Congratulations. Maybe you can answer my query: When Perovskites were first talked about, there was a lot of excitement about them being ultra-thin layer, flexible and could almost be painted on a surface. I'd prefer a dirt cheap, throw 'em anywhere, 15% material, one so cheap you would stick it on N-S-E-W facing roofs and walls and yards. When can I have those please?
Go hard, go far, go for broke. Congratulations and now the work starts. Challenge everything with respect, question everyone who answers Without doubt. Come to your own conclusion while you have the chance to work with guidance. One day you will be on your own .
Thanks for the great insight. I bought a single 100w panel in 1997 for $300 including a 100ah alkaline battery. It's amazing the leaps and bounds technology has grown over the years!
Guys, go for bifacial solar panels. Efficiency around 30%(both sides,front and back, could generate electricity), and there is even output during cloudy days. Use it as a canopy and use reflective furnitures and mirrors to reflect even more sunlight on the under side
I bought 8 x 415w solar panels in 2022 , they cost me just over £200 each . I can get the exact same panels today for £76 each including free delivery 😮 .
What is different here is that Oxford managed to scale up production. Great! But one question you forgot or decided not to ask this boss is the expected lifetime of these perovskite cells as this has been a problem for a long time.
Your question is flawed. The question is, what is the carbon footprint vs energy generation over the life of the panel. If it's better than fossil or nuclear, it is the better option. Secondly, it's a lot cheaper to replace solar panels than it is to build new traditional generators.
@@diggeroldmate8122 Economics plays a role in how quickly these systems will actually be deployed. Which is arguably more important than lifetime CO2 emissions per kWh. So no, the question is not flawed.
@@skierpageNo it’s a product development update interview - if you want to stay ignorant watch Midsomer Murders instead - your choice but don’t block the rest of us who want to learn? Sigh…….
@@diggeroldmate8122 because I hoped Oxford PV would reveal actual production panels with actual prices and actual projected degradation data. It's okay that they haven't yet, they may still succeed (I hope they do!), and the interviewer did what she could.
The downside is it uses lead as a primary substance. Really not as perfect as some claim. Plus there is the slightly more hopeful technology of photo rectenna which in theory could produce a 70-80% efficient solar cell.
i'd love to see it in small scale... where the space is limited and now you can place 1-2 panels (boat/RV etc) and you potentially could get 2x the output... waiting for it ! :)
This is arguably THE MOST important breakthrough in sustainable energy production. Nothing I have seen in media and science comes close. This also revolutionises energy for all, especially the Global South, allowing them to leap to their own inexpensive energy production.
absolutely they are not, they lack longevity, their degridation is over 10 x worst than standard pannels. Basically you would be replacing them every 3 to 4 yrs. So its like a sprinter competing against a marathon runner, seeing as PV generation is a long term commitment, the sprinter always looses
@@ewadge This whole thing about pannel efficency is a totally moot point anyways, who cares if you get a 5% increas, on a 400 W pannel, its just 20 watts, its insignificant. Mono crystaline silicone is so cheap these days, if you want more power, buy an extra pannel. The trouble is these days most folks are not mathamatically or scientifically literate enough to even remain sceptical regarding claims, let alone decifering what is important and what isnt. This as it stands is a imature, possibly flawed technology, that has no place in the wider market place. It all feels like a bullshit publicity campaign to generate social pressure, (bit like american pharmacutical adverts) to get this into the market. Who knows what deal the makers of these pannels have struck with this and many other channels.
I work for the world's largest silicon solar module manufacturer and am excited to see multi-junction cells come to market, soon. I can honestly say, without getting in trouble, that virtually all large module manufacturers are in late development of multijunction cells. Curious what the lifespan of perovskite is now, as that has been the limiting factor.
its still terrible, they are just not talking about it, they are just 1/12 th the lifespan of mono crystaline pannels, so despite been more efficient, perovskite become less efficient than mono crystaline after just 12 months, then they degreade rapdly with a lifespan of around 2.5 rs, compared to 25 to 30 yrs for mono crystaline. but this isnt mentioned anywhere in the video,
As I always say and no pun intended- more power to these guys bringing the next leap forward. Anything above 30% I remember being told a few years back is the dream…..
I really enjoy your natural presentational skills combined with your obvious intelligence and ability to frame questions in just the right way to illicit the best answers. You are, if I may say, a bloody genius. And it’s true that the camera really loves you too ! Keep it coming. I’ll keep watching. Much respect and many thanks.
Selling first to grid scale solar PV farms is a win-win, as it increases grid level generation and the original silicon PV sells become available on the second hand market for residential and commercial rooftop solar at a lower price than new panels, driving down the cost of new panels.
I bought my first solar panel about 30 plus years ago. Payed 350 bucks for 30 watts. That was all the electricity I needed back than to live 24/7 offgrid. Now I live with 380 watts 24/7.
I'm looking at this and wondering why the German government has modified the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) - valid from the third quarter of 2024 - in such a way that it becomes as uneconomical as possible for newly constructed solar systems by private individuals for private use in their own homes. Were the "big customers" - also known as energy companies - very helpful in writing the new law?!
Probably lobbying from the energy providers and the fact that we have too much renewable energy in the grid already on some days, especially if solar kicks hard around noon and many PV arrays still facing south to creat the maximum amount of energy during the day to get the most money out of it, at some 20 years ago people we getting 0.40-0.55€/kWh produced and exported to the grid and they get these rates for 20 years, now imagine a 10 kWp array in the early 2000s that would be a little under 100.000€ for you in these 20 years, basically offsetting the cost of the whole system and after that you probably have another 10-20 years of lifetime in the cells left.
I guess they had their influence. But the main reason is that solar got so incredibly cheap that it would get extremely expensive to pay everybody good prices. Another reason is that we lack storage and power lines to distribute the energy. Both solvable problems, but it takes time.
While I understand that it might appear that percent efficiency is "important", the hard truth is that $ per watt installed and longevity are the 2 single driving factors of solar. Having a solar panel made up of cells that are 29% or even higher efficiency is meaningless to the average homeowner... There's plenty of roof top on most houses to handle a few extra panels.
It wasn't covered in the video: did they solve the stability and durability problems with perovskites? Last I heard they degrade in direct sunlight, or with temperature and humidity changes you naturally experience when in use. It's all well and good if they have higher efficiency to cost ratio out of the box, but the thing that matters is the average cost per kWh over their warrantied life span. If their increased efficiency drops off within the days, weeks, and months that perovskites historically have then I expect the cost might not work out cheaper over it's life per kWh delivered. So, what is that, and how does it compare to silicon?
I don't think they will answer. I wish there was a service out there that could search all interconnected documents like an engine. That could be useful.
@@colinwiseman I was being polite. It looks better if they provide the answer and self correct. The long term stability issues persist. Feel free to link me to a source saying they last roughly as long as the more standard silicon if I'm wrong? It's a glaring omission from the Oxford PV guy, but I don't blame Everything Electric because this is specific scientific research and I know that's a specialist skill they likely couldn't justify the expense of within the team. The Oxford PV guy likely needs to drum up some funding for their research or potentially people lose their jobs, so it's all aboard the hype train. They likely thought that talking to Oxford PV was expert enough. The problem is that you can't trust the person who stands to benefit from it's success to give an unbiased overview of the technology. This is the problem with channels like "Undecided with Matt Ferrell" and "Two Bit da Vinci". They don't know enough science to be able to tell what is marketing hype and what is reality reliably. You might as well just read the company press release and blindly trust it. Sadly, occasionally, the fully charged group brushes close to this kind of whoopsie; hyping tech with an undisclosed Achilles heel. I suppose you can't cover such a breadth of topics without the odd thing slipping through the net. I think fully charged does far better than the other two channels I mentioned.
A C&EN article from back in 2018 mentioned OxfordPV had developed a stable forumulation and cell layering technique that improved stability in the 1,000s of hours mark. The article mentions that entry point for commercialisation is 10,000 hours mark, with high recyclability, as the OxfordPV panels are focused on commercial use then they may be targetting cases where increased generation over a five to ten year lifespan is beneficial. Particularly with high recyclable panels, this may not suit home generation where long durable panels (15+ years) are more cost effective.
I am coming up to a point where I need to convert my home into a smart home, and using solar and heat source. Thus is there a video you have done about how a home user could get the best out of the existing market of products and potentially upgrade patches as things like this technology can be upgraded to?
What advances creativity and the time of the advancement ... an idea may sit on the shelf for generations until someone finds an answer. This cannot be forced. Something may seem minor... then later an idea to improve it becomes grand
Perovskite can add another 20% in the near term. Then when multiple different layers are used it can get up to about 80% theoretically. Its just picking up parts of the light which silicone does not
Perovskite PV cells in development today contain lead which I'm glad was mentioned in the video. However they didn't mention that the lead leaches out of the panels which is really not great. A lot of work is being put into encapsulating the panels to stop the lead getting out, but even if successful it's going to be a problem at end-of-life processing. They also tend to degrade quickly, which is also not great; they have great efficiency when new but that tanks within a few years (as in, service life less than 5 years). No mention if this group has managed to address that. We'll have to wait and see how the economics work, since they didn't discuss costs. Sure, if the levelized cost is lower that's a win, but I'm not going to be celebrating anything until the data is available.
I think that if a random RUclips commenter knows about it, they know about it. There are strict laws which they would have to follow before they would be allowed to sell them.
@@evilution_ltd What laws would those be? I think that if a random RUclips commenter confidently asserts that a law exists, they should be able to cite it and demonstrate it applies to this product. There may or may not be laws involved, but it's a fact that lead-containing peroskite PV cells have a problem with lead leaching out of them. It's not addressed in the video how, or if, they addressed that problem.
@@Smidge204 Existing Substances Regulation (ESR), EC Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93, Directive 2008/98/EC and PIC Procedure. Look up EU REACH laws. Why would a company go into that much detail in a RUclips video and publicise intellectual property?
@@evilution_ltd It was a trick question, since existing PV panels contain lead and "Fixed-location photovoltaic panel installations" are already blanket exempt from RoHS restrictions. This is how I knew you were talking nonsense; it is not (currently? maybe in the future) necessary to comply with RoHS limits for PV panels used in non-mobile applications, therefore they are already compliant with the law *despite* the known problem of lead leaching out of them. The idea that they must have solved the problem because it would be illegal to sell them otherwise means you don't understand the law (and are hopelessly naive to think no company would ever risk doing anything illegal) As for intellectual property, I never asked for detail; They acknowledge that the product contains lead. If they solved the leaching problem, all they'd have to do is acknowledge that too. Anyone interested in this product will be able to read the Wikipedia page (or god forbid any of the many scientific and industry papers on it) and immediately notice that there is a lead contamination risk, and anyone considering investing in the company or buying their products should then ask how, or if, they manage that risk. A VERY reasonable question.
Great video and very interesting, I'm all for new technology that can turn around climate change, I drive and EV and love it being cheep to run and maintain, One question I would like to ask is how Solar fields / farms affect the immediate area, If I go to my car when it's been parked in the sun for a few hours I can't touch the body as it's hot, This has raised the air temperature around the car I would imagine even if only by a very small amount, What kind of temperature change will you see around a solar farm and does it help to increase the global warming event by anything at all or does it have a different affect because it's obsorbing the heat and changing the light energy to stored energy and having a cooling effect, It would be interesting to see temperature readings around the solar farm and then at the same time a few miles away, If there's an heating effect of this process then the next question to be answered is how much of Earth surface area can have solar panels before we have thermal run away, Please don't miss understand me as I'm all for it and progress but we need to know now and not after the event.
The buzz about Perokskite cells are going of for quite a while already. When are we getting commercially available Perovskite panels at a comparable price point and longivity as Si?
Not a single mention of thier longevity. If they have figured it out that would be awesome but you think you would have heard about them lasting a lot longer than in the lab settings.
and you still dont because they didnt mention how quickly these pannels degrade, they last just 2.5 to 3 yrs. this is the problem with perovskite, all though they are marginally more efficient than mono crystaline when new, after just 1 yr they are less efficient than mono, and then degrade rapidly to the pint of failure after just 3 yrs. As things stand, at best they are an immature technology. at worst they are a dead end. also solar pannel efficency is a total moot point, its just single figure % gains. so a standard 400 w pannel at most becomes a 420 watt pannel, far better just add an extra pannel, and this is very achievable now as pannels have become so cheap
Yes, as others have said, we’ll guess she wasn’t allowed to include longevity as a direct question and receive a direct answer. Surely that’s the key breakthrough. Let’s hope they have solved it, and that’s why they are at this stage of getting it trialled out in the field. Someone is putting money behind this enterprise clearly. Fingers crossed
I live in theLas Vegas valley, Nevada, USA. My wife and I RENT our rooftop solar because, when we began using solar we were in our 70s and purchasing rooftop solar would not have been an amount we could possibly amortize unless we live two be 100. Even so, by paying US $100. per monty for rental this year (our rate increases by 3% annually) and a $19. per month unavoidable "grid fee" we are saving many hundreds of dollars every year compared to non-solar neighbors. Only in 2024's hottest months did we pay for any electricity and that amounted to $20. per month on the two hottest months. With a perovskite/silicone laminate solar array of the same size as our current array AND a Li Fe Po battery bank inside on our garage wall we could have easily lived "off grid" and such a high efficiency array would have been worth an outright purchase, even the geezerhood of our lives. Imagine such an array with an LFP battery bank and a high efficiency heat pump air conditioner/furnace. Our HVAC and electric bills would be virtually non-existant! A boy can dream.
I make my own solar electricity by replacing silicon cells with flat silvered sheet metal. I form the sheet metal into a standard geometrical shape ( not parabolic) that focuses 100 square feet of sunlight at 600:1 that heats a boiler, that creates dry steam and then I use a turbine to generate ac and dc. Each solar conversion unit costs me about $60. I need only one.
I’ve been following Perovskite solar for about 10 years. As far as I know the issue was always that Perovskite was prone to degradation. This video didn’t mention anything about this unfortunately. Have these issues been solved?
1:50 it is not PPE, It is a cleanroom suit, designed to protect the wafers and semiconductors from human contaminants and to keep the integrity of the cleanroom itself. You can call it a CPE if you wish.❤👍
If it has been mentioned previously, please forgive me. If we can convert more of the suns energy to electricity, this could reduce the heat component, of solar panel operation. This should reduce production degradation as the new panels converts more radiation to electricity rather than heat. Very much looking forward to our ability to capture a wider range of emissions for conversion to electricity 😀
Great presentation. Crisp and clear and very relevant. I just installed 6 panels @570 watts each. At peak noon in December I am getting 2.450 kw power output. The panel efficiency is only 22%. Just imagine if it was 40%………
It’s great that a company has done this even better it’s a UK company, but the material is very unstable when exposed to light, no one touches on the longevity of the product but guess we will see in a couple of years. And I do think we are going the route of the car engine here ie BHP sells cars Torque wins races the same is happening here talking about the solar cell which is one cell of a module not the module it’s self! A cell can have a high efficiency but in a module the efficiency is taken down, silicon modules are looking at 24% at the moment so this is getting tasty. Can see an intel tick tick tick tick toc road map
I think Perovskite will be great, but it might be after some 4-7 years. 1) First perovskite won´t be available yet in (2 years) 2) When it will, the demand will be high, production not yet full, and greedy companies will take their share 3) Perosvkite will consist of 2 layers, and the price will be higher than of ordinary solar panels 4) the % won´t be that much higher in the first years (25-27%) while ordinary 22,5-24,5%. 5) When perovskite comes, ordinary panels will be sold at a rebate to reduce world wide stocks. 6) There will still be a small uncertainty of how long Perovskite will last. 7) When prices and efficiency are at place (after 7 years) solar will be built at a high number.
If it turns out 35% efficient perovskite silicon cells are, say, 50% more expensive than current solar cells, and therefore struggle to be competitive at a commercial / grid level scale, there could still be many very exciting opportunities where energy density per m2 is important. I'm thinking solar PV on EVs and on the wings of battery powered planes, etc.
The Renewable Green Energy problem is the collectors can't fix the shortcomings of the source, even if one converts all wave lances. The next problem is one needs to have more items to spread the cost over of the infrastructure requirements.
I wish there was more explanation of the difference between fossil fuel and nuke "efficiency" compared to solar & wind efficiency. When we speak of a nuke or coal/gas power station and the efficiencies, we're talking about how much 'fuel' we have to burn to get x amount of electricity. Much of the process loses energy through heat and mechanical and transmission losses - and the associated pollution that goes with that. With solar efficiency the 'fuel' is sunlight and it is only a matter of how many square meters of space you need - the more efficient, the less space your panels take up. If I can fit 1kw of PV on my shed today, then a doubling of efficiency means I can now fit 2kw on my shed. But in neither case was there pollution created in the generating of the electricity, due to 'efficiency' - and - the 'losses' are sunlight, so not losses at all - just failure to capture 100% of the light - whereas with burning 'fuels' the lower the efficiency - the greater the pollution.
If Perovskite is a "film" that overlays a silicon cell, then would there be a market to produce a Perovskite film for a DIY application for existing panels already in use?
@@nickwinn7812 I wasn't referring to this technology as it is in our present day, but more as a technological peal and stick possibility in the future. Yah never know.
love the way you have covered the history and future in less than 15 mins, also explained a complex subject in an easy to digest format, excellent work everyone!
The elephant in the room is what to do with degraded solar panels and the associated costs to recycle/dispose of them. In either case the "savings" realized by the use of this technology appears to be offset by the hazardous nature of the materials generated by the "recycling:" of these panels.
How do we get Perovskite? Is it ecologically friendly? Are we killing the planet to make it? I'm looking to add PV to my home roof and if the best I can currently get is 29% I'll take it but if there is a development to enhance that to 49% in the short term future should I get the PV installed now or should I wait? Will there be a way to enhance what I currently have? Could I add Perovskite panels to my setup and enhance whistler's there another way that will not kill the planet by replacing what I may have already installed and what are the costs to be like?
Why was durability mentioned as one of the key factors, but then not addressed during the interview. The problem with Perovskites has always been with their durability. Has this company addressed the durability issue of the Perovskite materials?
Each of the solar panels on my roof produces 400 watts. I'm wondering if the same sized panels made of perovskite + silicon could potentially produce 600 watts. If so, that would be an amazing leap.
It would. But if your current cells are 25% efficient, these particular new cells (25.9% efficient) might take them up to 415 watts. Good, but, as he said "incremental".
Maybe you can get it when you're panels have to be replaced. The thing with perovskite they work in a lab condition for a short time they are far away from 30 to 50 years for dual glass panels.
Everybody in the comments still fixated on CO2. Why is it that, despite CO2 being essential for life to exist at all, despite human contribution to total global CO2 being of the order of 3% and the remaining 97% being naturally occurring and outside our control, everyone still demonises it? People, we are currently living through a historically very LOW ( yes, low!) CO2 period. The fossil record proves this, along with the fallacy of the “warmest year since records began” headlines. We’re currently in an ice age and there have been long periods of much warmer temperatures, with no input from humanity. Furthermore, as the we approach solar max, would anybody care to explain how our CO2 is raising the temperature of the other planets in the solar system? The truly exciting thing about this video is the increase in efficiency. Making solar available without having to strip mine for rare elements is a goal worth pursuing. CO2 emissions are not the demon they’re portrayed as, but particulate pollution in the air can be dramatically reduced by only needing to burn carbon fuels under high demand conditions, rather than all the time. Improving air quality is also a good goal to pursue, though until they find a way to profit from it, that’s going to be a lonely horse. The particulate filter market is shrinking, with the sales of ice vehicles supposed to stop in the next decade, so how can big business make a profit from clean air, now? It’s probably time for another crisis, though exactly what that may be, I don’t know, yet. However, as consumption of easily taxable carbon based fuel decreases, other revenue streams will be introduced to replace them. So buy the best solar panels you can afford, now, set them up as unobtrusively as you can and make hay while the sun shines. One possible way to replace carbon tax is solar panel area tax. Easily seen and calculated from above, with little cost to the government, those bills will be landing soon. Just need to get everyone on board with it, first.
Such efficiency of solar panels would allow the production of electric cars with solar charging and even allow light low-speed electric cars to drive directly from the sun.
If I can get 8kw on my roof where a 4kw array used to be - and a 30kwh battery for half what it costs today - then I could be off grid 99.9% of the year - including heating (with Far infrared heating) and the rare occasions I need grid power, could be covered by grid-scale biogas and wind power. But if the 28 million households in the UK ALL had 8kw of PV and a 30kwh battery - then a 'smart grid' could connect them all & connecting the UK's wind fleet would mean there would always be a MASSIVE surplus. But the powers that be don't want "Power to the People" where everyone can generate 99.99% of their own electricity and heating needs - they want big corporate owned arrays, nukes and gas... and to sell us electricity at 28p per kwh, which costs them 1p per kwh to generate + £5 a week just for the grid connection. Renewable energy could be 'Power to the People' - and the authoritarian politicians and corporates (basically the same people) want to use it to enslave humanity still further.
I think time for economical competitive is not here yet. Also this time we heard nothing about how long life they will have. Will they ever reach 40 years lifetime as silicon cell already have?
In commercial applications, where the higher efficiency makes a tandem panel more cost effective, long term durability is not necessarily the goal. Even silicon only panels will be swapped out before their maximum lifespan is reached as their efficiency will have dropped and replacements/newer technology panels would be more cost effective than keeping the older ones
0:17 On that chart the "accelerated case" has solar PV deploying a bit shy of 700 GW/year in 2028, we are already there this year. The growth has been tremendous. COP meetings can do whatever they like, they won't solve anything, cheap solar PV on the other hand will.
Does Two Axis solar Tacking improves efficiency 40%? Yes, a two-axis solar tracking system can improve solar panel efficiency by up to 40% compared to fixed panels, as it continuously follows the sun's movement in both the east-west and north-south directions, maximizing the amount of sunlight captured throughout the day. Key points about two-axis solar tracking: Increased energy production: By constantly adjusting to the sun's position, a dual-axis tracker can generate significantly more electricity than a fixed panel system. Movement on two axes: Unlike a single-axis tracker which only follows the east-west movement, a dual-axis tracker also tracks the sun's north-south movement, leading to better overall efficiency. Higher initial cost: While offering greater energy output, dual-axis trackers are generally more expensive to install and maintain due to their complex design with more moving parts
Just got offered a PhD project in studying and discovering new perovskites - super excited to be working on this kind of research
Congratulations. Maybe you can answer my query: When Perovskites were first talked about, there was a lot of excitement about them being ultra-thin layer, flexible and could almost be painted on a surface. I'd prefer a dirt cheap, throw 'em anywhere, 15% material, one so cheap you would stick it on N-S-E-W facing roofs and walls and yards. When can I have those please?
Please note we RUclips commenters hate you kind of researchers who take funding and produce nothing! So please keep ROI in mind!
Get "excited" but avoid getting "super excited" you''ll have a heart attack.
Go hard, go far, go for broke. Congratulations and now the work starts. Challenge everything with respect, question everyone who answers Without doubt. Come to your own conclusion while you have the chance to work with guidance. One day you will be on your own .
@@michaeljames5936 Perhaps he's a professional studier. Don't expect too much.
Thanks for the great insight. I bought a single 100w panel in 1997 for $300 including a 100ah alkaline battery. It's amazing the leaps and bounds technology has grown over the years!
Guys, go for bifacial solar panels. Efficiency around 30%(both sides,front and back, could generate electricity), and there is even output during cloudy days. Use it as a canopy and use reflective furnitures and mirrors to reflect even more sunlight on the under side
Why not bificial tandem cells with mirrors? Why not cube tandem structures with 3 mirrors?
I bought 8 x 415w solar panels in 2022 , they cost me just over £200 each . I can get the exact same panels today for £76 each including free delivery 😮 .
I recently got 4x 575W bifacial pv panels for 82€ each, prices have dropped like stones.
Thanks to China.
Buy, buy, buy, … before the EU thinks it needs to tax all the profitability out of them.
Thanks Beijing. 😂 Thanks Subsidy Thanks China Overcapacity .😊
In China 550watt solar panel only $90
Great video...can't wait for the follow-up when this technology hits the consumer market!
good to see progress
Thanks so much for taking the time - appreciate it.
43% Amazing
...and like Silicons 29%, it will never be achieved, an equivalent amount would be about 34%. And 34% is not so great when you consider 66% is lost.
What is different here is that Oxford managed to scale up production. Great! But one question you forgot or decided not to ask this boss is the expected lifetime of these perovskite cells as this has been a problem for a long time.
Bingo.
Your question is flawed. The question is, what is the carbon footprint vs energy generation over the life of the panel. If it's better than fossil or nuclear, it is the better option. Secondly, it's a lot cheaper to replace solar panels than it is to build new traditional generators.
@@diggeroldmate8122 only hydro has a lower carbon footprint than nuclear. both are lower than solar.
@@yt.damian ah no sorry.
@@diggeroldmate8122 Economics plays a role in how quickly these systems will actually be deployed. Which is arguably more important than lifetime CO2 emissions per kWh. So no, the question is not flawed.
Nice to see a none hype interview , as it means it is going to happen , rather than could happen . More please .
This _is_ a hype interview. You can't buy these panels on the open market, and they're _hoping_ to ship their first salable panels to a customer.
@@skierpageNo it’s a product development update interview - if you want to stay ignorant watch Midsomer Murders instead - your choice but don’t block the rest of us who want to learn? Sigh…….
@@skierpage why did you watch it then unless you're just here to troll?
@@diggeroldmate8122 because I hoped Oxford PV would reveal actual production panels with actual prices and actual projected degradation data. It's okay that they haven't yet, they may still succeed (I hope they do!), and the interviewer did what she could.
@@diggeroldmate8122 I hoped to learn about Oxford PV's panel pricing and durability. Oh well. I hope they succeed.
A ray of hope in these dark times.
The downside is it uses lead as a primary substance. Really not as perfect as some claim.
Plus there is the slightly more hopeful technology of photo rectenna which in theory could produce a 70-80% efficient solar cell.
Here's a ray of hope stop watching the news
@@larryspinks5533 I'm sure you would love if everyone just dropped out and stopped observing the awful changes.
i'd love to see it in small scale... where the space is limited and now you can place 1-2 panels (boat/RV etc) and you potentially could get 2x the output... waiting for it ! :)
So, good for your 1st world hobbies? Cool cool.
@@zygmuntthecacaokakistocrat6589 an increasing number of people live on boats and barges in the UK cos houses are ridiculously expensive
@@zygmuntthecacaokakistocrat6589 you think only 1st world countries use boats? I guess let's ignore all the 3rd world fishing countries lol
This is arguably THE MOST important breakthrough in sustainable energy production. Nothing I have seen in media and science comes close. This also revolutionises energy for all, especially the Global South, allowing them to leap to their own inexpensive energy production.
absolutely they are not, they lack longevity, their degridation is over 10 x worst than standard pannels. Basically you would be replacing them every 3 to 4 yrs. So its like a sprinter competing against a marathon runner, seeing as PV generation is a long term commitment, the sprinter always looses
It *may* revolutionise energy for all, but it's none done it yet - it's about a 2 percentage point (
@@jukeseyableexactly. Nowhere was the longevity issue mentioned in this video.
@@ewadge so maybe this video shouldnt be trusted as a valid source of information, and instead regarded as a sales PR bullshit publication
@@ewadge This whole thing about pannel efficency is a totally moot point anyways, who cares if you get a 5% increas, on a 400 W pannel, its just 20 watts, its insignificant. Mono crystaline silicone is so cheap these days, if you want more power, buy an extra pannel. The trouble is these days most folks are not mathamatically or scientifically literate enough to even remain sceptical regarding claims, let alone decifering what is important and what isnt. This as it stands is a imature, possibly flawed technology, that has no place in the wider market place. It all feels like a bullshit publicity campaign to generate social pressure, (bit like american pharmacutical adverts) to get this into the market. Who knows what deal the makers of these pannels have struck with this and many other channels.
This is very interesting and good news I can’t wait to see where this is in two or three years please keep us updated
Imagine a world where you guys could work together, positively interactive wow ❤️👏🏼❤️
I work for the world's largest silicon solar module manufacturer and am excited to see multi-junction cells come to market, soon. I can honestly say, without getting in trouble, that virtually all large module manufacturers are in late development of multijunction cells. Curious what the lifespan of perovskite is now, as that has been the limiting factor.
I wonder how many different absorbers can be layered atop each other
its still terrible, they are just not talking about it, they are just 1/12 th the lifespan of mono crystaline pannels, so despite been more efficient, perovskite become less efficient than mono crystaline after just 12 months, then they degreade rapdly with a lifespan of around 2.5 rs, compared to 25 to 30 yrs for mono crystaline. but this isnt mentioned anywhere in the video,
Curious why they didn't mention longevity - wait no, it's because it's so crap!
He was clearly a very intelligent man but was explaining things simply so that the layperson could understand it easily.
Can’t wait for this to come to the residential roof top space
Thank you young lady for your presentation. I love Solar the Highlander great Lakes USA.😊
This is our future . I knew this years ago . Light was the key , geo thermal next , fusion next . Too old to get involved , but so thrilled !
To add , part of this is organic .
what is the longevity of the combo peroskovite solar cell?
Two questions I wish had been asked.
1) Have you overcome the stability issues of perovskite.
2) Have you built in ease of recycling into the product?
Excellent, as always, but I was hoping to hear more about durability. I thought durability is one of the weaknesses of perovskite solar cells.
Great Episode, thanks
Very interesting update on this technology...
As I always say and no pun intended- more power to these guys bringing the next leap forward. Anything above 30% I remember being told a few years back is the dream…..
At 8 times the price
Many thanks for this video! 🎉😊
I really enjoy your natural presentational skills combined with your obvious intelligence and ability to frame questions in just the right way to illicit the best answers. You are, if I may say, a bloody genius. And it’s true that the camera really loves you too ! Keep it coming. I’ll keep watching. Much respect and many thanks.
*elicit, not illicit drugs.
It also helps that she's very easy on the eye too 😂🤣😂.
Selling first to grid scale solar PV farms is a win-win, as it increases grid level generation and the original silicon PV sells become available on the second hand market for residential and commercial rooftop solar at a lower price than new panels, driving down the cost of new panels.
This will be an amazing thing to see when they are available to fit on my roof.
Amazing 👏 need the upgrade
Ive got 325 watt panels x13 425 watt x 13 would be great increase but would it be allowed by power company?
Perovskite based solar panels are being produced now in massive scale.
What is the cell voltage of one of these stacked cells?
Can you still use a normal mppt controller with them?
Great news. I wonder what is durability of the tandem cell? Silicon can produce energy for 20-30 years. What about perovskite inside this cell?
I bought my first solar panel about 30 plus years ago.
Payed 350 bucks for 30 watts. That was all the electricity I needed back than to live 24/7 offgrid. Now I live with 380 watts 24/7.
Great news! Thanks.
Bring them on!!!!!!!!
I'm looking at this and wondering why the German government has modified the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) - valid from the third quarter of 2024 - in such a way that it becomes as uneconomical as possible for newly constructed solar systems by private individuals for private use in their own homes. Were the "big customers" - also known as energy companies - very helpful in writing the new law?!
They removed export remunaration ? Or something else?
Probably lobbying from the energy providers and the fact that we have too much renewable energy in the grid already on some days, especially if solar kicks hard around noon and many PV arrays still facing south to creat the maximum amount of energy during the day to get the most money out of it, at some 20 years ago people we getting 0.40-0.55€/kWh produced and exported to the grid and they get these rates for 20 years, now imagine a 10 kWp array in the early 2000s that would be a little under 100.000€ for you in these 20 years, basically offsetting the cost of the whole system and after that you probably have another 10-20 years of lifetime in the cells left.
They're paid off by the big money (they want to do the installs) on the corporate level
I guess they had their influence. But the main reason is that solar got so incredibly cheap that it would get extremely expensive to pay everybody good prices. Another reason is that we lack storage and power lines to distribute the energy. Both solvable problems, but it takes time.
While I understand that it might appear that percent efficiency is "important", the hard truth is that $ per watt installed and longevity are the 2 single driving factors of solar. Having a solar panel made up of cells that are 29% or even higher efficiency is meaningless to the average homeowner... There's plenty of roof top on most houses to handle a few extra panels.
Given more and more people are living in the same area, this calculation rapidly changes in cities.
It wasn't covered in the video: did they solve the stability and durability problems with perovskites? Last I heard they degrade in direct sunlight, or with temperature and humidity changes you naturally experience when in use. It's all well and good if they have higher efficiency to cost ratio out of the box, but the thing that matters is the average cost per kWh over their warrantied life span. If their increased efficiency drops off within the days, weeks, and months that perovskites historically have then I expect the cost might not work out cheaper over it's life per kWh delivered. So, what is that, and how does it compare to silicon?
And when they do, they release lead into the environment
I don't think they will answer. I wish there was a service out there that could search all interconnected documents like an engine. That could be useful.
@@colinwiseman I was being polite. It looks better if they provide the answer and self correct.
The long term stability issues persist. Feel free to link me to a source saying they last roughly as long as the more standard silicon if I'm wrong?
It's a glaring omission from the Oxford PV guy, but I don't blame Everything Electric because this is specific scientific research and I know that's a specialist skill they likely couldn't justify the expense of within the team. The Oxford PV guy likely needs to drum up some funding for their research or potentially people lose their jobs, so it's all aboard the hype train.
They likely thought that talking to Oxford PV was expert enough. The problem is that you can't trust the person who stands to benefit from it's success to give an unbiased overview of the technology.
This is the problem with channels like "Undecided with Matt Ferrell" and "Two Bit da Vinci". They don't know enough science to be able to tell what is marketing hype and what is reality reliably. You might as well just read the company press release and blindly trust it.
Sadly, occasionally, the fully charged group brushes close to this kind of whoopsie; hyping tech with an undisclosed Achilles heel. I suppose you can't cover such a breadth of topics without the odd thing slipping through the net. I think fully charged does far better than the other two channels I mentioned.
A C&EN article from back in 2018 mentioned OxfordPV had developed a stable forumulation and cell layering technique that improved stability in the 1,000s of hours mark. The article mentions that entry point for commercialisation is 10,000 hours mark, with high recyclability, as the OxfordPV panels are focused on commercial use then they may be targetting cases where increased generation over a five to ten year lifespan is beneficial. Particularly with high recyclable panels, this may not suit home generation where long durable panels (15+ years) are more cost effective.
Now that makes sense. Swappable in a field is an easy task, akin to painting the forth bridge, but no life jacket needed 😆
I am coming up to a point where I need to convert my home into a smart home, and using solar and heat source. Thus is there a video you have done about how a home user could get the best out of the existing market of products and potentially upgrade patches as things like this technology can be upgraded to?
What advances creativity and the time of the advancement ... an idea may sit on the shelf for generations until someone finds an answer. This cannot be forced. Something may seem minor... then later an idea to improve it becomes grand
I wonder if this multijunction PV can be combined with thermal photovoltaics?
I notice they never said what the efficiency of the panels was...!
It's magic! ✨🪄🔮 Just trust them!
@@DixonCyderBusch That seems to be the bottom line!!
Perovskite can add another 20% in the near term. Then when multiple different layers are used it can get up to about 80% theoretically. Its just picking up parts of the light which silicone does not
This sounds great.
Perovskite PV cells in development today contain lead which I'm glad was mentioned in the video. However they didn't mention that the lead leaches out of the panels which is really not great. A lot of work is being put into encapsulating the panels to stop the lead getting out, but even if successful it's going to be a problem at end-of-life processing. They also tend to degrade quickly, which is also not great; they have great efficiency when new but that tanks within a few years (as in, service life less than 5 years). No mention if this group has managed to address that.
We'll have to wait and see how the economics work, since they didn't discuss costs. Sure, if the levelized cost is lower that's a win, but I'm not going to be celebrating anything until the data is available.
I think that if a random RUclips commenter knows about it, they know about it. There are strict laws which they would have to follow before they would be allowed to sell them.
@@evilution_ltd What's 'random' about him?
@@evilution_ltd What laws would those be? I think that if a random RUclips commenter confidently asserts that a law exists, they should be able to cite it and demonstrate it applies to this product.
There may or may not be laws involved, but it's a fact that lead-containing peroskite PV cells have a problem with lead leaching out of them. It's not addressed in the video how, or if, they addressed that problem.
@@Smidge204 Existing Substances Regulation (ESR), EC Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93, Directive 2008/98/EC and PIC Procedure. Look up EU REACH laws.
Why would a company go into that much detail in a RUclips video and publicise intellectual property?
@@evilution_ltd It was a trick question, since existing PV panels contain lead and "Fixed-location photovoltaic panel installations" are already blanket exempt from RoHS restrictions. This is how I knew you were talking nonsense; it is not (currently? maybe in the future) necessary to comply with RoHS limits for PV panels used in non-mobile applications, therefore they are already compliant with the law *despite* the known problem of lead leaching out of them. The idea that they must have solved the problem because it would be illegal to sell them otherwise means you don't understand the law (and are hopelessly naive to think no company would ever risk doing anything illegal)
As for intellectual property, I never asked for detail; They acknowledge that the product contains lead. If they solved the leaching problem, all they'd have to do is acknowledge that too. Anyone interested in this product will be able to read the Wikipedia page (or god forbid any of the many scientific and industry papers on it) and immediately notice that there is a lead contamination risk, and anyone considering investing in the company or buying their products should then ask how, or if, they manage that risk. A VERY reasonable question.
Thanks for the clear explanation
Great video and very interesting,
I'm all for new technology that can turn around climate change,
I drive and EV and love it being cheep to run and maintain,
One question I would like to ask is how Solar fields / farms affect the immediate area,
If I go to my car when it's been parked in the sun for a few hours I can't touch the body as it's hot,
This has raised the air temperature around the car I would imagine even if only by a very small amount,
What kind of temperature change will you see around a solar farm and does it help to increase the global warming event by anything at all or does it have a different affect because it's obsorbing the heat and changing the light energy to stored energy and having a cooling effect,
It would be interesting to see temperature readings around the solar farm and then at the same time a few miles away,
If there's an heating effect of this process then the next question to be answered is how much of Earth surface area can have solar panels before we have thermal run away,
Please don't miss understand me as I'm all for it and progress but we need to know now and not after the event.
The buzz about Perokskite cells are going of for quite a while already. When are we getting commercially available Perovskite panels at a comparable price point and longivity as Si?
Mega interesting!!!
What I would like to know is how will these perform on cloudy days.
Why can't we get(or absorb) energy from radio Activ waves(from radio Activ waste)?
probably wouldn't equal much energy.
You could shift light wavelength to make it more efficient
Not a single mention of thier longevity. If they have figured it out that would be awesome but you think you would have heard about them lasting a lot longer than in the lab settings.
That was a great explanation. I didn't understand the potential of perovskite until now. Mind blown 🤯
The potential to poison generations with lead?
and you still dont because they didnt mention how quickly these pannels degrade, they last just 2.5 to 3 yrs. this is the problem with perovskite, all though they are marginally more efficient than mono crystaline when new, after just 1 yr they are less efficient than mono, and then degrade rapidly to the pint of failure after just 3 yrs. As things stand, at best they are an immature technology. at worst they are a dead end. also solar pannel efficency is a total moot point, its just single figure % gains. so a standard 400 w pannel at most becomes a 420 watt pannel, far better just add an extra pannel, and this is very achievable now as pannels have become so cheap
Yes, as others have said, we’ll guess she wasn’t allowed to include longevity as a direct question and receive a direct answer.
Surely that’s the key breakthrough. Let’s hope they have solved it, and that’s why they are at this stage of getting it trialled out in the field.
Someone is putting money behind this enterprise clearly.
Fingers crossed
they havnt solved it
@@jukeseyablethen let's hope it is like half price or even lower so we can change it every 3 years
@@trexeyesonly55 as my late father used to say, live in hope, die in want
"Lets hope". If they had cracked this problem I'm sure they'd be singing from the rooftops about it, not ignoring it.
I live in theLas Vegas valley, Nevada, USA. My wife and I RENT our rooftop solar because, when we began using solar we were in our 70s and purchasing rooftop solar would not have been an amount we could possibly amortize unless we live two be 100. Even so, by paying US $100. per monty for rental this year (our rate increases by 3% annually) and a $19. per month unavoidable "grid fee" we are saving many hundreds of dollars every year compared to non-solar neighbors. Only in 2024's hottest months did we pay for any electricity and that amounted to $20. per month on the two hottest months.
With a perovskite/silicone laminate solar array of the same size as our current array AND a Li Fe Po battery bank inside on our garage wall we could have easily lived "off grid" and such a high efficiency array would have been worth an outright purchase, even the geezerhood of our lives.
Imagine such an array with an LFP battery bank and a high efficiency heat pump air conditioner/furnace. Our HVAC and electric bills would be virtually non-existant! A boy can dream.
Nice!
I make my own solar electricity by replacing silicon cells with flat silvered sheet metal.
I form the sheet metal into a standard geometrical shape ( not parabolic) that focuses 100 square feet of sunlight at 600:1 that heats a boiler, that creates dry steam and then I use a turbine to generate ac and dc.
Each solar conversion unit costs me about $60.
I need only one.
I’ve been following Perovskite solar for about 10 years. As far as I know the issue was always that Perovskite was prone to degradation. This video didn’t mention anything about this unfortunately. Have these issues been solved?
no, this is why the video ignored them
Excellent news. Can you tell us wow how long the perovskite panels will last? Do they last longer or shorter than silicon?
The more efficient panels will help people with smaller roofs!
I like that it isn't based on some super rare mineral. The value of the discovery is definitely proportional to the scale of deployment.
Excelente.
Saludos 👋
1:50 it is not PPE, It is a cleanroom suit, designed to protect the wafers and semiconductors from human contaminants and to keep the integrity of the cleanroom itself. You can call it a CPE if you wish.❤👍
If it has been mentioned previously, please forgive me.
If we can convert more of the suns energy to electricity, this could reduce the heat component, of solar panel operation. This should reduce production degradation as the new panels converts more radiation to electricity rather than heat.
Very much looking forward to our ability to capture a wider range of emissions for conversion to electricity 😀
Do not forget using quantum dots and structures!
Great presentation. Crisp and clear and very relevant. I just installed 6 panels @570 watts each. At peak noon in December I am getting 2.450 kw power output. The panel efficiency is only 22%. Just imagine if it was 40%………
I want to know more about this panel
I thought I remember hearing that perovskite didn't last as long as existing solar voltaic cells. Any truth in that? Thanks.
It’s great that a company has done this even better it’s a UK company, but the material is very unstable when exposed to light, no one touches on the longevity of the product but guess we will see in a couple of years. And I do think we are going the route of the car engine here ie BHP sells cars Torque wins races the same is happening here talking about the solar cell which is one cell of a module not the module it’s self! A cell can have a high efficiency but in a module the efficiency is taken down, silicon modules are looking at 24% at the moment so this is getting tasty. Can see an intel tick tick tick tick toc road map
I think Perovskite will be great, but it might be after some 4-7 years. 1) First perovskite won´t be available yet in (2 years) 2) When it will, the demand will be high, production not yet full, and greedy companies will take their share 3) Perosvkite will consist of 2 layers, and the price will be higher than of ordinary solar panels 4) the % won´t be that much higher in the first years (25-27%) while ordinary 22,5-24,5%. 5) When perovskite comes, ordinary panels will be sold at a rebate to reduce world wide stocks. 6) There will still be a small uncertainty of how long Perovskite will last. 7) When prices and efficiency are at place (after 7 years) solar will be built at a high number.
What is the life span for that level of efficiency ??
If it turns out 35% efficient perovskite silicon cells are, say, 50% more expensive than current solar cells, and therefore struggle to be competitive at a commercial / grid level scale, there could still be many very exciting opportunities where energy density per m2 is important. I'm thinking solar PV on EVs and on the wings of battery powered planes, etc.
Who makes 35% efficient panels...I'll give you a clue, NO ONE.
They will get cheaper won't they, as manufacturing increases.
I’m also thinking RV rooftops, where space is also highly limited.
The Renewable Green Energy problem is the collectors can't fix the shortcomings of the source, even if one converts all wave lances. The next problem is one needs to have more items to spread the cost over of the infrastructure requirements.
Brilliant episode! Crystal-clear (arf arf), and great that Oxford is the source of such important innovation.
Can't they tune something to fill up the green part of the spectrum?
I wish there was more explanation of the difference between fossil fuel and nuke "efficiency" compared to solar & wind efficiency.
When we speak of a nuke or coal/gas power station and the efficiencies, we're talking about how much 'fuel' we have to burn to get x amount of electricity. Much of the process loses energy through heat and mechanical and transmission losses - and the associated pollution that goes with that.
With solar efficiency the 'fuel' is sunlight and it is only a matter of how many square meters of space you need - the more efficient, the less space your panels take up. If I can fit 1kw of PV on my shed today, then a doubling of efficiency means I can now fit 2kw on my shed. But in neither case was there pollution created in the generating of the electricity, due to 'efficiency' - and - the 'losses' are sunlight, so not losses at all - just failure to capture 100% of the light - whereas with burning 'fuels' the lower the efficiency - the greater the pollution.
If Perovskite is a "film" that overlays a silicon cell, then would there be a market to produce a Perovskite film for a DIY application for existing panels already in use?
Exactly how would you get that film onto the silicon of existing solar cells?
@@nickwinn7812 I wasn't referring to this technology as it is in our present day, but more as a technological peal and stick possibility in the future. Yah never know.
How do you get a film under the glass of existing panels?
love the way you have covered the history and future in less than 15 mins, also explained a complex subject in an easy to digest format, excellent work everyone!
The elephant in the room is what to do with degraded solar panels and the associated costs to recycle/dispose of them. In either case the "savings" realized by the use of this technology appears to be offset by the hazardous nature of the materials generated by the "recycling:" of these panels.
How do we get Perovskite? Is it ecologically friendly? Are we killing the planet to make it?
I'm looking to add PV to my home roof and if the best I can currently get is 29% I'll take it but if there is a development to enhance that to 49% in the short term future should I get the PV installed now or should I wait?
Will there be a way to enhance what I currently have? Could I add Perovskite panels to my setup and enhance whistler's there another way that will not kill the planet by replacing what I may have already installed and what are the costs to be like?
Spelling error in the diagram at 3:40 - "perovskite" not "pervoskite".
Probably a politician that said the quiet part out loud. Nice catch.
Remarkable indeed. this might end all these silly wars going around in the world
People will continue to fight over land, other resources than energy, and control.
Did I hear lead (rhymes with dead)? Is that safe?
Hi! Can someone tag me the timecode of what degradation time of this panels? Twice watched and not see it in interview
The fact they didn't mention it tells you all you need to know.
Why was durability mentioned as one of the key factors, but then not addressed during the interview. The problem with Perovskites has always been with their durability. Has this company addressed the durability issue of the Perovskite materials?
You never mentioned how the panel does when it gets hot. Most panels output degrade as the temperature increases.
I just wana cover my driveway to avoid shoveling snow ❄
You can visit someone building triple junction gallium arsenide cells for satellites, they are even more efficient. Probably cost 100x though...
Each of the solar panels on my roof produces 400 watts. I'm wondering if the same sized panels made of perovskite + silicon could potentially produce 600 watts. If so, that would be an amazing leap.
It would. But if your current cells are 25% efficient, these particular new cells (25.9% efficient) might take them up to 415 watts. Good, but, as he said "incremental".
Maybe you can get it when you're panels have to be replaced. The thing with perovskite they work in a lab condition for a short time they are far away from 30 to 50 years for dual glass panels.
Everybody in the comments still fixated on CO2.
Why is it that, despite CO2 being essential for life to exist at all, despite human contribution to total global CO2 being of the order of 3% and the remaining 97% being naturally occurring and outside our control, everyone still demonises it? People, we are currently living through a historically very LOW ( yes, low!) CO2 period.
The fossil record proves this, along with the fallacy of the “warmest year since records began” headlines. We’re currently in an ice age and there have been long periods of much warmer temperatures, with no input from humanity. Furthermore, as the we approach solar max, would anybody care to explain how our CO2 is raising the temperature of the other planets in the solar system?
The truly exciting thing about this video is the increase in efficiency. Making solar available without having to strip mine for rare elements is a goal worth pursuing. CO2 emissions are not the demon they’re portrayed as, but particulate pollution in the air can be dramatically reduced by only needing to burn carbon fuels under high demand conditions, rather than all the time. Improving air quality is also a good goal to pursue, though until they find a way to profit from it, that’s going to be a lonely horse.
The particulate filter market is shrinking, with the sales of ice vehicles supposed to stop in the next decade, so how can big business make a profit from clean air, now?
It’s probably time for another crisis, though exactly what that may be, I don’t know, yet.
However, as consumption of easily taxable carbon based fuel decreases, other revenue streams will be introduced to replace them. So buy the best solar panels you can afford, now, set them up as unobtrusively as you can and make hay while the sun shines. One possible way to replace carbon tax is solar panel area tax. Easily seen and calculated from above, with little cost to the government, those bills will be landing soon. Just need to get everyone on board with it, first.
Such efficiency of solar panels would allow the production of electric cars with solar charging and even allow light low-speed electric cars to drive directly from the sun.
Next step: Hybridize Perovskite PVs with thermal collectors for total conversion efficiency of over 85%
If I can get 8kw on my roof where a 4kw array used to be - and a 30kwh battery for half what it costs today - then I could be off grid 99.9% of the year - including heating (with Far infrared heating) and the rare occasions I need grid power, could be covered by grid-scale biogas and wind power.
But if the 28 million households in the UK ALL had 8kw of PV and a 30kwh battery - then a 'smart grid' could connect them all & connecting the UK's wind fleet would mean there would always be a MASSIVE surplus.
But the powers that be don't want "Power to the People" where everyone can generate 99.99% of their own electricity and heating needs - they want big corporate owned arrays, nukes and gas... and to sell us electricity at 28p per kwh, which costs them 1p per kwh to generate + £5 a week just for the grid connection.
Renewable energy could be 'Power to the People' - and the authoritarian politicians and corporates (basically the same people) want to use it to enslave humanity still further.
Super awesome. Can't wait to see all the progress over the years.
I think time for economical competitive is not here yet.
Also this time we heard nothing about how long life they will have. Will they ever reach 40 years lifetime as silicon cell already have?
In commercial applications, where the higher efficiency makes a tandem panel more cost effective, long term durability is not necessarily the goal. Even silicon only panels will be swapped out before their maximum lifespan is reached as their efficiency will have dropped and replacements/newer technology panels would be more cost effective than keeping the older ones
0:17 On that chart the "accelerated case" has solar PV deploying a bit shy of 700 GW/year in 2028, we are already there this year. The growth has been tremendous. COP meetings can do whatever they like, they won't solve anything, cheap solar PV on the other hand will.
Does Two Axis solar Tacking improves efficiency 40%?
Yes, a two-axis solar tracking system can improve solar panel efficiency by up to 40% compared to fixed panels, as it continuously follows the sun's movement in both the east-west and north-south directions, maximizing the amount of sunlight captured throughout the day.
Key points about two-axis solar tracking:
Increased energy production:
By constantly adjusting to the sun's position, a dual-axis tracker can generate significantly more electricity than a fixed panel system.
Movement on two axes:
Unlike a single-axis tracker which only follows the east-west movement, a dual-axis tracker also tracks the sun's north-south movement, leading to better overall efficiency.
Higher initial cost:
While offering greater energy output, dual-axis trackers are generally more expensive to install and maintain due to their complex design with more moving parts
Panels are black and hot, the heat is lost in the air. If heat is used the efficiency of them is much higher.