The key technology they’re seeking to develop are perovskite plus silicon tandem solar modules. I’ve read research suggesting this combination could reach up to 35% solar cells – meaning a 33’ish% solar module. Most solar panels today are about 20-22% efficient - reaching 33 - increase by about 50% - would probably drop the cost of solar electricity by 50% (different 50% numbers).

"with a key objective to demonstrate 26%-efficient modules or higher on industrial scale."

"Measuring efficiency is fairly simple. If a solar panel has 20 percent efficiency, that means it’s capable of converting 20 percent of the sunshine hitting it into electricity. The highest efficiency solar panels on the market today can reach almost 23 percent efficiency. The average efficiency of solar panels falls between the 17 to 19 percent efficiency range."

That means they will be 74% in-efficient. That just really seems like a waste of time and money.

Solar panels are a waste of money for what you get out of them. It takes way more energy to create a solar panel then you will ever get out of them.

The following submission statement was provided by /u/ForHidingSquirrels:

The key technology they’re seeking to develop are perovskite plus silicon tandem solar modules. I’ve read research suggesting this combination could reach up to 35% solar cells – meaning a 33’ish% solar module. Most solar panels today are about 20-22% efficient - reaching 33 - increase by about 50% - would probably drop the cost of solar electricity by 50% (different 50% numbers).

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z2y3ru/next_generation_solar_modules_get_european/ixitlpa/

lol just wrong. Typical panels in europe have an energy payback time of 1 year. And a solar roof financially pays off in 8-12 years, potentially less, with 25-30years warranty.

On the subject of warrantees, and this applies to ordinary shingles also, in 25 to 30 years, the company that installed them will, in all probability, be out of business.

Oil is 70% inefficient - that product failed too, right?

It should also be pointed out that a solar panel is considered "dead" when its production falls below 80% of its original output. So even though it's "dead" after 25 years, it can still continue to be used long after that.

Oil is refined into many other useful chemicals and products and is not primarily used for electricity generation.

If you look at what is required to make a solar panel start to finish, you’d see that the amount of mining, diesel fuel used by mining equipment and transportation of goods…etc. had a way bigger impact on the environment. Solar panels are not recyclable. They leach out harmful chemicals into the soil as they age. They aren’t as bad as lithium batteries but still pretty bad!

So you’re saying efficiency doesn’t matter?

You know, you can look things up. Search for life cycle assessment and read some scientific papers. Plus, they are recyclable (just as Li Ion batteries). Your texts read like generated from some fossil lobby AI.

[removed]