Space Elevator Group to Open Nanotube Factory

FleaPlus writes "The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Universe Today report that the LiftPort Group, a consortium dedicated to commercially developing and constructing a space elevator, will be opening a carbon nanotube manufacturing plant in June of this year. The new facility has been dubbed LiftPort Nanotech. Many expect the LiftPort Group to be a front-runner in NASA's recently-announced Centennial Challenges competitions for space elevator technologies, which begin in September of this year."

Comments

Linking to a 2.7MB PDF

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice going, pointing to a 2.7MB PDF file. For those of you who want more information about the space elevator concept, visit the Wikipedia page on space elevators.

Re:Linking to a 2.7MB PDF

[gfody]

The single-walled carbon nanotube samples in this situation were just a jumble of tubes. They were not laid out in any pattern, and because of that, the heat generated from the flash could not dissipate, so the nanotubes just burned.

Not 100,000s of kilomters each, just fibres

[Anonymous Coward]

From the faq http://www.liftport.com/faq.php

We don't need and are not counting on individual carbon nanotube molecules running the entire length of the space elevator or any significant fraction thereof. The individual fibers in a string or rope are only a few millimeters long, yet the rope has a large fraction of the theoretical strength of the fibers. This is even more the case with MOLECULES, several orders of magnitude smaller than a fiber. A diamond is said to be the "hardest substance in the world" because of the strength of the carbon bonds that make it up, but a diamond is not a single molecule. Likewise an SE could be made with CNTs just a few centimeters or millimeters long. (In fact, a CNT several centimeters long is a wonder; they're single molecules!)

Brought to you by the RTFA consortium.

Re:Not 100,000s of kilomters each, just fibres

[dbIII]

but a diamond is not a single molecule

effectively it is - it is a single crystal - the word "molecule" makes no sense whatsoever in the context of crystaline materials - you don't have a molecule of iron or steel just as you don't have a beer atom. Crystals are described in terms of the smallest repeating unit, which is called a unit cell. The actual crystal - atoms all tightly bonded together, can be the size of the silicon ingot that wafers are cut from to make microprocessors. Multicystalline diamond is only useful as an abrasive.

There are two important points here - first is that the strength of something made up of multiple short fibres is going to be less than than the theoretical strength of the same thickness of continuous fibres. The second point is that is you could make continous fibres the full length (up to geostationary, then double it to balance and keep it up there) the material isn't quite strong enough yet. We'll get there someday, just don't buy any space elevator shares yet without realising that there is a long way to go.

This is nanotech all over again - people talking about little submarines doing fantastic voyage in blood vessels, while ignoring millions of less cinematic applications. We can use nanotubes for a lot of things.

In fact, a CNT several centimeters long is a wonder; they're single molecules!

Consider very long chain polymers.

Re:Not 100,000s of kilomters each, just fibres

[erki]

First of all a diamond *is* a single "molecule".

Wow. Science at its finest.

A diamond is a crystal. A crystal formed of carbon atoms, usually arranged in a cubic structure.

*sigh*

Re:Not 100,000s of kilomters each, just fibres

[DaleBob]

effectively it is - it is a single crystal - the word "molecule" makes no sense whatsoever in the context of crystaline materials - you don't have a molecule of iron or steel just as you don't have a beer atom.

It is probably true that doesn't make sense to call a metallic crystal (e.g., iron, aluminum, etc.) or an ionic crystal (e.g., any salt) a molecule, but I think it's pretty safe to call a single-crystal diamond a molecule. All the carbon atoms in the diamond are connected with covalent bonds, like in a "normal" molecule. This isn't true in metallic and ionic crystals. That is, the crystallinity of the atoms in the molecule doesn't influence the classification as a molecule, while the type of bonding does.

To me, it will always be very cool that a large crosslinked polymer, like, say, a bowling ball, is a single molecule.

Japan's Mitsui built first nanotube factory

[FleaPlus]

After submitting the article a few days ago, it's come to my attention that this isn't going to be the first nanotube factory; I didn't explicitly say anything of the sort in the submission, but wanted to clear any possible assumptions. From an industry report:

Among the small wonders produced by nanotechnology are carbon nanotubes, an advanced material as strong as diamond. These amazing carbon cylinders possess 100 times the tensile strength of steel and are 10,000 times finer than human hair. They are believed to conduct heat better than any other material, and they can also conduct electricity or function as semiconductors.

"Nanotubes are astonishingly promising, and I'm a realist, not an optimist," says Rod Ruoff, a mechanical engineering professor at Northwestern University. "It's a question of making the technology cheap enough." In 2001, only 3 kilograms of the highest quality carbon nanotubes--the single-walled variety--were produced worldwide, each gram worth $300, or 30 times as expensive as gold.

Now, full-scale production of carbon nanotubes is underway at the world's first ever large-scale nanotube factory, built outside Tokyo by the Carbon Nanotech Research Institute, a subsidiary of Japan's Mitsui & Co. The new facility is expected to churn out 10 tons of carbon nanotubes--albeit the lesser quality multi-walled type--a month, and CNRI anticipates the price will be a much more reasonable $80 a kilogram.

These multi-walled carbon nanotubes may not possess all the impressive properties of their single-walled brethren, but mixed with plastics, they make ultrastrong composites or microscale precision parts. Such carbon nanotube-filled plastics are already being used by automakers in fuel lines because they are conductive and can thus be grounded to release static electricity, which can ignite flammable gasoline.

Re:Japan's Mitsui built first nanotube factory

[FleaPlus]

The PDF document by Edwards discusses this a little:

One issue brought up is the possibility of discharging the ionosphere. Our calculations based on the size and conductivity of the ribbon and the electrical properties exhibited in our upper atmosphere illustrate that a small area (square meters) around the ribbon could become discharged in the worst conditions. The magnitude of this discharging makes us believe with high confidence that no adverse local or global phenomenon will occur. It also shows that it is unlikely, without considerable effort, that any kind of usable power may be generated by this same method.

Re:In the future...

[Stalyn]

Check this link out. It'll blow your mind how a space elevator not anchored at the equator is possible!!!

Re:COOL!

[GroeFaZ]

Nanotubes aren't necessarily conductive. Their conductivity depends on dopants and their twist.

Is LiftPort vaporware?

[ramblin billy]

Sure would be nice to have a space elevator. I'm having my doubts that this group of 5 full time and 4 part time people are going to have much to contribute. There is a lot of talk on their website about plans and research and 'groups', but very little substance. It seems their first priority was to develop a line of clothing and an online store. The "Finance" portion of their group consists of investment club opportunities which they generously offer to the public. I couldn't find any mention of other members of their "Group" apart from the sub-companies consisting of the same 9 employees. So far it looks like they have received some money from NASA and $100K from local development agencies in New Jersey where they have announced the building of their first factory. The money from NASA is a little misleading, however. It seems that another company, High Lift Systems, got its start when LiftPort's President, Michael J. Laine, ran into Brad Edwards on a space forum. Edwards is a physicist who worked at Los Alamos National Laboratories for 11 years and had raised $570K from NASA to study the feasibility of a space elevator. Laine originally wasn't interested - "I thought it was ridiculous,' says Laine" - but quickly changed his mind. Edwards is also the only scientist or researcher connected to LiftGroup on their website. Unfortunately for LiftGroup, but probably not for Edwards, after about a year he gave Laine the boot and went off to do research at Eureka Scientific under a NASA grant. Currently he has received $2.5M from the US government to fund his own lab. His take on Laine? He says that Laine "spins his wheels" and "if Michael Laine is standing there with something, Boeing and the Air Force won't even notice him."

LiftPort Group seems to be a lot of talk and a website. Search results for Laine are few and all related to LiftPort, yet supposedly he has been a leading proponent of the space elevator for years. Content about LiftGroup on other websites consists almost entirely of Liftgroup press releases, with no information other than that provided by LPG. LiftPort Group claims that LiftPort Carbon is a leading force in the industry and its product, Liftite(TM) carbon nanotubes, will "revolutionize the way the world thinks about materials". There is no third party reference to this not originating from LiftPort that I could find. As a matter of fact, I can not find ANY reference from ANY acknowledged authority in the field confirming any of LiftPorts claims. While other companies are mentioned in news stories about product releases, cooperative ventures, and funding awards, LiftGroup is mentioned in quotes from its own press releases. Maybe I'm missing a huge body of information somewhere, if not, the only question left seems to be...is Michael Laine a kook or a crook? I guess time will tell.

billy - who disavows all knowledge of THIS particular mission

Re:Is LiftPort vaporware?

[Anonymous Coward]

Michael Laine is a crook, and has a known history of cheating the city of Bremerton, Washington out of payments that he owes on various properties. I also worked for the man when he was the CEO of a web site that provided corporate yellowpages, YelloWWWeb.com. There's so many things that I could say about him, but I'll just tell you that the man is a snake charmer.

If he actually pulls through and builds this lift, I'll be amazed. As it stands, I'm expecting him to work this as a scam somehow.

Much more recent version.

[TheMadReaper]

Actually, the page an non-equatorial elevators you are looking at is a bit out of date. There is much more recent material in the paper I presented at the 3rd annual space elevator conference. The slides are also available here. The paper should give you a quantitative idea of what the situation is.

To put into perspective what the previous post says. Moving a bit off the equator is possible and costs nearly nothing. On the other hand, if you want to place the Space Elevator in the continental USA, you are going to have to significantly increase the tension at the base of the space elevator, for a given payload.

The reason for this increase in tension is that as you move further away from the equatorial plane, the elevator ribbon starts being inclined at the anchor. The vertical component of the tension needs to be able to lift the desired payload, so the total tension in the ribbon is greater. This gets really bad as the inclination of the ribbon nears 90 degrees (at a latitude of about 48 degrees for the standard Edwards ribbon parameters).