Was graphene just a buzzword? It was said it would revolutionize batteries, supercapacitors, processors...

Was graphene just a buzzword? It was said it would revolutionize batteries, supercapacitors, processors, materials science, etc etc. Fast forward 5 years and everyone has already forgotten about it and moved on.

Attached: 1530975457720.png (1600x839, 508K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/IesIsKMjB4Y
phys.org/nanotech-news/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

youtu.be/IesIsKMjB4Y

tl;dw outside of computing new materials and technologies are almost always too expensive to switch over too with existing infrastructure. The benefits simply don't outweigh the initial investment yet. My guess is we'll slowly see the pendulum start to swing with graphene over the next 15 years.

Pretty much, there's engineering and production problems on top of the laws of physics making it hard if not impossible to use graphene in clickbait claims ways.

This too, pragmatism over idealism is what works 99.99% of the time and what investors are interested in.

>My guess is we'll slowly see the pendulum start to swing with graphene over the next 15 years.
They said that 15 years ago

Tech companies are entirely for profit organizations. They're not being subsidized by governments to push technology forward, therefore they only move forward at a rate that's competitive with other tech companies in order to maintain their profits.

It is a work in progress. Just think how much it took for plastics to go from a concept to appear in the daily lives of everyone and apply it to graphene.

I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Plastics.

>It is a work in progress.
This user gets it.

Semiconductors and superconductors are more examples of the same.

6 years? or so, plastics picked up real fast.

>Was graphene just a buzzword? It was said it would revolutionize batteries, supercapacitors, processors, materials science, etc etc. Fast forward 5 years and everyone has already forgotten about it and moved on.
It's been a meme since at least the 90s

Discovery->first largescale graphene takes ~15 year.s

First large scale->Ubiquitous takes additional ~15 years.

Roughly 1 1/2 generations of human life.

>TheVerge
Should have gotten a black guy to do this video.

Nobody forgot about it, I see news about graphene and 2d materials in general almost every day. If it's not used in your latest toy doesn't mean it's forgotten.

He means the mainstream gaymen tech news stopped memeing it up so much

I can only advice reading some real news.
phys.org/nanotech-news/

It was 15-20 years before it got big. That's not including time spent pre-patent that I dunno about.

We still can't reliably make it on a large scale, gonna take a while.

Sign up to an IEEE Spectrum feed if you want graphene news.

Graphene is increasingly popular and available in batteries, especially hobby/RC batteries. It's popular because it can be charged more aggressively, for more cycles, and won't lose output until there's no more energy in it. Pretty cheap, too, about the same price as a name brand hobby battery of the same capacity, maybe 20% more expensive
But the hobby market is pretty small, so I imagine there are still lots of hurdles to overcome for truly mass production

I dunno about batteries and supercapacitors, but the problem with graphene for processors is that:
1. It's hard to separate and verify the purity of semiconductor graphene VS metallic graphene. If you put in a semiconductor strand, your transistor works. If you put in a metallic strand, it's shit.
2. It's hard as fuck to align and position the strands for the FET's gate correctly, and you have to do it manually, there's no mass production way of doing it.
It's impossible to predict how long it will take, but until somebody finds a self aligning process it's a dead end.

They claimed it could charge your batteries in seconds. How is this not priority for all the energy storage medium manufacturers