4 ms·
German armed forces warn that carbon fiber might be cancer-causing
- m8rl 12y agoA research facility of the german armed forces warns that carbon fiber once burned at high temperatures is transformed to micro-sized particles having effects on the lungs comparable to asbestors.
- rnernento 12y agoFrom the Google translated version of the article it looks like it's only dangerous when burned.
- milge 12y agoTo be fair, most things are dangerous when burned.
- lotsofmangos 12y agoPeople especially. I get very cross.
- judk 12y agoBut carbon fiber is used in applications where high-friction (burning) is likely to occur... It is harder to burn metal. And there are levels of dangerous, based on size and shape of microparticles.
- ars 12y ago> To be fair, most things are dangerous when burned. That's not at all true. Some things are more, some things are less. Incompletely burned plastic? More. Full burned? Less. Gasoline? Less. Mercury? More. Arsenic? Less.
- ry0ohki 12y agoI seem to remember hearing that sofas release cyanide when burned.
- falcolas 12y agoIf I recall correctly, creating carbon fiber involves burning a material. The fibers, even in their raw state, resemble asbestos. The saving grace is that they are typically cast in resin, so to get the asbestos-like fibers back, you have to burn off the resins binding them together.
- aw3c2 12y agoThis is about the ashes, which are smaller and able to get into the system.
- mxfh 12y agoSince the carcinogenic effect of asbestos is mostly caused by it's physical properties[1]; anything that resembles the shape of asbestos' micro-particles is also highly suspected to be carcinogenic. The shape, size, and adsorbing nature of the fibers also appear to be critically important. Recently, doubts have arisen concerning the safety of commercially available carbon nanotubes,[2] which may possess the same carcinogenicity as asbestos fibers because of their similar characteristics. Ample care has to be taken to prevent a tragedy similar to the one caused by asbestos exposure.[1] [1] http://www.med.nagoya-u.ac.jp/medlib/nagoya_j_med_sci/7112/p001-010_Toyokuni.pdf http://www.med.nagoya-u.ac.jp/medlib/nagoya_j_med_sci/7112/p... [PDF] [2] http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n7/abs/nnano.2008.111.html http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v3/n7/abs/nnano.2008.111... On making nanotubes less dangerous: Shorter is better http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201207664/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201207664/ab...
- 001sky 12y agoIt's probably worth making the distinction that most people are exposed to "Carbon Fiber" as CRP[1], not "raw carbon fibers". And it is the ~aersolized bits raw carbon/dusts (the subject of this article) that are problematic. _________ [1] The german title is "Bundeswehr warnt vor Krebs durch Carbonfasern", and From the German wikipedia page "Carbonfasern" ... The fibers are mainly for the production of carbon fiber reinforced plastic used (CFRP = Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic). Derived from the English, the abbreviation CFRP (is english Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic) used.
- genericuser 12y agoMuch like asbestos siding in that regard, where its not exactly being pumped into the air by most people, but people who work with it, for example sanding it, create a health hazard.
- jpindar 12y agoAnd indeed one way of making existing asbestos building materials safe (or at least, safer) is by spraying plastic on them to encapsulate them.
- exDM69 12y agoFormula 1 and other open wheel racing drivers have been exposed to carbon fiber dust (from the carbon-carbon brakes) for a few decades now. There is some research going on with former racing drivers. E.g. former F1 driver Mika Salo underwent surgery where his lungs were examined to assess the effects of repeated exposure to burned carbon fiber dust (this was several years ago). Unfortunately, I do not have any links to sources nor do I know the results of the research. Another big question mark is the health and environmental effects of graphene. There is a lot of research going on in applications of graphene but only now there have been research projects into possible negative effects on the environment.
- grahamel 12y agoI remember this. Article link http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4121126.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/41211...
- MrBuddyCasino 12y agoHere is something: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4121126.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/41211... Apparently the surgery was unrelated, they found lots of carbon brake dust in his lungs purely by chance. No conclusion on whether it is dangerous or not. Edit: grahamel was quicker :)
- exDM69 12y agoI recall him telling (in a Finnish commentary for a F1 race broadcast) that he went to another surgery to examine the carbon fiber dust in his lungs. But this was almost 10 years ago, I can't remember the specifics.
- nodata 12y agoCan you wash the carbon fiber dust out of the lungs?
- 12y ago
- krschultz 12y agoNote that this article (at least from the translated version) seems to be implying that the risk is around burning or particulate carbon fiber. I would definitely believe that. The epoxy is also pretty nasty too. If you don't wear the right personal protective equipment when using it, you can quickly become sensitized to it. I don't know what that means medically, but it can't be good. I have always worn the right gear when building things, but it is clearly harmful to you without proper ventilation and separation from your skin. I love composites, but they definitely have downsides.
- chrisBob 12y agoEpoxy resin is an algerin which is why you get sensitized to it. You have to be very careful when it is not fully cured, but once cured it is a good plastic. having said that I don't recommend getting exposed to any plastic smoke.
- aluhut 12y agoI can confirm this. They say that the dust becomes dangerous above 650°C. The fibers become even smaller and reach the lungs.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- rikacomet 12y agoThough I'm all in to scientific development and the benefits of these new materials, I still want to point out, that nor carbon-fiber or graphene exist in nature in large quantities for more than one reason, while diamond and graphite do. Now the question should be .. why is that?
- judk 12y agoLikely because they require complex structures processes to create, not just pressure and time and heat. "Danger to others" is not a factor in nature's selection process.
- JoeAltmaier 12y agoDanger to others that share a gene line IS part of natural selection. That's why most creatures don't cannibalize within their family/pack for instance.
- simias 12y agoThat's not what the OP was talking about however. The fact that carbon fibers are not present in nature only tells us that we didn't have to evolve anything protecting us from it if it's really dangerous (since it was never a selection criteria). That doesn't mean it's necessarily harmful though.
- JoeAltmaier 12y agoDisagree; OP was talking about why no animal in nature produces carbon fibre, given its dangerous to others nearby. Was it ecological pressure? I answered, yes that's possible.
- simias 12y agoCarbon fibers are pretty complex to produce, that alone can explain why they're not naturally present in nature. It would be similar to wondering why silicon microprocessors are not naturally synthesized by nature. It doesn't necessarily mean that evolution ruled it out, just that it may never have considered it in the first place because it never came to exist under the stochastic process of evolution.
- Kallikrates 12y agoIn another life I had to take aircraft crash response training, and was in charge of recovery (salvage, battle-field repair etc). The response to an aircraft with composite materials is totally different. With normal construction we could get to work as soon as the fire, was out and any hazardous liquids were taken care of. Crashes involving damage to composite structures required that the damaged areas be sprayed down with a varnish like chemical by the same troops who handle Chemical weapon response (they had special suits). Then there would be air particulate tests before we could move in. Here is a military study: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a420193.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a420193.pdf
- splawn 12y agoA long time ago a coworker told me about this. He told me it was because the dust was conductive and would wreck havoc with electronics.
- JabavuAdams 12y agoI've heard an anecdote along these lines, too. It was about a lathe that had been exposed to carbon-fiber dust starting to turn when supposedly off.
- JabavuAdams 12y agoThere's all kinds of nasty stuff in and around aerospace / military wrecks. It always boggles my mind when I see kids playing on wrecked equipment. DU aerosols, hydrazine, CF aerosols, and who knows what else.
- progx 12y agoAnd next week our great Bundeswehr Research Facility will tell us that: smell of burned oil can make us ill and eating of weapon bullets can cause diarrhea.
- bcohen5055 12y agoWhile in undergrad I spent about 5 years working with carbon fiber in a motorsports setting. I did a lot of cutting and sanding without a mask. There were weeks I would blow my nose 3 days after working on a part and still find black specks. I guess I'll find out in a few years...
- claudius 12y agoAccording to the article, this is the actually “good” variant: Normally, the dust is getting caught in the nose and does not reach the lungs. However, these fibres break down during a fire at temperatures of 650°C and become much smaller. This smaller size allows them to enter the lungs and potentially cause havoc there. Put another way, every “black speck” you found did not reach your lungs (although I doubt that this is particularly healthy, either…) :)
- chiph 12y agoThe USAF was concerned at one point that should an F-16 burn on a runway, it would release carbon-fiber strands which would float around the base and short out electrical equipment (communications gear, phone switch, power generation, etc). Seems like the concern was correct, but misplaced. We had a plane catch fire on a taxiway and burn, and no electrical mayhem resulted. Perhaps we should have worn our gas masks -- but we didn't know at the time.
- drzaiusapelord 12y agoSounds like that they were aware of 'Soft Bomb' technology and were worried that an accidental soft bomb could go off via the F-16's fiber/composite materials burning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-114/B_%22Soft-Bomb%22 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-114/B_%22Soft-Bomb%22 Interesting, that a plane from 1988 had warnings and concerns for a bomb that wouldn't be used until 1999. I wonder when the US first had one ready to go. What year was your experience?
- chiph 12y ago1983-85 at Hahn. We were the first base in USAFE to get the F-16 (A & B models). Now it's a civilian airport where RyanAir tricks people into thinking they're flying into Frankfurt -- an additional 90-minute bus ride away (there's a reason why the airfare is so cheap!)
- JabavuAdams 12y agoI'd be more worried about the tank of hydrazine in an F-16.
- xmstr 12y agoI was in the US military in the late 80s and early 90s and we were told then that carbon fiber used in aircraft may be cancer causing. Nothing new here.
- Havoc 12y agoTranslated highlights: Carbon fiber once burned at high temperature breaks down sufficiently for it to penetrate mucous membranes. The risk highlighted by the Germans here relates to the ash left over after the fire. i.e. Hinting a potential long term dangers / contamination from the ash floating around.
- wahsd 12y agoI find it interesting that this article was yanked from Hacker News just as quickly as I saw it. I clicked on the link, wanted to go to the discussion and had to find it through search in spite of its high vote count and recent submission.
- dang 12y agoHacker News is an English-language site. This is not to disparage content in other languages; it's just what HN is. Posts not in English mostly get demoted, unless they're of major significance and nothing is available in translation.