Cheap Solar Panels Made With An Ion Cannon

"Twin Creeks, a solar power startup that emerged from hiding today, has developed a way of creating photovoltaic cells that are half the price of today's cheapest cells, and thus within reach of challenging the fossil fuel hegemony. As it stands, almost every solar panel is made by slicing a 200-micrometer-thick (0.2mm) wafer from a block of crystalline silicon. You then add some electrodes, cover it in protective glass, and leave it in a sunny area to generate electricity through the photovoltaic effect. There are two problems with this approach: Much in the same way that sawdust is produced when you slice wood, almost half of the silicon block is wasted when it's cut into 200-micrometer slices; and second, the panels would still function just as well if they were thinner than 200 micrometers, but silicon is brittle and prone to cracking if it's too thin. Using a hydrogen ion particle accelerator, Twin Creeks has managed to create very thin (20-micrometer), flexible photovoltaic cells that can be produced for just 40 cents per watt; around half the cost of conventional solar cells, and a price point that encroaches on standard, mostly-hydrocarbon-derived grid power."

You had me at "Ion Cannon".

Pretty fascinating stuff. Should be interesting to see where solar is 5, 10 years from now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

You had me at "Ion Cannon".

---

http://images.wikia.com/starwars/ima...t_Defender.jpg

Now, we just need better batteries...

I wonder how the automation equipment handles such thin material.

A standard 200mm wafer is (if I recall) about 0.7 mm thick. That's 700,000 microns. Now these are actually rather robust, and there is a later stage process that back grinds them to a far thinner product. They are very fragile after back-grinding. After this step, the dies are cut.

Now of course, technology changes, but I have first hand experience of what I mentioned.

As I think about it, it isn't much different than fiberglass. Glass goes from strong, to brittle when it's thin, to flexible when it's very thin.

Nice work from these guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The OP

200-micrometer-thick (0.2mm) wafer

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

A standard 200mm wafer is (if I recall) about 0.7 mm thick.

...

I have first hand experience of what I mentioned.

---

smh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

As I think about it, it isn't much different than fiberglass. Glass goes from strong, to brittle when it's thin, to flexible when it's very thin.

Nice work from these guys.

---

You didn't read any of the linked articles... the 20-micrometer layer is deposited on flexible thin metal layer... that's what gives it the flexibility...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

You didn't read any of the linked articles... the 20-micrometer layer is deposited on flexible thin metal layer... that's what gives it the flexibility...

---

I thought it said the metal was deposited on the silicone.

Yes I read it, Mr. ASSume

Glad they may make them cheaper but the panels currently are only 80 cents of the $5 per watt installed price of PV. Forty cents won't make that huge of a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

You didn't read any of the linked articles... the 20-micrometer layer is deposited on flexible thin metal layer... that's what gives it the flexibility...

---

Going with WC on this one. It clearly says the metal backing is applied to the silicone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Going with WC on this one. It clearly says the metal backing is applied to the silicone.

---

:lol the metal backing is what gives it the flexibility, that's what I was pointing out and what was completely absent from WC's theory:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

As I think about it, it isn't much different than fiberglass. Glass goes from strong, to brittle when it's thin, to flexible when it's very thin.

---

Definitely my mistake in assuming he would understand what he read...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Glad they may make them cheaper but the panels currently are only 80 cents of the $5 per watt installed price of PV. Forty cents won't make that huge of a difference.

---

That's true, but that's pricing for a single module. Would be interesting to see how much of a dent it makes on volume installations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

:lol the metal backing is what gives it the flexibility, that's what I was pointing out and what was completely absent from WC's theory:

---

Wrong.

The metal backing keeps it intact. The crystal that thin is already more flexible than the metal, and will shear easily. You cannot add metal and make it flexible.

After the back-grind process, wafers can be bent pretty good. Not as much as represented in the article, but the thinner they are, the more flexible they are. They will bend real easy 45 degrees from the direction of the crystal lattice, and snap in a heartbeat with the lattice.

Have any hands-on experience with silicon wafers by chance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Wrong.

---

From the article:
A metal backing is applied to make it less fragile (and highly flexible, as you see on the right), and the remaining silicon wafer is taken back to the particle accelerator

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-conten...le-200x300.jpg

Uhhh...not sure why you are acting like such an attack dog on this...obviously the silicon is just as flexible as the metal backing or it would fracture when rolled up like that. The metal backing is added for durability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Uhhh...not sure why you are acting like such an attack dog on this...obviously the silicon is just as flexible as the metal backing or it would fracture when rolled up like that. The metal backing is added for durability.

---

Flexing the layer without the metal backing would destroy it. It's too fragile. Without the metal backing, there is no such flexibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Flexing the layer without the metal backing would destroy it. It's too fragile. Without the metal backing, there is no such flexibility.

---

Whatever. You are clearly pulling stuff out of your ass just to argue with WC. If the silicon laminate layer was not flexible it would still micro fracture on the outside curve when rolled up, metal backing or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Whatever. You are clearly pulling stuff out of your ass just to argue with WC. If the silicon laminate layer was not flexible it would still micro fracture on the outside curve when rolled up, metal backing or not.

---

:lol so no metal layer = no flexibility

Nlo dumbass. No metal layer = no durability. It has nothing to do with flexibility. The metal layer prevents impact fracture/penetration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Nlo dumbass. No metal layer = no durability. It has nothing to do with flexibility.

---

From the article:
A metal backing is applied to make it less fragile (and highly flexible, as you see on the right), and the remaining silicon wafer is taken back to the particle accelerator

I understand that since english is your second language you aren't getting the meaning in context. In the parenthesis the author probably should have used "yet" instead of "and".

Adding the metal did not suddenly make a brittle material flexible. It made an extremely thin and flexible material DURABLE for commercial use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Adding the metal did not suddenly make a brittle material flexible. It made an extremely thin and flexible material DURABLE for commercial use.

---

English has nothing to do with it. Silicon is still too brittle at the micrometer range. You need to be in the nanometer scale of thickness to make it flexible enough, which is the reason this thing needs to be processed by the ion cannon pre and post the addition of the metal layer.

Here's an article from 2006 explaining this:
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/17237/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I wonder how the automation equipment handles such thin material.

A standard 200mm wafer is (if I recall) about 0.7 mm thick. That's 700,000 microns. Now these are actually rather robust, and there is a later stage process that back grinds them to a far thinner product. They are very fragile after back-grinding. After this step, the dies are cut.

Now of course, technology changes, but I have first hand experience of what I mentioned.

---

lol firsthand

I'll also add that Si is quite brittle at the micron scale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Uhhh...not sure why you are acting like such an attack dog on this...obviously the silicon is just as flexible as the metal backing or it would fracture when rolled up like that. The metal backing is added for durability.

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

lol firsthand

I'll also add that Si is quite brittle at the micron scale.

---

Yes, wrong number of zeros.

Have you ever seen silicon bend? I have. It depends on the direction you bend it across the lattice. In one direction, it will snap readily in line with the crystal structure. Brittle in this direction. It is resistant to bending, but it will bend without breaking as long as you don't start a crack in line with the crystal grain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

English has nothing to do with it. Silicon is still too brittle at the micrometer range. You need to be in the nanometer scale of thickness to make it flexible enough, which is the reason this thing needs to be processed by the ion cannon pre and post the addition of the metal layer.

Here's an article from 2006 explaining this:
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/17237/

---

And that applies in this case... How?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

And that applies in this case... How?

---

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Have you ever seen silicon bend? I have. It depends on the direction you bend it across the lattice. In one direction, it will snap readily in line with the crystal structure. Brittle in this direction. It is resistant to bending, but it will bend without breaking as long as you don't start a crack in line with the crystal grain.

---

So its brittle. Thanks for sharing the other bit of info.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Yes, wrong number of zeros.

---

How many zeros were there supposed to be?

anyone have any opinions on the PV panels? I know that unimportant minutia during the production process is always fun to talk about but....


Also, I agree with TB, you had me at ion cannon (yes I see an irony)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

How many zeros were there supposed to be?

---

:rollin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

:lmao

---

OMG...

You don't understand how the differences in technology apply? The reasons they have different solutions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

So its brittle. Thanks for sharing the other bit of info.
Si is wood veneir, until you b


How many zeros were there supposed to be?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

So its brittle. Thanks for sharing the other bit of info.
So is wood veneer, until you bond it to something that keeps it from splitting down the grain. The thing with thin silicone it it tends to split down the crystalline lattice.


How many zeros were there supposed to be?

---

Seriously... You don't know?

I must give you too much credit in the intelligence department.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

anyone have any opinions on the PV panels? I know that unimportant minutia during the production process is always fun to talk about but....


Also, I agree with TB, you had me at ion cannon (yes I see an irony)

---

I think that the process is awesome. Great technological advances are often something simple nobody thought of doing before. My hat's off to these people. reminds me of what CMP did to speed and density of the semiconductor industry, allowing the advances of the 90's.

Who would have thought of using an orbital sander on the devise side of wafers?

FYI...

I just measured the three 200mm wafers I have. They each measure 0.75mm. I though I kept the wafer I had after a backgrind process, but it wasn't with these three. I think I might have it under one of my tool box drawers, but I'm not digging for it now. I was going to measure it too.

that is the standard size for 200mm wafers. 300mm wafers are slightly thicker, probably 0.8mm, but i don't have any to measure.

I can see using thinner blanks for solar cells, since they don't go through the same degree of stress as CPU, memory, GALS, PALS, etc.

These bring back memories:

Gaard Automation has been acquired by

IPEC to acquire Gaard Automation

Avantgaard 676 (formally MP400)

Avantgaard 776 used in training

Patent: Orbital motion chemical-mechanical polishing apparatus and method of fabrication

US Patent No: 6,095,904

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I wonder how the automation equipment handles such thin material.

A standard 200mm wafer is (if I recall) about 0.7 mm thick. That's 700,000 microns. Now these are actually rather robust, and there is a later stage process that back grinds them to a far thinner product. They are very fragile after back-grinding. After this step, the dies are cut.

Now of course, technology changes, but I have first hand experience of what I mentioned.

---

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

:lmao

---

:)

Drachen, I have nothing interesting to say in regards to this single bit of technology as I am not familiar with it, but the price drop is what anyone should have come to expect with Solar given its history of increasing efficiency at an exponential rate while also decreasing price at an exponential rate. Its awesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Seriously... You don't know?

I must give you too much credit in the intelligence department.

---

Admitting that there's a problem is the first step to recovery. It's rumored to be quite cathartic. You should try it some time.

Care to share your thoughts on the number of zeros we should have seen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Drachen, I have nothing interesting to say in regards to this single bit of technology as I am not familiar with it, but the price drop is what anyone should have come to expect with Solar given its history of increasing efficiency at an exponential rate while also decreasing price at an exponential rate. Its awesome.

---

Thanks, I just thought I would (possibly foolishly) try to put a wedge in the direction the conversation was going as I could have seen pages and pages of "how many zeros?" and "I have experience" . . . I too am not familiar with it and think it is pretty darn cool that we are finding newer and cheaper ways to produce this stuff.



Edit: And yes, I am fully aware that I have been guilty of being the sole reason that an interesting/important thread got off track (i.e. Grits), but I did try to bring it back at one point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wile E. Cobra, Soooper Genius

Seriously... You don't know?

I must give you too much credit in the intelligence department.

---

(shrugs)

Only one of you has a PhD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Admitting that there's a problem is the first step to recovery. It's rumored to be quite cathartic. You should try it some time.

Care to share your thoughts on the number of zeros we should have seen?

---

Quote:

---

A micrometre (or micrometer), is by definition 1×10−6 of a metre (SI Standard prefix "micro" = 10−6).
In plain English, it means one-millionth of a metre (or one-thousandth of a millimetre, or 0.001 mm). Its unit symbol in the International System of Units (SI) is μm. The latter may be rendered as um if Greek fonts are not available or not admissible. "Micron" comes from Ancient Greek: μικρόν mikrón, which means "small".

---

.7mm = 700 microns?

Aaaah I get it. He said 700,000 then ragged on you for not knowing and asking him, when in reality he was talking out his ass, and didn't want to admit he made a mistake.

Gotcha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Drachen, I have nothing interesting to say in regards to this single bit of technology as I am not familiar with it, but the price drop is what anyone should have come to expect with Solar given its history of increasing efficiency at an exponential rate while also decreasing price at an exponential rate. Its awesome.

---

Yeah. That and ION CANNONS!!!!111!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Yeah. That and ION CANNONS!!!!111!!

---

Best take in here so far TBH!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

Thanks, I just thought I would (possibly foolishly) try to put a wedge in the direction the conversation was going as I could have seen pages and pages of "how many zeros?" and "I have experience" . . . I too am not familiar with it and think it is pretty darn cool that we are finding newer and cheaper ways to produce this stuff.



Edit: And yes, I am fully aware that I have been guilty of being the sole reason that an interesting/important thread got off track (i.e. Grits), but I did try to bring it back at one point.

---

Do you think it will bring the cost down enough? I've been out of touch with the industry for a long time, but the silicone itself is only a small part of the price. I have learned from experience to be skeptical of numbers that appear to be forecasts rather than proven. especially when they come from companies trying to expand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

.7mm = 700 microns?

Aaaah I get it. He said 700,000 then ragged on you for not knowing and asking him, when in reality he was talking out his ass, and didn't want to admit he made a mistake.

Gotcha.

---

No, I admitted to making the mistake before that question. Yes, I had three too many zeros. Then after asking that silly question, after admitting an error, I thought I would reply that way.

In post #25:

Quote:

---

Yes, wrong number of zeros.

---

After AssLoco put my mistake in red.

I actually noticed it after rereading the thread as it progress soon after the mistake, meant to edit it, but got caught up with other things and forgot.

Now can we get back to the purpose of the thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

No, I admitted to making the mistake before that question. Yes, I had three too many zeros. Then after asking that silly question, after admitting an error, I thought I would reply that way.

After AssLoco put my mistake in red.

I actually noticed it after rereading the thread as it progress soon after the mistake, meant to edit it, but got caught up with other things and forgot.

Now can we get back to the purpose of the thread?

---

It's a minor thing. I'm just bustin' on ya, cause its funny, and let me post a cartoon youtoob.

By all means.

ION CANNONS!!!!! WHOOT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Do you think it will bring the cost down enough? I've been out of touch with the industry for a long time, but the silicone itself is only a small part of the price. I have learned from experience to be skeptical of numbers that appear to be forecasts rather than proven. especially when they come from companies trying to expand.

---

At their most optimistic projection (forty cents a watt for the panel) it will only reduce the price of PV solar by forty cents a watt. Racks, inverters, and labor are still the bulk of the current $5 a watt installed price of PV solar. Panels are currently eighty cents of that $5 per watt.

I want this Ion Cannon and the Magnetic Rail Gun to make love and have a baby.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

At their most optimistic projection (forty cents a watt for the panel) it will only reduce the price of PV solar by forty cents a watt. Racks, inverters, and labor are still the bulk of the current $5 a watt installed price of PV solar. Panels are currently eighty cents of that $5 per watt.

---

So the savings may be around 5%. If that makes the difference of buying USA rather than from China, sounds great. Still, once the Chinese buy one of these, don't you think they will replicate the technology?

Another cool physics thread from TB..... :depressed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

.7mm = 700 microns?

Aaaah I get it. He said 700,000 then ragged on you for not knowing and asking him, when in reality he was talking out his ass, and didn't want to admit he made a mistake.

Gotcha.

---

Hair splitting, but necessary considering the source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

No, I admitted to making the mistake before that question. Yes, I had three too many zeros. Then after asking that silly question, after admitting an error, I thought I would reply that way.

In post #25:

After AssLoco put my mistake in red.

I actually noticed it after rereading the thread as it progress soon after the mistake, meant to edit it, but got caught up with other things and forgot.

---

Then perhaps you should have simply pointed this out in reply to my initial post. Would have saved a lot of trouble for all involved honestly.

At any rate, thanks for finally answering the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

After AssLoco put my mistake in red.

---

Cute. Someone could use a beer......or two. :toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Then perhaps you should have simply pointed this out in reply to my initial post. Would have saved a lot of trouble for all involved honestly.

---

Would it have? You have shown yourself to hang with the other ankle biters. You have often taken provoked opportunity to rag on me. The way I see the situation, no matter how I answered your question, you would have likely found a way to dismiss me yet again.

Seriously. If I provided the answer, what's to keep you from saying "You had to look it up?" It's a losing battle to try to defend oneself against "Chump mode."

When you start acting like Fuzzy or Chump, you can expect me to treat you as I treat them.

Do you want an honest debate on topics or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Using a hydrogen ion particle accelerator, Twin Creeks has managed to create very thin (20-micrometer), flexible photovoltaic cells that can be produced for just 40 cents per watt; around half the cost of conventional solar cells, and a price point that encroaches on standard, mostly-hydrocarbon-derived grid power."

---

Now THAT is extremely cool. I don't know why some of you are being so negative about this. I don't agree with a lot of the warming "science", but there's no doubt we need the alternate energy sources. If this gets solar anywhere near the cost of fossil fuel prices, it's a big deal. Of course, it's still talking about generation cost, and that doesn't include storage cost for the batteries that don't exist yet. But it's a hell of a big step.

One thing that a lot of the climate zealots should note: this is a major advancement in solar, that would cut the cost of PV cells in half, and thus allow solar to challenge fossil fuel generation. That sort of debunks the claims that solar electricity can already be generated as cheaply, or nearly as cheaply, as by fossil fuel generation plants. That's the problem with the stories - none of them add up.

Don't get me wrong... hooray for this new technology. But it calls bullshit on some of the current fairy tales that have been floating around. You can't have it both ways - even though you try to all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

Now THAT is extremely cool. I don't know why some of you are being so negative about this. I don't agree with a lot of the warming "science", but there's no doubt we need the alternate energy sources. If this gets solar anywhere near the cost of fossil fuel prices, it's a big deal. Of course, it's still talking about generation cost, and that doesn't include storage cost for the batteries that don't exist yet. But it's a hell of a big step.

One thing that a lot of the climate zealots should note: this is a major advancement in solar, that would cut the cost of PV cells in half, and thus allow solar to challenge fossil fuel generation. That sort of debunks the claims that solar electricity can already be generated as cheaply, or nearly as cheaply, as by fossil fuel generation plants. That's the problem with the stories - none of them add up.

Don't get me wrong... hooray for this new technology. But it calls bullshit on some of the current fairy tales that have been floating around. You can't have it both ways - even though you try to all the time.

---

I wish the technology could be used in normal semiconductor facilities. If it could, it could save on chip making costs as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Would it have? You have shown yourself to hang with the other ankle biters. You have often taken provoked opportunity to rag on me. The way I see the situation, no matter how I answered your question, you would have likely found a way to dismiss me yet again.

Seriously. If I provided the answer, what's to keep you from saying "You had to look it up?" It's a losing battle to try to defend oneself against "Chump mode."

When you start acting like Fuzzy or Chump, you can expect me to treat you as I treat them.

Do you want an honest debate on topics or not?

---

AgLoco is actually quite gracious.

I on the other had ridicule your dumb ass. I hate to admit it but its always funny reading your napkin math and trade school approach to math and science or anything else for that matter.

Well, by George, thats 700,000 microns!

We know Fuzzy...

You are always criticizing, but never add anything of value. You are so transparent, don't you realize how much of a joke you are?

I must assume that you are one that thinks you never make simple mistakes. Must be awesome to feel that Godlike perfection.

By the way... I feel I'm the one being gracious to AgLoco. He continues to add no value to a discussion, but just nips at peoples heels. I at first though that he might be an intellectual equal, but I am fast starting to doubt that since he only has snide remarks like you.

You... It's all figment of your imagination... Delusions of grandeur... You don't add substance. Just darkness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Would it have? You have shown yourself to hang with the other ankle biters. You have often taken provoked opportunity to rag on me.

---

You take exception to being called out. Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

You....and especially YOU, need to make sure what is posted is correct. We all make mistakes, some honest, some out of ignorance. You've definitely shown a propensity for the latter. It's a monster of your own creation tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

The way I see the situation, no matter how I answered your question, you would have likely found a way to dismiss me yet again.

---

If you had answered .7mm = 700 microns, it's very doubtful that I could have found a way to dismiss it. Honestly, I wouldn't have been inclined to do so in the first place. Yet here we are on page 3 discussing what you should have clarified in the very next post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Seriously. If I provided the answer, what's to keep you from saying "You had to look it up?" It's a losing battle to try to defend oneself against "Chump mode."

---

It's obvious you didn't know or were confused about it.......or simply disinclined to acquiesce to my request (means "no") :lol. "Looking it up" was precisely what I was asking you to do......that or ask one of the local high schoolers.

lol Chump Mode. It doesn't take two paragraphs to ask for an explanation regarding the number of zeros you needed. I put it to you succinctly. Sorry if that bothers you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

When you start acting like Fuzzy or Chump, you can expect me to treat you as I treat them.

---

Admittedly, I've been driving by of late due to having one hell of a travel schedule. Even so, I've found nothing in your postings which warrants a cogent, in-depth retort.

I think you suffer from a preexisting bias against brevity. I'll try to fill future responses with as much nonsensical bullshit as I possibly can since that's more your flavor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Do you want an honest debate on topics or not?

---

Absolutely. First I'd like to make sure that you understand high-school conversion factors......hence my inquiry. Don't act like this is the first time you've made a mistake of this nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

By the way... I feel I'm the one being gracious to AgLoco. He continues to add no value to a discussion, but just nips at peoples heels. I at first though that he might be an intellectual equal, but I am fast starting to doubt that since he only has snide remarks like you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

.....After AssLoco put my mistake in red.....

---

Gracious indeed......

I'll re-iterate:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Admittedly, I've been driving by of late due to having one hell of a travel schedule. Even so, I've found nothing in your postings which warrants a cogent, in-depth retort.

I think you suffer from a preexisting bias against brevity. I'll try to fill future responses with as much nonsensical bullshit as I possibly can since that's more your flavor.

---