Solar panel windows that could turn whole buildings into power plants smash electricity record
Researchers in Denmark have set a new world record in efficiency for converting sunlight into electricity by using new windows that allow light to pass through while simultaneously generating power.
The transparent solar cell technology could provide a breakthrough for renewable energy by transforming skyscrapers and offices into power plants, using their windows to become solar panels.
The innovation from the CitySolar project could also help Europe meet its ambitions to make all new buildings nearly zero energy and fully decarbonise the European building sector by 2050.
Related
Electricity-generating windows? Swiss scientists design more efficient transparent solar panels
The researchers from the University of Southern Denmark combined organic solar cells with the material perovskite, which saw an efficiency of 12.3 per cent, which is on par with commercial solar cells.
The international team say the panels also have a transparency of 30 per cent.
Until now, transparent solar windows have not been able to absorb enough energy to be able to generate the amount of electricity needed for a building and the panels have previously not been transparent enough for use.
The CitySolar project says it has now overcome these issues.
'Transparent solar cells could be the next big step in building integrated energy solutions,' said Morten Madsen, a professor from the University of Southern Denmark who was one of the key researchers behind the breakthrough.
'The large glass facades found in modern office buildings can now be used for energy production without requiring additional space or special structural changes... This represents a massive market opportunity'.
Furthermore, Madsen said that the two materials used in the cells are highly affordable and could be scaled for commercial deployment.
When added to the organic solar cell, the perovskite layer absorbs near-ultraviolet light and the cell absorbs near-infrared light.
Related
Inside the world's first nuclear reactor that will power Earth using the same energy as the Sun
"The tandem solar cell mainly harvests energy from the infrared and ultraviolet parts of the sun's rays, but not from visible light. This allows us to set new efficiency standards for semi-transparent solar windows," Madsen said.
This then allows the light from the visible spectrum to pass through while leaving the visible spectrum relatively untouched.
The two materials are highly affordable, according to Madsen, making it a suitable technology for commercial-scale deployment.
The project is currently at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of between five and six, meaning it is between the proof-of-concept and prototype stages.
ADVERTISEMENT
It has received almost €4 million in funding from the EU and the team is currently in discussions with industry partners to scale up production of the see-through solar panels.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
4 hours ago
- Euronews
Timing of new data rules and plan to cut red tape baffles tech sector
Tech companies are confused about the timing of upcoming EU rules that aim to monetise data along with a new attempt to simplify rules affecting the sector, industry representatives have told Euronews. Most provisions of a new EU Data Act will come into effect on 12 September, just three months before the European Commission presents its digital simplification package: an effort to cut red tape and pull back on certain reporting obligations. In 2022, the European Commission proposed the new law to make sure that data created using smart devices - like connected cars or smart home equipment - is shared fairly. The EU wants to make sure the people using such devices benefit as more and more machines create huge amounts of data. Manufacturers of devices must design their products in a way that makes it easy for users to get and share their data under the Act. But there are some exceptions: if sharing data could reveal important business secrets, companies can temporarily stop the sharing. In emergency situations like floods or cyberattacks, private companies may be required to share their data with government agencies to help manage the crisis. Digital trade groups, however, say that uncertainty now surrounds the rules because of the simplification plans announced by EU Tech Commissioner Henna Virkkunen. The EU executive is currently gathering 'insights on where current policies can be simplified or streamlined'. In a statement to Euronews, the Business Software Alliance (BSA), a trade group which counts Amazon, Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle among its members, said that the timing of the simplification package 'raises the risk that companies will need to comply with the full obligations of the Data Act, only to see them potentially revised shortly thereafter'. Fewer than half of EU member states have designated or legally empowered national authorities responsible for implementing the new Data Act, according to BDA, which is now calling for the application of the law to be deferred to ensure legal clarity "until a coherent and effective implementation is found'. This was echoed by trade group Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA). CCIA Europe's Head of Policy and Deputy Head of Office, Alexandre Roure said 'Reopening the Data Act now would only create more uncertainty, and that's something companies can't afford. Including the Data Act in the Commission's upcoming digital simplification package would send mixed signals just as businesses are starting to adapt.' A spokesperson for the Commission said that 'there is no link between the planned Digital Simplification Omnibus and the national measures needed to give practical effect to the Data Act.' Rules in practice Besides the simplification efforts, most companies 'are still grappling with what the rules mean in practice,' said Roure. 'Clear guidance is urgently needed, especially on thorny issues like protecting businesses' trade secrets and how the Data Act interacts with the GDPR's data protection framework,' he added. BSA said also that 'significant concerns persist among industry stakeholders.' 'One major issue is the uncertainty over whether companies can recover the full value of contracts when a business customer terminates a fixed-term agreement prematurely. Additionally, the Act's aim to enforce interoperability across all cloud service providers may unintentionally hinder competition and innovation, potentially driving up costs for end users,' the statement added. The Commission said that while the Data Act applies directly in all 27 member states from 12 September, it also includes provisions that require national implementation measures such as on penalties and enforcement. Breaches of the Act can result in fines of up to €20 million or 4% of the company's total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher. 'The Commission is working closely with member states to support a timely and consistent implementation, including through the European Data Innovation Board where these national implementation measures will be discussed,' the spokesperson said.
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
How do mineral and chemical sunscreens affect our health?
Mineral sunscreens have gained in popularity in recent years, fueled by claims that they're gentler or safer than their chemical counterparts. But the real differences between the two types of sun protection are more technical than many consumers realise, making it easy to misunderstand what scientists know about their health effects. The differences between these sunscreens mainly come down to their active ingredients and how they block ultraviolet (UV) rays. Chemical sunscreens absorb UV radiation, converting it into heat and releasing it from the skin. Mineral sunscreens, sometimes called physical sunscreens, create a thin barrier that primarily reflects or scatters UV rays away from the skin. Even the terms 'mineral' and 'chemical' can be misleading, though, given all sunscreens use chemicals. Many mineral-based formulas also use other substances, called 'boosters,' to help the active ingredients work better. More accurate descriptors could be 'soluble' sunscreen filters – those that could permeate the skin – and 'insoluble' filters that could not do so, said Christian Surber, a dermatopharmacologist (someone who studies how drugs affect the skin) at the University of Zurich and the University of Basel. 'It's just the mechanism of action [of the filters] that is different,' he told Euronews Health. 'It can be absorption, and it can be scattering'. Euronews Health has chosen to use the terms that consumers are most likely to see when they shop for sunscreens. Sunscreen and health Concerns around how sunscreens affect our health are nothing new, prompting the European Commission Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) to assess the safety of three non-mineral UV filters – oxybenzone, homosalate, and octocrylene – in 2021 over concerns that they may have endocrine-disrupting properties. The SCCS determined that homosalate and oxybenzone were not safe at the concentrations commonly used at the time, and that octocrylene was safe at a concentration up to 10 per cent – though it cautioned that the data was inconclusive. One analysis, for example, estimated that a person would have to apply sunscreen daily for 277 years to experience the same hormone-disrupting effects observed in rats that were fed oxybenzone in a lab. Even so, the European Commission issued new restrictions in 2022 to lower the amount of these filters allowed in sunscreens. 'We pretty much don't see them anymore on the market, because producers know that [they may] cause problems or will not be allowed anymore on the European market in a few years,' Laura Clays from Euroconsumers and the Belgian consumer protection group Test-Achats told Euronews Health. Beyond these potential risks, some people with sensitive skin prefer mineral sunscreens, which use ingredients like zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, because they are less likely to cause skin irritation, Clays said. However, when her group ran consumer tests, several mineral-only formulas offered weaker SPF protection than their labels claimed, meaning 'the ones that contain only mineral filters do not protect you enough,' she said. Because the sunscreen does not absorb into the skin, people should make sure they are fully covered. That could be another challenge, according to Clays' tests: people tended to reapply mineral sunscreens less often, partly because they disliked the thin layer of white residue it left on their skin. But when used correctly, both chemical and mineral sunscreens are widely considered safe and effective by dermatologists and health authorities. 'In principle, all sunscreen filters have a safety profile that has been regulatory-wise assessed and deemed safe,' Surber said. Ultimately, skin experts agree: the best sunscreen is the one you will actually use on a regular basis. 'There's really no big difference, health-wise, between the two,' Clays said.
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
EU AI Act doesn't do enough to protect artists' copyright, groups say
As the European Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act)comes into force, groups representing artists say there are still many loopholes that need to be fixed for them to thrive in a creative world increasingly dominated by AI. The AI Act, celebrated for being the first comprehensive legislation to regulate AI globally, is riddled with problems, these organisations say. Groups like the European Composer and Songwriter Alliance (ECSA) and the European Grouping of Societies of Authors and Composers (GESAC) argue that it fails to protect creators whose works are used to train generative AI models. Without a clear way to opt out or get paid when tech companies use their music, books, movies, and other art to train their AI models, experts say that their work is continually at risk. 'The work of our members should not be used without transparency, consent, and remuneration, and we see that the implementation of the AI Act does not give us,' Marc du Moulin, ECSA's secretary general, told Euronews Next. 'Putting the cart before the horse' The purpose of the AI Act is to make sure AI stays 'safe, transparent, traceable, non-discriminatory and environmentally friendly,' the European Commission, the European Union's executive body, says in an explainer on the law. The law rates AI companies based on four levels of risk: minimal, limited, high, or unacceptable. Those in the unacceptable range are already banned, for example AIs that are manipulative or that conduct social scoring, where they rank individuals based on behaviour or economic status. Most generative AI falls into a minimal risk category, the Commission says. The owners of those technologies still have some requirements, like publishing summaries of the copyrighted data that companies used to train their AIs. Under the EU's copyright laws, companies are allowed to use copyrighted materials for text and data mining, like they do in AI training, unless a creator has 'reserved their rights,' Du Moulin said. Du Moulin said it's unclear how an artist can go about opting out of their work being shared with AI companies. 'This whole conversation is putting the cart before the horse. You don't know how to opt out, but your work is already being used,' he said. The EU's AI Code of Practice on General-Purpose (GPAI), a voluntary agreement for AI companies, asks providers to commit to a copyright policy, put in place safeguards to avoid any infringements of rights, and designate a place to receive and process complaints. Signatories so far include major tech and AI companies such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI. AI providers have to respect copyright laws, the Commission says The additional transparency requirements under the AI Act give artists clarity on who has already used their material and when, du Moulin added, making it difficult to claim any payment for work that's already been scraped to train AI models. 'Even if the AI Act has some good legal implications, it only works for the future – it will not be retroactive,' Du Moulin said. 'So everything which has been scraped already … it's a free lunch for generative AI providers who did not pay anything'. Adriana Moscono, GESAC's general manager, said some of her members tried opting out by sending letters and emails to individual AI companies to get a license for their content, but were not successful. 'There was no answer,' Moscono told Euronews Next. 'There was absolute denial of the recognition of … the need to respect copyright and to get a license. So please, European Commission, encourage licensing'. Thomas Regnier, a Commission spokesperson, said in a statement to Euronews Next that AI providers have to respect the rights holders when they carry out text and data mining, and if there have been infringements, they can settle it privately. The AI Act 'in no way affects existing EU copyright laws,' Regnier continued. Mandate licence negotiations, groups ask Du Moulin and Moscono are asking the Commission to urgently clarify the rules around opting out and copyright protection in the law. 'The code of practice, the template and the guidelines, they don't provide us any capacity to improve our situation,' Moscono said. 'They're not guaranteeing … a proper application of the AI Act'. The advocates said the Commission could also mandate that AI companies negotiate blanket or collective licenses with the respective artist groups. Germany's Society for Musical Performing and Mechanical Reproduction Rights (GEMA) filed two copyright lawsuits against AI companies OpenAI, the parent of ChatGPT, and Suno AI, an AI music generation app. While not directly related to the AI Act, Du Moulin says the verdict could determine to what extent AI companies could be bound to copyright laws. The Commission and the European Court of Justice, the EU's high court, have also signalled that they will review the text and data mining exemption in the copyright legislation issued in 2019, Du Moulin said. New AI companies have to make sure they are compliant with the AI Act's regulations by 2026. That deadline extends to 2027 to companies already operating in the EU.
