Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Interplay between temperature and bandgap energies on the outdoor performance of perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells

Abstract

Perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells promise power conversion efficiencies beyond the Shockley–Queisser limit of single-junction devices; however, their actual outdoor performance is yet to be investigated. Here we fabricate 25% efficient two-terminal monolithic perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells and test them outdoors in a hot and sunny climate. We find that the temperature dependence of both the silicon and perovskite bandgaps—which follow opposing trends—shifts the devices away from current matching for two-terminal tandems that are optimized at standard test conditions. Consequently, we argue that the optimal perovskite bandgap energy at standard test conditions is <1.68 eV for field performance at operational temperatures greater than 55 °C, which is lower compared with earlier findings. This implies that bromide-lean perovskites with narrower bandgaps at standard test conditions—and therefore better phase stability—hold great promise for the commercialization of perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Design and performance of the perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells.
Fig. 2: Outdoor performance of perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells.
Fig. 3: Temperature-dependent performance of the perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells.
Fig. 4: The performance of the tandem solar cells under current mismatch conditions.
Fig. 5: The calculated temperature-dependent performance of the ideal perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells.

Data availability

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available within the paper, its Supplementary Information and its Source Data files. Source data are provided with this paper.

References

  1. 1.

    Ledinsky, M. et al. Temperature dependence of the urbach energy in lead iodide perovskites. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 10, 1368–1373 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    De Wolf, S. et al. Organometallic halide perovskites: sharp optical absorption edge and its relation to photovoltaic performance. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 5, 1035–1039 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    McMeekin, D. P. et al. A mixed-cation lead mixed-halide perovskite absorber for tandem solar cells. Science 351, 151–155 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Jošt, M. et al. Textured interfaces in monolithic perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells: advanced light management for improved efficiency and energy yield. Energy Environ. Sci. 11, 3511–3523 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Sahli, F. et al. Fully textured monolithic perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells with 25.2% power conversion efficiency. Nat. Mater. 17, 820–826 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Shen, H. et al. In situ recombination junction between p-Si and TiO2 enables high-efficiency monolithic perovskite/Si tandem cells. Sci. Adv. 4, eaau9711 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Xu, J. et al. Triple-halide wide–band gap perovskites with suppressed phase segregation for efficient tandems. Science 367, 1097–1104 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hou, Y. et al. Efficient tandem solar cells with solution-processed perovskite on textured crystalline silicon. Science 367, 1135–1140 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kim, D. et al. Efficient, stable silicon tandem cells enabled by anion-engineered wide-bandgap perovskites. Science 368, 155–160 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Best Research-Cell Efficiency Chart (NREL, accessed May 2020); https://www.nrel.gov/pv/assets/images/efficiency-chart.png

  11. 11.

    Leijtens, T., Bush, K. A., Prasanna, R. & McGehee, M. D. Opportunities and challenges for tandem solar cells using metal halide perovskite semiconductors. Nat. Energy 3, 828–838 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Allen, T. G., Bullock, J., Yang, X., Javey, A. & De Wolf, S. Passivating contacts for crystalline silicon solar cells. Nat. Energy 4, 914–928 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Haegel, N. M. et al. Terawatt-scale photovoltaics: transform global energy. Science 364, 836–838 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Battaglia, C., Cuevas, A. & De Wolf, S. High-efficiency crystalline silicon solar cells: status and perspectives. Energy Environ. Sci. 9, 1552–1576 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sansoni, S. et al. Eco-friendly spray deposition of perovskite films on macroscale textured surfaces. Adv. Mater. Technol. 5, 1901009 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Chen, B. et al. Blade-coated perovskites on textured silicon for 26%-efficient monolithic perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells. Joule 4, 850–864 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Eperon, G., Hörantner, M. T. & Snaith, H. J. Metal halide perovskite tandem and multiple-junction photovoltaics. Nat. Rev. Chem. 1, 0095 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Albrecht, S. & Rech, B. Perovskite solar cells: on top of commercial photovoltaics. Nat. Energy 2, 1–2 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Jiang, Q. et al. Surface passivation of perovskite film for efficient solar cells. Nat. Photon. 13, 460–466 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Yoo, J. J. et al. An interface stabilized perovskite solar cell with high stabilized efficiency and low voltage loss. Energy Environ. Sci. 12, 2192–2199 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Zheng, X. et al. Managing grains and interfaces via ligand anchoring enables 22.3%-efficiency inverted perovskite solar cells. Nat. Energy 5, 131–140 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bush, K. A. et al. Compositional engineering for efficient wide band gap perovskites with improved stability to photoinduced phase segregation. ACS Energy Lett. 3, 428–435 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Mahesh, S. et al. Revealing the origin of voltage loss in mixed-halide perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 13, 258–267 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Correa-Baena, J.-P. et al. Promises and challenges of perovskite solar cells. Science 358, 739–744 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Aydin, E., De Bastiani, M. & De Wolf, S. Defect and contact passivation for perovskite solar cells. Adv. Mater. 0, 1900428 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Singh, P. & Ravindra, N. M. Temperature dependence of solar cell performance—an analysis. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 101, 36–45 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Sample, T. & Virtuani, A. Modification to the standard reference environment (SRE) for nominal operating cell temperature (NOCT) to account for building integration. In Proc. of the 24th EU-PVSEC, Hamburg 3332 (European Union, 2009).

  28. 28.

    Hoke, E. T. et al. Reversible photo-induced trap formation in mixed-halide hybrid perovskites for photovoltaics. Chem. Sci. 6, 613–617 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Horantner, M. T. & Snaith, H. Predicting and optimising the energy yield of perovskite-on-silicon tandem solar cells under real world conditions. Energy Environ. Sci. 10, 1983–1993 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Jacobs, D. A. et al. Light management: A key concept in high-efficiency perovskite/silicon tandem photovoltaics. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 10, 3159–3170 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Dupré, O. et al. Field performance versus standard test condition efficiency of tandem solar cells and the singular case of perovskites/silicon devices. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 9, 446–458 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Sahli, F. et al. Improved optics in monolithic perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells with a nanocrystalline silicon recombination junction. Adv. Energy Mater. 8, 1701609 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Holman, Z. C. et al. Infrared light management in high-efficiency silicon heterojunction and rear-passivated solar cells. J. Appl. Phys. 113, 013107 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Silverman, T. J. et al. Reducing operating temperature in photovoltaic modules. IEEE J. Photovolt. 8, 532–540 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Khenkin, M. V. et al. Consensus statement for stability assessment and reporting for perovskite photovoltaics based on ISOS procedures. Nat. Energy 5, 35–49 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Tress, W. et al. Performance of perovskite solar cells under simulated temperature-illumination real-world operating conditions. Nat. Energy 4, 568–574 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Kurnik, J., Jankovec, M., Brecl, K. & Topic, M. Outdoor testing of PV module temperature and performance under different mounting and operational conditions. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 95, 373–376 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Nordmann, T. & Clavadetscher, L. Understanding temperature effects on PV system performance. In Proc. 3rd World Conf. Photovolt. Energy Convers. Vol. 3, 2243–2246 (IEEE, 2003).

  39. 39.

    Haschke, J. et al. The impact of silicon solar cell architecture and cell interconnection on energy yield in hot & sunny climates. Energy Environ. Sci. 10, 1196–1206 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Dupré, O., Vaillon, R. & Green, M. A. Physics of the temperature coefficients of solar cells. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 140, 92–100 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Köhnen, E. et al. Highly efficient monolithic perovskite silicon tandem solar cells: analyzing the influence of current mismatch on device performance. Sustain. Energy Fuels 3, 1995–2005 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Jean, J. et al. Radiative efficiency limit with band tailing exceeds 30% for quantum dot solar cells. ACS Energy Lett. 2, 2616–2624 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    LabView 2017 v.17 (National Instruments, 2017).

  44. 44.

    Shockley, W. & Queisser, H. J. Detailed balance limit of efficiency of p-n junction solar cells. J. Appl. Phys. 32, 510–519 (1961).

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Green, M. A. Intrinsic concentration, effective densities of states, and effective mass in silicon. J. Appl. Phys. 67, 2944–2954 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    King, D. L., Boyson, W. E. & Kratochvill, J. A. Photovoltaic Array Performance Model Sandia Report SAND2004-3535 (United States Department of Energy, 2004).

  47. 47.

    Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (European Comisssion, accessed January 2020); https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/tools.html

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this publication was supported by funding from King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) under award nos. OSR-CARF URF/1/3079-33-01 and IED OSR-2019-4208. The authors thank TUV Rheinland Group for providing solar spectra from their outdoor test field on the KAUST campus. J.Á. thanks the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport for his pre-doctoral grant (FPU14/04466).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

E.A and T.G.A. conceived the idea and designed the experiments. E.A. developed the perovskite top cells, top electrodes and contact layouts and fabricated the tandem devices, E.A. and T.G.A. performed laboratory-based device characterizations. J.Á. contributed the fabrication of the perovskite absorber. T.G.A. developed nanocrystalline recombination junction and fabricated c-Si bottom cells. M.D.B. performed temperature-dependent absorptance measurements and prepared the silicon wafers. M.D.B and E.V.K. did the encapsulation of the devices. M.S. performed the field measurements. E.V.K. prepared the field data. L.X. performed the temperature prediction calculations. T.G.A. performed the temperature-dependent radiative efficiency modelling and yield calculations. E.A., T.G.A. and S.D.W. composed the manuscript. All authors discussed the results, contributed to the writing and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Erkan Aydin or Stefaan De Wolf.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–22, Notes 1–5, Table 1 and refs. 1–16.

Reporting Summary

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Photovoltaic parameters of a tandem solar cell at test field and Predicted ambient and cell temperature values for 2016.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aydin, E., Allen, T.G., De Bastiani, M. et al. Interplay between temperature and bandgap energies on the outdoor performance of perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells. Nat Energy 5, 851–859 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-00687-4

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing