Comment by jakedata 6 hours ago
There are two distinct use cases spelled out in this article. Electronic and photonic technology incorporating graphene to improve performance and efficiency and "we added graphene to stuff". Graphene cement, graphene carbon fibre - 3000 tons of graphene expected from one company in 2026.
Try not to breathe any, studies are still pending but that stuff gets everywhere.
I wonder if there are studies on the lives saved by asbestos's fireproofing feature vs. cost by its lung-disease-causing feature.
Answering my own question: the WHO estimates it costs 200K lives per year. No estimates on the other side, but that's a big number to overcome...
>Try not to breathe any, studies are still pending but that stuff gets everywhere.
I would understand such comment in the context of carbon nanotubes or fullerenes, but graphene? Have you forgot that graphite is literally a bunch of stacked graphene?
Considering how much graphite pencils are used across the world, we would've seen hypothetical negative effects already with a high degree of confidence.
Yes, graphene production aims to produce larger sheets, but it only makes graphene less biologically active, not more.
> Considering how much graphite pencils are used across the world, we would've seen hypothetical negative effects already with a high degree of confidence.
Graphitosis is the graphite equivalent of silicosis and asbestosis so yes we’ve got plenty of evidence it’s harmful, but it’s mostly a problem with occupational exposure where large amounts of graphite dust are produced.
That might change if there’s tiny sheets of graphene flaking off everywhere from nanocoatings and it turns out to be carcinogenic for the same reason asbestos is (which isn’t out of the question given the studies on CNTs and nanotoxicity in general).
IIUC graphitosis, silicosis, and black lung require to inhale ungodly amounts of dust. It's orders of magnitude more than we can expect from flaking-based trace contamination.
Why do you expect a different result from "tiny sheets of graphene flaking off everywhere from nanocoatings" compared to the same flaking from graphite smeared across paper?
My understanding is that it doesn't get everywhere at all. It appears to be confined to labs.
"Lets remove carbon from the atmosphere" ... humanity proceeds to invent ways to put more carbon in the atmosphere.
100 years ago, asbestos was the new wonder material, and "We added asbestos to stuff" was a very common marketing bullet point for building materials. It found its way into flooring, mastic, the predecessors to drywall, ceiling texture, insulation, and anything and everything used near a combustion appliance.
Literally just, take a process that used to use sand or horsehair or whatever filler, and add a significant portion by mass of asbestos powder instead.