George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
MaxM. You are mixing up two organisations in your post "Just Saying". The National Graphene Association (NGA) is US based and is there to promote graphene in the US. The Graphene Council despite being based in the US is worldwide and provides the Graphene Producers Verification Program. This tests that what is produced by the graphene company meets the specification given by that company and is capable of being produced consistently. A valuable start but it is not a test set by the Graphene Council as such. The whole issue of testing graphene is complex and needs much further work. A third ISO is under development at the moment and may help. Incidentally NPL and UofM have set up a testing facility to test graphene.
How about keeping on the subject of Graphene.
Information below on sports ware from Inno-8. Looks as though we have been overtaken? As it is produced by UofM it presumably will be high quality graphene being used. Thoughts?
http://archive.aweber.com/graphene-info
I think the reason that there has not been any increase in the SP is that Airbus have been collaborating with several companies over graphene.
A quick search shows the following:
https://graphene-flagship.eu/news/Pages/The-Leading-Edge-Graphene-Flagship-leads-the-way-in-graphene-composites-for-aerospace-applications.aspx
https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/AN_1571741206038575600/haydale-graphene-launches-new-material-for-lightning-strike-protection.aspx
However this latest news looks as though the project is going to be taken to a more advanced stage.
RobinHood. The ISO for graphene which is ISO/TR 19733 (Nanotechnologies -- Matrix of properties and measurement techniques for graphene and related two-dimensional (2D) materials) has not been published yet so not sure what you mean by "Nanene ISO approved in US." We are all waiting for the publication of this worldwide standard as it should start to sort out what is graphene and what isn't. Latest predicted date on the website is 03/19. Have I missed your point?
Moving away from share speculation here is a good summary of the current position on the graphene market.
https://www.graphene-info.com/graphene-do-not-miss-turning-point
Max. ISO do have a website. As I understand it the relevant ISO is ISO/TR 19733 Nanotechnologies “ Matrix of properties and measurement techniques for graphene and related two-dimensional (2D) materials. This is now “Under Publication” according to the website (see below). Regarding input to the draft, this had come from a number of countries, such as United Kingdom, USA, Japan and Korea. This particular project is led by Korea and the USA, but the United Kingdom is a strong participant in all the graphene standardization work being undertaken by the international committee on ISO/TC 229 Nanotechnologies.
What also comes out of analysis and discussion is that the ISO Standard is there to promote commercialisation and not to hamper it. However I do not believe publication will immediately solve the issues surrounding the quality of graphene but it will be a significant move in the right direction.There will inevitably discussions about testing and statistics. For example can something that is 60% under 10 layers still be called graphene? All very complicated and I wait to see what happens.
My guess at March for publication comes from tracking what has happened so far..
https://www.iso.org/standard/66188.html?browse=tc
Robin Hood/LSE. The National Graphene Association and the Graphene Council are two separate organisations. We are members of the NGA which is US centric. The Council although based in the US is more worldwide. We have entered the Graphene Council Verified Graphene Producers Program (August 18) and I think we should have had some results by now. However from my investigations I think that as we are the first in the programme (English spellingt) that it is all taking much longer than expected. Hope this helps. BTW what we really need is the ISO which I would guess should be by March 19.
RobinHood. I think that you are referring to The Graphene Council Verified Graphene Producer Program? VRS was due to undertake this in August as you say. The Program verifies that what is said on the tin of graphene is what is inside. Valuable but not yet an ISO. However the good news is that the ISO is progressing and the Final Draft Interim Standard has been published and is about to be sent out (according to the rather difficult ISO website). As far as I can tell this means we may have an ISO (DTR 19733) within six months if all the poitics are resolved. I will keep looking.
Whoops. Did not post. Trying again
https://www.iso.org/standard/66188.html?browse=tc
Robin Hood. Reference your post there is no ISO yet on certification only nomenclature. Latest position as far as I can tell below:
As I understand it the relevant ISO is ISO/TR 19733 Nanotechnologies “ Matrix of properties and measurement techniques for graphene and related two-dimensional (2D) materials”. An early draft has already been sent out for ballot with the response closing on 30 April 2018. Work is being done on the draft IS now. Regarding input to the draft, this had come from a number of countries, such as United Kingdom, USA, Japan and Korea. This particular project is led by Korea and the USA, but the United Kingdom is a strong participant in all the graphene standardization work being undertaken by the international committee on ISO/TC 229 Nanotechnologies. ISO/TR 19733 is a subset of this. Looking at the site (See below) it would appear that there is at least another 20 weeks to go before a Final Draft International Standard is produced and then there must be some time before it is implemented. The whole thing looks pretty complicated.
What also comes out of analysis and discussion is that the ISO Standard is there to promote commercialisation and not to hamper it. We need to bear this in mind when looking at the VRS lead. To my mind the overriding factor is the ability to integrate graphene of the correct sort into processes that improve the customer offering. This is where I think the VRS advantage lies.
https://www.iso.org/standard/66188.html?browse=tc
Good to see the RNS on GEIC and hope that this leads to great things. Interestingly I see that two of the original 2D Tech (acquired by VRS) people are now employed by GEIC despite still being on the 2D Tech website. Could be seconded of course but does not say so anywhere? In any case I hope that this is a good thing and that the IP is sorted.
In case the link in my previous post (Tuesday 18.59) did not work here is the interesting (unbelievable?) bit. "The Aukam processing plant was constructed between December 2017 and March 2018, with initial throughput and optimization reached during March and April 2018. To date, the plant has generated 4.5 tonnes of graphite concentrate grading between 88%-95% Carbon as Graphite ("Cg") of which 2.25 tonnes of concentrate has been shipped to Perpetuus Carbon Technologies ("Perpetuus") for the manufacture of graphenes to be used in the automobile bicycle tire industry. Gratomic and Perpetuus are currently in collaboration to build on Perpetuus' capability to initially provide 500 tonnes of surfaced modified graphenes per annum to support the volumes required by the tire manufacturing industry (see March, 4, 2018 news release). The first cycle tire order for the graphenes to a globally recognised brand is planned for delivery at the end of the second quarter of 2018. Additional applications that have now been generated in a preproduction format include radiant heating membranes and super hydrophobic coatings with an addressable market that includes: marine, oil & gas, power generation, industrial (repair & maintenance), infrastructure (new build) and automotive & transportation among others."
Somebody else looking at tyres. Can we believe the amounts quoted? https://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/gratomic-announces-successful-startup-of-aukam-proccesing-plant-20180507-00425
Lucky. Yes I am an investor (small investment) via one of the usual suspects who do not always pass stuff on. As for retirement as you will find out, if not already retired, everything seems to take longer and you get invited onto charities, local organisations etc. On the ISO side I am happy to wait and see.so let us convene in a few weeks. As I have said we have already taken the advantage of the Vocab ISO.
Lucky I could not go. Too busy. I read all the reports though. The ISO question interested me though which is why I tried to follow it through. Fatherelmer has done more of an investigation and unless the ISO website needs updating it looks as though all the relevant ISOs, apart from the one just published (Vocabulary) , are early stage. Good news though is that Vocabulary is already proving to be beneficial. PS Does anybody else find being retired takes up more time than working?
Fatherelmer Your post on ISO Certification caused me to have a look at this. I would guess the relevant ISO is ISO/NPTR/19733 Matrix of Characterisation and Measurement Methods for Graphene? I could not see another in the Nanotechnologies section that looked appropriate but it is not that easy to analyse. Should this be the one then it is at a very early stage. The problem also will be that several countries will be involved and it is not at all clear who is leading. I would guess that the US, China, India and South Korea will all want a say. Did you manage to find out anything else? Very important subject I feel.