4 ms·

I'd say that in terms of what we are able to do next, Graphene wins by a long way. Graphene is remarkable stuff, literally. I'd say in terms of impact on philo

I'd say that in terms of what we are able to do next, Graphene wins by a long way. Graphene is remarkable stuff, literally. I'd say in terms of impact on philosophy, religion and way of life, the large number of planets we're discovering.

jbrooksuk 11y ago
How is it literally remarkable stuff?
- chriswarbo 11y ago
  Graphene is a single layer of graphite. Graphite is used in pencils. Pencils can make marks, which are erasable, and hence re-markable. ;)
  - jseip 11y ago
    So many grammar points.
  - jbrooksuk 11y ago
    Up voted. Well played.
brockers 11y ago
I fear the graphene will fall by the wayside due to legal and social pressure. News sources have already pointed out that it is significantly more dangerous, if inhaled, than asbestos; another material this is insanely useful for a number of applications but is effectively blackballed as a engineer-able material. Another example is nuclear energy. Clean, abundant, and extremely safe. The fear of radiation exposer has turned it into a pariah in the world community; totally ignoring the fact the radioactive elements in coal emissions have kill more people in the last 30 years than 100 Three Mile Island incidences would.
- blumkvist 11y ago
  Nuclear energy is very expensive. Not in the sense that your bills are high. Cost are hidden and paid by the government, largely. The initial project's cost is astronomical, but it always goes over budgets and deadlines. Those are provisioned for in the initial contract, so the additional cost is rarely talked about. Nuclear companies are in bad shape nowadays, because governments around the world caught up with the way they conduct business.
- trebor 11y ago
  I lived near one of the asbestos super-sites that the EPA was still involved in monitoring. Back in the day it had been a huge asbestos mine. As far as I know, it was safe when I lived in the area but the health impacts were still being felt. Graphene will see adoption, but will probably be halted at the first sign of asbestos like diseases. I can only imagine how hard it would be to dispose of products with graphene correctly.
- xorcist 11y ago
  Nuclear, by which I take it you mean uranium fission energy, is far from a clean energy source. Extraction and refinement both have environmental challenges, and waste disposal is very much an unsolved problem in practice. Simple in theory, but with problematic economical and political issues. The "fear of radiation" is perhaps the least important problem (with bigger ones including cost, centralization, waste disposal and environmental issues), yet the only problem some proponents of the technology wants to discuss, perhaps with the implication that if we treat everyone else as stupid they will go away. Perhaps after so many years it is time to reevaluate that strategy.
- joshuapants 11y ago
  > I fear the graphene will fall by the wayside due to legal and social pressure. News sources have already pointed out that it is significantly more dangerous, if inhaled, than asbestos; another material this is insanely useful for a number of applications but is effectively blackballed as a engineer-able material. But, unlike asbestos, graphene won't be literally all around everyone right? And it won't be worked on by people who weren't informed of risks and provided with proper safety gear.

jbrooksuk 11y ago

How is it literally remarkable stuff?

chriswarbo 11y ago
Graphene is a single layer of graphite. Graphite is used in pencils. Pencils can make marks, which are erasable, and hence re-markable. ;)
- jseip 11y ago
  So many grammar points.
- jbrooksuk 11y ago
  Up voted. Well played.

brockers 11y ago

I fear the graphene will fall by the wayside due to legal and social pressure. News sources have already pointed out that it is significantly more dangerous, if inhaled, than asbestos; another material this is insanely useful for a number of applications but is effectively blackballed as a engineer-able material. Another example is nuclear energy. Clean, abundant, and extremely safe. The fear of radiation exposer has turned it into a pariah in the world community; totally ignoring the fact the radioactive elements in coal emissions have kill more people in the last 30 years than 100 Three Mile Island incidences would.

blumkvist 11y ago
Nuclear energy is very expensive. Not in the sense that your bills are high. Cost are hidden and paid by the government, largely. The initial project's cost is astronomical, but it always goes over budgets and deadlines. Those are provisioned for in the initial contract, so the additional cost is rarely talked about. Nuclear companies are in bad shape nowadays, because governments around the world caught up with the way they conduct business.
trebor 11y ago
I lived near one of the asbestos super-sites that the EPA was still involved in monitoring. Back in the day it had been a huge asbestos mine. As far as I know, it was safe when I lived in the area but the health impacts were still being felt. Graphene will see adoption, but will probably be halted at the first sign of asbestos like diseases. I can only imagine how hard it would be to dispose of products with graphene correctly.
xorcist 11y ago
Nuclear, by which I take it you mean uranium fission energy, is far from a clean energy source. Extraction and refinement both have environmental challenges, and waste disposal is very much an unsolved problem in practice. Simple in theory, but with problematic economical and political issues. The "fear of radiation" is perhaps the least important problem (with bigger ones including cost, centralization, waste disposal and environmental issues), yet the only problem some proponents of the technology wants to discuss, perhaps with the implication that if we treat everyone else as stupid they will go away. Perhaps after so many years it is time to reevaluate that strategy.
joshuapants 11y ago
> I fear the graphene will fall by the wayside due to legal and social pressure. News sources have already pointed out that it is significantly more dangerous, if inhaled, than asbestos; another material this is insanely useful for a number of applications but is effectively blackballed as a engineer-able material. But, unlike asbestos, graphene won't be literally all around everyone right? And it won't be worked on by people who weren't informed of risks and provided with proper safety gear.