Indeed photosynthesis is remarkably efficient using almost every photon that enters the system to produce energy.
They are still debating quantum mechanics in this system but there has been some nice research that at least from one team’s findings constitute the first firm evidence that theoretically consistent quantum effects occur in biological systems.
Just imagine that type of efficiency one day being applied to solar energy production.
I just snorted out my before bed milo. 
Quantum mechanics in plants. Quantum effects.
Wanna explain that one?
A little reading to go with the Milo (a registered TM of Nestle)
There is debate about decoherence and whether what is observed is just normal vibration or not.
Thanks for your links to some popular sites with articles using the term ‘quantum’. I will just stick to my uni textbooks.
Now, can I find some episodes of Quantum Leap on streaming I wonder?
Well the research isn’t too hard to find as well so some links to that are now included for less light reading in my post above.
Also mostly plant based with addictive sugars the base ingredient. Hope you did not over indulge. Past experience suggests it will make little difference to how much pleasure one can derive from reading text books at bed time. Unless one is cold and needs to start a fire to keep warm. 
The more serious observation is that we have greater scope to improve the efficiency of solar energy collection 4-5 times improvement.
One would hope they are relatively recent. 2012 if the Higgs boson is to be considered. The more we learn the less we know?
P.S.
A source publication that caters for a broad population, recent text books optional.
Although I did enjoy @grahroll selected bedtime reading. More to read tonight. 
There has always been a delay between new research being broadly accepted and appearing in textbooks and another delay between the new edition being published and the old ones being retired.
@gregr If you are studying physics or biology perhaps ask your lecturers if quantum effects in photosynthesis are being seriously studied or just another fad with the name quantum.
The word quantum, in my view, is one of most misused words around. Every time I see it in a popular science article I am dubious about the content. Quantum mechanics provides a model of what is happening in the sub-atomic realm, not what is going on with cells in plants.
Oh, and I cringe every time the word decimate is misused as well.
I agree. However it also appears in more grounded articles that have substance.
You are assuming that cell functions cannot be in the sub-atomic realm and cannot involve quantum effects. Why not let the data speak? There are quite a few researchers who publish in reputable journals who seem to think it is a thing.
But now we are into quantum field theory and quantum electrodynamics and how light (photons) are absorbed by the atoms making up the cells of plants. This drives chemical processes in molecules.
See what I mean about the term quantum.
Now lest someone say this is getting off topic, QFT and QED explain the mechanisms behind solar panels, electricity, and batteries.
I’ve no doubt that, if lithium proves to be a limitation, then the market will develop alternatives. That said, Australia is a major producer of lithium (and potential alternatives).
From one of the comments:
Hopefully Tesla and/or others follow up on producing batteries, and hopefully, vehicles in Australia.
PS. GM need not apply.
Hopefully Australian fully owned and operated Industries do this, why bother moving profits made here overseas to foreign owned headquarters eg Tesla, GM, Ford, Volvo etc etc etc. We need to get back to value adding as much as we can here before shipping the product and let’s keep the money here rather than sending money overseas.
I listened to an ex-miner on radio recently who had worked for a rare earth miner in WA. Lithium mining is often related to REs.
The company wanted to set up a processing and refining plant in Australia. With all the environmental and other red tape processes they had to go through and the time it would take, it was quicker and cheaper to build the plant in Malaysia, ship the semi-processed minerals to that country, export from there, and then ship the waste back to Australia for disposal.
Just how crazy is that?
While I have some sympathies about red tape being an issue, the other side is that toxic industries are not a service to a country regardless unless the country is only about money and nothing much else.
Some countries are happier or more tolerant to poison their environment than others, so I also have a lot of sympathy for our red tape. Adani may be a good example where they have a terrible reputation for doing the wrong things, yet they push hard enough to get permits and make commitments to do the right things, they then do the wrong things and pay paltry fines whilst essentially decimating a part of the environment - the latter taking decades of forever to recover from, not considering impacts on locals who are affected.
Our governments have been comfortable doing that for decades. Bipartisan for the most part too, but we all know that. This one appears to be wilfully squandering local strengths to participate in solar, and may even be allowing every type of research to ebb. It started with diminishing CSIRO and seems to have picked up speed ever since 
Malaysia gave the necessary approvals to Lynas to develop the processing plant… but…it is worth googling the community challenges and toxic waste disposal problems they have/are having over there (such as this one)
The environmental impacts of processing and waste generated are some of the reasons they went offshore in order to find somewhere willing to accept the risks/impacts.
Bearing in mind that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles still need batteries, with all the materials required for pure battery vehicles, plus those for the fuel cell, it’s probably time Australia grew up and started taking our own risks.
It’s a chicken-and-egg situation, but will the market ever be enough to justify establishing hydrogen fuelling infrastructure?
Not if a charging network for EVs gets there first. Since that solution already has a distribution network and there are already EVs in production I am guessing that is how it will turn out. My guess is that H2 only wins if EVs fail to solve the range problem in time and I doubt that will happen.
This is like VHS vs Beta, whichever gets to critical mass (self-reinforcing growth) first wins. So far it looks like EV.
I think that BEVs will win out where petrol is now used in vehicles. I think that HFC will win out where diesel is the norm.
Long distance trucking would be a natural fit for hydrogen fuel cells, because the tons of weight of batteries needed and the long recharge times would be a major issue. Hydrogen fueling stations you would think could be set up reasonably easily at truck stops along the highways.
