How Record Breaking Perovskites Are Here NOW

[@UndecidedMF]

Are you excited by the thought of finally getting your hands on perovskite solar panels? Go to surfshark.com/undecided for 4 extra months of Surfshark at an unbeatable price! If you liked this, check out How This TRULY Omni-Directional Wind Turbine is Genius kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZ2bhomFpd-ibbM

[@steveperryman8102]

@@UndecidedMF No .....

[@jimcabezola3051]

Yes. However, I hope the lead in that FLI substance doesn't leech out onto the ground and into the ground water. I can just hear lawyers sharpening their fangs over this...

[@estraume]

As an engineer, I will always favor solar over wind power due to the fact that solar can be build without moving parts. Long term reliability with full recycling and reuse of all materials at end of life would also be important seen from a sustainability point of view.

[@coco_robs]

It's also 'better' because it's taking energy super early on in the energy lifecycle of earth. Just as light hits earth it's energy is converted into electricity. The heat you would have got on your roof is now instead released as heat 'anyway' later on in the form of making a cup of tea or playing a computer game. The potentially negative effects of taking energy out the system are super small and minimised. Every other energy generation method takes energy from deep within the energy ecosystem; taking it from materials, from wind, from tides, from geothermal energy. Solar theoretically has the LEAST impact to the world's complex ecosystem. Furthermore; it's one of the few technologies that work both on earth and (with more efficiency) in space. So tech improvements benefit both land-based solar and space-based solar. You can't achieve that with wind, tidal or geothermal. So unless the Nuclear Fission project is a huge success; solar is the way! or at least until then, solar is the way!

[@rakeshkchauhan]

Well if the parts can keep on moving for 30 years without maintenance, who cares if they are cheap, like my fridge which is working fine after 30 years. Anyway, where the tracking Sterling Engine systems have gone... no one is talking about them.

[@FiveFiveZeroTwo]

Less moving parts is nice, but how would you cover winters with little sun?

[@GruffSillyGoat]

Wind has a higher efficiency limit than solar, close to 60% compare to solar's 40 to 50%, and offer lower land usage density and can be installed offshore. Currently wind is upto 50% efficient already. Plus some locations on the planet are more wind rich than solar rich. It's a mix of renewable generation that is required not particularly just one type.

[@somdudewillson]

@GruffSillyGoat ...I mean, I also support using many renewable energy sources, but lower land usage density is _bad_ - that would mean that they produce less energy for the same amount of land used.

[@shad0wyenigma]

I think explaining why improved efficiency is important was missed out of the video. Improved efficiency allows reduced land use, fewer materials needed to produce 1kW of power, lower deployment costs, and therefore reducing the overall costs of green energy while reducing the impact on the environment.

[@adr2t]

True, but think everyone is jumping the fence a bit too soon on this one. We need to see jumps closer to 5-10% than 2.5%. Not to say these dont open the door for it.

[@GruffSillyGoat]

@@adr2t - the OxfordPV seems to be close to that level already, at 20% efficiency increase to 24.5% would be 4% increase on a 20.5% silicon panel.

[@veganpotterthevegan]

@adr2t these really do give a significant gain though.

[@veganpotterthevegan]

@shad0wyenigma if used properly, we can reduce the heat in cities with inefficient panels. Car ports, long walkways, panels just off of roofs for an air barrier, stretches of freeway that can mean reduced use of AC in your cars etc. With those use cases, long term durability is more important. But once storage is sorted, we can easily make significantly more power than we need.

[@adr2t]

@@veganpotterthevegan Maybe, but I rather see the money be spent else where as well. For example, like the idea of using panels to help cool down areas with shade while still providing power generation like over parking lots. Or even, at least in the US, help drive more heat pump systems. The lower we can help get the cost of power to live down, the better each renewable becomes.

[@bogganalseryd2324]

We need em cheap for the private sector

[@taffygeek]

The first stage will be commercial customers which will be willing to pay a premium as it can be saved against the cost of land purchase. Hopefully this will drive efficiencies in panel manufacture and allow growth enabling economies of scale. Perhaps at that point private sales will become competitive .

[@TheHoveHeretic]

That's a sales policy more likely to ramp production levels (hence reducing price) a sight faster than waiting for smaller domestic installations to spread at higher unit cost. Just for the record ... I'm as frustrated at my inability to at least try any promising clean tech as anyone!

[@mybighandle]

Conventional solar panels have dropped 90% in the last decade. Some people wouldn’t install them if they were free. Just complaining about future tech because they’re afraid to move forward or just plain ignorant.

[@Hansen710]

china to the rescue

[@garyl6031]

Remember the first microwave ovens? $25k+/per now they are so cheap they are considered disposable. Once they commercial viability proven and the techniques are perfected then the price will plummet.

[@AdvantestInc]

Tandem cells breaking through efficiency limits is a game-changer for solar tech. It's exciting to see how material innovation like perovskites is helping us push past traditional boundaries in renewables.

[@Iprofessshirk]

Current silicone tech is not 15-22%.....all the factories in China are currently pumping out 22-23% efficiency cells. This is a pretty modest bump up to 24.5%. While I love to see improvements, lets not overstate them....and the question is "at what price"?

[@adr2t]

Not true at all.. while they can produce them at a higher efficiency, most of their bulk stuff is still less than 20%. Keep in mind their focus is more on cost than power efficiency.

[@Iprofessshirk]

@@adr2t I own a solar company, and import MW of solar each year...I'm buying panels on a regular basis that are 23%, low cost, grade-A panels.

[@GruffSillyGoat]

A 1% increase is not that small when considering the catchment area and exposure timeframe; this quickly adds up, as outlined in the video (9:30). Whilst the panel costs may be higher initially, due to low volume of production, for commercial and industrial customers this can have an immediate pay off for them (particularly in power generation). The 20% gain in the OxfordPV panels indicates a 4% improvement over a 20.5% efficient silicon panel using just a thin film coating. What's more with OxfordPV's licensing approach they are seeking this to be a low cost incremental change for existing PV manufacturer production lines rather than seeking to be the end producer themselves with all the inherent costs and commercial risks in ramping up production and sales. This is an approach optimised to seek the rapid deployment of perovskite technology; one the UK, and particularly university spin-off companies, often seek being a services rather than manufacturing based economy (ARM used the same approach in the semiconductor processor market for example, with significant effect). The company they are working with in Germany for production also make PV production equipment used around the world as well as panels, so OxfordPV are looking to offer a ready made solution for rapid deployment of licenable perovskite IP/chemicals and bolt-on (compatible) manufacturing equipment to existing PV makers. This is a two pronged approach of offering complete panels to drive adoption as well as open up the IP and manufacturing technology access to other producers.

[@adr2t]

@@Iprofessshirk I am sure you are, but that doesnt mean that the panels China makes are all like that. One of the BIGGEST solar giants over there and a few smaller ones are closing shop because their panels dont hit at least around 18% and thus have fallen out of demand. The only reason why its still even running is because they sell them without any markup and are used for VERY large solar projects because they're the cheapest. Really, doesnt matter, it mainly just comes down to cost per watt.

[@filipagh679]

@@adr2t now i order 18panels with 22.3% with 25years waranty for home -Longi 435Wp Hi-MO X6 100eur/panel

[@kushalvora7682]

That 0.5% weight increase is at cell level not at panel level. At panel level the weight increase would be almost 0% from perovskite addition

[@junkerzn7312]

Definitely progress. Not sure I would move it up the pyramid yet, but having whole modules out in the field is a good step. In my mind, the true game-changer is when modules reach 30% with at least a 15-year life-span above 25%. They are competing with high-end silicon modules whos degradation rates are already sitting at only 0.2% a year. Also, with all due respect to RICE University, anything with Lead, particularly in-solution or paint-on, is a big Ixnay. -Matt

[@petebateman143]

When the costs come down I'll get excited :)

[@vulpo]

And when they are proven to be environmentally safe.

[@chlistens7742]

I watched both the videos. Yes it sounds nice to see the improvement and seeing that they are almost available to everyone. Remember when people complain on 24% sounds low... well only 17-21% of the energy from Gas is converted into moving a car. I love to see every type of new panel and such. I am still hopping that Window cells will become cheap enough to use standard

[@GruffSillyGoat]

Very true, also a 1% change in solar efficiency has a big impact on the overall kW ouput produced by PV panel, due to the aggregate effect of producing more energy summed over period of time as well as across a deployment area.

[@keith3761]

but the car is getting that 21% from a super energy dense source, and for a very cheap price.

[@zackkirako8574]

@@keith3761 Cheap?

[@somenygaard]

@@zackkirako8574 Cheap AND plentiful

[@GruffSillyGoat]

@@keith3761 - not that dense, metal-air batteries offer similar max theorectical density and are 3 to 4 times more efficient in use. Plus when you factor in the continuous energy costs invovled in producing a fuel the nett overall energy density drops further.

[@tygreen101]

@2:26, you showed the silicon and perovskite cells on top of each other. About 10 years ago, there was talk of clear solar panels. Has there been any updates on clear solar cells/panels? If we could cover more external area of our house with panels, I would think there would be less need for higher efficiency. We might also be able to cover our entire cars with solar panels and thus have more area collecting/creating energy to make up for a less than perfect angle. I would also think clear would be less affected by the heat of the sun than a darker color.

[@Krystaltho]

@@tygreen101 I’m a material science PhD student and I’ve seen talks about this by some of the people who are developing it. Turns out it’s really hard and they’re still in the development stage and are not close to getting it to market. At least that’s what I know

[@Alaric323]

Entirely clear panels doesn't make much sense because you need to absorb that light to convert it to electricity; it just depends on what spectrum you want to absorb. A "clear" panel would only absorb ultraviolet or infrared light, the wavelengths we can't see. What COULD be cool though is "stained glass" solar panels, where each panel is tuned to absorb a different frequency so you can make mosaics out of it. They won't be nearly as efficient as full spectrum panels, but it could become an art form that attracts more wealthy purchasers.

[@RobertAlbrecht-c5d]

Hit 240k today. Appreciate you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. Started with 24k in September 2024

[@SteveMichaels]

This is super cool .... maybe it will drive down prices on solar panels now that there is an alternative. I do admit it will years before its common but you got to start somewhere kind of like carbon fiber did. imo enjoyed the video Matt ... Merry Christmas to you and your family and a fun and safe new years.

[@settingsun1]

Thanks Matt for covering this journey, future generations will find this channel valuable in seeing the pace of solar development.

[@oldsquid9887]

excelent! I want a 700w panel to test. where can i get one?

[@jrob8931]

The company that purchased those Perovskite panels is located in the Niagara Falls area. You wouldn’t know them. 😅

[@stevep9177]

Love me a good perovskite Shout out to my favorite perovskite content producer

[@Crackalacking_Z]

Props for the Rush Hour clip, it made me smile :)

[@tactrix1h]

I'm very excited by this technology, and looking forward to it being utilized world wide to replace the traditional silicon panels.

[@geoffstrickler]

You can bet that Oxford PV made the utility a really sweet deal on those panels, it provides cash flow to OPV, and gets them a major market win to prove their technology in the field. OPV might not even be making any significant net profit from the deal, but it buys them operating capital, time, reputation, and field experience.

[@haroldnicholos7436]

I think we need to focus less on the most efficiency and more on which is the easiest for recyclability

[@TLguitar]

I'm not even going to watch this one, because all of the previous updates on it failed to mention (at least to a meaningful extent) the issues with current perovskites being based on lead. If it becomes widely used in its current form it will certainly create a significant amount of lead pollution, especially around populated areas. Do we need a rerun of the effects observed a few decades ago from widespread use of lead-based paint and leaded car fuel?

[@GruffSillyGoat]

@@TLguitar - Not all perovskites are lead based, only the subset mentioned in the video, that if you watched you would have understood this was raised. Even with lead based perovskites, studies have been done into the leech risk from PVs, including lead run-off, the risk and volume determined are tiny and not that much above background levels in anycase. Unlike paints which were exposed so errosion run off had an impact. With PV's the chemicals are contained and exposed only by accident and on disposal not in the installation environment. Handling and recycling procedures and processes will reduce the risk further. It's more likely to get more lead run off from the roof itself than from the panel on the roof, particularly on older roofs and in certain parts of the world. So the OP was correct to highlight the recycling need and indeed this is being developed, at a fair pace, and is looking to shape up to be a similar approach to batteries with manufacturers being made resposible to perform or pay towards the recyclining of the panels. Not sure why you sought to scare monger if you've not watched the video.

[@weeveferrelaine6973]

@@TLguitar I live on a lead mine. Lead itself in the environment is actually pretty common, and only poses an issue if you ingest it. I don't think toddlers are going to be getting access to, and chewing on solar panels en mass anytime soon. Lead in paint was consumed as small flecks or when licked by kids. Lead in gas gets inhaled in exhaust, or on your hands. Lead in solar panels is about as dangerous as lead-acid batteries. Just have a good recycle plan to round up the majority of it, and make sure the public is aware that special recycling is needed.

[@TLguitar]

@GruffSillyGoat Because I've already watched previous videos from this channel about perovskites. And I did a quick Control+F on the transcript and saw that lead was only mentioned once when explaining the basic chemistry, without further references. But lead-based is the type always in current discussions, while others are currently not good enough so the technology in question, as of now, _will_ be based on lead. The companies involved in the development of current-generation lead-based perovskite solar panels probably all downplay this aspect, but it is much more likely not as manageable as they claim it is. From the information I could gather, each square meter of such solar cells contain about 7 kilograms of lead. That means that each household retrofitted with such panels would have hundreds of kilograms of lead across its roof. If lead-based panels would prove commercially viable and cheap enough for mass consumption, then their circulation across residential and industrial buildings in developed countries could easily double our global lead consumption. I just don't see that as a non-issue.

[@zotter2542]

@@haroldnicholos7436 Actually, that's also efficiency 😏

[@mnhtnman]

Thank you and good morning!

[@NathanHarrison7]

Exciting news. I’ve been waiting for greater efficiencies in solar technology before investing in a residential system. I’ve had my eye on the high-efficiency of Maxeon Solar Technologies PV panels. Look forward to seeing how all of this matures.

[@danilooliveira6580]

for residential most of your costs will come from installation, solar panels are already efficient enough for home use, unless you have a factory inside your house you won't need panels that are more efficient. if anything these perovskites may be a worse investment because they are more expensive and won't last as long as normal PV panels in the market, meaning it will take much longer for perovskites to pay for themselves, and you will probably need to pay to replace them much earlier. the only difference that may justify perovskites is a bit more energy generation from sundown/sunrise because, since they use bluer light, they will absorb some of the refracted light from the sky. but I have no idea how much of a difference it actually makes.

[@thatonneguy]

14:20 love this mentality. Imagine if US based companies started tossing capitalism into the wind and just started giving out solar panels for people to test. I grew up in the twin cities, mn. Currently living in WI. I'm hesitant to try solar because of our well known weather. The efficiency has to get to a certain point for me to even consider paying for it at this point.

[@sosic172]

Why would the gov waste other people's money giving solar panels where they wouldn't be effective then?

[@danilooliveira6580]

even better if proprietary technology wasn't a thing and we could freely share technologies and breakthroughs with each other so the technology would advance faster and we could have multiple companies around the world making their own solar panels.

[@tbix1963]

Thanks for sharing the latest breakthroughs. Curious if anyone is working on biphasial cells with perovskite. Have been seeing more utility scale farms being built with vertical panels facing east and west to level out the load curve.

[@MCPicoli]

Almost there. Soon, general availability?

[@evilginger013o_o]

An interesting approach to testing this type of panel would be small-scale, IMHO. Solar trickle chargers for vehicles. The current ones aren't great, but better than nothing for people who do not drive often, whose vehicle are not garaged (so no plug in trickle chargers can be used), and whose vehicles lose battery charge over time (parasitic drain or not). Older folks and disabled folks who do not drive often can find that they need to replace drained batteries or call roadside assistance frequently to jump start their vehicle, especially newer vehicles that have a ton of electronics built-in that need a higher charge when trying to start the vehicle and all of the built-in electronics. Smaller panels made with perovskite tested as trickle chargers for car/truck batteries could be a way to test how they degrade (or don't) under constant use, under naturally varying weather conditions (Sunny? Cloudy? Snowy and cold winter days? Et cetera.). Can they keep a battery fully charged in a vehicle that is only started and driven once a week, in varying climates and weather (sunlight) conditions? IMHO, this could be a way to convince some "solar skeptics" out there to try solar on a small scale rather than installing whole house solar- if they are efficient, safe, and reliable enough that that they do not need to call for a jump start every week, they may start to consider solar as a more reliable way to power their homes, full time or as backup power.

[@donl5158]

When do you estimate Perovskites to be commercially available to the consumer I actually built the Silicone Wafer plants for Arco Solar; yes Arco was in Solar for quite a while. My question: is the process similar in producing, so that these Silcone/cell plants can produce Perosvskites

[@johnreeves7261]

I made my first panels ever with Arco Solar cells in 1989! The panels were for my University's solar race car.

[@donl5158]

@@johnreeves7261 They were excellent panels at the time. Wonder if those you used are still around, just to ck on their remaining performance.

[@johnreeves7261]

@@donl5158 Alas the panels I made are long gone!

[@GruffSillyGoat]

The OxfordPV approach is to licence an extra production step as a bolt on to the existing manufacturing process, one that coats the silicon layer with a perovskite thing-film before encapsulating. The production partner they are working with in Germany to produce their panels also make PV manufacturing equipment, so in theory their processing technology could be deployed into existing production lines are relatively low cost (for equipment and technology licence). The question of consumer access then is a commercial one of which markets will the panel makers address first, most likely commercial rather than consumer as they'll probably deem silicon only products are sufficent for the latter and demand for tandem cells will be higher in the commercial sector (particularly in power generation) as a higher price point than silicon ones. Once the technology establishes and the cost of production upgrades reduces then perhaps the downtime required to retrofit production lines will be sufficient to outweigh temporary loss in revenue streams. So in short, it's not known when end consumer access will be available as it's probably driven more by commercial factors than technology ones now.

[@bachirsoualah8305]

The secret is to put the perovskite on top of a layer of silicon and isolate it from oxygen through a transparent glass cover and chemicals that increase the hardness to preserve it for 25 years.

[@TheHoveHeretic]

A Nobel Prize winner here on YT comments ...... lucky us!

[@JeffBilkins]

Maybe but the real secret is controlling the process and actually get it shipped.

[@loneIyboy15]

Maybe the real secret is the friends we made along the way.

[@sino_diogenes]

sauce?

[@manofsan]

Why not just put the silicon on top of the perovskite, since silicon is already a durable rugged material?

[@Vile_Entity_3545]

The 13 investors are going to see massive returns if this kicks off.

[@TheKillerman3333]

Wait till we get these at the retail market level. That would be awesome. It would greatly change a lot of enthusiast hobbies. Rc, solar transport and so on.

[@frankcoffey]

A normal solar panel costs more than a TV in the US so I don't expect much growth for homeowners. Utility scale might be a good application. There are also many folks figuring out ways to punish consumers who get solar panels by higher insurance rates, reduced payout for power, and in some countries even a fee to put power back in the grid. So I'm not doing it. Not just because of what is going on now but what they might think of next.

[@Banana-wb7bp]

You’ve been saying that for years almost weekly. Well done 👍

[@murderdoggg]

12:06 Dimethyl(formamid)e has a boiling point of 153°C. How do 12:58 your fancy (Formamid)inium lead iodide Perovskite formula blood crystals dry at only 100°C? Do they just hydraquafy and vacuum vaporate them?

[@TheMouthySicilian.]

I'm building off-grid in the Arizona high desert and need to purchase these panels now.

[@jonalirez6710]

One of my favorite Japanese manufacturing concepts/words is "Kaizen". Essentially small incremental improvements.

[@Snaakie83]

Fraunhofer is a huge player in science, i remember the name since they were basically responsible for MP3/H264&mpeg4

[@martinzihlmann822]

and all open for everyone to use from day one

[@grischu8277]

Meyer Burger needs some good Buzz around it. Licencing the bleeding edge of commercial PV technology might help.

[@TheIceman50]

What do the panels have to be outside. Behind glass panes, they would lose some efficiency but gain in longevity.

[@ericseidel4940]

For the moment the only broken record is the shortest live panels. In bulk 500w Si panels are about 60€ each, with a 25y waranty. I'd rather add a few to compensate a small efficiency deficit than buy Perovkite.

[@neubianx]

I still think that instead of making the Perovskite layer of a tandem panel permanently affixed, it should be removable and disposable. That way you can just play on servicing the entire system every 5 or 10 years by popping off the Perovskite protective layer and snapping in a replacement. This would reduce the longevity/durability requirements and make Perovskites viable now instead of at some unknown future date after developing new materials tech.

[@GruffSillyGoat]

It would be more costly to create two layers than the benefit gained. Extra layers would reduce the panels efficiency as the intermediary layers would interact with the light transmission negating the benefit of the additional layer. This was the approach being tried previously and failed to take off, not because of the technology, but the lower efficiency and higher cost. Now with perovskites being a thin-film coating that are deposited directly onto the silicon substrate, with lifespans projected (and tested) to last as long as the silicon panel as outlined with the commcerialised products raised in the video. Further, having panels with increased maintenance costs isn't commercially attractive, particularly for large scale operators where a 5/10 year maintenance cycle by itself would outweigh the cost benefit of having a panel with higher output - as this would be an ongoing resource cost rather than a one off capex spend.

[@paytonturner1421]

The para Sky solar panels in combined with energy storage by using hydrogen or ammonia to help with more energy storage with renewable energy.

[@playyourturntodieatvgperson]

Hydrogen is not an effective method of energy storage compared to batteries. It is inefficient and it has poor reaction time.

[@RandomWombleP]

@playyourturntodieatvgperson Like everything there are advantages and disadvantages. Arguably storage capacity for Hydrogen can be more easily scaled up although potential power output will remain constant, that might seem like a downside but in some circumstances being able to provide a constant output for a long time is going to be better than a large burst for a short period and obviously unlike BES you don't need huge amounts of various rarer metals which are also in demand for other uses. Also as a long term storage medium Hydrogen probably works better. I suspect in theory existing gas powerplants could be converted to Hydrogen with relative ease if a way to generate Hydrogen onsite was installed which has the advantages that a lot of the infrastructure is preexisting (including a large capacity grid connection which is sometimes a big issue with new power installations) which would make it a cheaper option however right now there is no incentive for anyone to do such a conversion as it would still have a cost to the owner over just continuing to use gas. Personally I think lots of smaller scale local BES storage which do not need huge capacity connections to the grid (not personal but covering something like 50-1000 homes) combined with larger national scale facilities made up of the likes of Hydrogen and pumped hydro are the way to go in theory especially if the local storage is backed up by local generation through personal roof top solar and potentially other means. This is not just about the storage but also about the power network itself as semi local solutions can reduce the need for more beefed up infrastructure everywhere. Certainly in the UK putting in new high voltage pylons is a big challenge. I also believe while it would probably be a relatively cost effective solution overall (and also provide more reliable supply during events that damage infrastructure like storms) it will never happen as it needs a holistic approach directed or regulated by a single entity while in reality everything is done piecemeal for the largest potential profit.

[@o_-_o]

Wow Peter Jacobson (Dr. Chris Taub from House, M.D.) is head of Oxford PV!

[@neildolan7177]

I guess one isdue with the transition is how long do you wait for the tech to improve. Silicon panels are still being deployed. Will they become obsolete?

[@__DexJames__]

Tech is moving so quickly, some brilliant minds out there. Thanks for making this video. We are headed for a four year hiccup in advancements but I think the market place will prevail.

[@thewatersavior]

First target should be disposable echargable vapes. Are there any fully recyclable batteries yet?

[@pewpin1039]

The secret is most likely lead.... which is why for optics sake they just use perovskite as the name. Since people would not be as hyped about new better performing solar panel if you would call them lead based panels that degrade quickly.

[@PKMNHUB]

I'll paint my whole roof with Perovskites, let's go Houston

[@gregraburn51]

awesome as always thank you

[@ssttevee]

Have you read about Japan's bet on perovskites? I saw some articles about Japanese perovskites last week and I was hoping to hear more about that in this video.

[@olliebrown89]

I'm pretty sure longi brought those Oxford pv panels

[@nahuelcutrera]

maybe oxford pv bought longi panels

[@GruffSillyGoat]

@@nahuelcutrera - nope, OxfordPV is a spin out technology company from Oxford University specialing in pervoskite material development and production methods. They've been working on this for years.

[@goebelwarming]

Do they make the perovskite, or is it mined?

[@BilichaGhebremuse]

97%great work bro

[@skyerios]

Ummm.... Table Salt and Diamond do not have the same crystal structure. Sodium Chloride has a simple cubic crystal structure. Diamond has a face centered cubit unit cell with has half of its tetrahedral holes filled.

[@mahbubhossainsamm]

Awesome news at the end of the year 💪🏻

[@artboymoy]

Great news. It will be interesting to see how the installation does in Germany.

[@TheCountdownnowgo]

Any indoor cells that recover power from led backlights?

[@jiriwichern]

Why would you want that? The amount of energy recovered would be negligible (you can't get more than the solar panel's efficiency's worth from the percentage of converted electrical energy the LEDs would output in light and another limiting factor would be you probably only capture a (tiny) part of the LED's light cone) and you'd rob the room of ambient light (absorbed by the solar panels instead of being reflected by your walls). The only application I could imagine being practical has already been invented: extremely low power applications, like a solar panel calculator, only needing a few micro watt.

[@shabazan]

Just wondering what it would be if this ‘secret technology’ was made public… or even cheaply licensed.

[@trevorsoh2130]

Been waiting for years to see Perovskite PVs commercialised - can’t wait to see its widespread use!

[@jeweleratlarge]

I'll buy as soon as they're available

[@MrTirantloblanc]

Thrilling and heartening 👏👏👏

[@196cupcake]

I hadn't considered machine learning for manufacturing processes, but I guess it makes sense.

[@hws888]

And the 25-year guarantee will be issued by the manufacturing company (as long as it will be around for 25 years) . Northvolt also guaranteed their batteries. Why is the efficiency so critical? Space in large installations is rarely an issue. According to Matt, standard cells efficiency is up to 22% so the new ones with 24.5% is a big deal?

[@unholyrevenger72]

Think of it this way. That bump of 22 to 24.5 percent is an 11 percent increase.

[@ronm6585]

Thanks Matt.

[@DougGarant]

Nice shirt. I listen to the guys as well.

[@rc51bigdaddy]

Would love to have these on my roof but that seems to be years off. Glad there are products in production though.

[@muhammedalzadjali2524]

It still looks an experimental shipment to the "undisclosed" buyer, rather than a product to be used by the end user.

[@daanstam6697]

I Ofcourse get why they want to keep their techniques and technology a closely guarded secret but i do wish it would have been opened to the public. If we could have all PV cell manufacturers use this and spend R&D on the techniques it would just skyrocket and used on a large scale by 2030

[@derloos]

OMG, an ATP t-shirt? I had to rub my eyes twice!!

[@the_hetman]

Yes, I noticed that classic ATP shirt too.

[@cooper1507]

11:58 Give that man less coffee.

[@gregp.7148]

LONGi’s 30.1% panels are the ones I’m getting! They are just around the corner.

[@lolidasterner414]

We need them cheap but also we need cheap capable batteries. Whats the point of more instantaneous energy without storage ?

[@TheHoveHeretic]

You're correct, though the question is a wider one than just bolting batteries on to what we have. Building *design* really needs to start reflecting the need for energy storage ... be that electrical or thermal.

[@adr2t]

Yes and no. We need to have both. Even at 2.5% increase across all areas is just - that many panels less we need to hit to get the same power output than before. Even if its only limited during the day, there are still plenty of things that can help offset their power cost.

[@cjadventures8840]

That was quick

[@jackshaftoe1715]

Prolly had em for years. Just big oil kept it under wraps

[@theword7268]

As someone who bought shares of Meyer Burger back in the day due to its association (back then) to Oxford PV Im not sure if im happy or jealous. I have seen my share value in Meyer Burger drop by -98% since then. But I still have the shares (not as many due to reverse split) but will this help Meter Burger? ISit possible that the US customer IS Meyer Burger? Didb Meyer Burger continue on a parallel track and maybe they make their own announcement?

[@Epic3032]

We need a hybrid Solar, Lunar and rain panels.

[@siracusa]

Nice shirt!

[@ramakrishna5480]

After watching tech chanels for a long time , I have new found respect for hardware engineers, there r millions of golden ideas but only a few makes it into real world

[@tibsyy895]

Let me guess...Another breakthrough! 😂😂

[@TheHoveHeretic]

Alright there Catweazle? It isn't *all* nuclear fusion - now just 30 years away.

[@xantiom]

Perovskite has always been the future, just one breakthrough would make them commercially viable: to make it as durable as crystalline silicon.

[@TheCountdownnowgo]

I am waiting for a breakout of affordability.

[@laughinggas5281]

At least this one is out of the lab

[@ChadKovac]

@@TheCountdownnowgo 💯 😂. Me too. Always the breakthroughs to finance that research that's still needed.

[@andybryant3052]

I hate to be a utilitarian, but I think they ought to make companies open source these technologies. Especially if any public funding is involved. Then, the inventors, investors, and developers get a cut of all goods produced.

[@drgolfjim]

Chris Case said the crystal structure of salt and diamond is the same......no. It is not. Nor is their atomic structure the same. I don't know what he's referring to.

[@Thevikingcam]

Are here, edition 42 time. Getting old with these guys. Been waiting for years it to hit actually shops to buy…… 😂😂

[@danilooliveira6580]

as nice as Perovskites entering the market is, the extra 5% isn't exactly game changing. normal PVs are already efficient enough for 90% of applications. what we need is for solar panels to become more durable, cheaper, and lighter so wider adoptions becomes more likely. and more importantly, we need cheaper and safer grid storage solutions, specially for home applications. as of now 5 to 10% more efficient solar panels that are exponentially more expensive won't exactly help with our energy transition.

[@christianwetzel5133]

I disagree, it is possible to produce silicon cells with higher efficiency. The technology is called singlet fission. This can increase the efficiency by 30 to 40%. AIKO has commissioned an Australian university to research it. But can be used for all solar cells.

[@guillermoherlt5141]

I think nobody says silicon is now obsolete, it just has its theoretical limits. Perovski cells push those limits further. And once it is as cheap and durable as silicon, everybody will want to buy perovski

[@radeksparowski7174]

becoming a flower in short term to survive is ok, but we need cold fusion to travel the space and truly thrive

[@4_Science]

I'd be at least a little concerned about what happens to the lead in these cells during disposal/recycling

[@dustinherk8124]

it may be "happening" but i am still highly skeptical on the longevity of the perovskite portion. as well as the additional cost for that portion. i do not believe this solution is as game changing as one thinks, after a few years of use. we have little to no actual real word evidence of a perovskite lasting even half as long as traditional solar panels. its all theory crafted information at this point.

[@jiriwichern]

Well, you have to start somewhere. You can wait 25 years to make sure they hold out long enough and then have to do it all over if your product fails or you can sell now and replace your first generation in 10 years with better ones that you have continued developing in the mean time if customers start complaining. Which strategy is more viable? And don't bring in the argument "but we need 10 years more of development first" because by that metric you'll never start production of a promising technology. When it's good enough to go, you go with it, all other things damned or you'll go bankrupt.

[@Shmade0304]

It’s probably San Diego gas and electric there doing a huge project that was put on hold a while ago

[@TheCountdownnowgo]

Cant they make a nano honeycomb of mirrors lined with solar collection material focused on a main mirrror for final collection? Why not lunar collection at night that collect nano microwaves. Shingles for homes and roofs.

[@JaykeBlayde]

Bro didn't mention if these are more fragile to a hail storm, or how much they cost. ooops

[@Austintwo3]

as far as price, the people buying these at the moment dont care about price

[@davidlanders2853]

30% by 2030!! Now that will be the game changer.

[@joonglegamer9898]

I'll get these when they're available at regular people prices.

[@mhfdejong]

Hey!! Hahaha that shirt:) love to see it in other creators

[@philippk736]

Awesome tech. But I am very much in favour or stop using the phrase "carbon footprint" which has been coined by BP to shift responsibility for solving climate issues to the consumer.

[@VisitorsWelcome]

I hope they find a way to make them without lead, which is toxic and makes recycling difficult.

[@mikejfranklin7000]

1. China seems to be leading in a lot of sustainable electrical technology. If it wasn't for their political system, we should all be Chinese. 2. Any issues with materials? Sustainability? Toxicity? Rarity? Wouldn't it be awful if some key materials were only available from undesirable regimes/systems.

[@trailingupwards]

These bifacial panels I purchased from ecopower claim to be 25 percent efficient.

[@bigpuffyfluff]

i keep thinking you're saying "prostates" and not "perovskites" lol

[@danieljueleiby914]

Thank you ! Its a such a nice Channel. Is it just me but does Chris Case sound like a PC ai voice, especially at the end 😂👌 but again thanks, great news, super exited. Now, where are the solidstate batteries in all their glory?

[@bernardcharlesworth9860]

As an installer yes. Could not come soon we have been limited to type n and bifurcated for too long