Low-temperature TiO2 Films for Dye-sensitized Solar Cells: Factors Affecting Energy Conversion Efficiency
Source abstract
Abstract
Semiconductor films prepared by electrostatic layer-by-layer deposition can be used to fabricate dye-sensitized solar cells after low-temperature treatment (150 °C). However, the resulting photocurrent is much less than when the film is sintered at 500 °C. The difference in short-circuit current is a factor of 2.2 with the Ru-based dye N719 and is 3.5 with the organic dye D5. The photocurrent at a given wavelength is proportional to the light-harvesting efficiency, charge injection effciency, and charge collection efficiency. Sintered films take up more than 60% more of either dye than unsintered films and therefore absorb more photons. Electron injection is hindered in unsintered films due to a conduction band edge potential 100 mV more negative than in a sintered electrode. Additional injection effects could be due to adsorption of the dye to polymer rather than to TiO 2 in unsintered films, although our measurements were inconclusive on this point. Kinetic studies show electron transport times (τ tr ) an order of magnitude faster then electron lifetimes (τ e ) in both sintered and unsintered electrodes. Furthermore, a Li + insertion experiment shows that both films have good electrical connectivity between TiO 2 nanoparticles. Unsintered films thus exhibit efficient charge transport despite the presence of polymer and the lack of heat treatment to induce necking.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: TiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells · Advanced Photocatalysis Techniques · Quantum Dots Synthesis And Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Center of Molecular Devices, Department of Physical and Analytical Chemistry, Uppsala University, Box 259, 751 05 Uppsala, Sweden
References (15)
Show source-provided references
1. O’Regan B. · Nature · 1991 · 353 · 73710.1038/353737a0 ↗
2. Chiba Y. · 2006 · 665
3. Decher G. · Science · 1997 · 277 · 123210.1126/science.277.5330.1232 ↗
4. He J.-A. · Langmuir · 2003 · 19 · 216910.1021/la020639b ↗
5. Agrios A. G. · Chem. Mater. · 2006 · 18 · 539510.1021/cm061679u ↗
6. Kijitori Y. · Chem. Lett. · 2007 · 36 · 19010.1246/cl.2007.190 ↗
7. Zhang D. S. · Adv. Func. Mater. · 2006 · 16 · 122810.1002/adfm.200500700 ↗
8. Halme J. · Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells · 2006 · 90 · 88710.1016/j.solmat.2005.05.013 ↗
9. Gutierrez-Tauste D. · J. Photochem. Photobiol., A · 2005 · 175 · 16510.1016/j.jphotochem.2005.04.031 ↗
10. Durr M. · Nat. Mater. · 2005 · 4 · 60710.1038/nmat1433 ↗
11. Boschloo G. · J. Phys. Chem. B · 2006 · 110 · 1314410.1021/jp0619641 ↗
12. Pavlishchuk V. V. · Inorg. Chim. Acta · 2000 · 298 · 9710.1016/S0020-1693(99)00407-7 ↗
13. Hagberg D. P. · Chem. Comm · 2006 · 2006 · 224510.1039/b603002e ↗
14. Nazeeruddin M. K. · Inorg. Chem. · 1999 · 38 · 629810.1021/ic990916a ↗
15. Peter L. M. · J. Phys. Chem. C · 2007 · 111 · 660110.1021/jp069058b ↗