How Scientists Achieved 39.7% Efficiency
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 พ.ค. 2020
- How Scientists Achieved 39.7% Efficiency [2020]
Subject Zero Patreon
/ subjectzerolaboratories
A new solar cell technology has broken the old 22% efficiency record, all of that with a 6-junction solar cell design, something that was thought unachievable for the past decade.
Developments in production methods of the famous III-V group of Semiconductor elements (IUPAC 13-15), was able to arrange them in unique ways to generate this amazing technology, all thanks to their distinctive alloy properties.
Groups III-V of the periodic table are known for their special characteristics that, when combined, produce a wide range of energy bandgaps that can be used in multitude of different electronics devices.
The most commonly known combination is Indium Gallium Arsenic or InGaAs …Fart noise… which is widely used in solar panels. In this new research they explored other elements of the group with a variety of combinations which ultimately increased solar panels conversion efficiency to a whopping 39.2% efficiency at one-Sun.
Sources
warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/physics...
www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.ph...
energyrates.ca/residential-el...
www.gogreensolar.com/products...
www.cbsnews.com/news/fun-fact...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalor...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shockle...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-j...
www.statista.com/statistics/4...
www.energy.gov/eere/solar/mul...
All Animations are done in house with Blender EEVEE by Zer0
NOTE: The animations in my videos take a substantial amount of time to make, so please be patient. I am trying to get a video per week, but some times it takes longer. - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![ITER - Blanket Shield Module | How it works [2022]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lxfhzZLGX2E/mqdefault.jpg)
I can remember the talk about reaching 20% efficiency, and how everyone would then be able to afford solar electric.
This is already achieved.
@@laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaag I think he means it's still not very affordable. At least, to run an entire household from.
@@escapetherace1943 it is affordable, you get your money back and then you not only get electricity for free you can even sell the excess for profit. Getting solar is an investment.
@@escapetherace1943 it depends on the cost of electricity in your area but for most of the population solar is cheaper. But due to the relative big upfront cost and general distrust of it from the general population most people steer away from it
@@omarcarrero3623 couldn't have summed it up better, also you run the risk of bad weather damaging the panels
Dude, you're churning out videos in the last few weeks like... dayum! I mean for doing all the rendering in Blender yourself, plus graphics and voice work that's frickin amazing. When compared to other channels who use mostly stock footage, 2D animations or overlays this is a really unique, personal, information dense and appealing 𝔸 𝕖 𝕤 𝕥 𝕙 𝕖 𝕥 𝕚 𝕔.
You've quickly become my favourite science/engineering channel
@DriftingAsleep He releases all this quite rapidly for someone, who doesn't do TH-cam as his main job.
Are you sure it's Blender? Looks more like Unity to me...
man this comment gives me hope for my channel lol, i love that there are so many people interested in engineering :) time to step the qaulity up on my end xD
@@FFehse-dk9is He overlays the Blender logo at the end of his videos. If it isn't Blender, then I'd be surprised.
TRICLO He’s also f-in hilarious. “PS - Sometimes even I don’t know what I’m saying,” or smth similar in the exquisitely rendered text.
Hmm...
That's nice. I just wish that my absorption of this videos information was more than 50%
This narrators enthusiasm is what I strive to have.
I like the Cave Johnson's vibe these videos have, they feel like I'm watching the future or something XD
Really nice dude keep it up, it's really good!
When life gives you lemons, you don't make lemonade, you make a bomb out of them and throw them back!
...with the lemons.
@@TomYourmombadil Now I have to play it again.... Look at me, I'm a potato.
cave johnson, were done here!
I'm really feeling my mediocre chemistry knowledge here
guess someday i'll get it
Take Introduction to Electronic Material as a class or just look up a video on it. Teaches you all about electron avalanching, Fermi levels, band gaps, MOSFET/semiconductor chemical layout, etc. Super awesome stuffs.
@@FALprofessional Any links? for any videos? I tried looking but if you know one..
to my pinecone brain it sounds like putting a translucent solar panel in front of another solar panel, and calling it one solar panel
Yes it is chemistry but not in the usual sense the elements used create pn junctions ( diodes ) that are sensitive to photons ( light) and this is solid state semiconductor property that relies on the quantum physics in the materials. In much the same way A LED ( light emitting diode PN junction ) emits light when a voltage is applied, this same material creates a voltage when light is applied to the junction. Read up on Transistors and diodes as they operate on the same principles and the theory of their operation. For example a P type material has an excess of spaces where electrons are missing in the lattice crystal structure of the material an N type has an extra electron in its lattice structure applying light to it knocks the electron free and it goes to the extra space in the P material with this causing an electron flow from N to P over the junction this is done by doping the materials with impurities to create an N or P type material
@@johncherish7610 and the direct flow through substance is blocked in some way so electrons go through our wires/create voltage? Or am I mixing stuff up
Can you cite some sources? I want to read up on this
+1 I'd love to see the sources cited in the video description.
Can't agree more!
I think this article is what he is talking about
The current edition of The Economist newspaper p 72 refers to this matter.
just go to spectrolabs and you'll see their 40% cells
Great vid! Keep up making those!
If I recall, efficiencies like these are Very impressive! Coal and biofuel loose a Ton of power, because the plants use a lot of the power themselves, weren’t effective at collecting all energy hitting them in the first place, and then even more energy is lost converting the material into a fuel we can use.
Cost per watt for the solar panel is more important than efficiency, but sure, 39.7% is definitely welcomed.
Yes 100% agree
That’s 100% dependant on the application.
On the earth yes. But it is really good for Spacecraft.
And how are those unrelated?
This will increase watts per square meter which is very important when you have limited space
Well done, educational and entertaining with the beautiful graphics and easy flowing script, voice and music.
Still loving the vids, so glad to see you gaining subscribers!
Go GaInAs my boy.
Turn up the GaIn
Or GaInP whatever floats your boat, I don't judge.
B
Q
This was a very comprehensive explanation.
And I am compelled to commend the splendid graphics and how accurate they are. Great job with the animation too. Marvellous.
First video of yours I've watched, immediately subscribed! Nice work dude
Honestly you are amazing. Thanks for your time and all your information that you bring to all of us.👏👏👏
There's 2 things that are incredibly important to make this worth it, or any solar panels for that matter:
1. Can it be recycled?
2. What is the actual lifespan in typical uses?
The main benefit of having highly efficient panels is that we dont need to devote nearly as large areas of real estate to make sufficient quantities of production. But solar panels start losing their appeal if we have just having them clogging up landfills in 20-30 years.
1) Not at the moment.
2)degradation begins at approximately five years.
This can be as high as 50%buy year 12.
Thank you for your questions, we d be happy to answer any other questions.
Today I learned that GAInASS is actually expensive to deal with
in Dutch, ga in, means go in
its true, its true
I heard Achieving GAinASS was a painful process😂
Excellent development. Keep up the great progress.
You're my favorite science/engineering channel
I thought this was SCP channel based on your logo
and was expecting totaly different SCP oriented content :D
To me it sounds just like the guy from Guga Foods/Sous vide everything
Do you have a citation for the paper/patent?
Also, to say that we haven't been able to surpass a 22% barrier without concentrators isn't true. Take a look at the NREL efficiency chart and there are plenty of cases above 22%.
all of them seem to be either
1) labs doing testing hence - non production models
2) concentrator systems - which means motorised arrays and cooling towers etc so very expensive for residential uses
Basically coming back to the fact that what is widely available and in use, is still within the 22% range.
Awesome Video With amazing graphics. You should do a behind the scenes or maybe even a quick workflow tutorial. I think the blender community could learn a lot from your excellent work.
This is amazingly exciting news - a while away from scaling up, but nonetheless awesome. Thanks for sharing!
We know that you were laughing inside the whole time, noice
NOOICE.
ROIGHT
FOINE
Woild
Banana Bandana.
Nice video but a couple of questions come to mind. What is the degradation curve of these panels and what is the end life recyclability of these panels? There a lot of heavy metals mentioned.
I'd love to see a video on high efficiency solar cells that have the capability to be produced at a scale and cost to allow wide spread adoption and that are environmentally friendly at the end of their life.
These videos keep getting better.
Nice explanation with best videos 👍 Share more ideas like there for the new technology
Mostly at yellow and green.
The < 20% efficiency range for solar cells has been broken a long long time ago. As in (long long) 35 years ago. The reason why they're not in common use is because they are expensive as hell. Fit for use only with space applications where the cost is no barrier and the gain in out put is warranted. Like with the Mars rovers.
Sooooooooooooooo for application for civilian usage, the record has finally been broken. That, I think, was the fuckin point. Like, maybe now we wont have to see such wonderful panels shot off into space at the cost of billions, instead, we can just look at our roof, and feel pride in humanities accomplishments for the little guy.
Thanks for cleaing that up rick! the first few sentences sounds like BS and it was.
To say this has an application for private civilian use is true if such a person where on the Forbes list of richest.
Amazing achievement, one clarification - to state the efficiency record jumped from 22% to 39.7% is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. 22% would be in the silicon solar cell technology architecture. 39.7% is a 6-junction multi-junction solar cell, as you indicated, with many prior achievements in the multi-junction solar cell technology under AM1.5 global irradiance (excluding concentrator of AM0 irradiance). The NREL link indicates the historical progression of solar cell efficiency records across different types of solar cell architectures: www.nrel.gov/pv/cell-efficiency.html.
Congratulations, you just earned yourself a sub
Just want to say, these animations are on point, visuals are very explanatory
I hope you do a video showing us how you make your videos what else do you use other than Blender?
I wanna know how is he doing the text, or he renders all the basic animations, keep the frames for a while and change it again upon giving new information
Tip: Put more numbers on the screen when making comparations so its easier to visualize the numbers
I love how hilarious the subtitles are contrasted by the sincere subject matter and comprehensiveness of knowledge.
About the note, I -we- will wait for another year with this badass quality!
Ps: we would love to know how you animate your work :) pls a video explaining that!
Thanks for the insight
GaInAs made my day, thank's for the video!
Awesome animations! Great video :)
Awesome video bruh 👊💪
PS. Even I don't know what I am talking about sometimes-
Subject zero science
Best caption ever.
What about separating the frequencies by diffraction grating and holographic lens and positioning the appropriate material for each band gap at the appropriate location rather than multi-layer. The area increases but fabrication may be cheaper. The holographic lens can keep the proper cells illuminated as the Sun moves I think. It may allow many more material types to be involved, perhaps increasing overall efficiency. This may be more appropriate for concentraror systems on reflection.
I believe in terms of future potential, a multilayered one is more efficient, as no energy is lost to the refraction of the frequencies, but right now i sounds like a really interesting idea
yeah man what he said
@@mvvo7366 😂😂😂
Increasing the area cancels out the benefits though, might as well just have an equivalent area multi-layer cell.
Solar panels generally are about getting W/m^2 you may increase the efficiency but the area you have is increased by N where N is the number of different materials. You'd have to use a concentrator before your grating so all the light that would hit your larger area passes through a much smaller grating and disperses the light over your larger area. Otherwise you are wasting massive amounts of energy, as @Himanshu Goel mentions without the concentrator you'd cancel out your advantages.
Great video sir!
Another excellent video.
When talking efficiency, is that referring to the photons from a particular spectrum such as visible light or does the statement cover the entire spectrum?
ithink the entire spectrum
Dr. William Shockley was absolutely brilliant, working on modern RADAR, inventing the transistor, the semiconductor and the theory that became the solar panel (the Shockley-Queisser Limit was mentioned in this video). I would even go as far as to argue he was smarter than Einstein if you compare his life's work to Einstein's life's work.
Thank you for this video!
Advancement in PV and all things electric need to be the top priority for all human effort right now.
Great stuff.
8:25 there is a layer of simethicone
I need to get some of those GaInAs for my wife.
Whoever renders your animations needs a raise.
Another amazing video ! So clean I watch even if the subject doesn't interest me.
04:03 Did you model the ISS ?
A third way of spelling aluminum/aluminium is now introduced: Alluminium 0:26
Literally the first thing I noticed
It will blow your mind when I tell you that in profession I work we call it "ali" or less common "alu". It is very rare to hear someone saying or even writing on official documentation the full word
"Big Thanks to my patrons: Toyota AE86"
nice
fantASSStic presentation sir, and thanks for silly smiles as break. :)
Incredible video!
"Ideal to replace the panels on the ISS"
Are we talking about the same ISS that is being decommissioned in 4 years?
Let's do it anyway.
@Kristian La Vigne I'd like to see proof backing that up...
@Kristian La Vigne Sure, never trust media, but trust some random people on the web that don't provide clear sources, twist and ignore facts to proof a wrong point. Seems legit. The biggest problem is that conspiracy theories always say "think" but just want you to blindly believe.
Yeah, the ISS is CGI. That's why I can see it pass over my house.
@Kristian La Vigne You can see it though.
I didn’t get it.
Put two suns in the sky, twice the input energy half the efficiency or HIGHER EFFICIENCY?
two suns in the sky, twice the input energy, same efficiency.
This guy gets lt
You didn't change the nature of the solar cells, you get twice as much energy as before to begin with, so you end up with twice as much energy. This ain't rocket science yo. (oh yeah I'm also ignoring the fact that two suns in the sky would prolly kill us all anyway)
Two suns? Forget it, it doesn’t work ....
Max Loh
I get it. Two suns doubles the output for original efficiency.
Lol I love your videos and content. Keep shining brother :)
PS I like 7:52 where you mention that you don’t even know what you are talking about. Keep it up
Wow, amazing animations!
4:59
Please use the normal "m²" and not "SQM" in your future videos. Thank you ✌🏻
They mean the same thing.
@@carultch We know, it’s just easier to read
...and what if you just pass it through a prism to separate out wavelengths into different types of panels?
You'd need a solar tracker for that.
@@michelangelobuonarroti916 Good point
That makes it a bit more difficult for a roof mounted solution.
I wonder how any extra efficiency and cost savings would compare to the extra power and financial cost of running the tracker for a solar farm 🤔...
... and weight and volume costs for space launch ...
also curious if the other "solar concentrator" solution required a tracker too?
It can work but you will lose about 1 or 2 percent of light in the prism and your total panel area will be larger than the area of the prism that the light is landing on which makes it totally space inefficient. So you will be trading capture efficiency for conversion efficiency
@@lugiarboy maybe going theough a concentrator lense on one axis first to reduce the area and then through the prism on opposite axis.
(Additional cost and mass for the tracker to pull but have to see how much cost reduction for from the panels themselves balances that out)
😉
then you have rainbows over the roof instead
Excellent video!
I love how your lab manager is a glorious JDM legend
Cool for space applications, but I'm really interested in $/watt.
Absolutely!
Currently under 5 cents per watt.
A 300wp panel is 70 buck from the factory.
Solar is becomming really cheap. Commercial solar farms are delivering energy for under 2 cents per kwh now.
And ready and wide availability.
Give the technology to the Chinese
"We did it! What's the cost per Watt?"
.
.
.
"$4000"
FACEPALM
That's the same for everything though.
It's still in the lab so after manufacturing improvements and mass manufacturing. The cost would come down.
@@BigMacintosh3020 well, normal solar panel cost between 1 and 2 dollars per watt, I don't think this will be 2000 times cheaper that fast, it will take decades before normal people can buy this panels
@@bassam_salim where do you live ? In my country the cheapest pv module cost about 110$ (285w). The is way much cheaper then 1$ per watt.
We need more of this tech!
I assume solar degradation of cells occurs proportionately faster with concentrated solar applications, no?
Yes, or at least that's the case with older ones. There were concentrator panels made in the 80s (90s?) that had much higher output but they also had short lifespans. The fresnel lenses cooked the cells. Dunno about modern versions with that issue, but I bet it's still a problem. Maybe they have half the lifespan instead of 1/10 or something..?
You can make your channel an order of magnitude greater for people like me if you add sources in the video description.
many "faCTS" ARE SIMPLY WRONG, THUS NO SOURCES.
Thumbs up and subscribed!
47% in efficiency? Omfg if this method become in large scale we could get a super revolution in solar energy output. It's unprecedent! Thank you a Lot to bring this content!
P.s.: idk How people dislike this kind of content, omg
Not necessarily. The biggest cost these days isn't the panels, it's the other hardware that converts it into usable electricity. For most users, space for more cheaper panels, even if they're less efficient, is not a problem.
Man I absolutely can't wait! Hopefully will happen in the next few years
Theoretically, if solar panels were 100% efficient would they be even darker than vantablack when opened into a circuit?
They would need to absord all wavelenghts of light that are produced by the sun, so yes, it should not reflect any light at all.
Question is however is it possible to reach such efficiencies due to a lot of the energy being infrared which is heat. Heat decreases efficiency, so we would need a new design for the cells.
if they were 100 % efficient. that mean we can't see them
So dark that the object would be in visible.
Keep it up mate
Very cool. Don't forget to put sources and citations in your description.
He says 39.2% in the intro but title says 39.7%
So which one is it?
I NEED TO KNOW!!!!
Well above 39% atleast
It raises by the GaInAs effect.
the 39.7% include a 0.5% sales tax. 🤓
@@quantumbubbles2106 Or relativistic effects from the photon's high speed
Great stuff, as always 👌
Just wanted to comment on what you said at the end, about Solar panels being essential for Mars exploration.
Due to Mars' reduced Solar irradiance (about half that of Earth's) and dusty environment, Solar power becomes kind of a "meh" choice.
I think they'll try to go nuclear instead, as the main source of power, I mean.
Some of the problems with nuclear, though, is the weight. Having to ship equipment sufficiently effective and safe to provide nuclear power outside of Earth's orbit, is gonna cost a fortune in rocket launch expenses, might as well ship 5x as many solar panels instead. Solar is pretty light weight in comparison.
@@Real_MisterSir I dont know mango. I suspect 1MW nuclear reactor will weigh less than 1MW of solar panels
OTOH there are no water clouds, so the difference may be less than you think.
As a research and developer, I love hearing and seeing new technologies discoveries. What I dislike is the discoveries developed in labs, universities and big corporations never seem to be commercially available. The best most people gets out from these “fabulous” discoveries are the seeds planted for more innovative technologies. In most cases, by time many of these discoveries become commercially available, the technology is obsolete. An example of this is Graphene, the miracle material. Discovered in 2004 by two scientist resulting in winning a Nobel Prize. To this day it has not been able to be economically commercialized in full sheets since it’s discovery in 2004. Oh, it’s a great material and I’m sure will be the a solution to many innovations. In the meantime.
Most of it was hard to follow, but I am happy to see progress 👍
Cheers
90% of the stuff went over my head.
10% efficiency
@@mar504 yes indeed
In the last twenty years there was every year a breakthrough in pv cell technology with record efficiency, yet we still have shitty cells.
Shitty cells, according to who?
That's markets for you. Why upgrade to the new while people will still pay for the same old subpar product?
Shitty? Possibly so. A least they have got significantly cheaper over the last twenty years.
I'm 61 years old. I would say that solar cells have improved dramatically in my lifetime.
But cells are much cheaper and better than 20 years ago.
Great Video! Congratulation.
Would you mind to tell what software do you use for those sick animations?
Thks, I almost made it to the end but unfortunately my eyes finally rounded back in my head ;)
Stated ''Efficiency'' accuracy depend on how close lab testing condition is to real world condition.
How does this man make his videos and why is he not one of the largest youtubers
I've put 600w of solar panels and a 3.3kw lifepo4 battery in my RV. Best money I've ever spent.
It's like a little generator that never needs gas for 20 years!
This is also a very important development for adding solar to Cars & RVs. How about a video on the Aptera?
Science: look at this wonderful advance.
Plants: Thomas had never seen such bs.
Aren't solar panels more efficienty than most plants?
IIRC, plants' efficiency is not that great... Like, we made artificial leaves a lot more effective than natural ones.
@@DunnickFayuro Ahh. so where are they being applied. My point is nature evolved it and we copy it. bragging about 30 something percent isn't all that fantastic considering how highly we think of ourselves.
@@DunnickFayuro I guess my secondary point is plants use the sun for life. We basically aren't interested if there is no profit, money dumped into research and devopment is based soley on profitability. We could be further along if we did it because it is the right thing. We would be further along if money were no option. So no, I am not impressed.
@@chorinu7609 Humans use the sun for life too. Nothing is possible any other way. (Appart maybe for some exotic chemical or radiation feeding bacteria)
39.2% or 39.7% ?
good question
Nice job complete
Great video
When will we get them on Earth?
Good one!!
after the oil tycoons stop buying rights to these and shelving them off public light of day
Never. They are more complex and therefore much more expensive. Current panels are good because of how cheap they are.
Okay, Fidel: name ONE oil company that is sitting on some "rights" to prevent a solar technology from getting to market. Just ONE. You kids and your childish theories ....
@@fidelcatsro6948
Actually oil companies support solar. They have launched massive solar campaigns in the past because they know that for the other 18 hours you will need a natural gas turbine as a backup. The alternative energy source they actually oppose is nuclear. They have sponsored many anti-nuclear propaganda campaigns in the past, and apparently have played a large part in getting all those laws that make nuclear so slow passed, though I haven't see any 100% proof of this.
What's the deal with "Toyota AE86" ?
Patron's name probably
sponsored by scotty kilmer of course..rev up your engines!
Amazing communicator
There is also a Swiss company that uses the regular monocrystaline panels and they couple it with water cooling to keep the efficiency quite high by maintaining an optimal temperature for the panels while also producing an abundance of hot water. Heat is the main part of the solar spectrum and to not catch and use the heat is an opportunity that is missed with most solar panels. Concentrating arrays do capture that though
SPECTROLAB has been making 40%+ efficient multi junction solar cells for decades.
*If we succeeded in raiding Area 51 we’d have 100% efficiency* -breaking the laws of physics bois-
if you raid the workshop there you might find overunity anti gravity propulsion systems that no longer need solar panels anymore
Very concise and informative thanks and done with Blender cool
Great vid
Excellent video on a practical subject people care about -- great job! How about artificial photosynthesis?
Never going to happen. Well in your and my lifetime, anyway.
@4:50 is that including what it cost to get the solar panals to space? or just the raw cost of the solarpanel