4 ms·
Perovskites are lately in the position of needing to prove longevity, which takes a long time. In the meantime, they are quite a lot cheaper to make, so in man
by ncmncm 4y ago
Perovskites are lately in the position of needing to prove longevity, which takes a long time.
In the meantime, they are quite a lot cheaper to make, so in many uses it would not matter so much if they did fail faster. In some uses, like aerospace, their lighter weight and better areal efficiency are essential, and forgive a lot.
- moffkalast 4y ago> they are quite a lot cheaper to make, so in many uses it would not matter so much if they did fail faster Hard disagree on that, their current longevity is comparably tiny so you'll have lots of overhead in installation costs. Not to mention the amounts of toxic lead trash you'll need to pay to dispose of, the thing is basically poison after all. Makes far more sense to invest in multilayer tech even if it costs more since it'll last longer by an order of magnitude and use far less area to function which is a big benefit for vehicles too.
- ncmncm 4y agoPerovskites do not need to have any lead in them at all. The thin films amount to very little mass, and in any case may be incinerated and the ash used as feedstock. Longevity is already up to years. In many uses that is plenty, especially when you can just roll it out, instead of needing to bolt it up.
- moffkalast 4y ago> Perovskites do not need to have any lead in them at all. Well that's news to me, I thought that was part of the core functionality.
- ncmncm 4y agoMany of the best chemistries have lead, but it is still early days. "Perovskite" refers to lattice structure. Tin has also been used.