4.7 Review

Present Status and Research Prospects of Tin-based Perovskite Solar Cells

期刊

SOLAR RRL
卷 4, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/solr.201900310

关键词

defect physics; lead-free perovskites; prospective; Sn perovskites; stability

资金

  1. National R&D Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) [NRF-2015M1A2A2055836, NRF-2018R1A2B6007888, NRF-2017M3A7B4041698]
  2. New & Renewable Energy Core Technology Program of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) [20183010013820]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sn-based halide perovskites have attracted much interest due to their highly valuable electrical and optical properties. The promising optical and electrical properties of Sn-based perovskites have enticed a lot of research to focus on developing the strategies and explore the in-depth material characteristics. Sn-halide perovskites exhibit apparent merits and demerits. The ideal electrical and optical properties are even better than that of Pb-analogs, namely close-to-optimal bandgap, strong optical absorption, and good carrier mobilities. However, the present achievement of Sn-halide perovskite solar cells is not satisfactory, which is commonly attributed to relatively low defect tolerance, fast crystallization, and oxidative instability. The efficiency of Sn-based perovskites is far ahead, with a 9% power conversion efficiency (PCE), than the other (Ge, Bi, Sb, Cu, etc.) Pb-free options but simultaneously lagging far behind Pb-based analogs that have a 25.2% PCE. This review is aimed at presenting milestone works and revealing the pros and cons of Sn-halide perovskites. In addition, the defect physics of Sn-based perovskites is described. The improvement of open-circuit voltage is a critical issue for Sn-halide perovskites to compete with Pb-based perovskites. The understanding of defect physics plays an instrumental role in designing strategies for efficient and robust Sn-halide perovskite solar cells.

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

4.7
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