Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Earth Power

More Durable UV Coating For Solar Panels Made From Red Onion Skins (zmescience.com) 39

Long-time Slashdot reader fahrbot-bot shared this report from ZME Science Researchers from the University of Turku, in collaboration with Aalto University and Wageningen University, have developed a bio-based UV protection film for solar cells that not only blocks nearly all harmful ultraviolet light but also outperforms commercial plastic films. The key ingredient is a water extract made from red onion skins...

[T]he same sunlight that powers [solar cells] can also degrade their delicate components — particularly the electrolyte inside dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSCs), a type known for their flexibility and low-light performance. To mitigate this, manufacturers typically wrap cells in UV-protective films made from petroleum-based plastics like polyethylene terephthalate (PET). But these plastics degrade over time and are difficult to recycle... Nanocellulose can be processed into thin, transparent films that serve as the perfect substrate for UV-blocking compounds.

Their breakthrough came when they dyed these films using an extract from red onion skins, a common kitchen waste. The result was a filter that blocked 99.9% of UV radiation up to 400 nanometers, a feat that outstripped even the PET-based commercial filters chosen for comparison... [T]he onion-treated filter excelled: it let through over 80% of light in the 650-1,100 nm range — an ideal sweet spot for energy absorption... Even predictive modeling based on early degradation trends suggested the CNF-ROE filter could extend a solar cell's lifetime to roughly 8,500 hours. The PET-based filter? Just 1,500 hours... [T]he red onion extract offered a rare combination of longevity, transparency, and sustainability...

The team envisions biodegradable solar cells for smart packaging, remote sensors, or wearable devices — especially in applications where recovery and recycling are not feasible. Their work is part of the BioEST project, funded by the Research Council of Finland, which supports sustainable innovation across electronics and materials science. This achievement taps into a broader movement to decarbonize every step of solar energy production. Plastic packaging is one of the overlooked sources of emissions in clean technology. Swapping out fossil-based plastics for biodegradable alternatives helps close that loop...

The findings appeared in the journal Applied Optical Materials.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Durable UV Coating For Solar Panels Made From Red Onion Skins

Comments Filter:
  • by blastard ( 816262 ) on Sunday September 21, 2025 @03:23PM (#65674728)

    when my panel breaks.

  • by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Sunday September 21, 2025 @03:42PM (#65674760) Homepage

    For those keeping score at home, 8500 hours is just over 354 days.

    • by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Sunday September 21, 2025 @04:00PM (#65674774)

      According to the paper the hours measured was for an accelerated light soaking stress test. Still not 100% on the timeframes here, still seems a little short...

      DSSCs along with UV filter films were subjected to an intensive light soaking protocol using an Atlas XLS+ solar simulation system. The xenon lamp of the system (model NXE 1700), which simulates the AM1.5G solar spectrum, (34) facilitated a 1000-h exposure to artificial sunlight. The spectral irradiance within the UV 300–400 nm range was quantified at approximately 240 MJ/m2. The simulator maintained internal conditions of approximately 35 C, a black standard temperature (BST) of 60 C, and a relative humidity level of 20%. Thermal imaging, conducted with a Fluke TiS75 camera, indicated the average temperature of the filters and DSSC to be 45 C. This 1000-h duration was chosen since it aligns with standard light soaking protocols in photovoltaic research, corresponding to roughly one year of outdoor exposure in a central European climate under the AM 1.5G solar spectrum. (54)

      The 1000-h light soaking test demonstrated that the CNF-ROE filter film effectively minimized electrolyte color bleaching and preserved JSC of the DSSC, outperforming other films, including the commercial SFC-10l filter. Predictive modeling based on the accelerated aging test projected that CNF-ROE could retain the lifetime of DSSCs for approximately 8500 h, significantly longer than the 1500 h for typical, commercially available, conventional, fossil-fuel-based UV filter.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Monday September 22, 2025 @05:10AM (#65675438) Homepage Journal

        The important part is that they are talking about dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSC), not the typical solar panels you put on your house.

        DSSCs are attractive because they are very easy and cheap to manufacture, and flexible. But they degrade fast with UV light, and the expected gains in protecting them have not been made. If their life could be extended to a usable amount they would offer an even lower cost option than already extremely cheap conventional solar cells, and open up some new applications.

    • For those keeping score at home, 8500 hours is just over 354 days.

      (a) The Sun doesn't shine 24 hours/day. (On on spot on the Earth /pedantic :-) )
      (b) It's still projected to last 5.6x longer than the current petroleum-based coating.

      ... the CNF-ROE filter could extend a solar cell's lifetime to roughly 8,500 hours. The PET-based filter? Just 1,500 hours.

      • For those keeping score at home, 8500 hours is just over 354 days.

        (a) The Sun doesn't shine 24 hours/day. (On on spot on the Earth /pedantic :-) ) (b) It's still projected to last 5.6x longer than the current petroleum-based coating.

        ... the CNF-ROE filter could extend a solar cell's lifetime to roughly 8,500 hours. The PET-based filter? Just 1,500 hours.

        Just a guess here, and I could easily be wrong. But maybe that's 8500 hours of direct and strong sunlight?

        I mention that because solar panels also produce low-but-still-useful levels of power when it's cloudy, as well as during early morning and late afternoon. In those cases of lower levels of sunlight, I suspect that that the UV levels are disproportionately lower; witness the reduced incidence and severity of sunburn on cloudy days and in the early morning and late afternoon.

        • Just a guess here, and I could easily be wrong. But maybe that's 8500 hours of direct and strong sunlight?

          The Applied Optical Materials.journal article referenced in TFA/S describes the stability testing setup:

          2.6. Stability Testing and Color Alteration Characterization

          DSSCs along with UV filter films were subjected to an intensive light soaking protocol using an Atlas XLS+ solar simulation system. The xenon lamp of the system (model NXE 1700), which simulates the AM1.5G solar spectrum, (34) facilitated a 1000-h exposure to artificial sunlight. The spectral irradiance within the UV 300–400 nm range was quantified at approximately 240 MJ/m2. The simulator maintained internal conditions of approximately 35 C, a black standard temperature (BST) of 60 C, and a relative humidity level of 20%. Thermal imaging, conducted with a Fluke TiS75 camera, indicated the average temperature of the filters and DSSC to be 45 C. This 1000-h duration was chosen since it aligns with standard light soaking protocols in photovoltaic research, corresponding to roughly one year of outdoor exposure in a central European climate under the AM 1.5G solar spectrum. (54)

      • by Entrope ( 68843 )

        TFS didn't claim it was 8500 hours of direct sunlight.

        As someone else pointed out, this was an accelerated life test where 1000 hours of light is thought to model a year of real exposure, bit going from 1.5 to 8.5 years of life still means it's a pretty short lifetime.

        And that's 5.6 times as long, not 5.6 times longer.

    • Yeah, if it's daytime 100% of those 354 days.
  • ... is stuff gonna eat that solar panel covering now?
    • ... is stuff gonna eat that solar panel covering now?

      It's the red coloring in the onion skins, which is extracted and bound with cellulose from wood pulp. From TFA:

      The CNF-ROE film—short for cellulose nanofiber with red onion extract ...

      I'm guessing it'll be too meager a meal for termites... :-)

  • Interesting.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ndsurvivor ( 891239 ) on Sunday September 21, 2025 @04:17PM (#65674786) Journal
    That Onions seem to have antibiotic properties, are good for cuts, and bacteria does not seem to grow on them. After I cut up onions, I personally don't consider the knife "dirty", so I do a quick rinse and let it dry. I don't think twice about it. I think that it is cool that someone is researching more ways to take advantage of that property of Onions.
    • This UV blocking ability is yet another notch for onions being the GOAT of vegetables.

      • I won't knock a good onion, but their close cousin garlic has the edge in my book. In addition to the wonderful flavor, it is also well known for it's anti-vampiric properties. Perhaps garlic, unlike these onions which block UV, instead emits it, which may explain why it repels vampires. I'm currently working on an NSF grant proposal to study this now that my previous proposal (aimed at studying how much fun alvinrod could have with a $300,000 Ferrari) fell through.
        • I mean for sure garlic is top contender but onions are just too versatile.

          Fried, caramelized, sautéed, grilled all work great. Mirepoix, soups, pizza, salads could go on and one, there's just so much they can go with.

          Now as a seasong or a flavor or such as garlic is usually used, for sure, the greatest. Oh whats that recipe? 2 cloves of garlic? That means mince the entire head and throw it in.

        • I won't knock a good onion, but their close cousin garlic has the edge in my book. In addition to the wonderful flavor, it is also well known for it's anti-vampiric properties. Perhaps garlic, unlike these onions which block UV, instead emits it, which may explain why it repels vampires. I'm currently working on an NSF grant proposal to study this now that my previous proposal (aimed at studying how much fun alvinrod could have with a $300,000 Ferrari) fell through.

          Vampires like garlic on their pizza. This "garlic is anti-vampiric" propaganda is something they've pushed for centuries to throw people off from taking real action against vampires and needs to be stopped. It's almost as anti-truth as the idea that vampires can't eat human food just because they aren't sustained by it without a healthy blood supply to go along with it. Too many people believe the propaganda, to the point some of it has become common tropes in vampiric fictions. Real vampires are simply amp

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      That Onions seem to have antibiotic properties, are good for cuts, and bacteria does not seem to grow on them. After I cut up onions, I personally don't consider the knife "dirty", so I do a quick rinse and let it dry. I don't think twice about it. I think that it is cool that someone is researching more ways to take advantage of that property of Onions.

      It shouldn't be really all that surprising. They're root vegetables, and that nice meaty bulb grows in the dark, where it's constantly under attack by bacte

  • that explanation felt uncommonly unnecessary

  • Kind of wasteful to just filter away the UV part of the light. After all, its ~5% of total energy from the sun light at the surface could contribute to the energy harvested by the PV panel. Is finding materials that do not deteriorate when exposed to UV light too difficult?
    • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      You can use the UV light. You need different material with a different bandgap. Basically a whole other panel, stacked on the first. But before you go after that 5% UV you're going to want to go after the blue, and probably the red and some of the near IR.

      They're called multijunction solar cells and they're used in places where you need maximum efficiency, like in space. For regular use, single junction cells are much more popular because a single bandgap panel absorbing at the maximum solar emission is goi

    • Multi-junction cells can do this. They're expensive though.

  • Just asking for a friend.

  • Stories like this, and many others, make me hope that even though the planet is going to get *VERY* uncomfortable, human ingenuity will ultimately mitigate the worst effects of this self-created problem. If you poke your head above the constant doom and gloom, there are positive stories. It's early days, but projects to regreen the planet are taking off - and succeeding. While the CCP spraypaint dead weeds and rocks green https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] other groups, including NGOs, charities, and of cour
  • by Geoffrey.landis ( 926948 ) on Sunday September 21, 2025 @06:56PM (#65674994) Homepage

    Nobody uses dye-sensitized solar cells. They were an interesting idea for a technology, but the improvements in silicon cell performance along with reductions in cost just made their mediocre performance obsolete.

    Also, nobody uses plastic coatings for solar cells. Plastics simply deteriorate too fast. Everybody uses glass.

  • We need a community-curated list of technological breakthroughs and their followups that make it to the front page of Slashdot. There's been some amazing R&D reports posted, and pretty regularly there will be one or more comments about how we'll never see it commercialized "because big will bury it", etc.

The "cutting edge" is getting rather dull. -- Andy Purshottam

Working...