contract with her to produce perovskites en masse - the condition was that the factory is built in Poland.
Fixed it for you!
Also first buildings in Warsaw and Lublin have been equipped with perovskites commercially - they can produce energy regardless of the angle that the sun is shining at them so they are much better than anything we’ve known and also as they are fully transparent - can be applied to windows of modern skyscrapers!
Not only are we watching, learning, we are counting puns. Your tell is the overly complicated sentence. Keep it up.
do research on how they get these rare earth materials. worse or the earth than fossil fuels
@@ReggaeRedeemer worse for the earth short term* not long term.
Please don't apologize for getting too technical...embrace it and feed us more. Great content.
At this point, I'd say power storage is the major issue. Not so much the efficiency of solar cells. Still, it will be nice to have cheaper cells
Valid point! Can’t argue that.
Although the possibility of efficient cells could open more opportunities where current cells are useless. Like on vehicles?
Best thing about your channel is that we get latest technology news and updates to discuss upon
Matt, EXCELLENT video. I´m a metallurgist and appreciate all of this incredible information in all its splendor. Just diminishing the cost to a fraction of the silicon SPs will ditch the fact of not being so durable. Numbers will talk here. I believe that, indeed, there is a market for this, and a huge one. I´d love some of the manufacturers send me some of their products to test them in real world conditions in our extreme weather, with 10 Celsius degrees of temperature differential between night and day, 85% humidity 24/7 and 12 hours of sunlight.
“The problem is that in most of the halide perovskites lead can dissolve in water. This water solubility and solubility in other solvents is actually a great advantage, as it makes building perovskite solar panels simpler and inexpensive -- another perk along with their performance. But the water solubility of lead can become a real environmental and health hazard when the panel breaks or gets wet, e.g. when it rains.”
It also makes recycling them dead ass simple and cheap.
Sounds like you could just put a layer of glass or transparent plastic over it?
@Daniel Miller silicone? Like Sylguard
Sure lead CAN dissolve in water. You CAN be killed jumping into traffic, but- just don't DO it! The safety factor IS a controllable variable. starting with- you'll notice plumbers no longer melt lead over gasoline blow torches. ( I plumb AND have three). ;-)
@@loftsatsympaticodotc thanks for being sensible
I actually work with some perovskite cells, in their native state they are stupidly hard to work with because they are extremely fragile and does not stick to anything well. Spotweld cracks it, solder comes right off. The pure forms are actually available relatively cheaply (under 100USD for a stack of 50 10cm x 5cm rectangles) even on e-bay but at least 80% will have fracture on arrival.
These have a GREAT potential but as you mentioned, very few companies are packaging them but at a huge drop in efficiency. Right now the packaging is the biggest issue. Also one of the craziest advantage of perovskite cell is that it works fairly well when the piece is broken.
Matt it would be very interesting to determine the lifetime costs (says 25 years) of using any of these solar products to determine the tipping points of when it is more cost-effective to either stay the course with a given technology or switch to another. TOC is typically the holy grail in mass adoption. Thank you for providing a quality insight/education in every video.
costs depend on the financiam system, the most important is safety. for that any money is worth to be paid
Our household solar setup in Australia paid for itself in around 4 years, worth EVERY cent.
Perovskite Solar Cells certainly have potential to have a huge impact. If the cost can be reduced significantly, then this opens up the market for a lot of people that can't afford solar today. Broader adoption is the best tech driver. It also appears to have a greater practical use model (solar glass, paint, ...) creating new opportunities.
It would be great if we can get organic/plastic solar cells to a competitive level with the other types. The best reason to pursue the organic cells over the other is the ease of recycling it, as you can likely just melt or thermally degrade it instead of needing to treat it like electronic waste.
I love what i see, i am a reseacher focusing on perovskite. I can proudly say, now is the time for perovskite to SHINE!!!!!
Hai,i getting more information about new technology from you and youtube so keep it is helpful for my studies in small village
Are you from India?
every time you upload a video with your face it put smile on my face. always learning something new.
Considering this can be "printed" I wonder if we could coat the outside of everyday objects like phones, laptops, planes, cars, etc, and then cover them with some kind of clear coat. Sure, maybe it will not last the entire life of a car, but maybe it would be a useful feature of more "disposable" electronics.
You would need to solve the oxidization, or a multi level clear coat/ceramic. Then the conductors for the custom panel connecting the cells
Lead coated cellphones... that sounds... iffy?
Phones are often in someone's pocket and laptops are almost exclusively used inside. So I don't think it would be a good use of resources there. Cars could possibly be efficient enough, but the efficiency needs to go up more to make it a viable option. I think planes may be a good place to put them since they are generally outside. I'm not sure how they can make it safe enough from an overcharging point of view.
I'm not ruling out the idea of coating everyday objects with these solar cells. But I think it would be more efficient to put them in places where they will generate power whenever there's enough light.
And with better batteries in the future and more wireless charging I don't think that it would make much sense to coat everyday objects in these cells.
But I don't mind if I'm proven wrong 😊
@@marcschaeffer1584 In the future they may not contain lead, I think
@@AnimilesYT yeah but I'd still like to have that option. Imagine you're stranded in the middle of nowhere, having a device that would charge itself by the sun would be useful.
Great overview, first i've heard of Perovskite, as a current solar home owner, very interested in lower cost, higher performane system to motivate others to adopt
Thank you for the information! I have been waiting on true multi spectrum solar cells for a long time, as had my brother (God rest his soul). Applying Perovskite solar shingles to every rooftop in America would be an option. With each cell having the ability to be replaced would be key (Or at least small segments), but only if we can keep the efficiency up over 80% for 20 years and the cost fairly low. It would also bring a much needed refresh to a trade craft that is starting to suffer here in the U.S
Welll.
Very cool
I think tech that directly harvests solar energy into electricity has a constant issue, it always suffers from UV damage and electron migration ect, so a thin film tech like perovskite could see more widespread use even with a reduced lifespan because it can be easier to replace, becoming a simple chore done every few years with proper engineering. Something like a roller system with a stabilized paper leader just tape the new roll on, and crank the rollers till the old roll is off.
And that can give it an large market advantage if the costs are low enough and if there is a core trade in to further reduce costs and reclaim the gold used.
So perhaps it is far to soon to tell the future but in any future it seems this tech has a future at least in some applications.
I love how you tell us that perovskite solar cells will be great, then you tell us about how there are tons of drawbacks and we're years away from seeing useful results!
It's the future! But in the same way fusion energy is the future too lol
Stop telling half truths boy...
Our company specializes in R & D and production of perovskite materials. From the current industrial production, perovskite materials such as MAPbI3, FAPbI3, CsPbBr3, etc. are cheaper than silicon. Perovskite solar energy is an ideal new energy
Am I the only one here feeling proud to hear just one instance of University from Jharkhand India?
Just love your videos Matt
Also refreshing that it's not somewhere in China who will eventually steal the tech and kick out the original IP producer.
We need you guys to get your university sector moving up and cranking out good research. All hands on deck to help us avoid climate change.
Considering India's position right next to the equator, it's imperative for all Indians that these problems get solved.. very soon!
Solar panels right now are outside of many people's budgets.
Anything that brings solar to the masses is to be welcomed.
3:11 WOW! That looks cool!
I want to see more of that process, the hex-cells just appear :D
th-cam.com/video/8jxWgjMXLqg/w-d-xo.html
Ink-jet printing pervskite solar panels is performed in Polish company Saule Technologies
You are talking over my head but thank you for introducing me to this subject. This awareness means that I will learn enough to value the use of these panels and that is the start to save our world!
Investing is buying yourself a better future you don't have to work hard.
@Kimberly Author What idea of investment one should be doing.
I'm a fan of crypto, I hold some few coins in my wallet.
@Goodson Thomas Nura Carvalho.
@Goodson Thomas fb name. 👆👆
+➊➌➍➏➐⓿➍➌➎➍➌
an update on this technology, they manage to use tape like material to keep leakage of lead to beyond 99.9% retention. It would still be a problem over time but they are getting there.
They have also achieved almost 30% efficiency for the next generation so perovskite might not be so far from commercial break now.
Reminded me of sputtered thin film technology for hard drives, though obviously very different technologies.
Well researched and produced video. Thank you.
IMHO increased performance, more than a decrease in overall cost will prove to be the tipping point at which perovskite completely replaces silicon as the primary component in solar cells. When it comes to conductivity and conversion, I feel as though silicon has reached it's ceiling, whereas perovskite might still have room to grow.
With such thin structures, I could see this having applications in aerospace. You could basically paint or laminate this onto the top side of the many electric aircraft that are under development. While it likely would not achieve a power balance, it would extend the range of these aircraft.
What does this link have to do with solar?
@@worthmor Absolutely nothing, they are being posted by spam bots.
Heck, even yet could reduce fuel consumption by running stuff in the plane from solar PV
A Japanese group put out a study they did on some perovskite cells that they exposed to a radiation source. They were trying to replicate the effects of long term radiation exposure similar to high orbit space flight. The Perovskite outperformed Silicon by a significant margin. I think we are likely to see these cells used on satellites before they see wide adoption on planes.
Starter solar panels for RVs, applications where installation is not costly or difficult, then if they are cheap enough, they can be switched out when their efficiency drops to low. Then there's portable panels for solar generators. I can definitely see a market.
The challenges and limitations listed in this video remind me a lot of early lithium batteries, but without the high cost. I remember the concerns of technicians (including myself) when presented with the first LiIon laptop batteries and their properties. Most of us were skeptical. Now, lithium dominates the battery market. Of course, I also remember the technologies that didn't work so well. NiCd, for example.
In short... maybe perovskite could take over, if only for niche purposes like flexible panels, transparency or high efficiency applications. If not this, then probably some other technology. Between the plateau of silicone solar cells and the increasing demand for green energy the need for better solar tech is great, and nothing drives innovation like need.
Copper oxide perovskite looks like an important discovery and it would last longeer than organic films!
The efficiency that matters is Watts/$. Watt/Msquare does feed into that, especially in places where the price of real estate is extremely high (like inside a payload fairing on orbital launch vehicle), so anything that can get a few more Watts out of a given area is likely to find a niche. Whether it takes over broader market remains to be seen.
You must also consider the cost of the supporting technology: the motorised frame that the panel mounts into, the alternator and power regulators. A solar panel that generated 2x the power at 2x the price would be a good investment.
In terms of mass adoption by homeowners? Definitely. Higher Watts/$ means faster return on investment.
For more complex arrangements, such as giant fields of solar panels that track the sun? The added investment of the equipment and the land probably do push the balance more in favour of higher watts/m^2
It's still going to be a balance of course
@@alsmith20000 Mounting and tracking hardware does become more cost efficient with a higher efficiency panel, so even if the cost goes up slightly more than the efficiency, the savings down the chain might make it worthwhile. Life cycle costs also come into play, so we are going to need to calculate levelized cost for the whole stack as well. Regardless, it is good to see more promising solar technologies take steps towards real world applications, and we will find out where it is or is not more cost effective.
@@alsmith20000 Incorrect... 2x the power at 2x the price is a wash from an investment perspective. You would need 2x the power at less than 2x the price in order to realize any cost savings.
For instance, if perovskite cells last half as long, but cost 1/4th as much as Silicon then you would collect 2x the power for the same costs.
@@jeremygoodall7799 I think the point has been missed here. The solar panel itself is only a component of the overall solar installation.
I think that there is also a difference in terminology. Power is the rate of change of energy but I believe you've used it as total lifetime electrical energy generated. You are of course right to consider he longevity as this affects the total energy that the panels absorb.
In any case, the current short life time of these panels does seem to be an important factor, preventing them from being rolled out en-mass.
The inventor of modern technology for the production of flexible photovoltaic cells based on perovskites is Polish physicist Olga Malinkiewicz. The Polish company Saule Technologies, in May in Wrocław, launched the first factory of these panels.:)
Great video!
I hope you're working on the new fusion breakthrough from MIT & CFS
@@rogerstarkey5390 2040. Since I became an engineer in the early ‘80s, fusion unfortunately has always been 20 years away for the big breakthrough. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hoping for fusion.
@@glasshalffull8625 with the recent breakthroughs it is possible it is actually now within 2 decades until the first test that actually produces more than it consumes
but i still don't exactly have a lot of hope to see any real production plants within the next 2 decades let alone fusion gaining enough of a share in power generation to make a difference when it still counts
What we really need to do is invest heavily into the technologies we already have to displace coal oil and natural gas now as fast as possible
fission might not be perfect but we already have it today and know how to make it more or less safe, we really need to get more nuclear fission plants operational instead of holding out for fusion coming soon™
And of course, expanding solar wind and geothermal where applicable
I still think the biggest holdback for solar is not being able to produce more power than you need at the homeowner level. Utility companies only allow you to produce as much as you typically consume. I think more people would be on board with solar if there was a fixed payback price for energy produced above what a typical home uses. The payback period for the initial investment would go down and people would try to be more conservative with energy usage if they could make money back. The system we have now is causing people to want to be independent of the grid with battery banks and triple power inverters. Utility companies need to focus on energy storage instead of putting caps on energy produced. Make better use of the extra energy produced during the day like producing green hydrogen or running more seawater Desalination plants with green energy.
A good question would be: How easy can it be recycled, and what are the energy costs for that?
Those machines for separating valuable materials from electronic waste already exist. They use mechanical force, and shaker decks, and water with additives, magnets, and all kind of different methods to separate the materials. They crush and mill everything to a fine powder, and while traveling through the machine various processes separate the materials in various stages. For example they can separate the lighter particles from the heavier particles by using a solution of water with soap that attaches to the lighter particles and that makes the lighter particles float, and then they skim of the lighter particles, and the heavier particles move on to the next process, and so on. It is one machine that does all the separation until all the various materials are separated from each other as much as possible.
They do that because on average they can recover more gold out of one ton of E waste compared to a ton of gold ore. And then there is also the other valuable materials that are recovered from the E waste. Such as platinum and other precious metals, but also copper and less valuable materials, but that are still useful and profitable.
And yes that machine consumes a lot of energy, but compared to the energy that is used to mine and refine new materials it is absolutely only a fraction of the total energy that is used for mining and refining new materials.
I know that a Duch company is very good at building these machines, but it is not a wide spread knowledge, because they don't really want to show how those machines work, because they don't want too many people to know that E waste is actually a very valuable product. I once watched a documentary about recycling E waste, and they even stated that at some point in time there will be so much E waste on a yearly bases that for some materials it will no longer be needed to mine for it in nature, if we make the processes that makes it possible to recover the valuable materials as efficient as possible with an infrastructure that makes it possible to do that.
Meaning that it should be easy for people to offer their broken products to a recycling station, and so on.
In my country you can offer your broken product to the delivery guy that brings you the new device that you bought online. Given the fact that it is a similar device. So if your TV is broken and you buy a new one they take your old TV if you want that. It is not obligated for the consumer to do that, but it is a service, and the delivery guy is obligated to offer that service.
It is called urban mining :-)
Standard silicon panels are already pretty cheap. I have a 410 Wp panel right here for around 140 US. It sure is a nice idea when that cost could drop to say 80 US. But these panels should last about 20 years so it's not really that big of a deal anymore. I think for most people installation costs are the major factor.
I believe cheap local energy storage will be the next biggest advancement with solar. When you can store the energy from your own panels and use it at night the grid stops being a limiting factor. Energy grids are already suffering from capacity limits. Cheap long lasting batteries can overcome this problem.
Perovskite can still be great for people who don't have a lot of space to put panels. When you have plenty of space however a panel's efficiency doesn't matter much. Because then you don't install a certain surface of panels but a combined number of Watts (peak) to cover your daily energy needs.
I think it needs 20 year warrenty, with it being like teslas roof. So that the barrier to entry is less for a great roof. That and mechaninical connections instead of wires. So it can be a slide on then braced. A standard size like shingles is vital.
Depends on who is using it, and whether it is integral to a structure. In a dedicated solar farm switching out every module every 2 years could easily be viable if the cost is low enough and they are designed to make the job easy. Even if they were roof mounted, switching them out could be viable. If you have to tear off the whole roof, not so much. I'm not a fan of the window idea for that reason too, but replacing the blinds every 2 years wouldn't be that big a deal.
Either way, I think the biggest barrier currently is the lack of good energy storage, not the difficulty of collection. The next barrier is the cost of the inverters to get solar energy to the grid. Even if the cells themselves were free, it would only reduce the cost of a system by 50% because the electronics are already half the cost.
If it ends up 1/4th the cost, a five year warranty would be plenty. Such a thing would be great for self-financing installs. Every five years get more, and continue to monitor where the old ones aren't providing value.
Current panels have 25 year warranty, not just on the panels, but on the production value. So, yeah, they need to do at least the industry standard.
@@Elizabeth-vz3zc Oh, you'll get your wish soon. Reported.
My undergraduate thesis study was about "Simulation study of Perovskite-Perovskite tandem junction solar cell".
Soon it will be publish in a journal.
Perovskite solar cell has potential but the only major problem is it’s stability.
Should be interesting to see where this goes in the near future. The longevity of the cell is going to be the big hurdle, no matter the cost as man hours in installation and replacement are a big concern.
It depends. If the cost is 10x less and the longevity is 10 years instead of 25 years then the tech is still viable. Especially that this market is still developing and in 10 years you may want to switch to another or this improved tech for even better results anyway.
@@aikenPL And provided it's less than 1/2 the weight, replacements should be much easier.
I want to hear about solar cells that will work in low light or cloudy conditions, also moonlight and also solar cells that can gather energy from radio waves.
Okay, so standard solar cells (silicon) practically require silver (Ag). On the other hand, the perovskite solar cell requires gold (Au). Nothing is easy.
@@Vedexent_ commercial solar in eu including everything (mounts, inverters, transformer) is about 0.7$ / watt.
Even lower if talking Gigawatt scale.
@@rogerstarkey5390 commercial solar in eu including everything (mounts, inverters, transformer) is about 0.7$ / watt.
Even lower if talking Gigawatt scale.
So basically cost per watt just for the panels is around 0.50$
Tech industry starting to feel like the gaming industry; "This game is gonna be really super cool we promise, but its still in alpha/beta/early access and wont be available for 2 years from whenever you see this message even if you see it 2 years after its posted"
As far as I know, you can get up to 40% performance of a solar cell by using a "micro-pyramid patterned surface". This is applicable to several materials
Makes sense a pyramid has 4 times the surface compared to a flat surface.
I think videos like this. Personal Solar projects. Commercial Solar projects etc will also play an important role in better and less expensive technologies for producing electricity. Keep the video coming you're making a difference.
note to self: save videos from matt Farrel when you are calm and relax.. stress and brain ache is not a good combo.
I saw a video on this topic about 4 years ago. The issues they faced were the same as you discribed here so its good to see that progress toward developing efficiencies and stability for long term energy conversion. Im not scientificie but the cost of this tech compared to present systems is what makes it appealing and perovskite can be found everywhere.
"I shouldeve probably just LEAD with that."
Oh no you didn't... Get out of here!
Led in the US... ;)
We should definitely review this technology again in 5-10 years, while some sales as well as further financial investment provide increased R&D to improve upon the technology. Maybe it will be ready for primetime by then.
damn, I was really hoping for a steampunk future with fields of solar sterling engines
THANK YOU for Posting.
THANK YOU for being so technologically astute. I applaud you on learning and teaching at the high level you are !!!
My comment: Have they tried sandwiching the Perovskite material inside two layers of PlexiGlass. NO air in there. So when the material flexes, so does the plexiglass. The plexiglass is coated with the backing AND the Perovskite layer and plexiglass layered on turning the whole unit into ONE PIECE, with 2 color-coded insulated wires coming out at a corner. This SHOULD eliminate cold, hot, hail & shifting damage & degradation.
Matt, thank you for all your videos. You are the source of all the info I want on leading tech, particularly with your overlying concern for the environment. I love this channel!!
these videos are awesome. wonderful insight. i find that the overly cautious fear of lead as an element in any paticular product a bit paranoid. its not going to harm you unless you enjoy licking your solar panels as a hobby.
I worked with pervoskite solar cells in a lab for a while. What came out of my experience is that it's dirty, unstable, the reproducibility is very low. In my opinion this material is the proof that it's no longer the pure need to know that is leading research, but fashion trends. It does look good on the paper, I admit, but I just wish we spent as much money on decreasing consumption than in new energy sources. It would be easy : by stopping designing items with high-tech unecessary features and come back to our good old fridges that are also our shrinks and coffee makes, we would save money and energy. No need of other energy sources if we stop consuming it like it's abundant.
Won't compare much to the billions of up-and-coming middle class in India and China by simply trying to conserve a bit. Nothing wrong with that, but we need real breakthrough solutions.
Someone needs to make a video analyzing Matt's videos and determining how many ppm (puns per minute) they tend to run.
Let's put solar panels on every home, business and covered parking rooftop and switch to electric vehicles making nearly everything we do solar powered while completely decentralizing our power supply and empowering everyone as power generation owners.
Solar power is CHEAPER and electric vehicles are soon to be CHEAPER to make and already are considerably CHEAPER to maintain and operate, especially if charged from your own solar power.
A 3-5 year ROI (return on investment) for a solar array that will generate power for decades is a no-brainer and the panels can even be made locally too.
#EndFossilFuels #SwitchToSolar #SwitchToElectric #GreenNewDeal #EmpowerEveryone
The math does not add up! Solar panels will not be efficient enough to charge a car and power a air conditioner. Its just physics. Solar has a place, but it is not for major power gird energy, well at least in most States or places around the world. There are places that Solar will work, but those places are small compared to the rest of the world. Nuclear is the only real option other than coal for powering the electric grid. All those wind farms are a drop in the bucket compared to what a Nuclear plant can do... It is just political now... If we get the fusion reactor to work, ALL OTHER ENERGY SOURCES ARE USELESS!!!
@Sod White We have to end citizens united, get ALL money out from controlling our politicians and switch to a ranked choice popular vote for an actual democracy of, by, and for the people. #DEMEXIT #StillSandersPlatform
#TooFarLeft
Education is a good investment from an individual, family, community or national perspective and tuition free education will reduce the burden from the root on our medical expenses too for example.
Healthcare for all is actually CHEAPER with the insurance industry off of the table along with most of the time lost due to billing among many other reasons.
A universal basic income (UBI) is CHEAPER than all of the thousands of individual federal, state and local social safety net programs including things like Social Security and unemployment insurance, etc with all of their budgets, overhead expenses and inefficiencies eliminating the humiliating need for people to lose time to prove their poverty to qualify for aid.
Internet for all is a great and necessary investment to give everyone the opportunity to study, search for work, work remotely, etc online.
Solar power is CHEAPER and electric vehicles are soon to be CHEAPER to make and already are considerably CHEAPER to maintain and operate, especially if charged from your own solar power.
What do you think will happen to crime rates, peace and equality in general after we launch universal healthcare, a universal basic income, universal education and internet for all, raising the starting point of capitalism from zero, we’ll let you die with no money, to a level of life with dignity, reducing societal daily fears on a massive scale and freeing us to welcome the automation revolution with open arms rather than with fear and great harm? 😃 #EqualityMovement #BLM
Call me overly positive, but I think we’re leaving the era of ‘greed is good’ and celebrating wealth and entering an #EraOfAltruism and equality. Let’s #AutomateEverything and #SkipToAbundance.
@@johnjay6370 Oh grow up you ridiculous fossil fuels TROLL!!
Of course most homes can go 100% solar power with less than half of their roof space, including vehicle charging. And of course most businesses can also get to 100% solar powered, including the use of solar covered parking, including electric vehicle charging.
Idiot / troll.
@@sanjuansteve Nope! Do the math my friend!!! The lie of Solar and wind turbines. Nuclear is by far the cleanest and BEST solution. IF they get Fusion working Solar, wind, coal, fission Nuclear will all be dated and not needed. We should be throwing our money in nuclear not green tech, because it is not really green...
@@sanjuansteve th-cam.com/video/RqppRC37OgI/w-d-xo.html
As a user, I dont want a solar cell that is anything less than proven and reliable. This stuff sounds good and perhaps in ten years it will meet that criteria.
"that criteria" S.B. "those criteria"
@@grindupBaker yes. pedantic but correct:)
Great content as usual!! I'm actually undecided with the whole idea of going solar or not, I got 3 quotes and waiting for 2 more to see if I finally decide to for it, if I go for it I will be able to get 2 different incentives from my government (1 federal and 1 provincial) that basically covers 1/3 of the total cost, and the close to 14 kW system will offset 111% of my energy needs, so would you recommend going solar, I think it's important to start helping the planet in every way possible but for some reason I have my doubts, maybe you can enlighten me a bit.
Power density is a huge factor.
The thin film would be great for solar powered bicycles and portable solar chargers.
Bicycle tourers, bike packers and hikers have a big problem charging their devices without carrying a lot of extra weight.
When concerned about the 20% efficiency of commercial photovoltaic cells, remember that the photosynthesis of modern plants are between 0.5% to 1% efficient and only a small fraction of biomass gets trapped geologically to form fossil fuels over millions of years.
Except plants do it all with pure organic self replicating materials and can fix CO2 without needing heat.
Photosynthesis is really clever evolution.
@@the_roadbites Sure photosynthesis figuratively grows in trees but remember, if you are expecting photosynthesis to provide the energy that we use, we already have that in fossil fuels. Are you really insisting we just continue with fossil fuel use? I'm simply saying the efficiency of solar photovoltaics isn't as terrible as people seem to think it is, it's actually quite impressive compared to our current method of using energy from the Sun which is fossil fuels.
Even with the small efficiencies of photosynthesis, forests are often 10-20 degrees cooler than the surrounding farmland. It makes you wonder if high efficiency solar cells will eventually have an effect on the local climate, as silicon absorbs energy in IR bands quite well.
@@macroman91 Most vegetation on Earth is green because they purposely reflect green light. There's actually too much light intensity in sunlight for the most common form of photosynthesis in use and as most of the energy of sunlight is green (yes, we really have a green sun), it is green that is reflected and hence not absorbed to become heat. Vegetation does have less albedo than say snow and ice but it does reflect far more energy than a lack of vegetation and that reflection is more likely to be the reason for cooler temperatures, not the relatively small percentage of energy converted to chemically stored energy by photosynthesis.
@@macroman91 In addition to what John Wang said, the energy carried down the wires would make it cooler by the solar panel, but it just comes out somewhere else when the electricity is used, so if you're using the energy locally it would have no net effect.
Saule S A is a company from Poland. I know about this, but didn't know that they opened a factory! Great news - thanks for the info! btw a lot of science about perovskite was done in last 10years in Poland. Regards!
Well Matt I have an extremely difficult science question for you, How does the efficiency of any type of solar panel compare to the hydrocarbon cycle of self replicating plants? Mix sunlight water Co2 and soil, and an entire planet is storing energy without manufacturing required, however without abundant Co2 this proccess will cease, any thoughts?
Nice!!!
Photosynthesis is actually less efficient at converting sunlight into energy about 3-6% compared to Solar panels in the 17-23% range. Plants don't need that much sunlight to covert soil nutrients and CO2 into energy stored in food, so evolved to only use a small percentage of it. Solar panels are specialized for a singular purpose of electricity generation and have been optimized for such.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetic_efficiency
@@tonamiplayman4305 Wasn`t aware solar panels could self replicate, plants efficiency is dependant on available Co2 and its a multiple because they replicate, so 3 to 6 percent is for the individual not the collective amount which greatly exceeds solar panels
@@crabbyr6929 Multiple research teams have calculated this to account for the energy generated from photons hitting the leaves and its low. Not because plants are poorly designed, just that they don't need that much. Most of the light is lost to reflection and moisture from the leaves.
@@tonamiplayman4305 You seem to be missing the point of everything I said. Solar panels do not replicate, Solar panels are not edible and solar panels do not depend on abundant Co2. However we are totally dependant on plants, Which due to their ability to replicate and produce hydrocarbons, their energy capture dwarfs solar panels and probably always will, As long as Co2 levels dont fall too l;ow, Then we asphyxiate plants and kill ourselves
Nice video. I was previously unaware of the current state of solar tech. Now I am informed. Cheaper, more efficient, less poisonous, less durable. Way to go scientists and engineers. Keep going.
Thanks for making a very complex subject (somewhat) understandable. At age 78 my head absorbs knowledge like concrete absorbs water - not. But, again, thanks.
Drago mi je poslušati o napretku i te tehnologije za korištenju solarne energije
After watching "Planet of the Humans" on Amazon Prime, I don't know what to think about all the supposed "Green" energy. THANK YOU for calling attention to the inefficiencies and huge manufacturing footprint of silicon cells. This technology seems like a real alternative.
It is surely a great possibility for perovskite to com in the market given the circumstances and the efficiency rate greater than silicon...but the main issue is going to be use of lead.......if the problems regarding lead can be solved then it will be the biggest breakthrough in solar industry..love from india
Very interesting and well researched video, great quality as always, Matt.
BUT
I sometimes have difficulties to cheer with the crowd and hail the glorious (potentially?) great discovery.
I see a lot of problems here in the real application. And there is nothing near the efficiency to the old solar horse.
Why don't we spend more time and ressources to work with the same enthusiasm on improving the weaknesses of Silicone:
DIRTY, really ?
Matt just put it this way without elaborating it further.
Old fashioned silicone panels don't contain Lead or other really toxic stuff., like perovskite cells.
Silicone is just dirty because the Chinese burn low grade and polluting coal to melt the cheap silicone then sell super cheap solar panels.
Cleanly produced solar panels are not competitive on the market.
We should use solar energy to make more solar panels.
Build forward better.
Efficiency, really?
Where is the problem to pack a few more solar panels and enjoy something below 30% efficiency, but for really long time.
Perovskite cells are a long way from being "lasting".
We don't need thin, light and toxic throw-away cells which last just a few years, then replace. A nightmare.
Future?
A commercially adept as a fusion reactor. Similar multi-generation project.
I've been lucky enough to have a tour of the research and development labs in South Wales near Swansea. There's some fine work going on there regarding solar power.
Especially here in New York where it is sunny only one day in ten.
I'd like to see follow up videos when someone finally figures this out and starts delivering perovskite solar cells.
Scientists in Australia have made a more efficient solar panel built using copper rather than silver. A huge leap in efficiency. Admitadely still something like .2 or .3 jump but an advance!
This could be a best alternative for space solar panels
Transparent solar film for windows makes this a game changer.
the reason why we afrent seeing this on the market is they want to be the only one to have this techology so there is no competition on the market. Thus when these come out, they will costs thousands of dollars.
Perovskite is a great step in moving away from silicon based products. While it has been used for many years to create fast reliable products, just like everything, it has its limits. In terms of solar cells, that limit would be its efficiency as well as cost. In terms of other technologies, it would be its instability at a molecular level. Great video!
If it can't last as long as silicon, then we are looking at a situation where it's usual to get your solar panels re-layered every few years. Which is perfectly fine, especially if the re-layering company also manages recycling and anything toxic. So that's what they should be looking to design. A modular system where you cycle out the panels. Ring up the company, they take your old ones, clip in some new ones, and back to the shop for reconditioning.
Or even better - the franchisee who does the installation work ships the old panels back to the parent company and clips in some new ones, ad the parent company deals with the slurry.
I think since perovskite cells are temperature sensitive, they could be improved by incorporating a solar water heating system to stabilize the temperature that the cell is subjected to.
Very good speech ,……. Eco friendly energy sources need lot of attention
I don’t see so positive to solar industry yet, compare to new wind energy techs
btw, info is gold, thanks for you to keep providing high quality info in future.
Cheaper manufacturing means higher yields for the investors, not cheaper products on the shelves