Fig. 4: LCA and techno-economic analysis results.
a, System boundary of LCA considering the proposed recycling strategy as the end-of-life scenario. b, Comparison of full-spectrum midpoint impact categories between recycling and landfill according to the Environmental Footprint (EF) v3.0 method (the values are normalized to the landfill scenario for better comparison). CED, cumulative energy demand; MR, material resources: metals/minerals; WU, water use; LU, land use; ECF, ecotoxicity: freshwater; EM, eutrophication: marine; EF, eutrophication: freshwater; ET, eutrophication: terrestrial; AC, acidification; POF, photochemical oxidant formation: human health; IR, ionizing radiation: human health; PMF, particulate matter formation; HTN, human toxicity: non-cancer effect; HTC: human toxicity: cancer effect; OD, ozone depletion; CC, climate change. c, LCOE of residential and utility-scale perovskite PV systems under recycling (three times) and landfill scenarios. Three device lifetimes are considered: 5 years, 10 years and 15 years. Therefore, the total service times are 5 × 3 and 10 × 3 and 15 × 3 years considering repeated recycling for the three scenarios to emphasize the importance of considering both lifespan and recycling times when assessing the economic efficiency of perovskite solar cells. The error bars convey the uncertainty in the LCOE estimates, reflecting a ±20% fluctuation in crucial input factors. This variability includes the expenses linked to energy consumption, labour, materials and equipment, all of which are integral to the processes of recycling, remanufacturing and reinstalling PV modules. ETL, electron transport layer; HTL, hole transport layer.
