9 ms·

Producing graphene in bulk using waste food, plastic and other materials

98 points by anchpop 5y ago

ksec 5y ago
Again, missing 2020 in the title.
phtrivier 5y ago
> Tour hopes to produce a kilogram (2.2 pounds) a day of flash graphene within two years, starting with a project recently funded by the Department of Energy to convert U.S.-sourced coal. “This could provide an outlet for coal in large scale by converting it inexpensively into a much-higher-value building material,” he said. That's where a lab scientists keeps both feet in the ground, makes sensible estimate, and fears missing them. Whereas an Elon-type would already have promissed a ton per seconds by the end of the year - and maybe the simple fact of stupidly overcommiting would actually make things a _bit_ faster. Good luck to them anyway, seems like a cool process.
Gravityloss 5y ago
Awesome! I wonder if the walls are made of graphene reinforced concrete, if I drill some holes, how dangerous is it?
- zdragnar 5y ago
  With or without graphene, if you're drilling holes into concrete without a mask, you're gonna have a bad time. Rock dust, mineral dust, even wood dust from a saw are all carcinogens when inhaled. I imagine the danger isn't significantly increased unless the graphene is layered thickly enough that the concrete doesn't bond all the way through it. Either you're worried about concrete dust, or you are worried about graphene dust. Concrete dust with bonded bits of graphene are going to be the same physical size as concrete, so I wouldn't expect it to be significantly more dangerous combined.
  - Gravityloss 5y ago
    Of course I'm wearing a mask when drilling into a concrete wall. Nevertheless the question stays.
    - tomcam 5y ago
      Hey I didn't know until today! Unfortunately I'm in my 60s...
croes 5y ago
Is it a good idea to burn food instead of turning it to compost?
- hosh 5y ago
  That was my thought too. There's some hard-to-compost stuff ... but I think those are still more valuable as biochar than graphene, from an ecological perspective. The flip side is, I wonder if this could be scaled down to a home device for processing plastics. It doesn't even have to produce graphene.
  - emteycz 5y ago
    Where do you live that compost is less available than graphene? I'd love to move there, it's a wonder material that seems close to magic and I'd love to use it for my tech products. Where I live, there are absolutely zero risks whatsoever of running out of compost even if we converted all disposed food to graphene - but were very much lacking graphene, especially of the cheap and large scale variety.
    - croes 5y ago
      They produce graphene from burning stuff. Where do you live where most things that burn don't contain carbon? Turn things to graphene that otherwise would just be garbage. You have enough compost? Send it to countries where deserts destroy farmland.
turnerc 5y ago
[2020] Ben from NightHawkInLight has a good "DIY" video on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Et8FEbCuCs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Et8FEbCuCs
- trhway 5y ago
  there is even a similar DIY, only using microwave generated flash, on producing a [very small] artificial diamond from graphite by what basically is CVD method https://www.instructables.com/How-to-Make-a-Synthetic-Diamond/ https://www.instructables.com/How-to-Make-a-Synthetic-Diamon... which most probably would work for any source of carbon (the people who don't like the low tech look of it may google for respected scientific labs doing similar :)
hosh 5y ago
I got mixed feelings about this. Food waste is valuable as compost and can be put back into the carbon cycle, and I think that is far more valuable than graphene in terms of ecology, rather than the market. Plastic, on the other hand, just sits there and we have not been able to put it back into the carbon cycle. Turning them into an advanced material like graphene is great.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  There's an easy way to put plastic back into the carbon cycle: burn it.
  - trainsarebetter 5y ago
    Gasification + fractional distillation tech I think are really under utilized. In theory it’s a great way to reduce this non ecological material into fuel, in return into something that is ecologically compatible. plastic is just fuckd
    - betwixthewires 5y ago
      CO2 is ecologically compatible. That's basically what long chain polymers reduce to if burned efficiently. And you can get energy out of them by burning them.
      - trainsarebetter 5y ago
        Yes that’s the point. gasification turns them into functional fuel’s. combusting them produces much “cleaner” gases than what burning plastic directly would produce.
      - funcDropShadow 5y ago
        > CO2 is ecologically compatible. Yes, but it just kills the climate.
        5y ago
agumonkey 5y ago
some people working in the field said it wasn't proven to be graphene (disagreement on methodology basically) and that it wasn't replicated
- AdrianEGraphene 5y ago
  Spent my PhD on this and can confirm. Tour's brilliant. Part of his brilliance is in leveraging hot topics to secure funding, increase his status as an expert, and ultimately give young minds the chance to push the field of carbon study forward. Academics have to play the game. It is not technically graphene due to the multicrysal + variable layer formation. You can search my user name in google scholar to see my publications.
  - agumonkey 5y ago
    thanks for pitching in do you know any good places to read, or sites to follow about graphene research ? I was interested in the flash joule thing to play with conductive ink or insulations..
- MrDunham 5y ago
  Any chance you have a source or reference to the people who disagreed? Not trying to snark, I’m genuinely interested in seeing the counter arguments. Thanks
  - murphyslab 5y ago
    There are a few ways that it might not be "graphene". First, it probably isn't monolayer, but rather variable layer numbers, so practically speaking... it's probably graphite. Second, there is likely to be a lot of defects. So you don't get the full strength that you would find with single crystal exfoliated or epitaxially grown graphene. Still, I would imagine that a method like this could be useful, particularly if you were building a colony off-world. You don't need high-quality graphene for making composites for construction.
  - agumonkey 5y ago
_dain_ 5y ago
Is "graphene" vaporware? I've been hearing it hyped up for over ten years but it isn't actually a proper usable technology yet, as far as I can tell. Just endless press releases about making it in increasingly unlikely ways in the lab.
- littlestymaar 5y ago
  But wait, they've built face mask to protect from covid with graphene. Too bad the graphene in the masks makes them dangerous for people to wear[1]… [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/masks-early-pulmonary-toxicity-quebec-schools-daycares-1.5966387 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/masks-early-pulmonar...
  - toomanybeersies 5y ago
    That article makes me wonder if carbon nanomaterials are shaping up to be the next asbestos.
    - shawnz 5y ago
      Carbon nanotubes in fact have similar pathology to asbestos. I don't think that specific issue applies to graphene though.
- iancmceachern 5y ago
  Yes. I've tried to use it several times in designs and it doesn't really have many practical uses. Companies are trying to use it in "head spreader" films, pads , etc. The issue is that it's only one atom thick, it has amazing thermal conductivity through the film, but very low cross section of material to do the thermal transfer because it's so thin. It has thermal conductivity of an order of magnitude less in Z, so stacking it doesn't buy anything. It has some limited use in some very specific applications, but it's not terribly useful.
- _gzur 5y ago
Animats 5y ago
“With the present commercial price of graphene being $67,000 to $200,000 per ton, the prospects for this process look superb” Tour hopes to produce a kilogram a day of flash graphene within two years Ah, scaling problems.
- stevespang 5y ago
earleybird 5y ago
Going by the numbers in the article: $200,000/ton, 2.2lbs/day production in two years; this yields $200/day. Fine for a lab, perhaps not so for a financial concern.
pabs3 5y ago
Is graphene stable when buried or does it return to the carbon cycle? Or is the plan to use it for other things?
toomanybeersies 5y ago
> By strengthening concrete with graphene, we could use less concrete for building, and it would cost less to manufacture and less to transport Wasn't the same thing said for asbestos cement?
oneman 5y ago
When pigs fly, there wings will be made of graphene.

98 points by anchpop 5y ago

ksec 5y ago

Again, missing 2020 in the title.

> Tour hopes to produce a kilogram (2.2 pounds) a day of flash graphene within two years, starting with a project recently funded by the Department of Energy to convert U.S.-sourced coal. “This could provide an outlet for coal in large scale by converting it inexpensively into a much-higher-value building material,” he said. That's where a lab scientists keeps both feet in the ground, makes sensible estimate, and fears missing them. Whereas an Elon-type would already have promissed a ton per seconds by the end of the year - and maybe the simple fact of stupidly overcommiting would actually make things a _bit_ faster. Good luck to them anyway, seems like a cool process.

Gravityloss 5y ago

Awesome! I wonder if the walls are made of graphene reinforced concrete, if I drill some holes, how dangerous is it?

zdragnar 5y ago
With or without graphene, if you're drilling holes into concrete without a mask, you're gonna have a bad time. Rock dust, mineral dust, even wood dust from a saw are all carcinogens when inhaled. I imagine the danger isn't significantly increased unless the graphene is layered thickly enough that the concrete doesn't bond all the way through it. Either you're worried about concrete dust, or you are worried about graphene dust. Concrete dust with bonded bits of graphene are going to be the same physical size as concrete, so I wouldn't expect it to be significantly more dangerous combined.
- Gravityloss 5y ago
  Of course I'm wearing a mask when drilling into a concrete wall. Nevertheless the question stays.
  - tomcam 5y ago
    Hey I didn't know until today! Unfortunately I'm in my 60s...

croes 5y ago

Is it a good idea to burn food instead of turning it to compost?

hosh 5y ago
That was my thought too. There's some hard-to-compost stuff ... but I think those are still more valuable as biochar than graphene, from an ecological perspective. The flip side is, I wonder if this could be scaled down to a home device for processing plastics. It doesn't even have to produce graphene.
- emteycz 5y ago
  Where do you live that compost is less available than graphene? I'd love to move there, it's a wonder material that seems close to magic and I'd love to use it for my tech products. Where I live, there are absolutely zero risks whatsoever of running out of compost even if we converted all disposed food to graphene - but were very much lacking graphene, especially of the cheap and large scale variety.
  - croes 5y ago
    They produce graphene from burning stuff. Where do you live where most things that burn don't contain carbon? Turn things to graphene that otherwise would just be garbage. You have enough compost? Send it to countries where deserts destroy farmland.

turnerc 5y ago

[2020] Ben from NightHawkInLight has a good "DIY" video on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Et8FEbCuCs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Et8FEbCuCs

trhway 5y ago
there is even a similar DIY, only using microwave generated flash, on producing a [very small] artificial diamond from graphite by what basically is CVD method https://www.instructables.com/How-to-Make-a-Synthetic-Diamond/ https://www.instructables.com/How-to-Make-a-Synthetic-Diamon... which most probably would work for any source of carbon (the people who don't like the low tech look of it may google for respected scientific labs doing similar :)

hosh 5y ago

I got mixed feelings about this. Food waste is valuable as compost and can be put back into the carbon cycle, and I think that is far more valuable than graphene in terms of ecology, rather than the market. Plastic, on the other hand, just sits there and we have not been able to put it back into the carbon cycle. Turning them into an advanced material like graphene is great.

betwixthewires 5y ago
There's an easy way to put plastic back into the carbon cycle: burn it.
- trainsarebetter 5y ago
  Gasification + fractional distillation tech I think are really under utilized. In theory it’s a great way to reduce this non ecological material into fuel, in return into something that is ecologically compatible. plastic is just fuckd
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    CO2 is ecologically compatible. That's basically what long chain polymers reduce to if burned efficiently. And you can get energy out of them by burning them.
    - trainsarebetter 5y ago
      Yes that’s the point. gasification turns them into functional fuel’s. combusting them produces much “cleaner” gases than what burning plastic directly would produce.
    - funcDropShadow 5y ago
      > CO2 is ecologically compatible. Yes, but it just kills the climate.
      - 5y ago

agumonkey 5y ago

some people working in the field said it wasn't proven to be graphene (disagreement on methodology basically) and that it wasn't replicated

AdrianEGraphene 5y ago
Spent my PhD on this and can confirm. Tour's brilliant. Part of his brilliance is in leveraging hot topics to secure funding, increase his status as an expert, and ultimately give young minds the chance to push the field of carbon study forward. Academics have to play the game. It is not technically graphene due to the multicrysal + variable layer formation. You can search my user name in google scholar to see my publications.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  thanks for pitching in do you know any good places to read, or sites to follow about graphene research ? I was interested in the flash joule thing to play with conductive ink or insulations..
MrDunham 5y ago
Any chance you have a source or reference to the people who disagreed? Not trying to snark, I’m genuinely interested in seeing the counter arguments. Thanks
- murphyslab 5y ago
  There are a few ways that it might not be "graphene". First, it probably isn't monolayer, but rather variable layer numbers, so practically speaking... it's probably graphite. Second, there is likely to be a lot of defects. So you don't get the full strength that you would find with single crystal exfoliated or epitaxially grown graphene. Still, I would imagine that a method like this could be useful, particularly if you were building a colony off-world. You don't need high-quality graphene for making composites for construction.
- agumonkey 5y ago

_dain_ 5y ago

Is "graphene" vaporware? I've been hearing it hyped up for over ten years but it isn't actually a proper usable technology yet, as far as I can tell. Just endless press releases about making it in increasingly unlikely ways in the lab.

littlestymaar 5y ago
But wait, they've built face mask to protect from covid with graphene. Too bad the graphene in the masks makes them dangerous for people to wear[1]… [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/masks-early-pulmonary-toxicity-quebec-schools-daycares-1.5966387 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/masks-early-pulmonar...
- toomanybeersies 5y ago
  That article makes me wonder if carbon nanomaterials are shaping up to be the next asbestos.
  - shawnz 5y ago
    Carbon nanotubes in fact have similar pathology to asbestos. I don't think that specific issue applies to graphene though.
iancmceachern 5y ago
Yes. I've tried to use it several times in designs and it doesn't really have many practical uses. Companies are trying to use it in "head spreader" films, pads , etc. The issue is that it's only one atom thick, it has amazing thermal conductivity through the film, but very low cross section of material to do the thermal transfer because it's so thin. It has thermal conductivity of an order of magnitude less in Z, so stacking it doesn't buy anything. It has some limited use in some very specific applications, but it's not terribly useful.
_gzur 5y ago

Animats 5y ago

“With the present commercial price of graphene being $67,000 to $200,000 per ton, the prospects for this process look superb” Tour hopes to produce a kilogram a day of flash graphene within two years Ah, scaling problems.

stevespang 5y ago

earleybird 5y ago

Going by the numbers in the article: $200,000/ton, 2.2lbs/day production in two years; this yields $200/day. Fine for a lab, perhaps not so for a financial concern.

pabs3 5y ago

Is graphene stable when buried or does it return to the carbon cycle? Or is the plan to use it for other things?

toomanybeersies 5y ago

> By strengthening concrete with graphene, we could use less concrete for building, and it would cost less to manufacture and less to transport Wasn't the same thing said for asbestos cement?

oneman 5y ago

When pigs fly, there wings will be made of graphene.