Solar 4.0: Ultra Efficient Solar Panel Breakthrough

Perovskite solar cells are set to revolutionize how we generate energy from sunlight, but a recent breakthrough may increase their efficiency by 250% accelerating our route to clean energy by decades.
Merch!
I think Scientists are Rockstars so I made t-shirts to celebrate it
Einstein Rockstar Tee: www.drbenmiles.com/merch/p/ro...
Curie Rockstar Tee: www.drbenmiles.com/merch/p/ro...
Schrodinger Rockstar Tee: www.drbenmiles.com/merch/p/ro...
0:00 Perovskite Solar Panel Efficiency Breakthrough
0:34 What are Perovskite Solar Cells?
3:41 Perovskite Solar Cell Breakthrough
8:39 Solar Power 4.0
#solar #perovskite #breakthrough
Where to find me:
Insta / drbenmiles
Newsletter drbenmiles.substack.com/
A few people have asked so I've added the info below. Some of these are affiliate links. If you make a purchase it doesn't cost you anything extra, but a percentage of the sale will help support this channel and my work to bringing entrepreneurship into science.
My camera : amzn.to/3ed5Xac
My lens: amzn.to/3xIAZyA
My lav: amzn.to/2SeE20Y and amzn.to/3nK33wA
My mic: amzn.to/3gUYYEv

[@startingwithaletter]

I wish this video had 250% more information about the absolute efficiency of the cells.

[@Aridzonan13]

I'd love to know if they've been tested in a Desert environment? Let's say 115F? I don't get excited about any new Solar Tech unless it's run flawlessly for 5 years in a serious Desert.. The major failure w/ HCPV (Hight Concentrated PV) was the cells could not handle the heat. This included cells w/ heat pipes (passive cooling), etc. The cells would deform and then separate. Some of the advanced HCPV cells were multi-junciton / full spectrum too.

[@yousausage]

Basically above 20% absolute efficiency is impossible for a solar cell.

[@bellissimo4520]

@@yousausage Perovskite solar cells already are higher than that (about 24% current record). I honestly don't believe at all that this will now be increased by 250% or anything close to that, but why shouldn't further increases not be possible? Perovskite cells started out with about 3% (2009), and have made quite a lot of progress in the last 14 years.

[@conorstewart2214]

@@yousausage except it isn’t. Why do you think it is?

[@farleftsilencelikenazis1021]

it doesn't matter. The entire topic of solar and wind replacing what we use now is a pipe dream. "Net 0" is an insane ideological point based on a detraction from reality, science and even IF we needed to cut CO2 (we don't) what they want is flat out IMPOSSIBLE. To mine the materials needed to phase out and produce just ONE generation technology units (wind solar and a battery storage farms) we need (based on 2019 mining and discoveries- 400 years to mine nickel 9920 years for Lithium 1733 for Cobalt 3287 for Graphite (natural flake) Silicon 5,9 years Vanadium 7101 years For Rare Earth Metals Neodymium 40 years Germanium 29113 years Lanthanum 166,8 years Praseodymium 31,4 years Dysprosium 193,2 year Terbium 59,9 years. That's based on assuming we can produce at 2019 levels when we only have global reserves of 2,33% Lithium 3,48% cobalt 3,57% graphite 3,52% Vanadium Plus IF we discover more of this stuff, for every 1000 deposits discovered only 1 or 2 become mines. It currently takes 20 years from discovery to mining. For every 10 producing mines, 2 or 3 will loose money and shut down. These ideas a re great! Fossil fuel will have to be replaced at some point but your audience needs to be away these are pipe dreams. Our politicians are on another planet mentally driven by climate hysteria.

[@altosack]

Please don’t use phrases like “an increase by a factor of 250%”. A factor is a simple multiple, such as 3.5. Every time someone uses a percentage greater than 100% as an increase, it’s always ambiguous what they mean (is 250% 2.5 or 3.5?), because too many that use it are innumerate and want to impress with big numbers.

[@mpirokajosephmgcokoca2355]

Was confused also 😔

[@condruzmarius]

250% means 1.5 increase

[@altosack]

@@condruzmarius - A factor of 1.5 is a 50% increase; a 250% increase is a factor of 3.5. By example, if one normally eats 2000 cal/day, and increases it to 3000, that is a 50% increase and a factor of 1.5, which is the original (1.0) plus the factor of increase (0.5). If one were to increase it to 7000, that would be an increase of 5000 cal, or 250% of 2000, and a total factor of 3.5. The ambiguous part is one could say the increase (5000) is a factor of 2.5, which correlates to the percentage increase (250%). Usually, if we say “increased by a factor of …”, it’s the total divided by the original, not the increase divided by the original.

[@nutsack6454]

@@condruzmarius100% increase means double so, your a bit wrong

[@getinthespace7715]

Great in depth explanations. I can tell this is going to be one of my favorite new channels.

[@lucidmoses]

I appreciate the honesty. I'm sure some youtube channels are already taking orders for this stuff.

[@bladez-if4vw]

You started off on a daunting path, but you managed to recapture my sense of understanding.

[@ryuuguu01]

I am glad you mentioned the lead in these. I almost never see it mentioned that not just is lead in them but it is in a water-soluble form.

[@petertrypsteen]

There are also lead-free ones.

[@ZACH12311]

There is much more lead in the solder of standard silicon panels than in the perovskite absorber. Lead free solder exists of course but it’s not widely used in the industry. Cheers!

[@srikengames]

@@ZACH12311 almost all products nowadays are produced RoHS compliant. Which means no more then 0.1% of dangerous chemicals like lead.

[@WouterZtube]

What a fresh breath of air. Someone knowledgeable explaining something very complex in simple terms. Thank you

[@michaelharrison1093]

It would be great to know what their base efficiency assumption was. I understand that some perovskite PV cells are only achieving around 8% efficiency so a 250% improvement on top of this will only bring perovskite cells in line with commercially available Si cells.

[@mrspeigle1]

That's the thing, it dosent have to beat silicon cells in efficiency if it can beat them in price.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

45-50% double junction

[@XxXDOMINIONXxX]

@@mrspeigle1 if you think these cells will be "magically cheaper" they won't be.

[@powmod]

@@mrspeigle1 Pure perovskite cells are actually cheaper since they use an easier and less energy intensive building process (printing) and low cost materials (lead). But if you are printing multiple layers of different materials with silver between them, I don't think it will be cheaper.

[@mrspeigle1]

@poWMod stuff for the bean counters to figure out, cheaper is the main promise of perovskyte Materials and manufacturing techniques might push it over the top but don't forget that silicon cells wich hit those efficiency numbers have thier own cost and complexity adds. Figuring out what it will be at scale is the question 🤔

[@jimmurphy5355]

So, 250% better. That’s great, unless the efficiency of their tested cell went from 1% to 2.5% Since they didn’t crow about the absolute efficiency, only the change, I’m going to assume their cell was pretty bad, and they didn’t want to mention how bad.

[@andreycham4797]

Ha ha ha they never tell you how good they really are but give us more money for continuing a research

[@DavidD03820]

Finally someone that actually listened and everyone glazed over! I never got the number of how many watts per square meter or anything this magic substance generates. Exactly what you said, 250% then what? what number is it better then, because 250% of 1 watt is 2.5w.. or 2500% of 0.1w is still 2.5w.

[@mistermood4164]

I believe the industry average is 17-19% efficiency

[@DavidD03820]

@@mistermood4164 industry average of solar cells are 17-19% efficiency, they never once talked about perovskite cells.

[@DavidD03820]

They talked about perovskite cells making 250% better then the last time. 250% better then WHAT? because 250% better of 0 is still 0. They never gave a number....

[@jedics1]

As someone who gets 90% of their power from a small 2kw solar/9kw LFP system, much higher efficiency and lighter solar would allow me to go 100% throughout winter. It might also allow me to charge a small Ev so I don't have to burn stuff ever again... Seeing they have yet to solve Perovskite's durability its still 5 and probably 10 years away before I get to buy it though. Lets hope Ai starts doing some heavy lifting to move things along a bit faster.

[@Sasoon2006]

Why don’t you add few more panels to get to 100%?

[@nightmareinaction629]

What solar panels are you using. You can already buy bi facial panels with cells of afficiency of 24%

[@leonlowenstadter9223]

If this is solved in 5 to 10 years, it would be a great success as the world turns towards renewable energies.

[@yourlogicalnightmare1014]

AI doesn't create knowledge. It only re-arranges and re-presents existing knowledge

[@cdunne1620]

@@yourlogicalnightmare1014 ..I would omit the word ‘just’ my friend. We know enough physics and science now to change the world so a bit of re-arranging would do just fine!

[@Kevin_Street]

Thank you for this video! You explain a complicated subject really well.

[@vermontsownboy6957]

I'm happy to discover this channel! Great content easy to understand! Thank you!

[@ahnilatedahnilated7703]

The degradation has been a major blocking point. If they can't solve this, then it doesn't matter how efficient they are or cheap.

[@TTM1895]

Everything degrades over time. No exception. Considering what the materials are made from and how much heat is placed upon them on a daily basis, the degradation problem isn't going to be solved anytime soon.

[@apollobukowski4275]

You could say the same about roads

[@xolomartinez6036]

Self healing materials

[@flamingo5900]

Degradation of 20% over 25 years is not bad. If it could be avoided then great.

[@heroclix0rz]

If the cost is low enough then it could be worth it. It's just that "cost" includes all the effort to replace degraded parts.

[@Andrew-rc3vh]

It's good to hear from someone who knows their physics. Well done!

[@germanjohn5626]

He doesn't, there is no solar cell on the market that is 100% efficient in that it converts all of the suns radiation hitting it into power.. Not even 50. His 250% efficiency is pseudo science and B.S. in order to bamboozle the community.

[@moremartin320]

Thanks for sharing and explaining! I learned a lot from your tutorial. I hope this technology will hit the marked soon.

[@jeremystein4534]

Excellent video, Dr Miles. Many thanks

[@dugandav1]

Great to hear about all these potential developments but at the end of the day, what the consumer/installer wants to see is a higher output for a smaller footprint that they can fit now!

[@neyhmor]

This "mirror " on the backside has been used in Si cells for decades now. It is called back scattering field (BSF). Although in Si the effect might be quite different (light reflecting + defect passivation) it also has increased the efficiency of Si cells a lot.

[@harleyme3163]

just looked it up... current available to buy panels now are around 20% effecient so theyre fulla shit

[@brodyalden]

Thanks for covering this!

[@madmesmith5187]

Thank you Ben for sharing and making understandable....Awesome....The wonders of the human mind....❤

[@rayoflight62]

The layer subject to cracking in a perovskite cell is the thin deposit of Indium Tin Oxide, the same material which is electrically conductive and transparent and it is used in all smartphone displays to construct the capacitive matrix able to feel where the finger touches the screen. After awhile the ITO layer cracks and the perovskite cell be ame useless. Anyway, it is not only the ITO layer to be a problem. There are a dozen of concurrent problems which need to be solved before a perovskite solar cell can leave the experiment laboratory and enter the manufacturing facility. This is the meaning when you ear that a technology is "in its infancy". The silver layer below the recombination area is a genius idea. A mirror spatial disposition of charges discourages the recombination? Wow. Does it work below the Base-Emitter junction of a bipolar transistor? The best we can achieve today if an Hfe of 500; can we get to 5000 with a mirror below the junction? This is truly big, it's relevant to many applications, not only the solar cells. I'm a bit skeptical because I see a roadblock with the junction potential barrier; does it stay the same with the mirror installed? I'm sure the solid state physicists are all closed in their labs doing many measurements, and sooner or later a preprint will popup - with a confirmation, or with the proof of a σςαμ. Thank you Dr. Miles for the video. It a very interesting theory of the mirror, albeit i find hard to match the electric forces with the distance and the angles. Greetings, Anthony

[@oldconspiracydude236]

solar cell that you replace every two years could still be cost effective

[@diatonicdelirium1743]

@@oldconspiracydude236 ... if sufficiently accessible and properly recyclable, otherwise it is a wasteful pain in the behind.

[@CaptainRon1913]

For a number of years now, work has been proceeding in order to bring perfection to the crudely conceived idea of a transmission that would not only supply inverse reactive current for use in unilateral phase detractors, but would also be capable of automatically synchronizing cardinal grammeters. Now basically the only new principle involved is that instead of power being generated by the relative motion of conductors and fluxes, it is produced by the modial interaction of magneto-reluctance and capacitive diractance. The original machine had a base plate of pre-famulated amulite surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the panametric fan. The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzlevanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was of the normal lotus-o-delta type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots of the stator, every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible tremie pipe to the differential girdle spring on the “up” end of the grammeters. The turbo-encabulator has now reached a high level of development, and it’s being successfully used in the operation of novertrunnions. Moreover, whenever a forescent skor motion is required, it may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration

[@mnomadvfx]

I understood some of those words 😅 Seriously though I thought that they had gotten much further along with PRVSKT solar endurance than this over a year ago. Depressing 😞

[@mnomadvfx]

@@oldconspiracydude236 If it is cheap enough yes, but the problem is that you would be hiring someone to go up and replace it every 2 years also unless you could access it from inside the house or from a tiered roof balcony.

[@thomash3537]

I just had a look at this publication, it is about photo detectors. The responsivity increase observed there does not at all translate into solar cells or their power conversion efficiency (PCE) although they both use perovskites. State of the art single junction perovskit solar cells have around 25% PCE and operate close to the thermodynamic limit which is around 32% PCE. There will only be incremental improvements. Multi junction devices or maybe singlet fission can get you beyond the thermodynamic single junction limit, but not a reduced recombination rate as seen in the TRPL data in that study.

[@Kysen10]

First time viewer and it's a relief that you know what you are talking about. Too many random tech tubers who just parrot other peoples work and add b-roll.

[@markhuebner7580]

Beautiful! Thanks!

[@107thFruit]

I know that perovskite cells can be roughly 1/2 the price of silicon cells, but with the adaptation of not using lead and adding the layer of silver I wonder how expensive they will end up being if this design is universally accepted after further lab testing.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

No perovskites as a material are 1/10th that of convention Crystalline Silicon. However the casing for all.perovskite panels may be made simpler without a silicon substrate, so they could end up being 50% less expensive.... Possibly more due to the roll to roll capability of perovskite material application.

[@nilsfrederking62]

Depends on the thickness of the silver plating they indicate 60 nm and it is an alloy, so maximum silver content per square meter would be(less than) roughly 1 gram which is less than a Euro in material cost.

[@_shadow_1]

@@nilsfrederking62 We also have to take into account that the silver could be potentially recycled and recovered, thereby further deceasing the total amount of silver used.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

Maybe dispersed metal atoms on multiple layers could allow for the silver effect. High temp metal could be used as its a substrate not impacting the perovskite layer, however the dispersed atom idea is a little bit complicated in terms or preventing atomic agglomeration for true dispersal

[@13thbiosphere]

@@nilsfrederking62 if the entire Industry converts it it could be * million square metres.... So 1 ton

[@MrArcheopteryx]

You made my day Doctor Miles! I am so looking forward to 250% higher efficiency in photovoltaics. Just imagine transparent, film-thick perovskite cells applied to buildings, houses, boats, etc. Now that would be a turning point in cheap renewable clean energy, ABUNDANT for everyone. Conversely, those who profit from a dependency on complex energy production and distribution, would probably oppose it, but that's just another day at the office in the life of progress. Beautiful graphical and verbal explanation. I subscribed. Eagerly looking for more from you. Cheers!

[@chiphappened]

*Finally Some good news possibly coming soon* GR8 Video 👍🏻☮️

[@cocis911]

Brilliant explanation - huge congrats on this video! And thank you!

[@romanregman1469]

Also: adding a simple mirror to the ground surface, angled to reflect onto the pv panel, it increases efficiency for very little cost. Or get the germanium ones, and add those mirrors, for even better efficiency, with minimal degradation from .... The Fkn Sun they're supposed to be pointed at!

[@snappycattimesten]

Can someone smart tell me if this 250% efficiency increase will get solar panels to 50% total efficiency of light energy conversion? Thanks.

[@Tempestan]

It would be around 63% efficiency. Basing this of 25% x 250% or .25 x 2.5= .625 round up to 63%. That would be the high side.

[@Northern-Don]

I love the way you’ve worded your question, I think the same ALL THE TIME - Thanks!

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

It would be about 55-63% efficiency- 2.5x better than current single or double layer perovskite tuned to the same light frequency

[@JorgetePanete]

​@@Tempestan it says +250%, not 250%

[@pappaflammyboi5799]

@@JorgetePanete Same thing.

[@acmottram]

I just love clever people. I didn't understand a word of what he said but it was great. I then loved the feed back from others who did understand this and raised thoughts and questions in only the way they can. Its factual and with out malice. So often our clever people are maligned what a great sadness. For all of you who suffered at school for being clever, thank you. The future of society and the world may rest upon you. I am also waiting to see if the technology for solar will reach the gen 4 stage while i am still alive. Go clever people.. :)

[@greenfrog58]

Great video!

[@Guardian_Arias]

Neat, you already stated that using a conductive layer between the N and P Type layers increase the efficiency of fluorescents but i wonder how other diodes might be affected. For example traditional diodes, Organic Light Emitting Diodes and even the ubiquitous double diode glued to itself, aka the Transistor. I also wonder what other conductive materials could be used like the uber hyped graphene and maybe even superconductors in the next "20 years"

[@martinklein9489]

A metal layer between N and P kills the diode, I guess the silver goes below the NP sandwich, however they are arranged in perovskites. In OLEDs you don't want your pairs to be stable, you want them to recombine as efficiently as possible in the intrinsic layer. Almost all semiconductor devices already have some kind of metal layer attached as these are the way to contact and use the devices, so no surprises there. Metals in combination with graphene alters the band structure of the graphene. This is used to create a multitude of effects f.e. for sensor applications. Although we are usually not talking metal sheets but small islands or single atoms of metals here.

[@davidwilson192]

It would be really nice if you linked to the actual scientific article in the video description

[@stevencaskey8502]

Good stuff. Thank you .

[@aclearlight]

A wonderful tutorial, thank you!

[@ClouD-jb9nz]

Excellent coverage of the paper, well summarised and explained. One remark: at 3:52 , the p/n doped regions do not have net positive/negative charge, but they are called p and n because of the type of majority carriers present in them (holes/electrons). The dopant atoms (from III/V groups) have both one less/extra electron, but also one less/extra proton in the nucleus, so they do not contribute a net charge. The same way, the depletion region is not neutrally charged, but it is slightly negative on the p side and slightly positive on the n side (since electrons have moved from the n side to fill the holes on the p side). This imbalance of charge generates a potential difference and hence an electric field across the depletion region, and this is what stops the flow of carriers across the junction

[@daily8150]

Just the comment I came looking for before commenting myself about doped semiconductors being neutral

[@HarryAGeorgiou]

Great video, i studied perovskite solar cells a few years ago when i tried and failed at a PhD in them, but I learnt quite a bit and wrote a massive review paper on their stability that was not accepted because it was too big. I might try to do a video on that but it might take a while. I think it is great the style and easy you describe things, so nice one .

[@Infoagemage]

Kudos for preserving through failure 💪🏼

[@KallePihlajasaari]

I encourage you to publish your findings in any format. Too much wisdom is lost or hidden that could help humanity in some small way. The more that is public domain, the less the corporate overlords can dictate who gets to use the information.

[@AreHan1991]

Thanx! Very well and clearly explained 😁

[@testboga5991]

Honest tech commentary on YT. Awesome!

[@marvinegreen]

I vaguely remember a Japanese scientist came up with a 2 layer solar cell that captured more of the light spectrum. Maybe 3 or 5 years ago. Is this a development of that work?

[@bariole]

I don't know anything about this particular scientist, but multijunction cells are being produced for at least 20 yars. Historically, they are very expensive.

[@ScienceDiscussed]

Nice video and a cool concept. I didn't read the paper but was there any suggestion that this could work for materials that don't involve silver. From my understanding access to silver is a serious roadblock for solarpanel manufacturing and removing sliver would save a lot of money.

[@_shadow_1]

Other metals could probably also be used in place of silver if reflectivity is the major property at play here. Aluminum has a very high reflectivity and electrical conductivity and it can have an oxide layer which can be adjusted in thickness to reflect certain wavelengths of light. A specifically tuned layer of aluminum + aluminum oxide might have similar efficiency if I have the correct assumption to what is going on here.

[@ScienceDiscussed]

@@_shadow_1 great answer. Thanks

[@patpowers9210]

@@_shadow_1 I was thinking about aluminum myself and was hoping to be the first to bring it up. Curses, foiled again!

[@HolarMusic]

@@patpowers9210 hehe, foiled

[@DrinkingStar]

Good Pros and Cons about Perovskite which have also been mentioned in other videos. However, as far as I know, you are the first that I have seen who explains how it works to improve efficiency....... I hope that some day you do a video on the optical concentrator, Axially Index Lens(AGILE) being developed and studied at Stanford U. Precourt Institute foe Technology.

[@Bianchi77]

Nice video, keep it up,thanks :)

[@lancecorey6582]

It would be interesting to find out if aluminum can be used as the substrate to hold the perovskite and still enhance the energy output. The aluminum would provide a stiff layer so the perovskite would not be damaged from flexing.

[@sampleoffers1978]

He said mirror effect with the silver and I don't own any solver mirrors

[@ankurbhatnagar4609]

What do you mean by 250% efficiency increase? How much is it for the new system after the increase?

[@yoshy2628]

PEROVSKITE SOLAR CELL got around 29% efficiency. 250% will land around 70%?

[@jp34604]

Beyond excellent thank you

[@stephenpike3147]

Fascinating what is going on with this material, I can see the weight reduction making fitting of solar panels so much easier if it becomes a real proven break through. The perovskites to silver charge interaction is almost a mirror image of an induction motor (perovskite = stator, silver = rotor and more tenuously release of photons = flux). In my simple mind would etching breaks in the silver so as to prevent recombination of charge ( analogous to the induction motor eddy currents and associated power losses) in the silver and thus maintain photon reproduction levels towards peak levels?

[@douglee2438]

So what is the overall conversion efficiency of these cells?

[@user-pf5xq3lq8i]

The fact they never told is a huge red flag.

[@pappaflammyboi5799]

Reference source articles please...

[@JuliusUnique]

wow, this is amazing

[@technokicksyourass]

Great to see a champion of solar energy that is truthful about the technology advancements. After 20 years of climate alarmism, and massive overpromising from the industry, it's refreshing to see someone just presenting the science.

[@vueport99]

And what nobody talks about is panels are dirty to produce, has a limited life time.... And what are we to do with all the old panels?

[@benjamindent4806]

If I remember hearing the creator from cal tech, he said while they are powerful and efficient, they are not durable and extremely cost prohibitive. Durable part is the key. Everything is expensive and over time it becomes cheaper

[@BenBCNus]

So, typical solar cells are in the 20-30% efficiency range...does this mean that these new cells could have around 75% efficiency? I can't believe this was not ever discussed in this video 👎

[@DIYDaveOK]

That's how solar propaganda works. Hint, suggest, imply, but when it comes to demonstrate...that's often conspicuously missing. I'd like to see the hard data as well.

[@kittimcconnell2633]

Those estimates should follow the creation of stable PV film. This video is about a developing technology, so its numbers are not yet relevant.

[@BenBCNus]

@@kittimcconnell2633 Yes, of course...that is the problem...he video title & thumbnails don't reflect what the typical viewer expects ("Ultra Efficient Solar Panel Breakthrough" and the thumbnail shows a 250% efficiency improvement)...if the video had stated something about improving a part of the process which has no current bearing with solar panel efficiency, that would have been different...in essence this is just cheap click bait 👎

[@blakelee4555]

No he said 250% INCREASE, so if it was 25% efficient before, 100% increase brings it to 50%, 200% increase brings it to 75%, and 250% increase brings it to 87.5% 😂

[@BenBCNus]

@@blakelee4555 If you use 20%, a 250% increase is 70%, so just rounded up a bit to 75%...not sure what your point is...

[@philipkudrna5643]

I loved the Galadriel quote!

[@maloukemallouke9735]

Thanks more video Like this one please.

[@theobserver9131]

Dude, I almost blocked you. 250% efficiency? (on your clickbait thumbnail). You're talking magical energy from nothing. It doesn't get better than 100%, and even that is impossible. Please, be a responsible representative of science and reality. Thumbs down for that.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

2.5x means between around 45-55% efficiency- the confusing part is where he said a "factor of" 250% which doesn't make sense

[@alistairmackintosh9412]

Agreed. A 250% increase in efficiency would have been a better phrase.

[@theobserver9131]

The key to my comment is; "on the clickbait THUMBNAIL". It says simply 250%efficiency. Not 250% IMPROVEMENT....as in 2.5 times better than the current level. The video itself is fine and easy to understand. It's actually excellent in my opinion. It's the thumbnail that is false and misleading.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

@@theobserver9131 250% efficiency makes no sense, that would be a material absorbing at 3-5 suns at 50% efficiency... Or in space at double the solar luminosity concentration. Even if a solar cell was 100% efficient in space it would only equate to 200% efficiency on earth ignoring ozone layer, clouds, ionic and radio interferences, aerosols and atmospheric moisture.

[@jeanpaulchristian3282]

If. Wind turbine were 100% efficient there would be no wind behind the turbine, maybe you can use electrohydrodynamic attractors to concentrate wind sheer solely on the wind blades themselves, but then there would be no wind but a low pressure zone behins the wind turbine

[@couchyrick6300]

Thank you for making a video like this that wasn't clickbait or ai voiced

[@DeAlpineBro]

I ignored this video at first because "breakthrough" videos are...well, let's say I'm skeptical. This was excellent, Dr Miles.

[@Ccodebits]

Good thing I've been waiting to get solar panels.

[@ram64man]

The issue I have many housing developments will reject the pannels that are highly reflective, already we see planning approvals limited to mono cell for neighbours approval especially hill side developments., hopefully they can still develop a cell for all spectrum wave length that’s more important than making them cheaper or adaptable in my opinion as this technology will still be expensive for many so maximise amount for less pannels is key

[@gene4094]

The energy conversion by solar cell for our energy needs. The same Perovskite molecule can be use for obtaining partial water plasma state. The same state that is in fluorescent lights to lightning bolts.

[@sreekumarUSA]

Thanks!

[@davidcummings2020]

The amount of led used in the solar panels is so negligable compared to what the battery industry still looses even though lead recycling is a huge success story. lets lake the short path to the next generation and work on the lead levels later right? btw great explanations.

[@JoeBloggs-ev2ui]

At the end of the day, the strength of sunlight tops out at about 1300W/sqm; so a conversion rate of 25-50% makes solar a very viable energy source. If they can get perovskite into this realm, the opportunities are amazing for off-grid living

[@ernestestrada2461]

I'm glad that you mentioned that these are thin film printer technology that have a limited life. But people listen to only half and then turn around and say this is a viable technology which it is not.

[@L.L]

Damnnn keep it up people lets develop that to the max. Now I want that on my car roof 😊

[@katana1960]

I heard about this years ago. It seems that we are always on the verge of a break through, but never seem to be able to buy them.

[@cheekybastard99]

I've been reading about massive solar breakthroughs for the last 20 years,

[@lnebw99]

In the end you say: if we solve the problem, the problem is solved. How enlightening....

[@mikelord93]

Wow, these would be great for all the applications because you can tailor them to any need you have. You can use them in tandem for farming, for example, or as coating for windows so that you can synthesize vitamine D without the worry of skin cancer. Applications are endless

[@davidlee50]

I might support it if the layer is protected like a double pane window in vacuum so the abrading wind on a roof sample would not pit it. My glasses do not last more than a year now because of low tech.

[@mikejones-vd3fg]

very cool

[@rolyantrauts2304]

In the UK our main energy requirement is heat, but for some reason we focus on what could be considered appliance energy. Solar thermal walls and roofs even in northern climes could achieve winter heating and the excess through summer can generate through an ORC likely cooled in a heatpump groundloop. Thermal stores can be little more than a insulated wall type which creates a generation latency to offset peak sunl;ight by several hours. Solar PV has focus because it can be sold and fitted as a cunsumer product whilst likely if designed and built, we already have extremely fit for purpose regional renewables.

[@jeremytaylor3532]

If they sprayed multiple layers of different perovskites on a mirror surface ( say a stainless cybertruck) then sprayed a partially silver surface over that so that light entered but then was trapped between the two silvered surfaces, like a laser beam is trapped in a ruby. Then possibly most of the light would bounce back and forth in the energy generation layers until they connected with an appropriate photo hole. Thus giving a near perfect conversion to power. If inexpensive highly efficient solar cells become possible it would really help out the grid.

[@mobilemarshall]

interesting stuff, hope it pans out

[@BELINC7]

I am glad I decided to read the comments first instead of watching the video, now I don't have to, because he blowing in the wind.

[@keithrosenberg5486]

I will believe it when it is installed in my solar array. And can it be made in huge quantities cheap enough for the average person to own.

[@shiinondogewalker2809]

red light is the lower end of the energy spectrum, which is inverted wavelength spectrum that they show in the graph

[@thetourk]

Interesting video. At somepoint there will be s break through not just in solar power but in battery technically as well.

[@chidubemjohnkelvin335]

We need this innovation

[@ericmichel3857]

Great work everyone, call me when it's ready.

[@maxheadrom3088]

The depletion region is electrostatically neutral but not charge carriers neutral. A small detail, though - nice video! very informatinve!

[@tysonjbest]

Would love to see a video on googles new Solar API 🤩 .Total game changer!!

[@dsd2743]

Please leave reference to the respective publications in the description. That would be highly appreciated.

[@lukaszbiniecki8624]

How durable are these perovskites. Is it any longer than 5 months?

[@AutoMaticTv]

Nice video

[@gigmaresh8772]

Guess I'll be using my Coleman panels to heat up the sand in my Buck Warner pot belly stove a few more seasons 😃

[@truegret7778]

This is fascinating! ARCO Solar had a TFS product (ThinFilmSilicon) panel product. It had similar conversion efficiencies (10-20% as I recall), however, an interesting challenge was cosmetics. One use case was to use a variation of this TFS product as the sunroof on vehicles, and ANY scratch or blemish or discoloration was cause to scrap the part.

[@igotufoinformation9636]

Sunroof on electric vehicles? Sounds good but I'd rather use solar for my home and reliable gas for my vehicle.

[@truegret7778]

@@igotufoinformation9636 Good for you ..... this was in the early 1990's, and intended for simply running the interior fans to keep the vehicle cool during hot days. Long before Tesla. The only e-vehicle back then on the market back then may have been the GM-EV1 (I think they were introduced in 1996). The panels were translucent. Maybe do a little research before you sound off and look silly.

[@igotufoinformation9636]

@@truegret7778 that's the first mass produced electric vehicle, t In 1912 the electric roadster was almost $2k while the gasoline car was about $700 Lol don't be silly

[@truegret7778]

@@igotufoinformation9636 The model T was about $850 in 1908, while the first e-carriage came along around 1832 (rechargeable batteries not until 1859). Again, the TFS sunroofs were not for e-vehicles. But, whatever ... don't be such a dork, and maybe put your tin-foil hat back on and look for those e-UAPs. Cheers

[@igotufoinformation9636]

@@truegret7778 I never claimed they were for e vehicles. You're trying to prove me wrong on a claim I never made. That sounds like a horrible marketing decision anyways lol 🤪 you need a tin foil hat, protect the little you have left

[@bartoszpienkosz7827]

Crazy outro bro

[@dinosaur0073]

So far, they are doing fine, but they need cleaning at least once a weak...thank you for info.

[@winfordnettles3292]

It would real interesting if the technology can be put into production for a limited test run on a large scale array. I'll be holding my breath........

[@helder4u]

exciting

[@RK-tf8pq]

Can this mirror approach be also used in thin film silicon solar cells to reduce recombination events?

[@aljawisa]

I'm still waiting for one of these main stream channels do to a video on Randil Mills "Sun Cell" and his latest device iteration I call the Solar Cube.

[@rondavison8475]

Thin film silicon or other materials can have a 2nd layer of pervoskovites added on the bottom of glass on glass solar panels. this allows them to be used now with the direct UV exposure removed by the top material. GAIA your welcome.

[@rondavison8475]

Perhaps sandwich the metal layer in the middle. This allows decoupling top cell from bottom cell not needing to be in //.

[@keithplymale2374]

The key things are going to be the cost to make them, how rare the materials to make them are and will they be recyclable. Beyond that the further question would be how easy to scale them up to mass production. The use of silver is going to increase the cost. Experiments need to made to find if other, lower cost, metal could be used. It does sound exciting but they are going to like fusion has always been I suspect.

[@nzoomed]

This is exciting, but I bet its decades away before we can buy them.

[@joeprizzi407]

I am not great with identifying accents, but I have to ask if you are from Liverpool. It is one of my favorites.

[@a64738]

Effective solar panes is only something you need when you do like me and mount it on a campervan where there is no room for large panels. For the rest of us low COST of the panels is the only consern. I have four 320w panels on my van, I could have fitted four 400w panels (the most efficient on the market) but they would have cost 5 times as much....