Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures
Perovskite solar cells (PSCs) offer a viable alternative to silicon‐based technologies. Assessing their environmental performance is essential for a responsible development. This study compares the life cycle impacts of two PSC architectures, mesoporous n‐i‐p and inverted p‐i‐n, using the life cycle...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley-VCH
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Advanced Energy & Sustainability Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/aesr.202400368 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850128540173860864 |
|---|---|
| author | Joana Príncipe Luísa Andrade Teresa M. Mata António A. Martins |
| author_facet | Joana Príncipe Luísa Andrade Teresa M. Mata António A. Martins |
| author_sort | Joana Príncipe |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Perovskite solar cells (PSCs) offer a viable alternative to silicon‐based technologies. Assessing their environmental performance is essential for a responsible development. This study compares the life cycle impacts of two PSC architectures, mesoporous n‐i‐p and inverted p‐i‐n, using the life cycle assessment methodology. The functional unit (FU) is a PSC with an active area of 2.88 cm2. The life cycle inventory uses primary production data complemented with literature, the EcoInvent v3.9.1 database, and process modeling. Environmental impacts are evaluated using the ReCiPe 2016 method in SimaPro v9.5.0.1. Results indicate that producing mesoporous PSCs has a higher environmental impact than producing inverted PSCs, due to differences in material and energy consumption. Specifically, mesoporous PSCs require about 132 MJ/FU compared to 25 MJ/FU for inverted PSCs, leading to carbon footprints of 14.1 kg CO2 eq./FU and 2.31 kg CO2 eq./FU, respectively. For inverted PSCs, energy consumption dominates the environmental impacts, accounting for around 80% of the total impact, while for mesoporous PSCs, depending on the environmental category, both materials and energy can dominate. Results highlight that energy consumption is critical and could be significantly reduced by using fully renewable electricity and/or minimizing the presence of metal in the back‐contact. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dfcc4a8d6a744a13978082ffaf9d944f |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2699-9412 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
| publisher | Wiley-VCH |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Advanced Energy & Sustainability Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-dfcc4a8d6a744a13978082ffaf9d944f2025-08-20T02:33:15ZengWiley-VCHAdvanced Energy & Sustainability Research2699-94122025-06-0166n/an/a10.1002/aesr.202400368Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n ArchitecturesJoana Príncipe0Luísa Andrade1Teresa M. Mata2António A. Martins3LEPABE – Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering University of Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 4200-465 Porto PortugalLEPABE – Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering University of Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 4200-465 Porto PortugalLAETA-INEGI, Associated Laboratory of Energy, Transport and and Aeronautics Institute of Science and Innovation in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 400 4200-465 Porto PortugalLEPABE – Laboratory for Process Engineering, Environment, Biotechnology and Energy, Faculty of Engineering University of Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 4200-465 Porto PortugalPerovskite solar cells (PSCs) offer a viable alternative to silicon‐based technologies. Assessing their environmental performance is essential for a responsible development. This study compares the life cycle impacts of two PSC architectures, mesoporous n‐i‐p and inverted p‐i‐n, using the life cycle assessment methodology. The functional unit (FU) is a PSC with an active area of 2.88 cm2. The life cycle inventory uses primary production data complemented with literature, the EcoInvent v3.9.1 database, and process modeling. Environmental impacts are evaluated using the ReCiPe 2016 method in SimaPro v9.5.0.1. Results indicate that producing mesoporous PSCs has a higher environmental impact than producing inverted PSCs, due to differences in material and energy consumption. Specifically, mesoporous PSCs require about 132 MJ/FU compared to 25 MJ/FU for inverted PSCs, leading to carbon footprints of 14.1 kg CO2 eq./FU and 2.31 kg CO2 eq./FU, respectively. For inverted PSCs, energy consumption dominates the environmental impacts, accounting for around 80% of the total impact, while for mesoporous PSCs, depending on the environmental category, both materials and energy can dominate. Results highlight that energy consumption is critical and could be significantly reduced by using fully renewable electricity and/or minimizing the presence of metal in the back‐contact.https://doi.org/10.1002/aesr.202400368cradle-to-gateenergy consumptionlife cycle assessmentmesoporous n-i-p and inverted p-i-n architecturesperovskite solar cells |
| spellingShingle | Joana Príncipe Luísa Andrade Teresa M. Mata António A. Martins Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures Advanced Energy & Sustainability Research cradle-to-gate energy consumption life cycle assessment mesoporous n-i-p and inverted p-i-n architectures perovskite solar cells |
| title | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures |
| title_full | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures |
| title_short | Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Perovskite Solar Cell Production: Mesoporous n‐i‐p Versus Inverted p‐i‐n Architectures |
| title_sort | comparative life cycle assessment of perovskite solar cell production mesoporous n i p versus inverted p i n architectures |
| topic | cradle-to-gate energy consumption life cycle assessment mesoporous n-i-p and inverted p-i-n architectures perovskite solar cells |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/aesr.202400368 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT joanaprincipe comparativelifecycleassessmentofperovskitesolarcellproductionmesoporousnipversusinvertedpinarchitectures AT luisaandrade comparativelifecycleassessmentofperovskitesolarcellproductionmesoporousnipversusinvertedpinarchitectures AT teresammata comparativelifecycleassessmentofperovskitesolarcellproductionmesoporousnipversusinvertedpinarchitectures AT antonioamartins comparativelifecycleassessmentofperovskitesolarcellproductionmesoporousnipversusinvertedpinarchitectures |