Development of High-Efficiency and High-Stability Perovskite Solar Cells with Space Environmental Resistance

Abstract

The rapid growth of the private space industry has intensified the demand for lightweight, efficient, and cost-effective photovoltaic technologies. Metal halide perovskite solar cells (PSCs) offer high power conversion efficiency (PCE), mechanical flexibility, and low-temperature solution processability, making them strong candidates for next-generation space power systems. However, exposure to extreme thermal cycling, high-energy radiation, vacuum, and ultraviolet light in space leads to severe degradation. This study addresses these challenges by introducing three key design strategies: self-healing perovskite compositions that recover from radiation-induced damage, gradient buffer layers that mitigate mechanical stress caused by thermal expansion mismatch, and advanced encapsulation that serves as a multifunctional barrier against space environmental stressors. These approaches enhance device resilience and operational stability in space. The design strategies discussed in this review are expected to support long-term power generation for low-cost satellites, high-altitude platforms, and deep-space missions. Additionally, insights gained from this research are applicable to terrestrial environments with high radiation or temperature extremes. Perovskite solar cells represent a transformative solution for space photovoltaics, offering a pathway toward scalable, flexible, and radiation-tolerant energy systems.

1. Introduction

The rapid expansion of the private space industry, driven by companies such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Rocket Lab, has accelerated the need for efficient, lightweight, and cost-effective photovoltaic (PV) power systems for satellites and spacecraft. Traditional space solar panels are dominated by multijunction III–V semiconductor cells (e.g., GaAs-based), which offer high power conversion efficiency (PCE ~ 30% under AM0) and excellent radiation tolerance, but they are extremely expensive and have a limited supply chain [1,2,3,4,5]. While III–V multijunction cells such as GaAs remain the gold standard with ~30% efficiency under AM0 and excellent radiation hardness; however, their high cost and rigidity limit scalability for next-generation small satellite platforms. Meanwhile, metal halide perovskite materials, with their versatile chemical tunability and processing flexibility, show great promise not only for terrestrial applications such as building-integrated photovoltaics and portable electronics but also as next-generation materials for space PV systems [6,7,8,9,10]. The perovskite ABX₃ structure consists of a large A-site cation, a smaller B-site metal cation, and halide anions at the X-sites, forming a three-dimensional framework ideal for PV applications. In contrast, metal halide perovskite solar cells (PSCs) have emerged as a transformative PV technology that could meet the unique demands of modern space missions. PSCs boast high specific power (power-to-weight ratio) due to their thin-film format, can be fabricated on flexible substrates, and have reached lab efficiencies exceeding 25–26% (single-junction) and even >30% in tandem architectures [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. These performance metrics are approaching those of GaAs while using abundant materials and low-cost solution processing. Importantly, perovskites have tunable bandgaps and can be integrated into multijunction devices or curved/rollable arrays, offering new design possibilities for spacecraft power supply [11,21,22,23]. Such advantages make PSCs attractive candidates for next-generation space photovoltaics, especially for the growing constellation of small satellites (the number of active satellites surpassed 7000 in 2023), where low cost and high specific power are paramount [24].

However, as illustrated in Figure 1, a major hurdle for deploying PSCs beyond Earth’s atmosphere is stability under the harsh space environment. Terrestrial PSCs, while efficient, are known to be sensitive to moisture, oxygen, and ultraviolet (UV) light—factors that cause rapid degradation if unmitigated [25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. In space, some of these stressors (oxygen and moisture) are eliminated by vacuum conditions, but they are replaced or exceeded by extreme conditions: intense thermal cycling (hundreds of °C swings), high-dose ionizing radiation (electrons, protons, and cosmic rays), vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) and UV flux, atomic oxygen in low Earth orbit (LEO), and mechanical vibrations during launch [32,33,34,35]. These factors can induce unique degradation pathways not encountered in typical lab tests. In recent years, research efforts have begun to address these challenges, yielding promising strategies such as radiation-hard perovskite compositions, novel interface engineering, and robust encapsulation techniques. Notably, the requirements for PV materials in space diverge sharply from those in terrestrial environments. In space, devices must withstand extreme thermal cycling, high-energy particle radiation, atomic oxygen exposure, and vacuum UV radiation—stressors absent or minimal on Earth but critical in orbit and deep-space conditions. These harsh factors demand unique materials and encapsulation strategies that go beyond conventional stability improvements designed for ground-level applications. Encouragingly, early demonstrations of PSCs in near-space and orbital tests have shown that—with appropriate design considerations—perovskite devices can indeed operate in space with acceptable stability under such challenging environments [12].

This mini-review builds on a perspective outline of “high-efficiency, high-stability perovskite solar cells with space environmental resistance” and expands it into a comprehensive overview. We preserve the original structure and key messages, while deepening the technical discussion in each section and incorporating recent studies (2022–2025). We examine the degradation mechanisms PSCs face in space and the latest materials and device innovations to overcome them. In particular, we highlight three design strategies introduced in the perspective—(1) self-healing perovskite compositions, (2) gradient buffer layers, and (3) advanced encapsulation and coating strategies—and further discuss recent advances in radiation tolerance, the potential applications of space-ready PSCs in deep-space and lunar missions, and the challenges of scaling up this technology for practical use. Several recent reviews have comprehensively addressed the development of PSCs for space applications, including aspects of radiation tolerance, device stability, and interface engineering [12,36,37,38,39,40]. However, these studies primarily focus on individual factors such as radiation damage mitigation, encapsulation, or interfacial stability, while giving limited attention to an integrated design strategy that simultaneously incorporates self-healing perovskite compositions, gradient buffer layers for thermal stress management, and multifunctional encapsulation techniques. This mini-review uniquely emphasizes this holistic approach, providing a roadmap that bridges material innovation with device-level and system-level requirements for long-term space operation. We also suggest illustrative figures/tables (e.g., a schematic of degradation mechanisms, a comparison of buffer layer approaches, and a timeline of space-qualified PSC demonstrations) to aid clarity. Through this review, we aim to articulate a roadmap by which PSCs can transition from laboratory curiosities to flight-qualified solar modules, potentially surpassing traditional III–V cells in missions where cost, mass, and flexibility are crucial. Ultimately, the convergence of perovskite materials science with aerospace engineering could unlock a new paradigm in space power technology, with spillover benefits for extreme terrestrial environments as well.

2. Challenges in the Space Environment

Perovskite solar cells in orbit are subject to multiple concurrent stressors that far exceed the conditions of standard terrestrial durability tests. Understanding these space-specific degradation mechanisms is a prerequisite to designing resilient PSCs. The major environmental challenges include the following (Figure 2):

Thermal Cycling: Spacecraft in LEO experience rapid day–night cycles (~90 min), leading to frequent swings in temperature (e.g., –150 °C in Earth’s shadow to +120 °C in direct sunlight). This cyclic thermal stress causes repeated expansion and contraction of materials. The coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) mismatch between different layers in a PSC stack can induce mechanical fatigue at interfaces [41,42,43,44,45]. Rigid layers like metal-oxide charge transport layers (TiO₂ and SnO₂) and brittle electrodes may delaminate or crack when the adjacent perovskite or polymer layers expand differently. Over many cycles, this can lead to catastrophic failure of the device (e.g., broken contacts or encapsulation seal failure). Recent analyses suggest that even thin interfacial layers do not fully alleviate thermal stresses in PSCs, underscoring the need for more robust thermal stress mitigation strategies.

Ionizing Radiation: High-energy radiation in space (principally electrons and protons trapped in Earth’s magnetosphere, and cosmic rays) bombards solar cells and can displace atoms or create defects in semiconductors. In perovskites, proton/electron irradiation generates deep trap states and non-radiative recombination centers by knocking atoms (especially halides) out of the lattice [46,47]. This typically manifests as a decreased photocurrent and fill factor over time. For example, 10 MeV protons cause observable void formation and ion migration in PSC films, degrading their performance [48,49,50]. Electron beams (MeV-scale) similarly reduce device efficiency by inducing lattice disorder and bond breakage [38,50,51,52,53]. Compared to silicon, metal-halide perovskites have a softer ionic lattice that might seem more vulnerable to displacement damage [39,54]. Indeed, without special precautions, unencapsulated MAPbI₃ devices can suffer significant performance losses under high radiation fluences. A lesser-known aspect is neutron radiation, which can also cause lattice displacements; while neutron flux is lower in most orbits, it has been studied (e.g., Romano et al. on ISS-like neutron spectra) and likewise found to affect perovskite device operation [55]. Overall, ionizing radiation is a critical life-limiting factor for PSCs, especially for long-duration missions or high-radiation orbits (e.g., GEO and deep space).

Combined Effects of Radiation and Thermal Cycling: In the space environment, perovskite solar cells are exposed to both ionizing radiation and extreme thermal cycling. Radiation generates various lattice defects and trap states, while subsequent thermal cycling can enhance the mobility and aggregation of these defects, potentially exacerbating non-radiative recombination and accelerating device degradation. Some studies also suggest that thermal cycling may partially anneal certain defects, depending on the temperature range and cycling conditions. Therefore, it is essential to consider the combined effects of radiation and thermal cycling when evaluating the long-term stability of PSCs for space applications. Further systematic studies are needed to fully elucidate the interplay between these two stressors.

Vacuum and Outgassing: The space vacuum presents both an advantage (no oxygen/moisture) and a challenge. In vacuum, volatile organic components in PSCs can sublimate or outgas over time [56,57,58,59,60,61]. Methylammonium (MA) and other organic cations, as well as residual solvents or additives, may gradually evaporate or escape from the film, leading to composition changes and reduced absorber quality. Likewise, organic charge transport layers (like Spiro-OMeTAD or polymer interlayers) can outgas or be chemically altered in vacuum, losing effectiveness [62,63,64]. While recent reviews have comprehensively addressed specific aspects such as radiation tolerance, encapsulation, or interfacial stability, our mini-review uniquely emphasizes an integrated approach combining self-healing perovskite compositions, gradient buffer layer engineering, and advanced encapsulation techniques, providing a holistic roadmap for space-qualified PSC development. The absence of atmospheric pressure also means there is no convective cooling—any heat generated (e.g., by absorbed radiation or resistive losses) can accumulate, potentially exacerbating thermal stresses locally. Moreover, vacuum ultraviolet radiation (VUV) from the sun, which is normally filtered by Earth’s atmosphere, can directly impinge on materials and break chemical bonds or cause surface charging [65,66]. To address these challenges, several mitigation strategies have been proposed, including the use of getter materials (such as metal-oxide nanoparticles, zeolites, or polymer-based sorbents) adjacent to organic layers to trap volatile species, as well as advanced encapsulation techniques to suppress outgassing. Blending charge transport layers with inorganic nanoparticles or cross-linkable polymers can also enhance vacuum stability.

Ultraviolet (UV) and Atomic Oxygen: Space solar spectra (AM0) contain a higher fraction of UV and high-energy photons than terrestrial AM1.5. UV light can accelerate certain degradation in PSCs—for instance, it can drive halide phase segregation in mixed-halide perovskites and generate oxygen radicals on TiO₂ that then attack the perovskite [32,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74]. In fact, UV illumination under bias has been linked to enhanced ion migration and instabilities. Atomic oxygen (AO), prevalent in LEO (from atmospheric residuals), is highly reactive: it can erode unprotected polymer or organic layers and create defects on exposed surfaces [75,76]. While PSCs are typically encapsulated, any pinholes or coating imperfections could allow AO to reach the perovskite or contacts, causing surface pitting or chemical changes [77,78]. UV and AO effects are reminiscent of accelerated weathering, necessitating UV-filter layers or robust encapsulants in design (discussed later). A recent study demonstrated that employing strong-bonding surface layers can significantly reduce UV-induced degradation in PSCs—for example, a tailored hole transport layer reduced UV damage by binding to undercoordinated surface ions.

Mechanical Stresses and Vibrations: Launch and deployment subject solar panels to intense vibration and mechanical shock. While this is a transient event, the mechanical robustness of PSC devices is a concern since perovskite films are brittle, and thin electrodes can crack [79,80]. Flexible substrates (like polyimide films) can help, but the interface adhesion and the encapsulant must withstand these forces [81,82,83]. Additionally, once in orbit, micrometeoroids or debris impact is a minor but non-zero risk; even small impacts could puncture a thin-film device if not shielded.

These mechanisms collectively shorten the operational life of PSCs in space and can lead to unpredictable failure modes. For instance, a cell might pass initial qualification on the ground but then delaminate after a few hundred thermal cycles, or see its output drop suddenly after a solar flare event. Such unpredictability complicates the qualification process for space deployment, which traditionally demands minimal power degradation (e.g., 1 year for LEO satellites). In summary, the space environment imposes coupled extremes of thermal, radiative, and mechanical stress that challenge the intrinsic stability of current PSCs. Therefore, it is essential to establish standardized testing protocols that reflect these combined stressors—such as radiation–thermal cycling tests—to accurately evaluate the durability and space readiness of perovskite solar cells. Recent studies have emphasized the need for such integrated test metrics to ensure reliable performance and comparability across research efforts [12]. A fundamental rethinking of device architecture, materials, and packaging is needed to achieve the durability targets for space use. The following sections discuss emerging solutions aimed at imbuing perovskite solar cells with the resilience required for prolonged extraterrestrial operation.

3. Strategies for Achieving High Stability and Performance

To address the above challenges, researchers have proposed and demonstrated several synergistic design strategies that form the foundation of a space-compatible PSC architecture. In this section, we highlight two primary approaches from the original perspective—self-healing perovskite compositions and gradient buffer layer engineering—and elaborate on them with recent technical advancements. We also integrate additional strategies from the literature, such as novel encapsulation and interface modifications, that complement these approaches. Figure 3 illustrates how these elements can be combined: envision a PSC device with an intrinsically radiation-tolerant perovskite absorber and a graded buffer layer stack to relieve thermal stress. The overall goal is to create a device that not only achieves high initial efficiency but also maintains it under the rigors of space for a commercially viable period.

3.1. Self-Healing Perovskite Compositions

One of the most intriguing phenomena reported in perovskites is their ability to exhibit self-healing behavior after degradation, particularly after exposure to radiation or other stress [84,85,86,87,88,89]. Advances in compositional engineering have yielded defect-tolerant perovskite structures that can recover from radiation-induced damage to some extent. The principle behind this is the soft ionic lattice of halide perovskites: when energy from radiation creates lattice defects (such as vacancies or interstitials), the lattice can reorganize and re-anneal those defects under mild stimuli (light illumination or gentle heating) due to the low formation energy of these ionic bonds [90,91,92,93]. This is unlike the permanent displacement damage in rigid covalent semiconductors (like Si or GaAs), which accumulate irreversible defects [94,95,96,97].

Researchers have capitalized on this by incorporating volatile additives and dynamic bonds into the perovskite formulation. Mechanistically, volatile additives and dynamic bonds contribute to self-healing by enabling the migration of mobile ions or molecules to defect sites, thereby promoting lattice reorganization and passivation of radiation-induced damage. For example, adding excess organic iodides (e.g., formamidinium iodide, FAI) or chloride-based additives (e.g., methylammonium chloride, MACl) during film formation can create a reservoir of material that can later migrate to heal iodide vacancies or other radiation-induced lattice disruptions [13,98,99,100]. Similarly, using large organic cations as surface capping agents (such as phenylethylammonium (PEA) or other quaternary ammonium ligands) produces a 2D/3D hybrid interface that can dynamically reform and passivate defects [101,102,103]. Upon illumination, these molecular species may redistribute and fill trap sites, effectively annealing radiation damage. This reversible reorganization of the lattice and interfaces has been observed experimentally: in situ photoluminescence recovery and time-resolved absorption measurements show that perovskite films can partially regain their optoelectronic quality after simulated particle irradiation, once the damaging flux is removed and the sample is rested or illuminated. For instance, one study found that after exposing MAPbI₃ devices to a high proton dose, the devices’ photocurrent actually increased above pre-irradiation levels when measured after a period of light-soaking, indicating self-healing of radiation-induced defects. The proposed mechanism was that protons had knocked H⁺ ions from MA molecules; when irradiation stopped, those mobile H⁺ ions resealed many of the created defects, improving charge collection [104,105].

Beyond additives, choosing inherently more robust perovskite compositions can improve radiation tolerance. Mixed-cation and mixed-halide perovskites (e.g., FA–MA–Cs lead halides) tend to have better thermal and phase stability, and some studies suggest they also handle radiation better than pure MAPbI₃ [99,106,107,108,109]. For example, triple-cation perovskites (containing Cs⁺, MA⁺, and FA⁺) were tested under 68 MeV proton irradiation up to 10¹³ protons/cm² and showed only ~20% loss in J_SC when accounting for external degradation like glass darkening [110,111,112,113]. Crucially, much of the loss was recoverable via self-healing post-irradiation, as described above. This tolerance is orders of magnitude higher in fluence than the levels at which crystalline Si cells fail (Si devices showed degradation at ~10¹⁰ cm⁻² in the same study). Thus, the defect-healing capacity of perovskites is a genuine advantage in radiation-rich environments, effectively allowing them to “heal” some of the damage that would permanently handicap other photovoltaics. It should be noted, though, that self-healing is not limitless—if radiation fluence is extremely high or continuous, permanent decomposition can occur once the healing mechanisms saturate or if critical structural bonds (like the Pb–X framework) are broken irreversibly. As Kirmani and Sellers (2025) caution, perovskites’ very tendency to self-heal might be their Achilles’ heel under extreme irradiation: the same lattice fluidity that enables defect healing can also lead to ionic flow and material decomposition under intense, prolonged radiation stress [90]. Therefore, research is ongoing to balance this self-healing property with overall robustness. Recent material innovations go beyond classical 3D perovskites. For instance, 2D/3D perovskite formulations (Ruddlesden–Popper phases as capping layers) have shown enhanced environmental stability and could help in radiation scenarios by acting as a sacrificial healing layer on the surface. Although lead-free double perovskites (e.g., Cs₂AgBiBr₆) show lower efficiencies, they are inherently more stable and may offer a safer alternative for long-duration missions [114,115]. Their radiation resistance remains under investigation. Another approach is embedding passivating agents that are activated by radiation, e.g., encapsulating perovskite grains with a photoluminescent polymer that can absorb UV or high-energy impacts and re-emit benign light, simultaneously healing surface traps (this concept is still speculative but aligns with self-healing principles) [10,105]. Additionally, operational protocols can exploit self-healing: a satellite could periodically self-anneal its panels by gentle heating (through resistive heaters or solar warmth) or by open-circuiting the array under illumination to promote recombination-assisted healing. In summary, tailoring perovskite compositions and interfaces to be adaptive under stress—i.e., to heal after damage—is a promising strategy to meet the stability demands of space. Initial demonstrations of such self-healing PSCs have yielded impressive results, with reports of devices regaining performance after high-dose irradiation or extended UV exposure. Overall, volatile additive-assisted self-healing and dynamic bonding strategies appear most promising for space-grade PSCs, as they enable defect passivation and lattice repair without sacrificing efficiency. Future work should prioritize the development of multifunctional cation systems and surface capping agents that enhance both radiation tolerance and environmental stability, moving beyond simple compositional tuning.

3.2. Gradient Buffer Layer Engineering

While self-healing compositions tackle the chemical and electronic degradations, the mechanical challenge of thermal cycling requires a complementary solution. A significant issue is the CTE mismatch between the layers of the solar cell: typically, a PSC stack might include a glass or polymer substrate, a transparent conductor (ITO), an electron transport layer (ETL, often metal oxide), the perovskite absorber, a hole transport layer (HTL, often organic), and a metal electrode [116,117,118,119,120,121]. Each of these has a different thermal expansion coefficient. As temperatures swing, the layers expand or contract by different amounts, generating shear stress at interfaces. Over repeated cycles, this can cause delamination (peeling of layers apart) or cracks through the brittle layers. Rigid ETLs like TiO₂ are particularly problematic as they do not accommodate strain well, thus transferring stress to the perovskite layer and inducing fractures or grain detachment (Figure 4).

The proposed solution is a gradient buffer layer architecture. Instead of a sharp interface between two materials of disparate elasticity and CTE, a graded intermediate layer (or series of sublayers) is introduced to bridge the mechanical properties. In practice, this means integrating materials with an intermediate CTE and perhaps some flexibility at the critical junctions (e.g., between the perovskite and a metal-oxide transport layer). For example, a thin layer of ZnO or Al₂O₃ (CTE in between that of TiO₂ and the perovskite) could be deposited on the TiO₂ ETL, followed by an organic–inorganic hybrid layer (such as a polymer like PVP or PMMA doped with oxide nanoparticles) before the perovskite is laid down. For instance, a recent study demonstrated that incorporating an oxidized Ti₃C₂T_x MXene interlayer between the electron transport layer and the CsPbI₃ perovskite significantly improved both the efficiency and operational stability of p-i-n-structured perovskite solar cells by enhancing interfacial contact and suppressing defect formation [122,123]. Incorporating a GO layer has been shown to enhance interfacial stability, reduce stress accumulation, and improve the long-term durability of perovskite solar cells under thermal cycling. This sequence creates a gradual transition in stiffness and thermal expansion from the hard oxide to the soft perovskite. The graded buffer suppresses the build-up of localized stress because each interface now sees a smaller mismatch. It is analogous to using a series of springs of intermediate stiffness rather than a single hard junction. Such architectures have been shown to reduce cracking significantly; for instance, devices with compliant interlayers or adhesive “buffer” layers have endured many more thermal cycles than control devices before failure [124,125].

In addition to metal oxides and polymers, researchers are investigating self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) or molecular layers that can act as molecular buffer zones at interfaces [126]. While only a few nanometers thick, SAMs (like organophosphonic acids on ITO or metal oxide) can relieve some strain and improve adhesion, indirectly aiding thermal cycling resilience. Another effective approach is the use of flexible substrates and encapsulants [119,127,128]. Replacing rigid glass with a flexible polyimide (Kapton) substrate allows the entire solar cell to flex slightly and better accommodate thermal expansion differences. Likewise, a soft elastomeric encapsulant (e.g., PDMS or a silicone) can act as a shock absorber for both mechanical vibrations and thermal expansions. One recent study reported that using a “laminated” structure—essentially encapsulating the PSC between two slightly stretchy polymer sheets—improved survival in thermal shock tests, as the encapsulant bore the brunt of the stress and protected the fragile perovskite layer. Encapsulation layers can thus double as mechanical buffers, in addition to their primary role of sealing out moisture/oxygen on Earth.

A concrete example of buffer layer engineering is provided by Chen et al. (Nature 2024), who developed a multifunctional ytterbium oxide (Yb₂O₃) buffer for PSCs that improved both efficiency and stability [16]. The Yb₂O₃ served as an interlayer that not only facilitated charge extraction (boosting efficiency) but also imparted better thermal and environmental stability to the device. While not explicitly about thermal expansion, this illustrates how inserting tailored metal-oxide buffers can enhance durability. Another example is the use of organic interlayers (like PEDOT:PSS) between inorganic layers: PEDOT:PSS is somewhat flexible and can reduce stress between, say, a metal electrode and the underlying layer. The key is to avoid any abrupt interface between a very hard and a very soft material. Graded compositional doping of a single layer is another approach—for instance, gradually increasing the content of a polymer in a composite from one side to the other.

It should be noted that implementing gradient buffers must be balanced with electrical functionality; any additional layers or thickness could impede charge transport if not carefully designed. Thus, researchers aim for buffers that are thin and ideally also serve an electrical purpose (e.g., surface passivation or charge-selective contact) to avoid efficiency loss. Encouragingly, some experiments show that certain buffer layers can even improve efficiency (via reduced non-radiative recombination) while also enhancing mechanical robustness.

In summary, thermal–mechanical engineering of PSCs via gradient buffers and flexible components is a vital strategy to ensure high stability in space. By smoothing out CTE differences and adding compliance, these design tweaks can prevent fatigue and extend device lifetimes under cyclical temperature stress. Future work in this area includes optimization of buffer layer materials (e.g., exploring other metal oxides or 2D materials as intermediates) and testing full devices through accelerated thermal cycling to quantify improvements. We anticipate that a combination of intrinsic material toughness (from self-healing compositions) and extrinsic stress-relief (from buffer layers) will be needed for truly space-qualified PSCs.

3.3. Advanced Encapsulation and Coating Strategies

Beyond the active device layer innovations, encapsulation is a universally critical aspect of PSC stability in space. Space encapsulation must serve multiple roles: seal the device from vacuum and AO, block UV to some extent, dissipate electrostatic charge, and endure thermal stress [117,121,127,128]. Traditional space solar cells use coverglasses (thin glass with UV-filter coatings) bonded with silicone to the cells. For flexible perovskite devices, rigid glass may be impractical, so thin-film encapsulants are studied [121,129]. Promising approaches include atomic layer deposition (ALD) of ultrathin inorganic coatings (e.g., Al₂O₃ and SiO₂) directly on the cell. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) researchers recently demonstrated that an ultrathin layer of SiO₂ could effectively protect a PSC in space-like conditions [70]. This nanometer-scale SiO₂ coating prevented sublimation and shielded against UV, significantly slowing degradation. Likewise, Al₂O₃ ALD layers have shown the ability to block moisture and oxygen and even stop erosion by atomic oxygen. These inorganic layers are often combined with a polymer overcoat (forming a hybrid encapsulation): for example, a thin ALD oxide plus a flexible polyimide film on top. The combination can achieve a low water vapor transmission rate and also mechanical ruggedness. Encapsulation can also enhance radiation tolerance. Some specialized encapsulant materials contain radical scavengers or hydrogen-rich polymers that can absorb radiation and protect the cell (a technique long used in polymeric radiation shielding) [77,83,121,129]. While PSCs might not need heavy shielding due to some self-healing, a smart encapsulation could further reduce the radiation dosage that reaches the active layers, extending life. One concept is to use a transparent polymer that contains aromatic or conjugated units to absorb UV/high-energy photons and fluoresce lower-energy light useful to the cell—effectively a downconversion layer that doubles as encapsulation. Another consideration is electrostatic discharge (ESD): in space, dielectric surfaces can accumulate charge. Encapsulations might incorporate a transparent conductive layer (like a thin ITO or conductive mesh) to dissipate charge and avoid ESD damage to the perovskite.

In short, the encapsulation and packaging of PSCs for space must be as carefully engineered as the cell itself. Recent progress suggests that with ultrathin oxide coatings and durable flexible barriers, it is possible to protect perovskite devices for many months in LEO conditions. Indeed, a 10-month exposure test on the ISS (as discussed later) showed that properly packaged perovskite cells can survive and function with minimal loss. As we move forward, continued innovation in this “last line of defense” will be essential to achieve multi-year stable operation.

4. Recent Advances in Radiation Tolerance

Radiation tolerance is a focal point in the quest to qualify PSCs for space. Until recently, there was cautious optimism that perovskites might inherently be more radiation-hard than silicon or GaAs, due to early reports of devices surviving high radiation doses with minimal damage. This optimism was fueled by observations such as those by Lang et al. and others, where perovskite cells maintained >80% of performance after proton fluences that would devastate conventional cells [130,131,132]. Additionally, the surprising self-healing phenomena (Section 3.1) suggested that perovskites could recover from what damage did occur, an ability absent in rigid lattices. Together, these led some to hail PSCs as “radiation-proof” solar cells ideal for space.

Recent studies have sought to scrutinize and quantify this radiation tolerance more rigorously. A 2025 perspective by Kirmani and Sellers posed the provocative question “Are metal-halide perovskite solar cells really radiation tolerant?” [90]. Their analysis acknowledges the evidence of radiation resilience but also identifies potential vulnerabilities that might have been overlooked. For example, while displacement damage in perovskites can be annealed, ionizing radiation (high-energy photons or particles that ionize the material) could cause chemical decomposition that is not so easily healed. They point out that intense radiation can produce localized heating (via phonon bursts) and hot spots that could break down the perovskite’s organic components or induce irreversible phase changes. In other words, moderate doses might be fine (self-healed), but very high doses or certain spectra (like heavy ions) might still be lethal to PSCs. Their perspective calls for multidisciplinary approaches—combining theory, operando experiments, and new device designs—to fully understand and improve radiation tolerance [85]. The takeaway is that PSCs are promising for radiation-rich space environments, but we should not be complacent; continued innovation is needed to ensure they can handle the worst-case radiation scenarios (such as solar particle events or long-duration deep-space exposure).

On the experimental front, multiple recent studies have provided deeper insight:

Proton and Electron Irradiation Studies: Martínez et al. (2022) and Nguyen et al. (2024) conducted controlled irradiations of PSCs with high-energy protons (several MeV) and observed the formation of nanoscale voids and enhanced ion migration in perovskite films at high doses [111,130]. Performance losses in these studies were evident, but importantly, the damages were partially mitigated by device architecture—e.g., devices with inorganic charge transport layers fared better than those with organic layers, because the inorganic layers were more radiation-stable and could maintain interface integrity. Kim et al. (2024) showed that under a 6 MeV electron beam, MAPbI₃ devices retained a significant fraction of their efficiency after 10¹² e⁻/cm², whereas comparable GaAs cells would have been severely degraded [131,132]. This again underscores the relative tolerance but also highlights that some degradation does accumulate in perovskites at very high fluences.

Mechanistic Insights: Using techniques like photoluminescence mapping and deep-level transient spectroscopy, researchers have begun to identify the defect states induced by radiation and their healing pathways [133,134]. For instance, gamma irradiation was found to induce mobile ion migration in single-crystal MAPbBr₃, but upon stopping irradiation, the ions resettled and the crystal’s photoluminescence mostly recovered [135]. Another study reported that electron-beam irradiation in vacuum created Pb–Br antisite defects (deep traps ~0.83 eV) in a mixed-halide perovskite, but these defects could be largely annealed out by mild thermal treatment [91]. Such studies confirm that reversible defect formation is a key part of the radiation response in PSCs. In effect, radiation creates disorder which, if the material is given a chance (time, light, or heat), can partially reorder itself.

Material Choices for Radiation Hardness: Recent advances also include identifying which materials in the PSC stack are most susceptible. It appears that the organic charge transport layers and contacts are often the weakest links under radiation, rather than the perovskite itself. Spiro-OMeTAD, for example, degrades and loses conductivity under radiation and UV. Thus, replacing organic transport layers with all-inorganic ones (like NiO, CuSCN, inorganic carbon electrodes, etc.) can improve the radiation tolerance of the whole device [136,137]. One study demonstrated a PSC with inorganic charge transport layers that showed almost no degradation up to a certain proton dose, whereas the same perovskite with an organic HTL did degrade—meaning the perovskite was fine, but the HTL was not [132]. This has led to a design principle: a fully inorganic stack for space PSCs, whenever possible, to eliminate radiation-sensitive organic components. Similarly, using a metal-oxide buffer (like the YbOx layer mentioned earlier) can help absorb some radiation without harming the perovskite [59].

Radiation-Tolerant Device Structures: Researchers are also exploring tandem structures or spectrum-splitting, where a wide-bandgap perovskite (which might be more radiation-hard) is paired with a lower-bandgap cell [132,133]. The idea is that the top cell could shield the bottom cell from some radiation. For example, all-perovskite tandems could be tuned such that the top layer (perhaps inorganic cesium-based perovskite) takes the brunt of UV and high-energy particles, protecting the bottom layer. While speculative, it is another avenue to improve tolerance.

Table 1. Summary of recent advances in radiation tolerance of PSCs.

Aspect	Key Finding	References
Radiation Effects	Proton/electron irradiation causes nanoscale voids and ion migration; partial self-healing possible through thermal annealing.	[129,130,131,132]
Material-Dependent Response	Devices with inorganic CTLs (e.g., CuSCN and NiO) show better radiation stability than those with organic CTLs (e.g., Spiro-OMeTAD).	[132,136,137]
Self-Healing Mechanism	Defects such as Pb–Br antisites and ion migration can be reversed by mild thermal treatment or relaxation.	[83,133,134,135]
Stack Design Strategy	Fully inorganic PSC stacks are more resistant; metal-oxide buffer layers (e.g., YbOx) further improve radiation hardness.	[56,132,136,137]
Tandem/Shielding Approaches	Wide-bandgap perovskites (in top tandem cells) could serve as radiation shields for underlying layers.	[132,133]

summarizes the key recent advances and strategies developed to enhance radiation tolerance in PSCs.

In summary, recent advances have bolstered our understanding that metal-halide perovskites possess an unusual resilience to radiation—likely due to their defect chemistry and lattice dynamics—but also that achieving true radiation hardness will require careful device design (eliminating weak components and potentially adding protective layers). The narrative has evolved from simply observing that “PSCs are radiation-tolerant” to actively engineering radiation-hard PSCs, informed by both simulation and experiment. As the field moves forward, we can expect increasingly radiation-resilient perovskite formulations, possibly drawing inspiration from other radiation-hard materials (like ceramics or novel 2D materials) to hybridize with perovskites. This will be crucial for extending the use of PSCs from short LEO missions to longer, harsher missions (e.g., GEO satellites, lunar surface, and deep-space probes) where cumulative radiation doses are far greater.

5. Applications in Deep-Space and Lunar Missions

The potential of perovskite solar cells extends to a variety of space missions, each with distinct environmental conditions and requirements. Here we discuss how PSC technology could be tailored for LEO satellites, geostationary or deep-space probes, and surface missions like those on the Moon or Mars, highlighting recent progress and mission-driven research (Figure 5).

Low Earth Orbit and Small Satellites: LEO is currently the most active arena for new satellites (including large constellations for communications and Earth observation). LEO satellites typically have lifetimes of 3–7 years and experience moderate radiation (trapped electron/proton belts) and rapid thermal cycling [32,33,34,35,138]. PSCs are particularly attractive for smallsats and CubeSats in LEO because of their high specific power and flexibility [17,45]. Many CubeSats have limited surface area for solar cells and strict mass constraints—lightweight, flexible PSC panels can generate substantial power without adding significant mass or volume [12]. In fact, the first on-orbit tests of PSCs were conducted on CubeSat or small satellite platforms: for example, a 1U CubeSat experiment reported in 2023 demonstrated in-orbit power generation with perovskite mini-modules and provided data on degradation, informing us that even with minimal shielding the devices performed adequately over months. Agencies like NASA are actively funding CubeSat tech demos of perovskite PV (e.g., the PVDX CubeSat by Brown University is being developed to test PSC performance and real-time degradation monitoring in orbit). For LEO use, one key advantage of PSCs is cost scalability: hundreds of small satellites could be outfitted with PSC panels at a fraction of the cost of today’s GaAs panels, enabling missions that would otherwise be cost-prohibitive [3]. The relative radiation environment in LEO is milder than in deep space, which means the current generation of PSCs (with some shielding or aggressive self-healing designs) might already meet the required ~5-year life with acceptable degradation. A recent analysis projected that perovskite/silicon tandem cells could be suitable for LEO if they maintain at least 80% initial performance over 1 year, a target that appears within reach given ISS test results and accelerated aging data. Thus, the near-term application of PSCs could well be in LEO constellation satellites, where replacements are frequent and some degradation is tolerable if compensated by low cost and quick deployment.

Geostationary Orbit (GEO) and Deep-Space Probes: For missions beyond LEO—such as GEO communications satellites, interplanetary spacecraft, or space telescopes—the demands on solar arrays are even higher. These missions require 10+-year lifetimes and encounter harsher radiation (especially beyond Earth’s magnetosphere). Historically, only high-end III–V multijunction cells have been able to meet these requirements [1,2,3,4,5]. Can perovskites compete here? The answer likely lies in tandem or hybrid architectures. One vision is to use perovskite/III–V tandem cells for GEO satellites: the perovskite could be a radiation-hard top cell that extends the efficiency beyond what III–Vs alone achieve [19,20,132,139]. There have been proposals (and early experiments) to grow or laminate perovskite layers on GaAs cells to combine the best of both: the ruggedness of GaAs with the spectral coverage and weight savings of perovskite. While III–V multijunction cells such as GaAs remain the current standard for space photovoltaics due to their exceptional radiation hardness and proven longevity, they are also associated with high cost and limited scalability. In contrast, PSCs offer a lightweight and low-cost alternative with increasing competitiveness, particularly when integrated into hybrid tandem structures. Such configurations could allow PSCs to complement III–V technologies by improving overall efficiency and reducing array mass without compromising reliability, especially in missions where weight and surface area are critical constraints. Another scenario is deep-space probes (e.g., to Jupiter or the asteroid belt) where sunlight is weak and the temperature is cold. Interestingly, perovskites often perform better at low temperatures (higher Voc), and their flexible nature might allow deployment of very large-area sails to catch the sparse sunlight [139]. However, at distances such as Jupiter’s orbit (where solar irradiance drops below 4% of Earth’s), power density is severely limited, and perovskite cell performance under such extremely low-light conditions remains insufficiently explored. While laboratory tests and LEO missions suggest good low-irradiance behavior, further research is needed to confirm PSC efficiency in these ultra-low-flux environments. The radiation in deep space (cosmic rays and solar proton events) is intense, but if the self-healing mechanisms and shielding strategies are improved, perovskites could be feasible [86,132,133,134]. For instance, a highly radiation-resistant perovskite cell with a thin coating of protective material might survive the journey to Jupiter’s orbit, providing power at a fraction of the mass of current solar arrays (Juno’s massive GaAs arrays could potentially be matched in output by much lighter perovskite arrays if radiation issues are solved). Nonetheless, both radiation durability and operational efficiency under deep-space light conditions must be validated through future dedicated studies before such applications become practical. Admittedly, this is forward-looking—more development is needed before perovskites can endure multi-year deep-space exposure without frequent self-repair.

Lunar and Martian Surface Applications: One of the exciting prospects for PSCs is supporting surface missions, such as powering lunar habitats or rovers. The Moon presents a challenging environment: ~14-day long nights, high daytime temperatures (~120 °C), and deep cold at night (–170 °C), plus cosmic radiation and lunar dust. Traditional solar panels struggle during the long lunar night (needing energy storage), and the dust can cover the panels and reduce output [133,140,141]. PSCs could be deployed as flexible sheets on lunar habitat surfaces or even as rollable mats that astronauts or robots unroll over large areas [86]. Their low weight could allow transport of more spare capacity. Moreover, the tunability of perovskites might be used to create panels that maximize output during the low-angle sun at polar regions or in specific spectra. The stability issue is significant on the Moon—encapsulation must handle the vacuum and dust abrasion. Some research has suggested that encapsulated PSCs might actually benefit from the vacuum (no oxygen/humidity), provided they handle radiation; indeed, vacuum could prevent certain degradation like oxidation, as noted by the Chinese near-space balloon tests, where lack of O₂/H₂O led to very stable performance [90,132]. For dust, a potential advantage is that flexible PSC sheets could be shaken or cleaned more easily than rigid panels (or even self-clean if an electrostatic dust removal layer is included). NASA’s Artemis program has identified lightweight, high-efficiency PV as a priority for lunar surface power, and perovskites are being investigated in this context. Dr. McMillon-Brown at NASA Glenn, for example, is leading a project on perovskite solar cells for the Moon and Mars, acknowledging their promise if stability can be ensured.

On Mars, sunlight is about 50% of Earth’s, but perovskite solar cells are known to maintain high efficiency even under low-light conditions. Thus, the reduction in solar irradiance does not significantly diminish their power output compared to conventional solar cells. However, dust storms are a serious issue (as experienced with Mars rovers) [142,143]. Flexible perovskite panels that could be rolled out or even integrated into rover skins are a concept; they would need good dust-proof encapsulation (perhaps a transparent self-cleaning coating). The colder Martian climate might actually help perovskite stability (less thermal stress), but the UV and radiation are factors. Mars’s surface could be a great application if radiation-hard PSCs are achieved, given the need for lightweight deployable power for habitats. To address these challenges, recent studies suggest using transparent self-cleaning coatings and robust encapsulation to protect PSCs from Martian dust. Additionally, developing radiation-hardened perovskite compositions and UV-blocking layers can further enhance stability under harsh Martian conditions.

High-Altitude Platforms and Near-Space: Though not exactly deep-space, it is worth mentioning that PSCs have potential for stratospheric platforms (high-altitude drones, and balloons), which see near-space conditions (strong UV, cold, and low pressure) [21]. Some demonstrations have already been performed, as noted earlier: perovskite cells on balloons at ~35 km retained >95% of efficiency during flight. This indicates that for pseudo-satellites (planes at ~20 km continuously on solar power), PSCs could be a viable option, especially since at those altitudes the lack of moisture is beneficial and temperatures are low. The success of stratospheric tests is a strong sign that PSCs can handle a subset of space conditions for extended periods.

In conclusion, the range of applications for space-grade PSCs is broad: from swarms of short-lived LEO satellites to ambitious deep-space explorers and lunar colonies. Each scenario imposes unique stresses but also offers unique opportunities for perovskites to shine. The high specific power and low cost of PSC technology could enable missions that deploy larger surface areas of PV than ever before (because it is affordable and lightweight), which is a paradigm shift from the current practice of eking out every percent of efficiency from expensive cells. Imagine a lunar base covered in many hundreds of square meters of perovskite solar carpeting—even if each panel is, say, 20% efficient and degrades slowly, the sheer area and low cost might deliver reliable power. The challenge of course is ensuring those panels survive the environment, which circles back to the strategies discussed earlier. As those strategies mature, we foresee perovskites moving from test demonstrations to actual mission power sources within the next decade.

6. Challenges in Scalability and Integration

Unlike traditional III–V solar arrays, which remain prohibitively expensive at large scale, perovskite modules benefit from scalable printing techniques and low-cost materials, making them particularly suited for large space constellations where economic feasibility is paramount. While laboratory-scale devices demonstrate the potential of perovskite photovoltaics in space, scaling this technology to practical, large-area solar arrays and integrating it into existing spacecraft systems pose additional challenges. In this section, we address the considerations for manufacturing, scaling, and integrating PSCs for space missions, exploring the practical challenges in the pathway from laboratory demonstrations to fully integrated space solar array systems.

Large-Area Module Efficiency and Uniformity: Most high-efficiency perovskite cells are fabricated at sizes of a few mm² up to 1 cm². However, a typical satellite solar panel may be on the order of 1–2 m² (for a smallsat) up to tens of m² (for a large satellite or space station) [40,144]. Scaling up perovskite modules involves challenges in maintaining uniform film quality and avoiding defects over large areas. Any pinhole or non-uniform region could become a failure point, especially under stress. Solution-processing methods like slot-die coating or blade coating are being developed to make large-area perovskite films with good uniformity [40,144,145,146,147]. In recent work, blade-coated perovskite/silicon tandem sub-modules achieved over 31% efficiency at >1 cm² area, which is a promising sign for scalability [148]. Nevertheless, even minor efficiency losses or defect-related degradation can be amplified in a series-connected module with many cells. However, scaling to large areas increases the risk of yield loss due to defects such as pinholes, incomplete coverage, and compositional inhomogeneities. These flaws not only reduce local performance but can trigger catastrophic failures in space, where electrical breakdowns may propagate. Maintaining low defect density (<10⁴ cm⁻²) is therefore essential to ensure high module yield, as imperfections tolerable in small cells can cause severe degradation in large-area modules. In addition, solution-based processes like slot-die or blade coating inherently suffer from variability across meter-scale substrates, making uniform crystallization and defect control challenging [40,144,145,146,147]. Precise process control and in situ monitoring are required to minimize these issues. For space, every percentage point of efficiency counts (to minimize the area for a given power), so ensuring that large-area modules approach the lab-cell efficiencies is important. This requires high-quality manufacturing and possibly modular panel designs (tiling many small sub-cells in parallel/series networks to localize the effect of any single cell failure). The main challenges associated with large-area perovskite coating and module integration are summarized in

Table 2. Key challenges in large-area perovskite coating and module integration.

Large-Area Coating Challenge	Description
Defect Formation Risk	Pinholes, incomplete coverage, and compositional inhomogeneity can arise, especially across meter-scale substrates.
Yield Reduction	Increased probability of device failure as the area scales up; even minor defects can lead to significant yield loss in large modules.
Crystallization Uniformity	Achieving uniform crystallization requires precise control of ink rheology, temperature, and coating speed across large areas.
Encapsulation Difficulty	Edge and seam sealing become more critical in large modules to prevent environmental ingress and electrical breakdown.
Need for Process Monitoring	In situ defect detection and quality control are essential to maintain low defect density and high yield.

.

Stability and Encapsulation at Module Scale: Sometimes, materials behave differently at larger scales. For instance, a small cell can be hermetically sealed in a glovebox, but a meter-scale panel is much harder to encapsulate perfectly [149,150]. Edge sealing becomes critical: moisture or vapor intrusion at the edges can propagate and ruin the whole module. For space, moisture is not an issue, but vacuum ingress means internal materials can outgas into any tiny void. This can create bubbles or delamination pockets in a large panel. Advanced encapsulation techniques like edge welding of barrier films or glass-frit bonding (for rigid panels) might be required to ensure long-term integrity [151,152]. Moreover, the encapsulation chosen must be scalable: ALD coating each cell might be fine for small areas, but coating many square meters could be time-consuming [153,154]. Instead, roll-to-roll compatible barriers or spray coatings might be needed for mass production of space-grade PSC panels. Scalability also ties into cost—one of the main reasons for using perovskites is low cost via printing processes, and to preserve that advantage, manufacturing techniques must be industrially viable (high throughput and ambient processing if possible). Fortunately, companies are already scaling perovskite PV for terrestrial use (some aiming for module fabs), and those advances can translate to space hardware.

Integration with Spacecraft Systems: Space solar panels are not used in isolation; they form part of a power system including deployment mechanisms, solar array drives (to rotate them toward the Sun), and power management electronics. If PSCs are to replace or supplement III–V cells, they must be compatible with these systems. One challenge is operating voltage and configuration: perovskite single-junction cells have ~1 V open-circuit voltage each. To obtain 30–100 V needed for a spacecraft bus, many cells need to be connected in series. This is similar to silicon, so not a new problem, but careful string design is needed to ensure shadowed or damaged cells do not drag down the string. Bypass diodes might be integrated to alleviate hot-spot formation when one cell is shaded (just as in conventional panels). Another integration aspect is thermal management: PSCs have different thermal emissivity and absorption characteristics than GaAs panels. They might run hotter or cooler depending on their absorbance of infrared, etc. Spacecraft may need to adjust thermal control if the new panels have different heat rejection profiles. Also, if flexible PSC arrays are used, the deployment mechanisms might need redesigning (e.g., a roll-out drum rather than hinged rigid panels). On small satellites, this could be beneficial (simpler tape-spring deployments).

Reliability and Redundancy: Space industry standards demand reliability and often build in redundancy. For example, a satellite might carry extra solar cells to compensate if some degrade. With PSCs, their novel degradation modes mean we need new testing protocols. Scalability of testing is an issue: how do we rapidly test a large-area PSC array under simulated space conditions? Facilities for combined thermal vacuum and radiation testing exist, but running those on very large flexible panels can be complex. Nonetheless, this is a surmountable engineering issue as the field matures.

Manufacturing Challenges: Producing space-grade hardware usually involves rigorous quality control (QC). For perovskites, which are sensitive materials, QC might involve in-line inspection for micro-defects, flash testing of modules, and environmental stress screening (thermal cycling a sample from each batch, etc.). Scaling up manufacturing means implementing these QC steps cost-effectively. Encouragingly, the relatively low-cost materials of PSCs mean that even with strict QC and some yield loss, they could remain cheaper than III–V cells (which have very expensive input materials and processes).

Supply Chain and Materials: Space qualification of materials is a non-trivial step. Every component (encapsulant, substrate, solder, etc.) usually needs a history of use or dedicated testing. Perovskites introduce new materials (e.g., lead halides and organic ammonium salts) that traditional spacecraft makers have not worked with. Questions such as “will this material contaminate optics if it outgasses?” or “does this material embrittle at −150 °C?” need to be addressed. For example, lead halide vapors or organic amines could potentially condense on sensitive surfaces in a satellite if not fully sealed. Thus, part of integration is convincing spacecraft engineers that these materials can be managed safely. Using inorganic capping layers or getters inside the panel might be one way to trap any volatiles that do escape.

Environmental and Safety Regulations: One practical integration concern is the presence of lead in perovskites. Spacecraft are exempt from many terrestrial regulations, but handling and disposal of lead-containing panels must be carried out properly. If a satellite burns up on reentry, it will disperse lead in the upper atmosphere—likely with a negligible impact at current scales, but if thousands of perovskite-powered satellites were deorbited, this could raise questions. Lead-free perovskites or encapsulation that retains lead might become necessary in the long term for sustainability and regulatory compliance.

Path to Qualification: Scalability and integration culminate in the formal qualification process. To be widely adopted, perovskite panels must pass standard space qualification tests (thermal vacuum, vibration, radiation, etc.). The challenge is not just passing once, but doing so consistently across manufacturing lots. This will likely require iterative design tweaks and close collaboration between material scientists and aerospace engineers. Some organizations (e.g., ESA’s PSC Working Group and NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate) are already crafting roadmaps for this. A notable step was the successful launch and operation of perovskite tandem cells by HZB/Potsdam in 2024, which essentially served as an in-space qualification test for those devices. As more such missions fly, confidence and data will grow.

In summary, scaling up PSC technology for space involves tackling manufacturing scale, module-level durability, and system integration. None of these challenges appear insurmountable given the rapid progress in both perovskite solar tech and the strong push from the space sector for innovative solutions. It is an engineering continuum: what works in a lab cell must be translated to a robust, spacecraft-ready subsystem. The coming years will likely see pilot production lines for space PSC modules and more on-orbit tests to validate their performance at scale.

7. Future Outlook and Broader Impacts

The development of high-efficiency, high-stability PSCs with space environmental resistance stands at the intersection of cutting-edge materials science and the burgeoning NewSpace industry. Looking ahead, we foresee a convergence of these fields that will drive robust, space-qualified perovskite solar technologies into reality. There are several key trends and broader impacts worth noting:

Convergence of Disciplines: Historically, space PV development was a niche field dominated by a few specialized materials (Si and GaAs) and companies. The rise of perovskites has brought in a vast community of chemists and materials scientists, who are now collaborating with aerospace engineers. This cross-pollination is accelerating innovation. For example, materials researchers are learning to frame problems in terms of end-of-life performance and radiation dosage, while space engineers are open to unconventional solutions like self-healing materials. This convergence will likely yield not only better solar cells but also improvements in related areas (like radiation shielding materials, flexible electronics for space, etc.). As noted in the perspective, realizing space-compatible PSCs requires rethinking device architectures and encapsulation from the ground up—a challenge that spurs creative solutions across disciplines [83].

Surpassing Traditional Technologies: If the stability and integration challenges are resolved, PSCs could surpass traditional III–V solar technologies in certain mission profiles. Particularly in missions where cost and mass are critical (e.g., large constellations, deep-space probes on a budget, or one-time use systems), perovskites could be transformative. For instance, situations such as a disposable Mars lander that needs a cheap power source for a few months, or a swarm of sensor satellites where losing a few due to degradation is acceptable given how inexpensive they are, are scenarios where today’s costly cells are a bottleneck. Perovskites might open these missions up. Additionally, perovskite technology can be scaled rapidly due to printing methods; if a satellite operator suddenly needs hundreds of kW of solar arrays, printing them is faster and easier to ramp than expanding III–V production [2,21]. Thus, PSCs introduce a desirable flexibility in production and deployment.

Timeline and Roadmap: In terms of timeline, we can anticipate the following (tentatively): In the next ~2 years, more on-orbit experiments (CubeSats and ISS exposures) will refine our understanding. Within the next 2–5 years (around 2025–2027), there is a possibility of applying PSCs to low-risk small satellite missions, such as CubeSats or ISS demonstration experiments. Over the subsequent 5–10 years (around 2030), this application is expected to expand to mainstream satellite fleets and lunar exploration technology demonstrators. This projection takes into account the ongoing space experiments, accumulated flight data from small satellites, and advances in environmental resistance technologies. Each success will build confidence. A possible roadmap involves incremental steps: first supplemental panels (hybrid arrays with perovskite sheets alongside traditional panels as backups or demonstrators), then primary power for short missions, and finally primary power for long missions once the longevity is proven. Importantly, the roadmap should include establishing standards for space PSC testing (e.g., defining a standard radiation tolerance benchmark that all designs must meet—efforts like those by international PVSpace conferences are already in motion).

Broader Impacts on Terrestrial Technology: The advances made for space can feedback into terrestrial renewable energy. Space-grade PSCs necessitate extreme durability, which could translate to more stable perovskite panels for use on Earth (especially in harsh climates—deserts with high UV, polar regions with big temperature swings, and high-altitude locations with more radiation). For example, a UV-resistant, self-healing perovskite developed for space could be a boon for tropical solar farms where intense UV and heat currently degrade modules. Moreover, the concept of self-healing materials has broad implications beyond solar cells: if we can design electronic materials that repair themselves, that can revolutionize everything from consumer electronics to electric vehicle batteries. The work on gradient thermal buffers might find use in any application where materials with different CTEs are bonded (packaging of LEDs, flexible displays, etc.).

Environmental and Economic Considerations: Perovskite PV offers a more democratized access to space power technology. Lower costs mean not only more satellites, but potentially the viability of concepts like space-based solar power (SBSP), where large arrays in orbit beam energy down to Earth. SBSP has been conceptually stalled partly due to the exorbitant cost of lifting traditional solar panels to space; lightweight, printable perovskite panels could revive interest in this futuristic idea by drastically reducing the cost per watt in orbit. Environmentally, if perovskite panels replace some fraction of launches of heavy panels, the reduced launch mass could lower launch-related emissions [2,17]. On the flip side, one must manage the lead content and debris implications as discussed, to ensure this technology remains sustainable and does not introduce new problems (ongoing research into lead-free perovskites or recycling methods is relevant).

Challenges Remaining: While optimistic, we must remain clear-eyed about the challenges still to be solved. Achieving a >5-year reliable life for PSCs in GEO or deep space is unproven as of 2025. Degradation that is minor in LEO might accumulate more in GEO. Also, scaling production to the needed quality levels and ensuring every cell on a large panel can heal or withstand stress uniformly is a complex task. There may also be unforeseen failure modes—for instance, how do perovskite panels behave after 10 years of micrometeoroid hits, or continuous bombardment by solar wind particles? Long-duration data is lacking, so part of the outlook is the need for patience and extensive testing. Some experts advocate for a “failure mode engineering” approach: deliberately stress devices to the breaking point to see how they fail, and then address those modes one by one.

In conclusion, the path forward for space-worthy perovskite solar cells is extremely promising, marked by rapid progress and growing interest from the space sector. Through strategic innovation in materials (self-healing perovskites and robust interfaces) and clever engineering (buffer layers, encapsulation, and new module designs), it is reasonable to expect that PSCs will carve out a niche—and possibly a dominant role—in space power systems. This journey from lab to orbit exemplifies how a breakthrough in fundamental science can ripple outward to transform industries. The coming decade will be crucial: as research groups and companies demonstrate high-performance PSCs surviving in space, the skepticism will fade and adoption will accelerate. When that happens, we may witness a paradigm shift where satellites and spacecraft derive power from thin, flexible, even printable solar films, ushering in an era of more accessible and scalable space exploration. And as a virtuous cycle, the lessons learned off planet will help improve sustainable energy technologies here on Earth, fulfilling the broader promise of perovskite photovoltaics in diversifying and expanding our energy frontiers.

Summary of Future Prospects and Research Directions

• Development of high-efficiency, highly stable PSCs with enhanced environmental resistance is in progress, supported by advances in materials and encapsulation technologies.
• Self-healing materials, composite buffer layers, and improved interfaces are promising approaches for extending device lifetimes in harsh space environments.
• Optimization of large-area coating and module integration processes remains essential to enable mass production of space-grade PSC modules.
• Practical application to low-risk space missions (e.g., CubeSats and ISS experiments) is feasible between 2025 and 2030, with gradual expansion to mainstream satellite platforms.
• Additional technological validation, including long-term space exposure data and standardization of testing protocols, is required for future deep-space and GEO missions.