| Literature DB >> 34947535 |
Mohammed Islam Elsmani1, Noshin Fatima1, Michael Paul A Jallorina2,3, Suhaila Sepeai1, Mohd Sukor Su'ait1, Norasikin Ahmad Ludin1, Mohd Asri Mat Teridi1, Kamaruzzaman Sopian1, Mohd Adib Ibrahim1.
Abstract
The unprecedented development of perovskite-silicon (PSC-Si) tandem solar cells in the last five years has been hindered by several challenges towards industrialization, which require further research. The combination of the low cost of perovskite and legacy silicon solar cells serve as primary drivers for PSC-Si tandem solar cell improvement. For the perovskite top-cell, the utmost concern reported in the literature is perovskite instability. Hence, proposed physical loss mechanisms for intrinsic and extrinsic instability as triggering mechanisms for hysteresis, ion segregation, and trap states, along with the latest proposed mitigation strategies in terms of stability engineering, are discussed. The silicon bottom cell, being a mature technology, is currently facing bottleneck challenges to achieve power conversion efficiencies (PCE) greater than 26.7%, which requires more understanding in the context of light management and passivation technologies. Finally, for large-scale industrialization of the PSC-Si tandem solar cell, the promising silicon wafer thinning, and large-scale film deposition technologies could cause a shift and align with a more affordable and flexible roll-to-roll PSC-Si technology. Therefore, this review aims to provide deliberate guidance on critical fundamental issues and configuration factors in current PSC-Si tandem technologies towards large-scale industrialization. to meet the 2031 PSC-Si Tandem road maps market target.Entities:
Keywords: perovskite-silicon; roll-to-roll; solar cell; stability; tandem
Year: 2021 PMID: 34947535 PMCID: PMC8708322 DOI: 10.3390/nano11123186
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Recent research gap studies on perovskite, silicon, and PSC-Si tandem solar cell.
| Ref.no/Year | Author(s) | Focused Area(s) | Research Gap(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Taesoo et al. | A broad review on thin-film solar cell technologies | perovskite detailed stability challenges, addressing methods, and PSC-Si tandem solar cell |
| [ | Kour et al. | A recent review on perovskite technology degradation mechanism and market challenges | perovskite ion migration challenges, addressing methods, and PSC-Si tandem solar cell |
| [ | Yamaguchi et al. | Topical review on all SHJ based tandem solar cell technology | Perovskite degradation mechanisms and various silicon solar cells structures |
| [ | Salhi et al. | Perovskite stability challenges understanding | Advanced PSC passivation methods such as two/three dimensional 2D/3D PSC and silicon-based tandem solar cell |
| [ | Krishnan et al. | Perovskite stability comprehensive review | Silicon bottom solar cell challenges and tackling methods |
| [ | Wang et al. | A comprehensive and detailed on perovskite stability | Hysteresis, halide free perovskite study, and PSC-Si tandem |
| [ | Yang et al. | Perovskite interface engineering | PSC additive/compositional engineering and PSC-Si tandem |
| [ | Hermle et al. | Passivating contacts for silicon solar cell in tandem configuration | Perovskite instability |
| [ | Akhli et al. | A detailed review on PSC-Si tandem with various configuration | Various silicon bottom cells technologies/roll-to-roll fabrication technology |
| [ | Wu et al. | Progress on PSC-Si tandem solar cell technologies | Various silicon bottom cells technologies/roll-to-roll fabrication technology |
| [ | Lui et al. | Detailed and recent progress on monolithic PSC-Si tandem | Four-terminal 4T PSC-Si tandem |
| [ | Kim et al. | Upscaling PSC-Si monolithic tandem strategies, including blading deposition | Perovskite loss mechanism and 4T PSC-Si tandem |
Figure 1PSC-Si 4T (left) and 2T (right) simple schematic diagram.
Summary of the advantages and challenges based on PCS-Si tandem with various conditions, materials, and structure.
| Tandem Solar Cell Type | Ref./Year | Advantage(s) | Limitation(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2T-PSC-Si | [ |
Champion cell, Highest PCE (29.15%), and FF (>80%) so far Stable in overcoming PSC-hole carrier extraction efficiency with low ideality factor |
Current density mismatch (ΔJ) ~0.77 mA Relative improvement of Voc owed to non-radiative recombination at perovskite’s electron transport layer PSC-ETL |
| 4T-PSC-Si | [ |
High PCE (28.3%) Semitransparent Cr/Au/MgF2 front electrode allows IR light transmittance to the bottom cell (~66%) |
Slight Cr/Au light parasitic loss Cr/Au/MgF2 Higher sheer resistivity which affected FF and Jsc of the top cell |
| 2T-PSC-Si | [ |
PCE 26.0%, total Jsc 40mA. Optimized layers thicknesses using Si homojunction bottom cell. |
Low fill factor (FF) Higher current mismatch between sub-cells |
| 2T-PSC-Si | [ |
PCE 25.2% @38.7 mA/cm2 via layers index matching techniques for flat surface silicon sub-cell |
PCE 25.2% is limited due to low FF |
| 2T- Triple Junction-PSC/PSC/SHJ | [ |
High Voc ~2.69 eV with optimized middle cell band gap with PSC sequential deposition technique |
PCE (14%) Limited due to low FF |
| 2T PSC-Si | [ |
PCE 25.2% @19.5 mA @500 nm PSC @1.63 eV Fully Textured cell. Low lateral and conductive nc-Si: H Device stability improved |
Requires more improvement in the front contact and successive layers. Top cell voltage improvement towards wide-bandgap absorber. Stability to be improved. |
| 4T PSC-Si | [ |
An optimized 26.4% overall efficiency with PSC band gap 1.73eV with the use of Rubidium mixed-cations. Improved cell stability and negligible hysteresis resulted from Rubidium |
Open circuit voltage is yet below the obtained bandgap with reduced FF |
| 2T-PSC-Si | [ |
PCE 23.6% @1.63 eV Voc Reduced parasitic absorption loss Enhanced stability through bilayer SnO2/ZTO as a diffusion barrier Low-temperature deposition, i.e., ALD or pulsed-CVD over the rough surface of PSC Silicon Nano Particles (SiNP) enhanced infrared EQE Hysteresis free |
Due to PSC surface roughness, Voc is low to reach the theoretical limit. Front surface reflection still exists (to account for) |
| 4T-PSC-Si | [ |
Improvement of perovskite aperture area to 1 cm2 from 0.25 cm2 total efficiency PCE of (23% and 25.2%) n-i-p-based with PCE 20.5% monolithic at 1.43 cm is also developed in the same paper Low-temperature PSC solvent deposition |
Low FF due to high series resistance in 1 cm2 cell Parasitic absorption due to ITO and in Molybdenum oxide (MoOx) layers |
| 2T PSC-Si | [ |
PCE 18.1% @1.78 V Low Temperature deposition of ETL (SnO2) as replacement to the TiO2. |
Hall transport layer (HTL) Spiro-OMeTAD parasitic absorption with high overall reflectance and no surface texturing ICL: ITO acts reflector |
Figure 2PCE (%) as a function of the area in cm2 for certified PSC-Si tandem solar cell for various structures since 2016–2020 shown in the navy-blue color zone margins. The lowest right coroner represents uncertified 2018 released by University of Sydney (USYD)-Australia [64]. The figure shows current PCE-Area and research/future trends in the colored arrows. Data has been extracted from solar cell efficiency tables (49–57) available at www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com.
List of examples of efficiency performance-related material types and perovskite absorber chemical structures.
| Material (Compound) | Perovskite Absorber | PCE (%) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Organic | (FAPbI3)0.95 (MAPbBr3)0.05 | 22.7 ± 0.51 | [ |
| Organic | (FAPbI3)1−x(MAPbBr3)x | 21.6 | [ |
| Organic-Inorganic | FA0.75(MA0.6Cs0.4)0.25PbI2Br/Rb(5%) | 17.4 | [ |
| Organic-Inorganic | PTABr-CsPbI3 | 17.06 | [ |
| Organic-Inorganic | CsxFA1−xPb(I,Br)3 | 14.0 | [ |
Figure 3Illustration of the certified various perovskite cell and multi-cells, (a) the efficiency trend, the inset shows real minimodules produced by Toshiba [81]; (b) the area of the corresponding cells for the same period for higher cells area, and the inset represents the corresponding thin film (various) small area graph. Some data points in Figure 3 coincide with each other. Data are obtained from solar cell efficiency tables (42–57) available at www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com.
The summaries of the significant stability sub-challenges with physical basis along with proposed healing/mitigation strategy (s).
| No. | Challenge | Reasons | Remedies |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Moisture Instability |
Amine salt hydrophilicity [ |
Mixed-cationic engineering with dual ion hybridization [ Low dimensionality perovskite and nanostructures integration [ |
| 2. | Oxygen instability |
Oxygen desorbing donor trapping sites [ May Water formation [ Superoxide formation [ |
High binding energy layer/less oxygen reactive materials [ Cationic and passivation engineering [ |
| 3. | UV light instability |
Light-induced degradation of the constituent perovskite materials chemical instability, including charge transport layers [ |
Proper interfacial engineering with barrier layers carrier transport [ |
|
Integration of 2D and 2D-3D composite perovskite [ | |||
|
Interface engineering such as in CsBr interface [ | |||
| 4. | Thermal instability |
De-phasing of the perovskite organic absorber due to thermal decomposition capacity of constituent’s materials (accelerated with light exposure) [ |
Proper structural Alpha phase perovskite engineering (e.g., organic cationic engineering) |
|
Surface engineering with organic cation termination and quantum dots Q.Ds [ | |||
|
2D perovskite engineering [ | |||
|
Top layer thermal sensitivity [ |
Novel electrode thermally stable materials [ | ||
| 5. | HTL and ETL interface instability |
Chemical reaction with environmental factors such as U.V and surrounding layers (e.g., TiO2) [ |
Interface engineering with good blocking effect layers of diffused ions between Transport layer and perovskite modification [ |
|
Modification/irreversible deformation of HTL- Spiro-OMeTAD due to MA+ alteration, which may induce pinholes ready for iodide diffusion [ |
Adoption of the improvement on the new concept materials such as stable transition metals oxides, carbon nanomaterials with modified interfacial layers (HTL Free) [ | ||
|
Li oxides doped-Spiro-OMeTAD salt hydrophilic and diffusive nature [ PEDOT: PSS high hygroscopes and acidity nature to react with Transparent Conductive Oxide (TCO) [ |
Introduction of lithium-free dopants in the transport layers [ | ||
| 6. | Metal electrode layer-based instability |
Electrode interaction with the environment. Moreover, the Pinholes created with the interaction of metal contact with perovskite absorber-halide/transport layer may cause the formation of Aluminum/silver- halide compound (AlI3 and/or AgI) [ |
Metal contact engineering with pinhole-free interfacial engineering (e.g., barrier design) [ 2D metal novel semitransparent doped materials (e.g., Graphene) [ |
| 7. | Processing-post process methods |
Low-temperature annealing process influence low fracture energy as a result of a small grain and rough films [ Water content during processing is responsible for increased hysteresis due to the increment of mobile ions [ Annealing temperature may lead to a difference in thermal coefficient resulted in inefficient interface connectivity [ Elimination of unreacted PbI2 [ |
Understanding the interplay effect of optimum temperature and materials on perovskite thermomechanical properties and morphological aspects [ Solvent engineering using antisolvents helps create an intermediate phase that may remove humidity content after the annealing step [ Understanding of the influence of preprocessing and post-processing conditions and compositional engineering on the morphology and crystallinity of Perovskite [ |
Figure 4Schematic diagram of (a) the simple interplay between extrinsic and intrinsic perovskite performance degradation mechanisms with blue line arrows. The consequence of direct and indirect chain reactions is represented in red and green arrows, respectively. Hysteresis symbolic graph is depicted from Ref. [127]. (b) Summarizes the various perovskite engineering methods adopted in Table 4.
Figure 5Generic and fragmented silicon solar cell technologies cross-section schematics (The surface morphology may vary from flat surface/partially textured to the fully textured surface) From Left to right (a) PERC technology, middle (b) SHJ technology and (c) IBC. All structures and materials are for an explanatory purpose reprinted from [186], Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier (Not to Scale). (Note: in PERC structure, back metal contact in the black color is intended to diffuse through insulator via local BSF layer).
The overall performance metrics for a bottom cell selection criteria, loss mechanism (s), and leading silicon technologies market perspective.
| Technology | Performance Metrics | Loss Mechanism(s) | Market Share State/Anticipation |
|---|---|---|---|
| PERC |
less Surface Recombination Velocity (SRV) in comparison with Al-BSF [ |
Bulk, emitter, and back contact SRH recombination [ Front and back reflector optical loss High Al consumption [ |
Current mainstream silicon along Al-BSF photovoltaic. Anticipated shift from p-PERC to n-PERC reaching 70% total solar cells market share by 2022 then fading away for PERx/TOPCON/PERC+ [ |
| PERC+ |
Less SRV in comparison with PERC with better passivation technologies Less Al paste consumption in comparison with PERC [ |
Slight increase in series resistance in comparison with PERC [ |
The market share was expected at 16% by 2019 [ A 2021 recent projection PERC+ to be the leading market stream in the upcoming years [ -Anticipated to be the leading horse for the tandem applications |
| SHJ |
Better passivation quality as compared to homojunction and IBC-SHJ cell ( Less thermal budget used in SHJ [ |
Front and back contact layers optical loss [ Balancing between TCO’S optical and electrical series resistance performance [ Effect of the edge recombination due to TCO’S inadequate coverage [ |
International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic (ITRPV) expects SHJ to possess a 12% market share by 2026, a more significant share than 15% by 2031 [ |
| IBC-SHJ |
Better optical response due to no emitter contact shadowing ( Comparable Voc and FF to SHJ [ A promising new paradigm with IBC POLO [ |
Process complexity (i.e., lithography) and cost are the main concerns for this technology [ |
ITRPV market share expectation at 15–20% by 2030 [ |
Figure 6An illustration of the Generic 2T perovskite silicon tandem major loss mechanisms with each set of layers light spectrum absorbance adapted from various literature (The surface morphology may vary from flat surface/partially textured to the fully textured surface). The purple circles represent the modified ICL layer (i.e., nanocrystalline materials). [Reprinted/Adapted] with permission from [ref [219]] © The Optical Society.
Figure 7Schematic diagram of (a) A way forward towards PCS-Si tandem vast industrialization and the work required Table 2. T- PSC-Si based on roll-roll technology integration with existing silicon solar cell technology as part of the overall roadmap in (b).