This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Perovskite solar cell article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The original compared a perovskite cell without a back mirror with a GaAs cell with a back mirror saying that the former nearly reaches the latter. The efficiency limit in both cases being different, it was spurious to state "the perovskite cell without a back mirror nearly matches the GaAs limit with a back mirror".
Therefore: I've specified the spectrum, and made it clear the perovskite bandgap can be tuned to the ideal. This allows it to reach the maximum radiative efficiency in principle, for a bandgap of 1.35eV. The GaAs call however cannot, because its bandgap is slightly too high at 1.424eV.
The GaAs cell with a back mirror, however, can nearly reach the same as the perovskite solar cell with a back mirror, to wit 33%.
I think the GaAs cell does not belong here. However since it is mentioned in the reference, I have not removed it. Jpgcwiki ( talk) 00:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Perovskite solar cell. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:50, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
In my opinion the processing section reads as an advertisement for the cited articles. It is heavy on detailed descriptions of very special methods and does not provide an overview for the reader. I think this section should include a historical development of processing methods with citations of a view milestones that actually contributed to the development of more homogeneous films for high photovoltaic performance. In the current state it misses any concept, solution processing methods are mixed with vacuum vapor deposition etc. Razh Muur ( talk) 12:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The sketch depicting different perovskite architectures should be changed as it uses wrong naming conventions for cathode and anode. The current version follows the naming convention of electrolytic cells (possibly adapted from dye-sensitized solar cells, at it is denoted as "sensitized perovskite solar cell"). However, as a thin film solar cell perovskite solar cells should follow the naming convention of classical pn-junctions. Thus, p-type contact is the anode and n-type the cathode. A nice overview can be found here: http://www.sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/chemistry_and_biochemistry/internal/research_groups/andrew_b_greytak/docs/which_is_the_anode_abg.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razh Muur ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Also in "b) Schematic of a thin-film perovskite solar cell. In this architecture in which just a flat layer of perovskite is sandwiched between to selective contacts." to should be changed to two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinzele ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
With the potential of achieving even higher efficiencies and the very low production costs, perovskite solar cells have become commercially attractive, with start-up companies already promising modules and powerbanks on the market by 2017.[6][7][8] Dr. Universe ( talk) 03:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Please update the article with info on this paper (it relates to longevity/stability of perovskite solar cells). It's included in 2020 in science like so:
Scientists show that adding an organic-based ionic solid into perovskites can result in substantial improvement in solar cell performance and stability. The study also reveals a complex degradation route that is responsible for failures in aged perovskite solar cells. The understanding could help the future development of photovoltaic technologies with industrially relevant longevity. [1] [2]
-- Prototyperspective ( talk) 22:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
References
In what way is this article about climate change? There isn't a single mention or reference within it to climate change. This seems an inclusion without an actual basis. Anastrophe ( talk) 19:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Opening the Wikipedia, I was surprised to see the leading image indicating a mass-produced perovskite solar cells. However,it seems to just be stock footage used by the video producer, as it was certainly not to do with what was being spoken about or the research in the lab. Someone should post what a "usual" device looks like, i.e. a fabricated device on a glass or flexible substrate. An image of factory-scale solar cell production might give a reader the false impression that perovskite devices are entering or close to entering the market. Rsfadia ( talk) 22:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
An image of factory-scale solar cell production might give a reader the false impression that perovskite devices are entering or close to entering the market– I don't think that this is the impression the user gets from that, especially as it's clarified in the text. Images on Wikipedia very often give slightly false impressions simply because no better alternative image exists and it's useful for illustration. I don't know whether or not the suggested alternative image is better or whether there's some other CC BY image by now to upload to WMC. Prototyperspective ( talk) 12:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Perovskite solar cell article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The original compared a perovskite cell without a back mirror with a GaAs cell with a back mirror saying that the former nearly reaches the latter. The efficiency limit in both cases being different, it was spurious to state "the perovskite cell without a back mirror nearly matches the GaAs limit with a back mirror".
Therefore: I've specified the spectrum, and made it clear the perovskite bandgap can be tuned to the ideal. This allows it to reach the maximum radiative efficiency in principle, for a bandgap of 1.35eV. The GaAs call however cannot, because its bandgap is slightly too high at 1.424eV.
The GaAs cell with a back mirror, however, can nearly reach the same as the perovskite solar cell with a back mirror, to wit 33%.
I think the GaAs cell does not belong here. However since it is mentioned in the reference, I have not removed it. Jpgcwiki ( talk) 00:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Perovskite solar cell. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:50, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
In my opinion the processing section reads as an advertisement for the cited articles. It is heavy on detailed descriptions of very special methods and does not provide an overview for the reader. I think this section should include a historical development of processing methods with citations of a view milestones that actually contributed to the development of more homogeneous films for high photovoltaic performance. In the current state it misses any concept, solution processing methods are mixed with vacuum vapor deposition etc. Razh Muur ( talk) 12:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The sketch depicting different perovskite architectures should be changed as it uses wrong naming conventions for cathode and anode. The current version follows the naming convention of electrolytic cells (possibly adapted from dye-sensitized solar cells, at it is denoted as "sensitized perovskite solar cell"). However, as a thin film solar cell perovskite solar cells should follow the naming convention of classical pn-junctions. Thus, p-type contact is the anode and n-type the cathode. A nice overview can be found here: http://www.sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/chemistry_and_biochemistry/internal/research_groups/andrew_b_greytak/docs/which_is_the_anode_abg.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razh Muur ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Also in "b) Schematic of a thin-film perovskite solar cell. In this architecture in which just a flat layer of perovskite is sandwiched between to selective contacts." to should be changed to two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kinzele ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
With the potential of achieving even higher efficiencies and the very low production costs, perovskite solar cells have become commercially attractive, with start-up companies already promising modules and powerbanks on the market by 2017.[6][7][8] Dr. Universe ( talk) 03:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Please update the article with info on this paper (it relates to longevity/stability of perovskite solar cells). It's included in 2020 in science like so:
Scientists show that adding an organic-based ionic solid into perovskites can result in substantial improvement in solar cell performance and stability. The study also reveals a complex degradation route that is responsible for failures in aged perovskite solar cells. The understanding could help the future development of photovoltaic technologies with industrially relevant longevity. [1] [2]
-- Prototyperspective ( talk) 22:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
References
In what way is this article about climate change? There isn't a single mention or reference within it to climate change. This seems an inclusion without an actual basis. Anastrophe ( talk) 19:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Opening the Wikipedia, I was surprised to see the leading image indicating a mass-produced perovskite solar cells. However,it seems to just be stock footage used by the video producer, as it was certainly not to do with what was being spoken about or the research in the lab. Someone should post what a "usual" device looks like, i.e. a fabricated device on a glass or flexible substrate. An image of factory-scale solar cell production might give a reader the false impression that perovskite devices are entering or close to entering the market. Rsfadia ( talk) 22:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
An image of factory-scale solar cell production might give a reader the false impression that perovskite devices are entering or close to entering the market– I don't think that this is the impression the user gets from that, especially as it's clarified in the text. Images on Wikipedia very often give slightly false impressions simply because no better alternative image exists and it's useful for illustration. I don't know whether or not the suggested alternative image is better or whether there's some other CC BY image by now to upload to WMC. Prototyperspective ( talk) 12:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)