5 ms·

Waste-based perovskite solar cell achieves 21.39% energy efficiency

50 points by wglb 2y ago

wglb 2y ago
Paper https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.202423635 https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.20...
Hizonner 2y ago
> comes from a type of agricultural waste known as furan Where do they get these people?
- Hizonner 2y ago
  I'd like to request some comment replies from anybody who keeps up the downvoting on this one. I've found that every time I post something complaining about a "science journalist", or a "tech journalist", not having a basic understanding of the stuff they write about, or not doing meaningful research, I reliably get downvotes. Sorry, if you are reporting on a "science" beat, I do expect you to recognize the word "furan", because you either took organic chemistry or have paid some attention to the world around you. You don't have to be able to sketch it, but come on.
  - h0l0cube 2y ago
    I didn't downvote, but I think—at least in this instance—if you were more specific about what you're criticizing, instead of just expressing generic outrage, you might not have been downvoted and might also have inspired a meaningful discussion.
- imperial_march 2y ago
  [dead]
ttyprintk 2y ago
It’ll always be waste-ish because of the lead, no?
apsec112 2y ago
"Also, some of the materials used to make them, such as silicon, are becoming scarcer and thus more expensive." !? The Earth's crust is 28% silicon by mass. It's literally the second most abundant element. I'm not a professional, but isn't most of the cost of solar outside the panels now anyway - installation, cabling, inverters, permitting, storage for use during peak hours, etc?
- walrus01 2y ago
  Ignoring for a moment the cost of inverters and storage... With the cost of big-ass 400W solar panels as low as they are now, in the pallet load or container load, much of the cost is actually the labor and the mounting. $150 per panel x 22 on a pallet = $3300 For a ground mounted PV system, you can easily spend far more than 3300 on the foundation work, concrete, steel erection and frame than the raw solar panel costs now. Randomly chosen 40kW theoretical would be $15000 in panels plus LTL truck cargo, the rest of the costs for a working system would be much more than 15k. It's also possible for a roof mounting system to cost more than the panels in materials and labor and time.
  - 3eb7988a1663 2y ago
    Which is why I am a fan of this simple idea, just put them flat on the dirt. Stick a fence around it to stop deer, and see what happens. One company is trying it[0]. I am not sure if water drainage, plant growth, whatever might be a problem, but for the cost of installation, seems worth exploring. [0] https://electrek.co/2022/12/12/texas-solar-farm-flat-on-the-ground/ https://electrek.co/2022/12/12/texas-solar-farm-flat-on-the-...
    - walrus01 2y ago
      There's a few different companies selling roof intended mounting systems that use weight/ballast to hold down panels at about a 20 degree angle (facing south, in the northern hemisphere), which are basically big plastic trays with some clips to hold the panels and a place to put concrete blocks. Some care has to be taken to prevent gaps that let wind get underneath them for worst-case windstorm scenarios, but it's definitely a product that exists.
calibas 2y ago
> a type of agricultural waste known as furan Important note, it's not waste, it's manufactured from waste.
photochemsyn 2y ago
Much better article here. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/02/17/organic-inorganic-perovskite-cell-based-on-furan-based-polymer-achieves-21-39-efficiency/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/02/17/organic-inorganic-per... This system appears based on tin, not lead, so that's a plus for not generating as much toxic waste. However the lifetime report - 10% efficieny loss over 1000 hour - is why people vastly prefer monocrystalline silicon cells, whose lifetime is easily 200X as long (more like 1000X, but other components of the PV module than the silicon will degrade more on the 200,000 hours timeline). You'd have to replace these once a year or so to retain >90% of the initial power output, versus mono-Si which lasts for 25 years+.
- gpm 2y ago
  Not based on this exact paper, but Oxford PV is claiming to have perovskite solar cells that will last 25 years now (and is commercially selling tandem silicon-perovskite cells based on this). https://undecidedmf.com/how-record-breaking-perovskites-are-here-now/ https://undecidedmf.com/how-record-breaking-perovskites-are-...
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  Submit that as a recommended alternative link to mods by email at hn@ycombinator.com
abetancort 2y ago
Nonsense.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  Why is it nonsense? Your assessment may be correct, but it's not informative.

50 points by wglb 2y ago

wglb 2y ago

Paper https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.202423635 https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adfm.20...

Hizonner 2y ago

> comes from a type of agricultural waste known as furan Where do they get these people?

Hizonner 2y ago
I'd like to request some comment replies from anybody who keeps up the downvoting on this one. I've found that every time I post something complaining about a "science journalist", or a "tech journalist", not having a basic understanding of the stuff they write about, or not doing meaningful research, I reliably get downvotes. Sorry, if you are reporting on a "science" beat, I do expect you to recognize the word "furan", because you either took organic chemistry or have paid some attention to the world around you. You don't have to be able to sketch it, but come on.
- h0l0cube 2y ago
  I didn't downvote, but I think—at least in this instance—if you were more specific about what you're criticizing, instead of just expressing generic outrage, you might not have been downvoted and might also have inspired a meaningful discussion.
imperial_march 2y ago
[dead]

ttyprintk 2y ago

It’ll always be waste-ish because of the lead, no?

apsec112 2y ago

"Also, some of the materials used to make them, such as silicon, are becoming scarcer and thus more expensive." !? The Earth's crust is 28% silicon by mass. It's literally the second most abundant element. I'm not a professional, but isn't most of the cost of solar outside the panels now anyway - installation, cabling, inverters, permitting, storage for use during peak hours, etc?

walrus01 2y ago
Ignoring for a moment the cost of inverters and storage... With the cost of big-ass 400W solar panels as low as they are now, in the pallet load or container load, much of the cost is actually the labor and the mounting. $150 per panel x 22 on a pallet = $3300 For a ground mounted PV system, you can easily spend far more than 3300 on the foundation work, concrete, steel erection and frame than the raw solar panel costs now. Randomly chosen 40kW theoretical would be $15000 in panels plus LTL truck cargo, the rest of the costs for a working system would be much more than 15k. It's also possible for a roof mounting system to cost more than the panels in materials and labor and time.
- 3eb7988a1663 2y ago
  Which is why I am a fan of this simple idea, just put them flat on the dirt. Stick a fence around it to stop deer, and see what happens. One company is trying it[0]. I am not sure if water drainage, plant growth, whatever might be a problem, but for the cost of installation, seems worth exploring. [0] https://electrek.co/2022/12/12/texas-solar-farm-flat-on-the-ground/ https://electrek.co/2022/12/12/texas-solar-farm-flat-on-the-...
  - walrus01 2y ago
    There's a few different companies selling roof intended mounting systems that use weight/ballast to hold down panels at about a 20 degree angle (facing south, in the northern hemisphere), which are basically big plastic trays with some clips to hold the panels and a place to put concrete blocks. Some care has to be taken to prevent gaps that let wind get underneath them for worst-case windstorm scenarios, but it's definitely a product that exists.

calibas 2y ago

> a type of agricultural waste known as furan Important note, it's not waste, it's manufactured from waste.

photochemsyn 2y ago

Much better article here. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/02/17/organic-inorganic-perovskite-cell-based-on-furan-based-polymer-achieves-21-39-efficiency/ https://www.pv-magazine.com/2025/02/17/organic-inorganic-per... This system appears based on tin, not lead, so that's a plus for not generating as much toxic waste. However the lifetime report - 10% efficieny loss over 1000 hour - is why people vastly prefer monocrystalline silicon cells, whose lifetime is easily 200X as long (more like 1000X, but other components of the PV module than the silicon will degrade more on the 200,000 hours timeline). You'd have to replace these once a year or so to retain >90% of the initial power output, versus mono-Si which lasts for 25 years+.

gpm 2y ago
Not based on this exact paper, but Oxford PV is claiming to have perovskite solar cells that will last 25 years now (and is commercially selling tandem silicon-perovskite cells based on this). https://undecidedmf.com/how-record-breaking-perovskites-are-here-now/ https://undecidedmf.com/how-record-breaking-perovskites-are-...
dredmorbius 2y ago
Submit that as a recommended alternative link to mods by email at hn@ycombinator.com

abetancort 2y ago

Nonsense.

dredmorbius 2y ago
Why is it nonsense? Your assessment may be correct, but it's not informative.