1kg CIGS = 5kg Uranium

[Texas]

"1kg CIGS = 5kg Uranium
December 16, 2008
By Martin Roscheisen, CEO

The notion of a kilogram of enriched Uranium conjures up an image of a powerful amout of energy. Enough to power an entire city for years when used in a nuclear power plant, or enough to flatten an entire county when used in a bomb — that’s presumably what many people would say if one asked them about their thoughts.

In our new solar cell technology, we use an active material called CIGS, a Copper based semiconductor. How does this stack up against enriched Uranium?

Here’s a noteworthy fact, pointed out to me by one of our engineers: It turns out that 1kg of CIGS, embedded in a solar cell, produces 5 times as much electricity as 1kg of enriched Uranium, embedded in a nuclear power plant.

Or said differently, 1kg of CIGS is equivalent to 5kg of enriched Uranium in terms of the energy the materials deliver in solar and nuclear respectively.

The Uranium is burned and then stored in a nuclear waste facility; the CIGS material produces power for at least the warranty period of the solar cell product after which it can then be recycled and reused an indefinite number of times."



http://www.nanosolar.com/blog3/

[Mike756]

And how much energy is that?

Calculations please.

[Texas]

And how much energy is that?

Calculations please.

I guess you will have to write a letter to Nanosolar because only they know how much of the active ingredients they use. However, you should be able to find on the Internet how much electricity a kg of enriched uranium produces when used in a nuclear reactor.

I look forward to seeing the fruits of your research.

[Mike756]

"However, you should be able to find on the Internet how much electricity a kg of enriched uranium produces when used in a nuclear reactor."

Yes, however, the kwh produced depend on things like percent enrichment, percent burnup, thermal efficiency, whether or not fuel is recycled...etc.

Of course you just take what they say at face value.

It might be helpful to know how much that 1 kg of CIGS costs.

Nuclear fuel costs about 1/2 cent per kwh.

[Greenman]

"However, you should be able to find on the Internet how much electricity a kg of enriched uranium produces when used in a nuclear reactor."

Yes, however, the kwh produced depend on things like percent enrichment, percent burnup, thermal efficiency, whether or not fuel is recycled...etc.

Of course you just take what they say at face value.

It might be helpful to know how much that 1 kg of CIGS costs.

Nuclear fuel costs about 1/2 cent per kwh.

As I understand it, fuel costs are only about 20% of the real costs. 50% is for investment in facilities which typically runs in the multiple billions. This brings the cost up to 3.0-4.0 cents per kwh, not to mention the problem of nuclear waste storage for perpetuity. Also, if we started now, nuclear plants wouldn't come online for 5-8 years.

The most important thing to note is the future cost curves. I'm not aware of anyone projecting nuclear costs to come down while solar costs have been on a downward path which will continue into the foreseeable future.

The real question should be how to scale up solar energy as fast as possible.

[Mike756]

"As I understand it, fuel costs are only about 20% of the real costs. 50% is for investment in facilities which typically runs in the multiple billions. This brings the cost up to 3.0-4.0 cents per kwh"

Really? I had no idea you actually had to build the reactors, I thought you could just burn the fuel.

"not to mention the problem of nuclear waste storage for perpetuity."

Hmmm, yes, when you do stupid things, it does tend to create problems.

"Also, if we started now, nuclear plants wouldn't come online for 5-8 years."

If you start now, you might be informed in 5-8 years.

"The most important thing to note is the future cost curves. I'm not aware of anyone projecting nuclear costs to come down while solar costs have been on a downward path which will continue into the foreseeable future.

The real question should be how to scale up solar energy as fast as possible."

Ummm, make it cost less.

I the meantime, people will do what is in their best interest.

When it does cost less, it will take off. Everybody knows this. The point of the post, which you missed, was to point out the near uselessness of comparing the mass used. I am not anti solar or pro nuclear; I am anti propaganda and stupidity.

[Greenman]

[INDENT] I am anti propaganda and stupidity.

Based on your response, you fooled me. Arrogance is simply a camouflage for stupidity.

[Mike756]

Based on your response, you fooled me. Arrogance is simply a camouflage for stupidity.

If you are aware of something which can camouflage yours, I suggest you try it.

[darthvader420]

What a pointless thread, Texas.

[OPEC SUCKS]

[QUOTE]I look forward to seeing the fruits of your research./QUOTE]

At least part of the power for your PC to type that probably came from a nuclear power source........