3.9 Article

Group IV Oxides for Perovskite Solar Cells

期刊

DOKLADY PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 496, 期 2, 页码 13-19

出版社

MAIK NAUKA/INTERPERIODICA/SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1134/S0012501621020020

关键词

perovskite solar cells; photoelectrode; thin films; nanostructured materials; zirconium dioxide; hafnium dioxide; energy bandgap; photovoltaic characteristics

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [20-69-47124]
  2. Russian Science Foundation [20-69-47124] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanostructured Group IV oxides have been synthesized and utilized as photoelectrodes for perovskite solar cells. Differences in photovoltaic characteristics of PSCs are attributed to morphology and charge transfer features of mesoporous HfO2 and ZrO2 layers. The results indicate promising prospects for the application of nanostructured Group IV oxide materials in high-efficiency PSCs.
Nanostructured Group IV oxides (ZrO2 and HfO2) have been synthesized and their structural, optical, and energy parameters have been studied. The obtained nanopowders have been used to fabricate nanostructured thin-film photoelectrodes for perovskite solar cells (PSCs). FTO/cTiO(2)/HfO2/CH3NH3PbI3/Spiro-MeOTAD/Au cell architecture has been developed. Photovoltaic characteristics and photoconversion efficiency for PSCs based on mesoscopic hafnium and zirconium oxides have been compared to the analogous characteristics for known titania-based PSCs. It has been demonstrated that the differences in the photovoltaic characteristics of PSCs are due to the morphology of the mesoporous HfO2 and ZrO2 layers, as well as to the specific features of charge transfer and accumulation at the perovskite/photoelectrode interface. The results obtained indicate good prospects for the application of nanostructured Group IV oxide materials with E-g > 5 eV as photoelectrodes for PSCs. Charge hopping mechanism in very wide bandgap photoelectrodes and its advantages for the development of high-efficiency PSCs is discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据