Tootfinder

Proton Energy Dependence of Radiation Induced Low Gain Avalanche Detector Degradation
Veronika Kraus, Marcos Fernandez Garcia, Luca Menzio, Michael Moll
https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.01800 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.01800 https://arxiv.org/html/2602.01800
arXiv:2602.01800v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Low Gain Avalanche Detectors (LGADs) are key components for precise timing measurements in high-energy physics experiments, including the High Luminosity upgrades of the current LHC detectors. Their performance is, however, limited by radiation induced degradation of the gain layer, primarily driven by acceptor removal. This study presents a systematic comparison of how the degradation evolves with different incident proton energies, using LGADs from Hamamatsu Photonics (HPK) and The Institute of Microelectronics of Barcelona (IMB-CNM) irradiated with 18 MeV, 24 MeV, 400 MeV and 23 GeV protons and fluences up to 2.5x10^15 p/cm2. Electrical characterization is used to extract the acceptor removal coefficients for different proton energies, whereas IR TCT measurements offer complementary insight into the gain evolution in LGADs after irradiation. Across all devices, lower energy protons induce stronger gain layer degradation, confirming expectations. However, 400 MeV protons consistently appear less damaging than both lower and higher energy protons, an unexpected deviation from a monotonic energy trend. Conversion of proton fluences to 1 MeV neutron-equivalent fluences reduces but does not eliminate these differences, indicating that the standard Non-Ionizing Energy Loss (NIEL) scaling does not fully account for the underlying defect formation mechanisms at different energies and requires revision when considering irradiation fields that contain a broader spectrum of particle types and energies.
toXiv_bot_toot

of course... it's actually much worse than just policy dredged up from the days of Paul Martin and Stephen Harper… it's a gigantic step backward at the behest of fossil fuel interests in order to keep people burning fossil fuels.
EV mandates should be 'sold’ as an affordability measure! Because they are!
No, I don't mean grants, I mean everyday use. Real impacts on your pocket book. How much money would you save if you *never* went to a gas station. Just think about that for second.
Then we can do the math.
My 2019 Hyundai Kona Electric just passed 251152km (palindrome!) yesterday and gets around 6km/kWh on average.
I pay about $0.13/kWh at home to charge so that's $0.02/km. That is $5,023.04 in total energy expenses so far.
Our 2012 Toyota Prius C is at 270,000km and gets about 5.5L/100km or 0.055L/km. At (a discounted) $1.25/L that’s $0.04/km or $10,800 in total energy expenses so far.
Per kilometre the EV is half the cost to 'fuel' than one of the most fuel efficient gas cars out there.
In general, why would *anyone* choose something that costs double to run!?
And yet, the government doesn't sell this as ‘affordability’ it sells it as 'environmental responsibility'.
Let's be honest, they do that because they *know* the environmental message is *less* motivating than money.
Now I said at the beginning, "imagine" never going to the gas station. Obviously that doesn't mean you're fueling for free... but there is another overlooked aspect to this.
Fueling your car is a day to day thing. It's one of the biggest pulls on people's bank accounts precisely because it is such a frequent cost.
Now imagine if that 'bill' was just rolled into your home electricity bill. Which you could do other things to reduce cost overall?
EVs are not just an environmental game changer, they are a financial one for the average person.
That is why oil companies are throwing absolutely everything they have at government (and also fomenting fascism) to keep their good times going, at our expense.
#CanPoli #CdnPoli #EV #ClimateChange #ClimateAction #Driving #Affordability