| Literature DB >> 33996094 |
Mikko Kokkonen1, Parisa Talebi2, Jin Zhou1, Somayyeh Asgari3, Sohail Ahmed Soomro4, Farid Elsehrawy5, Janne Halme5, Shahzada Ahmad6,7, Anders Hagfeldt8, Syed Ghufran Hashmi1.
Abstract
Dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSCs) are an efficient photovoltaic technology for powering electronic applications such as wireless sensors with indoor light. Their low cost and abundant materials, as well as their capability to be manufactured as thin and light-weight flexible solar modules highlight their potential for economic indoor photovoltaics. However, their fabrication methods must be scaled to industrial manufacturing with high photovoltaic efficiency and performance stability under typical indoor conditions. This paper reviews the recent progress in DSSC research towards this goal through the development of new device structures, alternative redox shuttles, solid-state hole conductors, TiO2 photoelectrodes, catalyst materials, and sealing techniques. We discuss how each functional component of a DSSC has been improved with these new materials and fabrication techniques. In addition, we propose a scalable cell fabrication process that integrates these developments to a new monolithic cell design based on several features including inkjet and screen printing of the dye, a solid state hole conductor, PEDOT contact, compact TiO2, mesoporous TiO2, carbon nanotubes counter electrode, epoxy encapsulation layers and silver conductors. Finally, we discuss the need to design new stability testing protocols to assess the probable deployment of DSSCs in portable electronics and internet-of-things devices. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33996094 PMCID: PMC8095349 DOI: 10.1039/d1ta00690h
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Mater Chem A Mater
Fig. 1Evolution of conversion efficiencies of DSSCs in recent years.
Fig. 2Schematic illustration representing device structure and working principle of a dye-sensitized solar cell. CB = conduction band, Ef TiO2 = fermi level of TiO2, S = ground state of dye sensitizer molecule, S* = excited state of dye sensitizer molecule, S0 = oxidized dye, S+ = charge separation, I− = iodide ion and I3− = triiodide ion.
Fig. 3(a) Traditional DSSC use either a thermoplastic or porous insulating spacer to avoid short circuit between the mesoporous TiO2 and the counter electrode. (b) Type II junction alignment[31] of the band edges for the mesoporous TiO2 film and a p-type semiconductor layer. The p-type semiconductor serves as an electron-blocking hole-selective charge collection layer. (c) The sensitized TiO2 electrode and the PEDOT semiconductor-based counter electrode make direct contact via mechanically pressing and make a new DSSC embodiment. (d) In the DSSC with the contacted electrodes, the redox couple diffuses merely through the mesoscopic TiO2 film (reproduced from reference with permission[25]).
Fig. 4Proposed process flow for producing advanced monolithic DSSCs with alternative Cu redox shuttles-based electrolytes and solid hole conductors.
Fig. 5Energetics in DSSCs with respect to redox potentials of each redox couple (I−/I3−, [Co(bpy)3]2+/3+ and [Cu(dmp)2]1+/2+) utilized in DSSCs.[55]
Some of the high efficiency DSSCs produced with alternative Co and Cu redox based electrolytes and solid-state hole conductors
| Electrolyte composition | Dye | PCE (%) | Stability | Year | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| 0.20 M [Co2+(phen)3](PF6−)2, 0.05 M [Co3+(phen)3](PF6−)3, 0.07 M LiClO4, 0.02 M NaClO4, 0.03 M TBAPF, 0.01 M TBPPF, 0.01 M HMImPF, 0.30 M TBP, 0.10 M TMSP, 0.10 M MP, 0.05 M CPrBP, 0.10 M CPeBP, and 0.05 M COcBP in MeCN | ADEKA-1 + LEG4 | 14.3 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported | 2015 |
|
| 14.7 @ 50% mW cm−2 | |||||
| (0.22 M [CoII(bpy)3](B(CN)4)2, 0.05 M [CoIII(bpy)3](B(CN)4)3), 0.1 M LiClO4 and 0.85 M TBP in acetonitrile (ACN) | ZL003 | 13.6 @ 100 mW cm−2 | 50 days dark conditions with 25% RH 15% drop in efficiency was observed due to acetonitrile evaporation | 2019 |
|
| 0.25 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)2, 0.06 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)3, 0.1 M LiTFSI, and 0.5 M 4- | SM342 + Y123 | 12.76 @ 100% sun intensity | Not reported | 2017 |
|
| 12.34 @ 10% sun intensity | |||||
| 0.22 M Co(bpy)3(PF6)2, 0.05 M Co(bpy)3(PF6)3 (0.05 M), 0.1 M LiClO4, 0.2 M TBP, 0.1 M TPAA in acetonitrile | LEG4D35 + dyenamo blue | 10.5 @ one sun illumination | Devices retained 89% of the initial efficiency when soaked in full sun light intensity up to 250 h and at 25 °C. Also, MPPT tracking was performed | 2016 |
|
| 10.2 @ 11.4 sun illumination | |||||
| 11.7 @ 0.46 sun illumination | |||||
| 0.20 M [Co(bpy)3](TFSI)2, 0.06 M [Co(bpy)3](TFSI)2, 1.00 M | MK2 | 9.42 @ 0.1 W cm−2 | Not reported | 2017 |
|
|
| |||||
| 0.2 M Cu(tmby)2TFSI and 0.04 M Cu(tmby)2TFSI2, 0.1 M lithium bis(triuoromethanesulfonyl)imide and 0.6 M 4- | XY1:L1 | 11.5 @ full sun light intensity | 16 h 1000 lux illumination at the daytime + 8 h of darkness for 12 days. Devices retained performance | 2020 |
|
| 34 @ 1000 lux intensity | |||||
| 32.7 @ 500 lux intensity | |||||
| 31.4 @ 200 lux intensity | |||||
| 0.07 M Cu( | Y123 | 10.4 @ full sun intensity | Not reported | 2020 |
|
|
| |||||
| 0.06 M [Cu(tmby)2](TFSI)2, 0.2 M [Cu(tmby)2](TFSI), 0.1 M LiTFSI and 0.6 M TBP in acetonitrile | Y123 | 11.0 @ 1000 W m−2 | Device stability of non-encapsulated cell was observed at ambient conditions which showed slight increase in the initial photovoltaic performance. Also, stability of one ssDSSCs operating at maximum output power was examined for 200 h under radiation at 500 W m−2, was examined | 2017 |
|
| 11.3 @ 500 W m−2 | |||||
| 10.5 @ 100 W m−2 | |||||
| 0.2 M Cu( | D35 + XY1 | 11.3 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported | 2017 |
|
| 25.5 @ 200 lux intensity | |||||
| 28.9 @ 1000 lux intensity | |||||
| 0.10 M Cu(dmbp)2BF4, 0.05 M Cu(dmbp)2(BF4)2, 0.50 M TBP, and 0.10 M LiBF4 in acetonitrile | Y123 | 10.3 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Stability test of one device was conducted for 15 days. 10% deviation in photovoltaic performance was observed due to acetonitrile evaporation in dark conditions | 2017 |
|
Fig. 6General characteristics of efficient semiconducting oxide layer in DSSCs.
Some of the high efficiency DSSCs with TiO2 PEs combined with various sensitizers, as well as Co and Cu redox shuttle-based alternative electrolytes
| Photelectrode (PE) | Thickness (μm), TiO2 | TiCl4 conc. (mM), pre-treatment, post-treatment | Dye | Electrolyte composition | PCE | Stability | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| TiO2 | 3.5 | Not reported | SM315 | 0.25 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)2, 0.06 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)3, 0.1 M LiTFSI, and 0.5 M 4- | 13.0 @ 1000 W m−2 | 500 h @ full sun @ 298 K ∼25 °C no significant loss detected |
|
| 3.5 | Not reported | SM371 | 12.0 @ 1000 W m−2 | ||||
| TiO2 | 5 | Not reported | YD2-o-C8/Y123 | 0.165 M CoII(bpy)3(B(CN)4)2, 0.045 M CoIII(bpy)3(B(CN)4)3, 0.8 M | 12.3 @ 99.5 mW cm−2 | DSSC (unknown number of cells) were soaked in full sunlight at 30 °C for a period of 220 h, which led to 10–15% decrease in the overall efficiency |
|
| 5 | Not reported | 13.1 @ 50.8 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 13 @ 9.4 mW cm−2 | |||||||
| TiO2 | 3.5 | 60 (twice) | SM342:Y123 | 0.25 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)2, 0.06 M Co(bpy)3(TFSI)3, 0.1 M LiTFSI, and 0.25 M or 0.5 M 4- | 12.76 @ 100% sun | Not reported |
|
| 3.5 | 20 mM | 12.34 @ 10% sun | |||||
| TiO2 | 5 | Not reported | Y123 | 0.2 M Co(bpy)3(B(CN4)2), 0.05 M Co(bpy)3(B(CN4)3), 0.1 M LiClO4, 0.2 M 4- | 8.6 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 5 | 40 | 9.4 @ 50 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 8.7 @ 10 mW cm−2 | |||||||
|
| |||||||
| TiO2 | 4 | Not reported | XY1:L1 | 0.2 M Cu(tmby)2TFSI, 0.04 M Cu(tmby)2TFSI2, 0.1 M lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl) imide, 0.6 M 4- | 11.5 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 4 | 13 | 13.7 @ 10% sun | |||||
| 34 @ 1000 lux | |||||||
| TiO2 | 4 | 40 (twice) | XY1 + 5T | 0.2 M CuI(tmby)2(TFSI), 0.06 M CuII(tmby)(TFSI)2, 0.1 M lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl) imide (LiTFSI)2, 0.6 M | 9.53 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 4 | 13 | 10.2 @ 10 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 29.2 @ 1000 lux | |||||||
| TiO2 | 3.5 | 40 (twice) | 0.2 mM LEG4 in | 0.2 M Cu(dmp)2TFSI, 0.04 M Cu(dmp)2TFSI Cl, 0.1 M LiTFSI, 0.5 M 4- | 8.32 @ 96.515 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 3.5 | 40 | 9.78 @ 50.791 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 9.74 @ 12.279 mW cm−2 | |||||||
| TiO2 | 3 | 40 | Y123 | 60.6 mg Cu(dmp)2TFSI, 13 mg Cu(dmp)2(TFSI)Cl, 12.6 mg LiTFSI 32 mg 4-tertbutylpyradine (4-TBP) in 0.4 ml of acetonitrile | 7.0 @ full sun | Not reported |
|
| Not reported | 40 | 7.6 @ 50% sun | |||||
| 7.5 @ 10% sun | |||||||
Particle size of TiO2 nano-particles.
Champion device efficiencies.
Fig. 7Rapidly sensitized photoelectrodes via inkjet printed dyes accelerates the staining process and can also be adopted to produce multicolour printed dyes based TiO2 electrodes and for precise co-sensitization of the PEs (reproduced from ref. 31 with permission).
Fig. 8General characteristics of an efficient carbonaceous counter electrode in DSSCs.
Champion DSSCs reported in recent years employing alternative catalyst materials
| Catalyst (CE) | Electrolyte composition |
| PCE (%) | Stability | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Graphene | 0.22 M Co(bpy)3(PF6)2, 0.05 M Co(bpy)3(PF6)3, 0.1 M LiClO4, and 0.2 M 4- | 0.2 | 9.4 @ 1 sun | Not reported |
|
| 9.6 @ 0.51 sun | |||||
| 9.3 @ 0.095 sun | |||||
| Carbon | 0.6 M [Co(phen)3]2+/3+ (Co( | 2.92 | 9.53 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 10.03 @ 50 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 9.21 @ 10 mW cm−2 | |||||
| Selenide/graphene composite | 0.21 M [Co(bpy)3](TFSI)2, 0.068 M [Co(bpy)3](TFSI)3, 0.95 M tBP, and 0.055 M LiTFSI in ACN | 4.13 | 11.26 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Stability of one DSSC reported for >336 h. The device was stored in dark at 25 °C |
|
| Graphene nanoplatelets | 0.25 M [Co(bpy)3][B(CN)4]2 and 0.06 M [Co(bpy)3][B(CN)4]3 complexes with 0.1 M LiTFSI and 0.5 M 4- | ∼30 | 10.3 @ 1 sun | Not reported |
|
|
| |||||
| SWCNT | 60.6 mg Cu(dmp)2TFSI, 13 mg Cu(dmp)2(TFSI)Cl, 12.6 mg LiTFSI, and 32 mg 4- | ∼2.1–2.9 | 7.5 @ full sun illumination | Not reported |
|
| 8.3 @ half sun illumination | |||||
| PEDOT | 0.2 M Cu( | Not reported | 11.3 @ 100 mW cm−2 | Not reported |
|
| 25.5 @ 200 lux intensity | |||||
| 28.9 @1000 lux intensity | |||||
| PEDOT | 0.2 M Cu(tmby)2TFSI, 0.04 M | Not reported | 11.5 @ full sun intensity | 16 h 1000 lux illumination at the daytime + 8 h of darkness for 12 days. Devices retained photovoltaic performance |
|
| 10 Cu(tmby)2TFSI2, 0.1 M lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide, and 0.6 M 4-tertbutylpyridinein acetonitrile | 34 @ 1000 lux intensity | ||||
| 32.7 @ 500 lux intensity | |||||
| 31.4 @ 200 lux intensity | |||||
| PEDOT | 0.04 M [Cu(tmby)2](TFSI)2, 0.20 M [Cu(tmby)2]TFSI, 0.1 M LiTFSI, and 0.6 M 1 methylbenzimidazole in acetonitrile | Not reported | 13.1 @ 100 mW cm−2 | DSSC remained stable (4 days) when stored in ambient dark conditions. DSSC retained 90% of its initial value during maximum power ( |
|
| 13.1 @ 50 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 12% @ 10 mW cm−2 | |||||
| 31.8 @ 1000 lux | |||||
| 30.8 @ 500 lux | |||||
| 27.5 @ 200 lux | |||||
|
| |||||
| PEDOT | 0.06 M [Cu(tmby)2](TFSI)2, 0.2 M [Cu(tmby)2](TFSI), 0.1 M LiTFSI and 0.6 M TBP in acetonitrile | Not reported | 11.0 @ 1000 W m−2 | Device stability of non encapsulated cell were observed at ambient conditions which showed slight increase in the initial photovoltaic performance. Also, stability of one ssDSSCs operating at maximum output power was examined for 200 h under radiation at 500 W m−2, was examined |
|
| 11.3 @ 500 W m−2 | |||||
| 10.5 @ 100 W m−2 | |||||
The values were evaluated from the curves in and the unit is Ω.[92]
Fig. 9Illustration of the factors that affect DSSC devices and their possible consequences which hinder the photovoltaic performance.
DSSCs reports produced with several sealing materials
| Device design | Sealant | Stability | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | Surlyn | Stability of one DSSC reported, which retained 90% of initial photovoltaic performance for 500 hours under continuous full sun irradiation with a UV cut-off filter |
|
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | Surlyn, bynel and epoxy | Champion DSSCs with ACN maintained 66% of the initial efficiency after 2000 hours at 20 °C and 1 sun light intensity. DSSCs with 3-MPN solvent based electrolyte maintain 91% of the initial efficiency |
|
| DSSCs with ACN solvent based electrolyte maintain 100% efficiency at maximum power point at 30 °C for a period of 1000 h | |||
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | “Surlyn and hermetic sealing with epoxy adhesive (3 M)” | DSSC maintained 90% of initial PCE with full sunlight soaking at 60 °C for 1000 h |
|
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | Surlyn | The QS-DSSCs with dyes N-719 and Z-907 retained 95% and 97% of their initial value under continuous light illumination of 200 lux at 35 °C after 1000 h |
|
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | UV curing glue | Stability of one DSSC reported, which retained 92% of its peak value during light soaking test at 60 °C for 500 h |
|
| Thin film (AlO | The PE and CE were attached with epoxy resin | DSSC retained 50% of the initial value after 300 h |
|
| FTO glass PE – FTO glass CE | UV curing glue | DSSC remained stable (4 days) when stored in ambient dark conditions. DSSC retained 90% of its initial value during maximum power ( |
|
Few proposed stability test protocols for indoor testinga
| Test id | Light source | Temperature | Rel. humidity | Environment/set-up | Characterization light source | Load |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| ISOS-D-1 | None | RT | Ambient | Ambient air | Indoor light source | OC |
| ISOS-D-2 | None | 60 °C | Ambient | Oven, ambient air | Indoor light source | OC |
|
| ||||||
| ISOS-V-1 | None | RT | Ambient | Ambient air | Indoor light source | Positive:VMPP; |
|
| ||||||
| ISOS-L-1 | Indoor light source | RT | Ambient | Light only | Indoor light source | MPP or OC |
| ISOS-L-2 | Indoor light source | 60 °C | Ambient | Light and temperature | Indoor light source | MPP or OC |
|
| ||||||
| ISOS-T-1 | None | RT to 60 °C | Ambient | Hot plate/oven | Indoor light source | OC |
| ISOS-T-2 | None | RT to 65 °C | Ambient | Oven/env. chamber | Indoor light source | OC |
| ISOS-T-3 | None | −40 to +65 °C | <55% | Env. chamber | Indoor light source | OC |
|
| ||||||
| ISOS-LC-1 | Indoor light source/dark cycle | RT | Ambient | Light only | Indoor light source | MPP or OC |
Reported table is an alternation from a Table 1 presented in ref. 105.
Original test.
Modified/recommended test ISOS standards have solar simulator or sunlight for light source, which are not suitable for indoors stability testing and have been changed to indoor light source Voc, VMPP are determined from light J–V curves[105] RT = room temperature 23 ± 4 °C, RH = relative humidity, OC = open-circuit condition, MPP = maximum power point.