>I’m of the mindset that you should be weary of and ignore the comments of software developers, physicists, and electrical engineers’ viewpoints on the hard sciences unless the prove otherwise as it relates to energy.
Ah yes, physicists viewpoints on the hard sciences are particularly untrustworthy.
And here is the claim mentioned above:
>For every 1 pound of polysilicon you make, you make 4 pounds of the nasty stuff-silicon tetrachloride.
>Okay, so some green hippie nutbags will tell you that you can just recycle this silicon tetrachloride stuff into new polysilicon because it requires less energy, but that’s bullshit because it costs a lot to do so.
>Silicon tetrachloride is the colorless inorganic fuming liquid and is used to produce high purity silicon. It can be produced by using several methods and compounds including chlorine, metal silicon, and coke among others. Moreover, it can be also produced as a byproduct after treating metallurgical grade silicon to form polysilicon. For each ton of polysilicon, 3-4 tons of silicon tetrachloride is generated. Polysilicon manufacturer’s further process the waste silicon tetrachloride generated and reuses it after processing. This saves the energy cost and raw material cost however, required an expensive set of machinery to process waste silicon tetrachloride.
Wait a minute. So there is one process where it is an undesired byproduct and another process where it is actually the primary input?
>Hence polysilicon manufacturers prefer silicon tetrachloride instead of raw silica to save on cost, energy, and time. Moreover, the government from various countries has enforced laws to prevent unauthorized dump of toxic silicon tetrachloride. For instance, in China, 98.5% silicon tetrachloride produced as a byproduct is required to be recycled which compels manufacturers to adopt silicon tetrachloride as a raw material for polysilicon production.
>I’m of the mindset that you should be weary of and ignore the comments of software developers, physicists, and electrical engineers’ viewpoints on the hard sciences unless the prove otherwise as it relates to energy.
Ah yes, physicists viewpoints on the hard sciences are particularly untrustworthy.
And here is the claim mentioned above:
>For every 1 pound of polysilicon you make, you make 4 pounds of the nasty stuff-silicon tetrachloride.
>Okay, so some green hippie nutbags will tell you that you can just recycle this silicon tetrachloride stuff into new polysilicon because it requires less energy, but that’s bullshit because it costs a lot to do so.
Wow! Very convincing arguments!
Ok now a random google search:
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/03/05/218770...
>Silicon tetrachloride is the colorless inorganic fuming liquid and is used to produce high purity silicon. It can be produced by using several methods and compounds including chlorine, metal silicon, and coke among others. Moreover, it can be also produced as a byproduct after treating metallurgical grade silicon to form polysilicon. For each ton of polysilicon, 3-4 tons of silicon tetrachloride is generated. Polysilicon manufacturer’s further process the waste silicon tetrachloride generated and reuses it after processing. This saves the energy cost and raw material cost however, required an expensive set of machinery to process waste silicon tetrachloride.
Wait a minute. So there is one process where it is an undesired byproduct and another process where it is actually the primary input?
>Hence polysilicon manufacturers prefer silicon tetrachloride instead of raw silica to save on cost, energy, and time. Moreover, the government from various countries has enforced laws to prevent unauthorized dump of toxic silicon tetrachloride. For instance, in China, 98.5% silicon tetrachloride produced as a byproduct is required to be recycled which compels manufacturers to adopt silicon tetrachloride as a raw material for polysilicon production.
Turns out China is a green hippie nutbag country.