|
|
|
|
|
by amirhirsch
2666 days ago
|
|
I love this area of technology and the scale of your vision. For the battery application, do you need to use only electrically conducting nanotubes? Is your 27kWh per kg number for single-walled electrically conducting nanotubes? Do you need to filter out semi-conducting nano-tubes? I think that the improvements to batteries will have a better value proposition than strengthening concrete, though perhaps you can get away with less filtering requirements for non-electrical applications. How much does this strengthening increase the life-time-value of the concrete? Concrete is under $100 per ton (poured cost, 50% of which is dry materials), and it seems like you're talking about 50% - 150% increased cost. At scale, you are talking about ((40 billion kg) * 27 * (kWh per kg)) / (1 year) = 123.205917 gigawatts -- to makes 1267 kg of nanotubes per second for 40 million tons of carbon nanotubes per year. 123 GW almost certainly means hundreds of billions of dollars invested in power infrastructure for the purposes of carbon nanotube production for concrete. If you expect to scale with sustainability in mind, you should consider designing your entire reaction around the renewable energy source. Perhaps you can employ similar catalytic processes to the Co-Mo-S photo-hydrogenation from sunlight to achieve higher efficiency per area by using sunlight more directly. |
|