Significant advance in stabilizing perovskite solar cells

Significant advance in stabilizing perovskite solar cells
Perovskite solar cells with metal oxide hole and electron transport layers. Credit: Tunde Akinloye/CNSI

UCLA professor Yang Yang, member of the California NanoSystems Institute, is a world-renowned innovator of solar cell technology whose team in recent years has developed next-generation solar cells constructed of perovskite, which has remarkable efficiency converting sunlight to electricity.

Despite this success, the delicate nature of perovskite—a very light, flexible, organic-inorganic hybrid material—stalled further development toward its commercialized use. When exposed to air, perovskite cells broke down and disintegrated within a few hours to few days. The cells deteriorated even faster when also exposed to moisture, mainly due to the hydroscopic nature of the perovskite.

Now Yang's team has conquered the primary difficulty of perovskite by protecting it between two layers of . This is a significant advance toward stabilizing . Their new cell construction extends the cell's effective life in air by more than 10 times, with only a marginal loss of converting sunlight to electricity.

The study was published online Oct. 12 in the journal Nature Nanotechnology. Postdoctoral scholar Jingbi You and graduate student Lei Meng from the Yang Lab were the lead authors on the paper.

"There has been much optimism about perovskite ," Meng said. In less than two years, the Yang team has advanced perovskite from less than 1 percent to close to 20 percent. "But its short lifespan was a limiting factor we have been trying to improve on since developing perovskite cells with high efficiency."

Yang, who holds the Carol and Lawrence E. Tannas, Jr., Endowed Chair in Engineering at UCLA, said there are several factors that lead to quick deterioration in normally layered perovskite . The most significant, Yang said, was that the widely used top organic buffer layer has poor stability and can't effectively protect the perovskite layer from moisture in the air, speeding cell degradation. The buffer layers are important to cell construction because electricity generated by the cell is extracted through them.

Meng said that in this study the team replaced those organic layers with metal oxide layers that sandwich the perovskite layer, protecting it from moisture. The difference was dramatic. The metal oxide lasted 60 days in open-air storage at room temperature, retaining 90 percent of their original solar conversion efficiency. "With this technique perfected we have significantly enhanced the stability."

The next step for the Yang team is to make the metal oxide layers more condensed for better efficiency and seal the solar cell for even longer life with no loss of efficiency. Yang expects that this process can be scaled up to large production now that the main perovskite problem has been solved.

Explore further

Graphene as a front contact for silicon-perovskite tandem solar cells

More information: Jingbi You et al. Improved air stability of perovskite solar cells via solution-processed metal oxide transport layers, Nature Nanotechnology (2015). DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.230
Journal information: Nature Nanotechnology

Citation: Significant advance in stabilizing perovskite solar cells (2015, October 19) retrieved 21 April 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Oct 19, 2015
It's sort of scary how fast the perovskite cells are progressing. If they can be made stable at current efficiency levels (or at even slightly better levels) these could be come the "everyman's solar cell" - affordable even in the poorest countries.

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
Of course, the perovskite cells generate money - but for researchers only.

Reality check:
You are aware that researchers get paid a fixed salary? And that none of the money they generate (via more grants or whatnot) ends up in their pockets?

No technology that is in its infancy goes to market immediately. First it has to be brought to acceptable performance levels, THEN you go to manufacture (where you usually lose some performance because a lab prototype can be manufactured more carefully than doing something roll-to-roll.)

If people were to follow your mode of thinking (thankfully no one does) then we would never even start researching anything.
So just STFU and enjoy that people are smart and continue to work so that ungrateful wretches like you can enjoy all the things you currently use.

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
Interestingly I'm just who is criticizing the hundred years standing ignorance of cold fusion most often here

And in all the years you have done so you haven't had a single taker. So either you are the smartest human alive (unlikely, since you haven't managed to show any work on...anything...ever) Or you're just the only one who hasn't gotten the memo. Guess which.

We only differ in recognition, which research is contributor

No. You wouldn't know a researcher from a lamppost (or science from religion - as evinced by your religious belief in this cold fusion fairytale which has been a no-show for more than 20 years now)

I give recognition to scientists because I know how science works: by small increments (like in this article). It's not the Hollywood fantasy you think it is. It's hard work and slogging away at details. Until you actually get up the guts to talk to a scientist you'll never figure this out.

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
My opinions are upvoted and accepted smoothly at cold fusion sites
likely because, like you do here, you use a sock army for validation

preaching pseudoscience to pseudoscience acolytes and telling everyone that you get uprated by them doesn't in any way demonstrate your validity, nor your acceptance of the scientific method model, which has demonstrated to work (like here: )

this is like saying there is evidence for xtians religion being real because the preacher said so

and i say again- the reason you can't get recognition in REAL scientific circles is because of two things:

2- you don't understand the validated science (or any other, really, which is why you think intuition is ok in physics)

Oct 19, 2015
Being ignored with mainstream, which believes, it's fairy tale according to pluralistic ignorance paradigm.
this is epic failure on your part...
1- it is not pluralistic ignorance when there is NO empirical evidence that is repeatable nor validated

2- if physicists didn't push evidence and it's power, we wouldn't have QM, which gave us computers, etc
the cold fusion is "fairy tale" because it has no results in mainstream journals - and these journals don't accept it because their editors believe in the same ways
no, there is no results in mainstream journals because there is no repeatable evidence or valid evidence to build upon

perhaps you also have apophenia

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
At the cold fusion sites most of people agree with me blah blah BS blah ignorant attitude of mainstream physics
so... you allow your religious acolytes to feed your Dunning-Kruger... so what?
I'm not voting troll
and i've already proven you a liar on that front... not only did i call you out on your sock army, but DOCILE is one of the ones i reported as being in said army, along with three other names you've used in the past year... how is that not using a sock army to downrate, and how do you think it proves you didn't do it?

that is what is called empirical evidence, zeph. it is also validated because, as i posted your sock army list and you claimed "you're only projecting your own personal attitude to my alleged behavior" even then, suddenly you are using the SAME log-in names to downrate and POST here on po...

how could you do that if you didn't create them and manage the accounts?
EPIC FAIL for you

Oct 19, 2015
In the other journals we have plenty of experimental evidence already
it aint evidence until it is validated... by secondary sources NOT linked, profiting, paid for, created by or in any way a part of the first team (a failure of mills and rossi in the past)

making a claim without evidence is like pissing in a fan and telling yourself it is raining: just because you want to believe it doesn't mean it is true

this is why you always get banned, and re-spawn as some other name that is on the list of carefully tracked names we have of you. this is not a matter of "belief", but one of evidence

but you keep forgetting that we track you, so you "believe" you are safe and can't get caught...
if anything, you are the one demonstrating pluralistic ignorance, and you focus on your religion (aw, cf, etc), not science

there is more of you here than you like to admit:

Oct 19, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 19, 2015
Did you ever notify it?
WTF are you asking? try again, but use English
It's easy: it's only my posts...not that one of yours
and again, WTF are you talking about? ENGLISH please

historically, i listed your sock army on PO. you even cried about it because you got outed, and then tried to blame me (eventually these comments were deleted because you got caught)
so what did you do?
you started posting from names in the sock army list i posted...

that is called evidence
and then, when you posted with said sock army names, it was VALIDATION of the evidence

you even bragged about it later.
so now you claim this is not you? or that others are projecting?
how does your posting from a sock army that was used to downvote/TROLL demonstrate projection or that you didn't create the sock army?

are you delusional/stupid?

Oct 20, 2015
This might be a silly question but I have to ask. Why don't they just incase the things in clear acrylic plastic as soon as they are made? That stuff will stay clear for years. Windows are made from it. That seems like it would solve the air and water problems.

Oct 20, 2015
This might be a silly question but I have to ask. Why don't they just incase the things in clear acrylic plastic

One of the advantages of perovskite cells is that they are very thin - which means they can be printed on any kind of surface - even flexible ones.

Oct 20, 2015
Oops Zeph...sockpuppet-voting...again? Getting tired of your current account? Need to get banned yet again? You are, without a doubt, one of the most pathetic individuals on this planet.

It's getting really tiresome arguing with little kids that go for these kinds of shenanigans (reminds me of a Calvin and Hobbes cartoon: "If you can't win by reason - go with volume")

Back on ignore you go.

Oct 20, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Oct 24, 2015
Why don't they just incase the things in clear acrylic plastic as soon as they are made? That stuff will stay clear for years
Perovskite cells degrade with UV radiation too - http://www.resear...r_Cells. They're simply cells made of organic compound and no organic compound survives the sunlight long time...

Ok, I can understand that. There are UV blocking dyes out there too though that could be put into the plastic.

@AP, but so can plastic. That's why I don't understand the problem.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more