Talk:Dye-sensitized solar cell

Link to a List of Dye Solar Cell manufacturers

Wikipedia is not a directory, so I cannot put the list directly in wikipedia. But working a lot with dye solar cell technology, I think the list is an important ressource and therefore an external link should be provided:

• List of Dye Solar Cell Manufacturers

BinFlo (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

That list is compiled by "administrator" of the site www.dye-solar-cell.com. Adding such list would contradict basic wikipedia policies, such as WP:RS, WP:ELNO, and a few related ones. Materialscientist (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why this list contradicts to WP:RS, WP:ELNO! The list has to be compiled by someone and can be updated on this page by everyone. I would like to have such a list here on wikipedia, but it was deleted as a directory! BinFlo (talk) 10:22, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:RS here means that "someone" should be a reliable and trustworthy source of information; "administrator" is not such a source, and their site www.dye-solar-cell.com is a commercial site. Materialscientist (talk) 10:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

www.dye-solar-cell.com is not a commercial site.. It's a new page by a group of DSC researchers trying to build a platform for information on DSC: Too push this technology! - I think more reliable and trustworthy than most sources on wikipedia! Everyone who is interested can join this DSC community!BinFlo (talk) 10:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, good luck, but please note that wikipedia should not be used as a vehicle for promoting your site or technology. See WP:SOAP and WP:NPOV. Materialscientist (talk) 10:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

It is actually not my site and definitely not my technology! I don't understand why some users act so restrictively against this informative link or an appropriate list on wikipedia.com! Prohibiting complements by citing WPs stands for no progress. I thought wikipedia is all about information and I hope other users see that point, too! BinFlo (talk) 11:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:ELNO point 14 says specifically that we are not interested in lists of links to manufacturers. - MrOllie (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Introduction reads like an advertisement

It's also not really a good summary of the article, which is otherwise quite good. 95.109.104.4 (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Citations

This article could really use some citations... ---Neil

There appear to be citations throughout the article, now Steve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 05:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Business-side info

I had previously added a link to a global directory of manufacturers of equipment for dye cell production(http://www.enf.cn/database/equipment-film-dssc.html). The information was taken down by someone who hadn't actually reviewed the validity of the information but was deleting based on the fact that I posted up several links to ENF.

On the suggestion of one of person that removed the information, I am submitting suggested comments/links here in the hope that other editors will evaluate the relevance and resubmit it to the main page:

Dye Cell Production Equipment Directory of manufacturers who sell equipment for dye cell production.

Kit Temple 14:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

help - re "black dye"

I want to know where to obtain or how to produce black die. The chemical name given to the "black die" returns very few results on google, most of them useless or eventually referring right back to this article. If someone has the information I want, or can post a link to a site, or give a more commonly used name for the black dye, I would really appreciate it. The article itself would also benifit from some more links to the black dye, since the commercial applicability seems to hinge on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.31.142.128 (talk) 02:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

You should look up the Dysol web site, there's a link in the article. They make small kits with all the parts, including the dye, that you can use to make your own cells. The limited number of hits on "black dye" is a side-effect of it being used only to describe this particular dye, I don't believe it is commonly used outside this field. Maury (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I have your "black dye" right here: Black Dye. I do research on DSSC's, we've used this dye and others from that site. jayjaya29 (talk) 19:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"from all solvent" to "solvent-free liquid redox electrolytes"

I changed "from all solvent" to "solvent-free liquid redox electrolytes"

Allthough the salts are solid, the mixture is not

As stated in the article (High-performance dye-sensitized solar cells based on solvent-free electrolytes produced from eutectic melts):

" Here, we introduce the concept of using eutectic melts to produce solvent-free liquid redox electrolytes. "

"We therefore reasoned that a mixture formed from the three solids EMII, DMII and AMII could provide a room-temperature ionic liquid with superior fluidity and ionic conductivity compared with the binary melt."

Duplicate effort?

Shouldn't most of the section about the previous technology be replaced with a pointer to the main solar cell article? It seems redundant here.

I'd make the change, but want to seek consensus before something that major. (Plus I'm temporarily anonymous until I recover my password, and don't want to make that big a change anonymously.)

98.117.141.38 (talk) 00:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

IMO, comparison with traditional solar cells is worth leaving in this article as an introduction. Adding links and simplifying the section is Ok. Materialscientist (talk) 01:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Misleading comparisons

The comparisons to other solar technologies are potentially misleading, as the 11% efficiency of laboratory-scale DSSC champion cells is compared to the 12-15% efficiency of high-volume commercial-scale silicon cells. Similarly, while thin film silicon's efficiency -- again for commercial-scale devices -- is relatively low, laboratory-scale thin film cells based on CIGS and CdTe have achieved efficiencies in the mid-to-upper teens. I would consider CIGS and CdTe to be second-generation technologies, and would place DSSCs and organics in a third generation. (In which DSSCs are indeed the most efficient.) Making this note as a placeholder to do my own edits when I get time, though of course anyone who wants to jump in sooner is welcome. 98.117.141.38 (talk) 01:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Second or Third gen?

"DSSCs are currently the most efficient second-generation [12] (2005 Basic Research Solar Energy Utilization 16) solar technology available" "The dye-sensitized solar cell is the only third generation technology ready for mass production.[citation needed] "

Also, i'm going to go out on a limb and claim that 2005 isn't 'current' anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.97.155 (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Picture needs adjusting

The way I understand it, the picture shows 3I^- gaing an electron to become I₃^- and vice versa. This is at odds with the text of the article which says 3I^- is oxidised to I₃^- as well as chemistry common sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.31.243.98 (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The closed circle between the I3- and 3I- indicates that there is a constant process whereby I3- loses electrons to become 3I- but at the same time other molecules of 3I- attach electrons to return to the original state of I3-.

However, I think there is another place in the picture that is wrong, namely, why does the line connecting the upper and the lower electrodes point downwards, as if electrons that reach the upper electrode go back transversing the elctrolyte and down to the lower electrode? They actually flow out of the cell and into the external circuit upon reaching the upper electrode. SO shouldn't that line point outwards from the upper electrode? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.60.103.193 (talk) 09:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Ms Toivola's dissertation

Minna Toivola released her dissertation in April 2010, on replacing the most expensive component (glass) with either steel or plastic. The tech's father himself, Michael Grätzel, was her opponent in the dissertation proceedings.

I added this here to wait until it becomes notable enough. It's readable here: http://lib.tkk.fi/Diss/2010/isbn9789526030708/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.251.26.207 (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the introduction on semiconductor solar cells

In my opinion a classical solar cell is not "made from two doped crystals" as stated in the article, but rather from a single crystal with differently doped domains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.191.141.254 (talk) 21:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that, too. Gah4 (talk) 06:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

price/performance ratio

I think the formula for price/performance ratio is wrong, isn't it simply dollar/kW? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.219.83.219 (talk) 11:37, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

You are correct. I removed the silly unit. Also I changed "high" enough to "good" enough, since logically you want the price/performance to be low! 86.156.236.226 (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

What products have actually reached the market

There's lots of hype and promises/predictions - but what is actually available ? and what efficiencies and costs/kWp do they have ? - Rod57 (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Dye sensitization

This is a fine article, but why is there no article on the dye sensitization process itself? Specifically, it is the process used for make silver halide films sensitive to other than blue light. I was trying to find where to link for dye sensitization, and found this, but it isn't really appropriate for non-solar-cell applications. Gah4 (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dye-sensitized solar cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928151255/http://www.solaronix.com/technology/assembly/ to http://www.solaronix.com/technology/assembly/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

External links

There are fifteen entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

• ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
• LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
• WP:ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.

As for citation in the section: Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section. Trim links per policies and guidelines. -- Otr500 (talk) 01:33, 1 March 2023 (UTC)