I used to work on hybrid perovskite for solar cells, during my PhD, a few years ago. The problem with theses materials was their short lifetime (some thousands of hours of sun exposition) and chemical instability, which made them unsuitable for "real life" uses, back then (but suitable to get high impact-factor papers...). Is that still a problem?
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2025
115 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
71760 readers
3511 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I've heard there's been some real breakthroughs in perovskite for solar cells in just the last few years. As you said, chemical instability is supposed to be their primary weakness, but my understanding is that progress has been made in finding the perfect chemical makeup for the "sandwiching" materials between layers of perovskite. I'm pretty sure that "perfect" chemical makeup is the proprietary trade secret variety, so I don't really know much more about it.
And admittedly, I've never been in the field of materials science, so you're much more of an expert in this area. But I've been following a lot of green energy news, and I know promising progress is actively being made on perovskite.
Thanks. I have to admit I haven't worked on perovskite since then, so my knowledge is surely very outdated.
I found this paper that seems so address this question:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026265X23005428 // perovskites demonstrate exceptional photodetection abilities characterized by high sensitivity and fast response times, rendering them ideal for the development of optical sensors for medical diagnostics and environmental monitoring. Additionally, they hold promise in gas sensing applications, detecting specific gases with high sensitivity and opening up a wide range of potential applications in industrial process control and environmental monitoring. Although perovskite materials have gained attention due to their unique properties, their stability in the presence of moisture or oxygen remains a significant challenge and is an active area of research. // this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of recent applications of perovskite materials-based sensors. Specifically, the focus is on chemiresistive gas sensors based on perovskite oxides and fluorescence/photoelectrochemical sensors based on halide perovskites
This is actually a really good paper, but i'm skimming it to find the references to the stability of peroskite...but i'm not good at doing this on a mobile device.
Does it matter if there's a ultraviolet and IR filter on it? Is it functionally equivalent to darkness?
No idea. IIRC the problem comes from chemical instability i.e., even when properly encapsulated, the methylammonium just evaporates/decompose and you're left with a nice lead iodide layer. Can't say if it's better now. It's been quite a feew years ago.
Isn't thousands of hours enough for many cameras?
If it's a moving mirror camera* and it's used to take stills it's probably fine, as the sensor is only exposed for a fraction of a second per image.
If you want to film with it or put it in a phone, where it's exposed all the time, it would certainly not be enough.
* I have no clue what they are called in english
In English they're called reflex camera. No one makes them now.
If it's a moving mirror camera* and it's used to take stills it's probably fine, as the sensor is only exposed for a fraction of a second per image.
You can say goodbye to live view then
No, the mirror reflects to the view finder untill you press the shutter, then it moves thr mirror to expose the photo sensor and then back.
I mean no more live view via the screen
Digital single-lens reflex, aka DSLR if that's what you mean by moving mirror
No idea.
Silicon CCDs have lifetime exposure limits also. Perovskites are delicate and 1000 hours is way less than the millions silicon offer, but its also overkill in a still camera. Lenses wear out faster than silicon tech does.
Yeah, but I'm talking about chemical instability which happens nonetheless, independently on the light you shine on it.
There have been some improvements but their poor stability is still the biggest problem yeah
I often see developement in that area. Mostly from this channel. Maybe that impacts it's other uses. https://youtu.be/Lglick8bCPc
I had just watched a video about they need lead as well? Is that true?
I mean, lead is a very common element and can have many legitimate uses. If we're talking about using some amount of lead in a camera sensor, do understand how tiny camera sensors are. This is likely a very insignificant amount of lead. And it will be fused into this sensor, it's not likely to ever leave the confines of the component's plastic casing, behind a lens, with a phone. That's very different from say, mixing it into gasoline and burning it.
For many kinds of them, yes, but not literally all