backtop


Print 33 comment(s) - last by menace.. on Feb 4 at 6:10 PM

Biomed company Bayer expects nanotubes to explode in popularity

Bayer has opened a new Euro 22 million research facility that will be responsible for manufacturing new carbon nanotubes, according to a news report published on the Bayer News Channel.

Specifically, Bayer MaterialScience (BMS) will develop "Baytubes," a new multi-wall carbon nanotube technology.

"Current forecasts predict an annual growth rate of 25 percent for carbon nanotubes" said Dr. Joachim Wolff, BMS Executive Committee member, said in a statement.  "We are also expecting nanotechnology to create a total of 100,000 new jobs in the German industry in the medium term."

The new facility is expected to produce 200 metric tons of nanotubes each year.  

There aren't many CNT production facilities in the world, able to meet industrial-scale CNTs -- and this plant will specialize in Baytubes.

Baytubes are different because the modified carbon  is able to be added as a filler to help improve the mechanical strength to metal systems.  BMS offered an example of Baytubes being used in coatings for ships, offering higher abrasion resistance to help reduce wear over time.

The new Baytubes could also be used in skis, surfboards, hockey sticks, bicycle components and similar products. 

Baytubes could be used in numerous ways in a wide variety of industries, with BSN using "thermoplastic and thermoset systems and coatings."

Nanocyl, a Belgian biotech company specializing in nanotubes, is installing a reactor that will be used in nanotube production -- overall product capacity would be up to 400 tons per year.

Traditional multi-wall nanotubes are comprised of rolled layers of graphite, with a small number of carbon nanotube suppliers available.  For the expected growth nanotubes should receive in the coming years, there still aren't a lot of manufacturers available.   



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Gut für Deutschland!
By GTaudiophile on 2/2/2010 8:16:46 AM , Rating: 3
Investment? Manufacturing? New tech? Jobs?

Sounds like a lot of things we are missing in the USA these days.




RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By Duwelon on 2/2/2010 8:31:13 AM , Rating: 1
Germany cut taxes for businesses, something that is antithetical to our liberal's "businesses are evil" mantra. Not even sure how that happened in Germany, but it's working for them, like it works EVERYWHERE IT'S TRIED. This recession would be over in 3 months max if the dumbass liberals would come out with tax breaks so businesses could hire more employees. Many people including myself are looking forward to november when hopefully enough of them will be thrown out on their asses and we can finally bring the USA back to recovery.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By steven975 on 2/2/2010 9:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
Not quite fair! Don't forget about the new GM facility where a bunch of people put one wire each on the Korean battery packs! It's going to single-handedly bring our manufacturing back from the brink!

I bet LG (that's who makes them right?) probably offered to ship the batteries with all the wiring pre-attached for an extra few bucks, too! But, no, we need a new factory to do that.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By porkpie on 2/2/2010 9:33:41 AM , Rating: 4
Well, we have a pilot CNT plant planned for the US here too...construction will start in about 20 years, as soon as all the environmental impact statements are complete.

Until some environmentalist group shuts it down with a lawsuit, that is. Them nanertubes are killing our childrens!


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By TechIsGr8 on 2/2/10, Rating: 0
RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By porkpie on 2/2/2010 1:39:02 PM , Rating: 4
They're also responsible for causing tens of tens of thousands of cases of lung problems and excess cancer rates, by keeping coal-fired power plants active through shutting down the nuclear industry. They're responsible for enormously costly scares like Alar, that turned out to be wholly without cause. They're responsible for the worldwide surge in malaria rates that has claimed millions of lives, due to fraudulent claims about DDT.

They're responsible for us having to buy oil from overseas, by barring us from drilling for it here at home. They're responsible for putting hundreds of thousands out of work by "protecting" pseudo-species like the Northern spotted owl. They're responsible for a growing mindless worship of nature and all things "natural", causing more and more uneducated people to reject the benefits of science, technology, and even rational thought itself.

I could fill a few books with what else they're responsible for, but I think you get the point.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By riottime on 2/2/2010 4:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
replace 'they're' with religious folks. :)


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By msomeoneelsez on 2/3/2010 12:07:02 AM , Rating: 2
I thought progressives were generally anti-religion? (BTW, the "liberals" of today are really progressives of the turn of the century [not millenium])

I get your point though :D


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By jiminmpls on 2/2/2010 10:05:44 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, let's adopt German tax rates - and their health insurance system, too. That would signicantly reduce the deficit and make US business much more competitive.

Germany individual income tax rates ,2009

Tax % Tax Base (EUR)
0 Up to 7,834
14% 7,835-52,552
42% 52,553-250,400
45% 250,401 and over


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By clovell on 2/2/10, Rating: 0
RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By Oregonian2 on 2/2/2010 1:00:03 PM , Rating: 2
Here in Oregon, about a week or so ago our voters just increased both personal income taxes "for the rich" and increased corporate taxes. Purpose was to give the legislature more revenues (which are down for some reason). But then our unemployment rate is only about 11%.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By steven975 on 2/2/2010 4:57:11 PM , Rating: 2
If that 42% means I don't have to worry about my health, I'm all for it.

Of course, if that 42% had SS/Medicare plus a bunch of other stuff added on, not so much.

Really, to be a functional society with any measure of sustainability, the average person would need to pay more than they do now. Included in this average are those that pay nothing and those for which taxes are a source of income (about 25% of our country pays 0% or below net taxes, and 50% pay no (or less) federal income tax).


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By TechIsGr8 on 2/2/2010 1:00:32 PM , Rating: 1
Works for me. At least Germany gives a crap about their people, unlike the USA's predatory capitalism, which would barbecue grill a live human baby on a stick if it could make money on it.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By porkpie on 2/2/10, Rating: 0
RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By menace on 2/4/2010 6:10:44 PM , Rating: 2
Define "predatory capitalism". Getting people to buy stuff they don't need? How is that accomplished, by hypnotism? Is the example you quoted intended to imply US corporations are free to violate any laws even to commit the most horrific criminal offenses such as murder or are you saying this is an example of something that actually had happened? Can you give one concrete example of what you really mean or are you just spouting vitriol because you don't have the intelligence to make your point with reason?


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By CBeck113 on 2/3/2010 4:49:16 AM , Rating: 2
Actually it's a bit more complex than that - no, alot more complex. The German tax system "rewards" marriage & families, and lets singles pick up these missing costs. Basically, I fit in your 42% bracket with my income, but I actually pay 16% income tax. HOWEVER, then you add health insurance, social insurance, unification "tax", church tax (for us catholics, a WW2 relic that just won't go away...), retirement insurance and unemployment insurance, with then makes about 63% in the bank at the end of the month. A single person would get around 40% out of his salary. Oh, and to put the tax reduction in real numbers: I have €30 more now. That equals six packs of cigarettes if I would smoke, or 26 liters of diesel for my Opel Corsa.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By Drag0nFire on 2/2/2010 10:47:20 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, it works everywhere but here. Since we tried it for the past 8 years, we would know.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By steven975 on 2/2/2010 4:59:13 PM , Rating: 2
the very worst of those 8 years (the last two) had someone other than the president calling the shots.

Same people calling the shots as now. Where's the "change"


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By TechIsGr8 on 2/2/2010 12:56:40 PM , Rating: 3
US business taxes are some of the lowest in the developed world, due to all the deductions allowed. The Reich wing loves that talking point about high business taxes, but it's simply not true. Most aren't smart enough to research the claim, so when idiots say it, it's as good as true. For those who then say that's why business move offshore, wrong again. Corporations move offshore to avoid ALL taxes. They contribute nothing to the infrastructure that they utilize in order to make profits, including the US highways, airways, communication systems, clean air, clean water, court/justice system, etc. There is no such thing as a "free market". Why do you think corporations aren't lobbying for a "flat tax", or a "fair tax"? Because they know they would actually start having to pay real taxes for a change.


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By porkpie on 2/2/2010 2:09:57 PM , Rating: 2
"US business taxes are some of the lowest in the developed world"

You really shouldn't discuss things you know nothing about. Currently the US has the second highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world. In 24 of our 50 states, counting the state income tax level makes it the HIGHEST rate in the developed world.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/229...


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By steven975 on 2/2/2010 5:00:07 PM , Rating: 2
yea, funny how people break numbers into components and use one component to compare to the entire amount somewhere else, isn't it?


RE: Gut für Deutschland!
By B on 2/2/2010 7:39:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most aren't smart enough to research the claim, so when idiots say it, it's as good as true.


Your research skills could be improved too. Moving offshore does not end taxation for a foreign or multinational corporation. Foreign corporations are taxed on their U.S. source income. When a corporation has nexus with the U.S., regardless of where it is chartered, the corporation is subjected to U.S. tax.

quote:
Corporations move offshore to avoid ALL taxes.
This statement is false.

For further reading please refer to Subchapter N, Subpart B(Foreign Corporations), §882 Tax (on income of foreign corporations connected with United States business) of the Internal Revenue Code. As a little teaser for you, the first words of this section are "imposition of tax".


By 91TTZ on 2/2/2010 9:34:20 AM , Rating: 2
Materials that are very small and strong are great for their mechanical properties, but studies show that these types of materials ruin people's lungs since they're small and sharp enough to penetrate your membranes and get stuck. Think of asbestosis, silicosis, etc.




By porkpie on 2/2/2010 9:50:09 AM , Rating: 2
Do you realize some counties in California have asbestos levels some 100X or more higher than EPA allowed levels? Just from the asbestos found naturally in the air, water, and soil? Millions of fibers per cubic meter in some places?

Do you realize that asbestos miners (who spend decades breathing enormously concentrated levels) often did develop asbestiosis...but that even so, their lifespan was slightly longer than the national average.

No one is going to die if they accidentally breathe in a few nanotubes. The risk factors here are incredibly low.

Begone, envirowhacko! Begone!


By Shig on 2/2/2010 11:04:33 AM , Rating: 1
Ethical issues shouldn't be overlooked when evaluating nanotechnology. The problem is the environmentalists wait until these companies poor millions upon millions into research / development / commercialization, then they come in at the very end and say WAIT STOP NO, SORRY.

Many people also are ignorant towards nanotechnology and take alarmist approaches for something they don't even remotely comprehend and end up listening to politicians and media that don't know shit.

People need proper education on this matter or the alarmists will shoot everything down.

Nanotechnology is nothing but a tool. Just like any tool it can be used properly or mis-used.


By 91TTZ on 2/2/2010 3:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
I'm no enviro-wacko, but I do think that these things should be considered.

BTW, do you have any supporting info to support your claims about asbestos miners living longer than the national average or did you just make that up?

quote:
No one is going to die if they accidentally breathe in a few nanotubes. The risk factors here are incredibly low.


That's not how it works. The more these materials are used the more they'll be in the environment. It's not a matter of "accidentally breathing in a few nanotubes", it's more of a matter of limiting exposure to them. Even people who don't work with asbestos have millions of fibrils in their lungs, and the incidence of disease is proportional to the exposure.


By porkpie on 2/2/2010 4:11:04 PM , Rating: 2
I never make anything up. The actual study was quoted by Dr. Dixie Lee Ray, in at least two of her books. I don't have them here at work, but she gives a clear reference

BTW, neither me nor her means to suggest that asbestos was somehow increasing the miner's lifespan. Just that the very low risk from their exposure was more than compensated for by other factors in their lifestyle, such as receiving a lot of exercise. Also, the results don't apply to miners in crocidolite mines, a significantly more dangerous version of asbestos, but one that consitituted only about 5% of total asbestos mining.

The risk for people NOT working in a mine continually breathing in millions of fibers is vanishingly small. Yet asbestos lawsuits have cost the US alone a quarter of a TRILLION dollars, with no end in sight yet. There are literally thousands of mega-millionaire lawyers, all made rich from the asbestos windfall.


By 91TTZ on 2/3/2010 1:36:45 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you about the lawyers blowing it out of proportion. It definitely has become a scam. When I bought my house I couldn't legally remove the asbestos tiles even though the asbestos was encapsulated in vinyl and not flying around like a powder.


use?
By RU482 on 2/2/2010 9:29:44 AM , Rating: 2
what is the end use of these 200 metric tons of carbon nanotubes?




RE: use?
By heulenwolf on 2/2/2010 9:54:46 AM , Rating: 2
I second the question. From the article, it sounds like a better Teflon to me. What are the properties that make Baytubes so special, besides the "nano" property, of course;)


RE: use?
By D2Lalma on 2/2/2010 11:00:06 AM , Rating: 2
simply: They are the stronges rope what is known(/weight).

aerospace will use it, but the future of batterias are also lies there. http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=8442


Missing
By wwwcd on 2/2/2010 9:17:25 AM , Rating: 1
USA missing, they out of science, but attended with trillions of dollars in military action!




"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki