The new material has eight times better performance than pure cubic silicon carbide
Nowhere is it stated how efficient either material is, other than to say that the researchers are 5-10 years away from a material that’s 10% efficient. So they must have an efficiency of less than that I guess.
From the paper, the closest I can see is:
The applied bias photon-to-current efficiency (ABPE) of the Ni(OH)2/Co3O4/3C-SiC photoanode reached 0.47% at 0.65 V vs RHE, which is 15.6 and 1.8 times higher than that of the 3C-SiC and Co3O4/3C-SiC photoanodes, respectively (Figure 4b)
I don’t know how representative that measurement is though.
The paper’s PDF give clearer, less click-baity information on efficiency:
The applied bias photon-to-current efficiency (ABPE) of the Ni(OH)2/Co3O4/3C-SiC photoanode reached 0.47% at 0.65V vs RHE, which is 15.6 and 1.8 times higher than that of the 3C-SiC and Co3O4/3C-SiC photoanodes, respectively (Figure 4b).
A 8x increase is good progress for that specific technique, but 0.47% is very low efficiency. There’s still ways to go.
threaded - newest
Nowhere is it stated how efficient either material is, other than to say that the researchers are 5-10 years away from a material that’s 10% efficient. So they must have an efficiency of less than that I guess.
From the paper, the closest I can see is:
I don’t know how representative that measurement is though.
Good question.
The paper’s PDF give clearer, less click-baity information on efficiency:
A 8x increase is good progress for that specific technique, but 0.47% is very low efficiency. There’s still ways to go.