New Book: Solar Cells 23,000 Times Worse for Environment Than Carbon Dioxide

[daveman]

New Book: Solar Cells 23,000 Times Worse for Environment Than Carbon Dioxide

Solar Cells Linked to Greenhouse Gases Over 23,000 Times Worse than Carbon Dioxide According to New Book, Green Illusions ... Solar cells do not offset greenhouse gases or curb fossil fuel use in the United States according to a new environmental book, Green Illusions (June 2012, University of Nebraska Press), written by University of California - Berkeley visiting scholar Ozzie Zehner. Green Illusions explains how the solar industry has grown to become one of the leading emitters of hexafluoroethane (C2F6), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These three potent greenhouse gases, used by solar cell fabricators, make carbon dioxide (CO2) seem harmless. – PR Newswire

--

Bottom line according to this new book, Green Illusions: Hexafluoroethane has a global warming potential that is 12,000 times higher than CO2.

This isn't just some statistic with a dubious genealogy. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) makes this assessment. And it gets worse. Hexafluoroethane is "100 percent manufactured by humans, and survives 10,000 years once released into the atmosphere."

Here's some more from the press release:

Nitrogen trifluoride is 17,000 times more virulent than CO2, and SF6, the most treacherous greenhouse gas, is over 23,000 times more threatening. The solar photovoltaic industry is one of the fastest-growing emitters of these gases, which are now measurably accumulating within the earth's atmosphere according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

A NOAA study shows that atmospheric concentrations of SF6 have been rising exponentially. A paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Geophysical Research Letters documents that atmospheric NF3 levels have been rising 11 percent per year.

"If photovoltaic production grows, so will the associated side effects," claims Zehner. "Even worse, there's no evidence that solar cells offset fossil fuel use in the American context." Zehner explains that alternative energy subsidies keep retail electricity costs incrementally lower, which then spurs demand. "It's a boomerang effect," remarks Zehner. "The harder we throw alternative energy into the electrical grid, the harder demand comes back to hit us on the head. Historically, we've filled that demand by building more fossil fuel plants, not fewer."​

Imagine that. A leftist do-gooder scheme whose actual results are worse than the problem it proposes to solve.

Oh, well, doesn't matter. Their INTENTIONS are pure, and that's all that's important.

Right, USMB AGW cultists?

 

[Old Rocks]

Electronics Industry Changes the Climate with New Greenhouse Gas: Scientific American

Emissions of a greenhouse gas that has 17,000 times the planet-warming capacity of carbon dioxide are at least four times higher than had been previously estimated. Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is used mainly by the semiconductor industry to clean the chambers in which silicon chips are made. The industry had in the past estimated that most of the gas was expended during the cleaning process and only about 2 percent escaped into the air. But the first-ever measurements of nitrogen trifluoride levels in the atmosphere, published recently in the journal Geophysical Research Letters show that emissions could be as high as 16 percent.

The results might not have immediate repercussions—nitrogen trifluoride currently adds 0.04 percent of the global warming effect created by carbon dioxide emitted from sources such as coal-burning power plants and cars. More and more gas will be needed, however, as flat-panel LCD televisions become standard in American living rooms and the fledgling thin-film solar cell industry takes off; nitrogen trifluoride is used as a cleaning agent in the manufacture of both.

So, what are you stating? That we should stop all electronics production in the US, or that we should find a way of reclaiming this gas so that it will not get into the atmosphere.

And I note that your book only blames the solar photovoltaic industry, while it is a very small part of the problem.

 

[Old Rocks]

Accomplishments | PFC Reduction / Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry | US EPA

The figure below shows the U.S. semiconductor industry partners’ historical and expected future PFC emissions in green and yellow bars respectively compared to its “business as usual” (BAU) emissions in blue. The BAU scenario reflects the partners’ direct PFC emissions assuming they take no action to reduce emissions. The semiconductor industry’s impressive growth pattern is historically cyclical. While production slowed and declined in 2001 and 2002, rising demand for mobile consumer products (e.g., iPods, cell phones) and computers in 2005 is driving the recovery and continued growth. Analysts predict maintained industry growth approaching 11 percent annually through 20071.

 

[Old Rocks]

ESRL/GMD 2012 Annual Conference

Nitrogen Trifluoride Global Emissions and Emission Factors Estimated from Atmospheric Observations

T. Arnold1, C.M. Harth1, J. Mühle1, P.K. Salameh1, A.J. Manning2, J. Kim1 and R.F. Weiss1

1Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093; 858-534-2599, E-mail: [email protected]
2Atmospheric Dispersion Group, UK Meteorological Office, Devon, United Kingdom

Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), an anthropogenic greenhouse gas with a 100-yr Global Warming Potential (GWP) of over 16,000, has an increasing atmospheric abundance due to its emission from a growing number of manufacturing processes and an expanding end-use market. We present an updated historical record for atmospheric NF3 based on a new and rigorous calibration (SIO-2012 scale), and show the latest analyses using our automated analytical method (an adapted Medusa GC-MS), including in situ measurements at La Jolla, California (32.87° N, 117.25° W).

We used a 2D atmospheric chemical transport model and inverse method together with our atmospheric data to optimally calculate global emissions over the last three decades. CO2-equivalent NF3 emissions (based on a 100-yr GWP) in 2011 totaled around 20 Mt, which equates to ~0.06% of global CO2 emissions due to fossil fuel combustion and cement production. Our results suggest that the global emission factor has recently stabilized after many years of efficiency gains. Longer-term market trends for NF3 are difficult to predict, however, production is expected to continue rising significantly in the foreseeable future. Given our latest findings, we expect a similar relative rise in both production and emissions over the coming years. This would lead to an accelerating rise in atmospheric NF3 and a significant increase in the contribution of NF3 to total radiative forcing. Although the emission factors we calculate are higher than “bottom-up” estimates from industry, from a climate perspective NF3 continues to be preferred to C2F6 as source of fluorine plasma in industrial processes.

While we need to do all we can to prevent more GHGs from going into the atmosphere, the amount that the electronics industry contributes due to these gases is less than 1% of the whole. And of that, the solar cell industry is only a very small part compared the chips, large screen tv's, and other electronincs.

So what we have here is more hysteria concerning solar panels. Because very soon they will deliver electricity far cheaper than coal. With no downstream effects, asthma, lead, and mercury in the atmosphere than our young children breath.

 

[daveman]

Electronics Industry Changes the Climate with New Greenhouse Gas: Scientific American

Emissions of a greenhouse gas that has 17,000 times the planet-warming capacity of carbon dioxide are at least four times higher than had been previously estimated. Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is used mainly by the semiconductor industry to clean the chambers in which silicon chips are made. The industry had in the past estimated that most of the gas was expended during the cleaning process and only about 2 percent escaped into the air. But the first-ever measurements of nitrogen trifluoride levels in the atmosphere, published recently in the journal Geophysical Research Letters show that emissions could be as high as 16 percent.

The results might not have immediate repercussions—nitrogen trifluoride currently adds 0.04 percent of the global warming effect created by carbon dioxide emitted from sources such as coal-burning power plants and cars. More and more gas will be needed, however, as flat-panel LCD televisions become standard in American living rooms and the fledgling thin-film solar cell industry takes off; nitrogen trifluoride is used as a cleaning agent in the manufacture of both.

So, what are you stating? That we should stop all electronics production in the US, or that we should find a way of reclaiming this gas so that it will not get into the atmosphere.

And I note that your book only blames the solar photovoltaic industry, while it is a very small part of the problem.

But it's only the PV industry that morons like you claim will save us all from eeeevil CO2 and global warmercoolerchanging.

If you could admit much of what you say is based on bullshit, you might be salvageable.

But your next two posts prove you're more interested in bitterly clinging to your religion's dogma.

 

[daveman]

Because very soon they will deliver electricity far cheaper than coal.[/B]

Bullshit.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yeah -- 20 years ago, the EPA would bless ANYTHING to get rid of cleaners like Carbon Tet or percfluorides. And these variants snuck in as "less toxic" and less polluting. But gradually, it was recognized that they mean something to the GreenHouse..

Let's be honest about a few things..

I can make the monthly quota for CPU chips for the whole population of your STATE out of the silicon on just one residential rooftop Solar installation.. Therefore the PV industry IS a significant if not DOMINANT user of these gases..

Nitrogen trifluoride - Cleaning up in electronic applications | News | gasworld


Experts anticipate that from 2012, photovoltaic producers will spend more on gases
than flat-screen manufacturers, and from 2017 they are even set to overtake the chip
sector.
Although only a handful of different gases are used in solar-cell manufacturing – in
comparison with more than 20 for semiconductors – the volumes required are
significantly greater.

HOWEVER --- NF3 was chosen because it's EASIER to control and breakdown. And the answer to this problem is in the design of the Deposition chambers that are being cleaned with these products. Like a "self-cleaning oven" feature, it seems to me we could cut "escape" by 50 to 75% with secondary cleaning cycles and sequestration tanks on the chambers. I've actually had that discussion with a buddy of mine who works for a big Semi.. But you don't just JUNK that kind of equipment and it can have a useful lifecycle of 20 years.. So ---- eventually --- this is probably a non-problem.. Unless GOVT STEPS IN AND MANDATES that Semi companies screw up their lines by replacing chambers..

Semi companies are VERY SUPERSTITOUS about making adjustments to existing FUNCTIONAL fabrication lines..

The Greenhouse Gas That Nobody Knew by Richard Conniff: Yale Environment 360

But back in the 1990s when the Kyoto Protocol was being negotiated, NF3 was a niche
product of unknown global warming potential (GWP). [In calculating GWP, carbon
dioxide is the basic unit, with a GWP of one. For other gases, scientists measure
infrared-absorption, the spectral location of the absorbing wavelengths, and the
atmospheric lifetime of the gas to determine its global warming effect relative to
carbon dioxide.] So NF3 got left out, meaning no requirement for industry to track
emissions, or even to report how much NF3 is actually being produced.

That left room for what felt to Prather like a “flimflam.” In an interview with Yale
Environment 360, he estimated that 20 or 30 percent of total NF3 production ends up
in the atmosphere — not the two percent industry had seemed to suggest.

He and Hsu characterized Air Products, the same NF3 producer that the EPA had honored, as producing the annual global warming equivalent of one of the world’s largest coal-fired power plants.

A new paper, published in Geophysical Research Letters in October, filled in gaps in this glum picture — and threatened to turn the NF3 emissions success story into a public relations disaster. Ray Weiss and his research team at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography reported that NF3 is now present in the atmosphere at four times the expected amount, with atmospheric concentrations rising 11 percent a
year. Working from annual production estimates of 4,000 metric tons, Weiss figured that about 16 percent of current production is ending up in the atmosphere.

Corning Painter, a vice president at Air Products, praised the Weiss paper but argued that “in terms of order of magnitude the numbers are relatively close” to earlier estimates. In a letter to New Scientist magazine this summer, Painter had seemed to give the impression that overall emissions were in the two percent range.

“More than 20 years of research and work with our customers finds that less than 2
percent of NF3 is released into the atmosphere,” he wrote.

But in an interview with Yale Environment 360, Painter said Air Products has a two
percent emissions rate just in producing and packaging the gas, though he said that
rate continues to go down. He said global NF3 production is actually 7,300 tons
annually. Given Weiss’s figures for atmospheric concentrations, he said, that would
translate to an overall emissions rate closer to 8 percent, including manufacturing,
transportation, and end-use.

Yeah it's MUCH higher than anyone anticipated, but as bolded in the article above (AND CONFIRMED by OldieRocks -- whos ALWAYS RIGHT) -- a major NF3 company is about the equivalent of ONE giant coal plant..

NOTHING is totally clean. Unless you want to make it more expensive than gold or platinum.. Ive drank completely clean water -- the kind that Semi producers pay $200 per gallon for --- and it's not healthier or tastier than what comes out of my 'fridge filter".

We could increase Solar PV efficiencies today by 50% by mining a lot more Arsenic, but we don't. That's why engineers have to juggle a hundred variables to come up with an optimal design..

 

[Oddball]

Huh-huh...And what of the cadmium required for them?

 

[flacaltenn]

Huh-huh...And what of the cadmium required for them?

NF3 lives for 10,000 years in the environment (suppose we should check that factoid out) but Cadmium is "forever"..

Just like the diamond commercial...

 

[Oddball]

I was talking about the mining of it.

Seems that envirowhacks haven't ever been introduced to the concepts of trade-offs or externalities.

 

[daveman]

I was talking about the mining of it.

Seems that envirowhacks haven't ever been introduced to the concepts of trade-offs or externalities.

All that matters is intentions.

In their quest to "save the environment", the environment is just collateral damage.

Of course, the end goal is not to save the environment, but to push for greater and greater government control over individual lives.

 

[flacaltenn]

I was pretty appalled today when one of our resident enviro-whacks told me he wasn't concerned at all about the enviro consequences of tidal power.

It's situational ethics of some variety.. Like that automatic dispensation you get as a voting Democrat from being labeled a racist...

 

[daveman]

I was pretty appalled today when one of our resident enviro-whacks told me he wasn't concerned at all about the enviro consequences of tidal power.

It's situational ethics of some variety.. Like that automatic dispensation you get as a voting Democrat from being labeled a racist...

Just as they don't give a damn about the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico the size of New Jersey caused by agricultural runoff due to corn production for ethanol.

Like I said: The environment is collateral damage to "saving the environment".

They really don't give a shit about it.

 

[waltky]

Granny been wonderin' where dat cow pasure smell been comin' from...

UN says greenhouse gases at record high in 2011
20 Nov.`12 — The main global warming pollutant reached a record high level in the air in 2011, the U.N. weather agency said Tuesday.

Concentrations of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere averaged 390 parts per million during the year. That is up 40 percent from before the Industrial Age, when levels were about 280 parts per million, the World Meteorological Organization said. Carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, stays in the atmosphere for 100 years. Some of it is natural, coming mainly from decomposing dead plants and animals, but scientists say the bulk of it is from the burning of fossil fuels.

There have been 350 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere since 1750 and it "will remain there for centuries, causing our planet to warm further and impacting on all aspects of life on earth," said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. "Future emissions will only compound the situation." Between 1990 and 2011, carbon dioxide and other gas emissions caused a 30 percent increase in the warming effect on the climate, the agency reported.

After carbon dioxide, methane has the biggest effect on climate. Atmospheric concentrations of methane also reached a new high of 1,813 parts per billion in 2011, up 159 percent from pre-industrial levels of about 700 parts per billion. About 40 percent comes from natural sources such as termites and wetlands, but the rest is due to cattle breeding, rice agriculture, fossil fuel burning, landfills and incineration, the agency said.

More

 

[Politico]

Well it's a good thing my reasons for wanting solar have nothing to do with the environment.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

For those of you who find "trends" so fascinating, here's an interesting "trend". Please take note how effective the EPA has been. LOL! Seems, rather than being instrumental in decreasing the impacts of global warming, if one goes by "trends" as the cause for something, they're being instrumental in increasing the impacts of global warming. :-(

 

[konradv]

It's amazing how deniers will use Greenhouse Theory when it suits them with no sense of irony at all. If the stuff in question is so bad, why the denial about CO2 and methane?

 

[Old Rocks]

I was talking about the mining of it.

Seems that envirowhacks haven't ever been introduced to the concepts of trade-offs or externalities.

WebElements Periodic Table of the Elements | Cadmium | uses

The following uses for cadmium are gathered from a number of sources as well as from anecdotal comments. I'd be delighted to receive corrections as well as additional referenced uses (please use the feedback mechanism to add uses).

Rather like zinc, cadmium is used to a small extent as coatings (often achieved by electroplating) to protect metals such as iron. Its use is restricted because of environmental concerns. The metal is a component of some specialist alloys including solders and alloys with low coefficients of friction and good fatigue resistance. Cadmium is a component of Ni-Cd batteries. Cadmium is used in some control rods and shields within nuclear reactors.

Cadmium is used in black and white television phosphors and in blue and green phosphors for colour TV tubes. Some semiconductors contain cadmium. The sulphide (CdS) is used as a yellow pigment. Some compounds are used as stabilizers for PVC.

 

[Old Rocks]

I was talking about the mining of it.

Seems that envirowhacks haven't ever been introduced to the concepts of trade-offs or externalities.

Had you done the slightest research, you would have found that we don't mine for cadmium. It is a byproduct of mining for copper, zinc, and lead.

 

[Old Rocks]

It's amazing how deniers will use Greenhouse Theory when it suits them with no sense of irony at all. If the stuff in question is so bad, why the denial about CO2 and methane?

You are expecting logical thought out of this bunch?