RE:HPQ CEO's response to production yield questionHello xxxxxxx
In the New Release of February 15th it contained the following statement
Gen2 test #007 achieved a Production Yield of 13.4%, the highest to date: ten times greater than baseline Gen1 test #63 Production Yield of 1.3% and 1.8 times greater than Gen2 test # 003 Production Yield of 7.4%; (3) Production Yield is the conversion efficiency of Quartz into Silicon Metal of the process
I have been reading up on this process and have a question.
Am I mistaken in assuming that to make 1 KG of Silicon at 100% Yield you would require 2.135 KG of pure Quartz and 0.854 KG of Carbon?
You are not mistaken, these quantities are theoretically correct, although 100% could never actually be achieved.
If my above calculation is correct and I believe it can be verified from sources all over the internet, this would mean that at 13% yield, the Gen 2 would require 7.7 times more carbon and Pure Quartz to produce 1 KG of Silicon.
Yes Steven, that is correct. In fact for any amount of silicon, it would require about 7.7 times the theoretical quantities of these components with the yield at 13%.
The Specifications for the Gen 2 was it not meant to produce 2.6 KG / day assuming 300 days a year of production? Again correct me if my math is off.
This is only correct if the statement made about the gen 2 being a 1/250th scale of the 200 TPA plant, was indicating it was a 1/250 of 200 Tons per year.
So if the Specs are correct, and the goal is 2.6 KG/day of production, at a current yield of 13% that would mean the Gen 2 would need to be loaded with 42.7 KG of pure carbon, (about 7.4 litres) for every 23.5 litres of Fine ground feed stock.
Actually Steven, this is not quite correct. The quantities would be 42.7 Kg of pure quartz (about 16.1 litres volume) plus about 17.1 Kg of pure carbon (about 7.4 litres volume). Keeping in mind, the previous reply relative to the scale.
Is this not a lot of material to feed into a bench top unit in a single day?
It depends on the size of the bench top unit, and on how quickly it can process the feed materials.
Also, I am not sure of this, because I can find no supporting science, but does the power requirements go up to process 7.7 times more feed? Can the current Gen 2 unit's single electrode handle it?
Yes, if all of the feedstock material is brought to the same temperature conditions the power requirements would be directly proportional to the feedstock mass and the processing time.
I cannot answer the second part of that question.
Finally, if tapping is not an objective of the Gen 2, like Peter indicated, and you yourself confirmed on this forum, how are the benefits of directional Solidification, frequently touted in the past, going to be proven?
Directional Solidification is a well-proven technique for removing metallic impurities from Silicon, and as such does not need to be proven. Directional Solidification does require relatively large quantities of liquid Silicon to be an effective process for improving the batch purity, by up to as much as a factor of 10 times, depending on the impurity types. It will not be possible to demonstrate this with Gen 2.
Would be interested in the science behind everything, and rest assured it has nothing to do with bashing, pumping or hyping. I just want an idea if the numbers are correct.
Your curiosity as an investor is quite reasonable, although not everything can be divulged for IP reasons.