I'm extremely interested in graphene. Right now the pro

>>1821067

I had a graphene startup back in 2015

we manufactured capacitors out of a catalyzed sugar condensation but we couldn't get appreciably superior results compared to existing electrolytic technology

like my five other startups it failed after 3 months.

>>1821072
What's your general perception of the stuff? Do you think we'll overcome these challenges in the next decade or so?

All graphene manufacturers on the London AIM are pretty fucking sad stories when it comes to their share price. Seems like it was over-hyped and until someone can make square metre sheets of flawless graphene I don't see much of a change.

The only company I know of that has built an actually useful product is a lightbulb which is more energy efficient: http://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/graphenes-lightbulb-moment

I'd say don't bother as there are better things to invest in.

>>1821079

the only thing i can see it used for is a building material.

sugar is too expensive for that.

no immediate future.

>>1821167
>>1821237
I'm pretty sure their producing batteries with the stuff. Small electronics in general will probably be the first steps with the technology, give it requires less of it to get the job done.

I'm okay with going into this without an ROI for awhile. I truly believe its the future. Just a matter of getting it done.

>>1821406

see >>1821072

>>1821406
>I'm pretty sure their producing batteries with the stuff.
they are an additional component in a miniscule manner, high-end batteries used in electronics and electric vehicles are lithium and cobalt dependent, as shown by the price spikes of the commodities since 2015