Slashdot Mirror


New Technology Produces Cheaper Tantalum and Titanium

Billy the Mountain writes "A small UK company is bringing new technology online that could reduce the prices of tantalum and titanium ten-fold. According to this piece in The Economist: A tantalising prospect, the key is a technique similar to smelting aluminum with a new twist: The metallic oxides are not melted as with aluminum but blended in powder form with a molten salt that serves as a medium and electrolyte. This technology is known as the FFC Cambridge Process. Other metals include Neodymium, Tungsten, and Vanadium."

139 comments

  1. someone in Russia just went nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone in Russia just went nuts

    1. Re:someone in Russia just went nuts by a_hanso · · Score: 5, Funny

      one might even say he threw a tantalum

    2. Re:someone in Russia just went nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That pun was titanising.

  2. bringing new technology online by ls671 · · Score: 1

    "A small UK company is bringing new technology online that could reduce the prices of tantalum and titanium ten-fold."

    Online... Will it make the tantalum and titanium down-loadable also?

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:bringing new technology online by oldhack · · Score: 2

      haha. "Bring it online" is a common management-speak from the "quaint" old days. :)

      This is a post that I would have expected from slashdot back in her good old days. I hope there still are some here that are in the know, and chime in with their thoughts.

      Thumbs up, lamer.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    2. Re:bringing new technology online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aluminum is mostly made by Rio , and uses subsidized electricity from anyone who wants jobs and a smelter, and heaps of sodium hydroxide - a salt that also 'costs' to produce. Anyone who discovers a way of saving energy inputs will be well rewarded.
      Magnesium. like aluminum is basically solidified electricity, so the process sounds good - until the other energy is factored in.
      BTW Alum smelters have stirrers that add pressure to the equation - chemists have done their homework, and using aluminum to make aluminum is obviously not likely.

    3. Re:bringing new technology online by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      "A small UK company is bringing new technology online that could reduce the prices of tantalum and titanium ten-fold."

      Online... Will it make the tantalum and titanium down-loadable also?

      Yeah, you'll just have to download it to your 3D printer, and you print out as much as you want. Tantalum wants to be free.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  3. Slowpoke by WWJohnBrowningDo · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    From Wikipedia:

    The FFC Cambridge process was developed by George Z. Chen, Derek J. Fray and Tom W. Farthing between 1996 and 1997 in the University of Cambridge.

    I realize /. is a little behind the times, but 17 years behind?

    Are we going to have stories about Wright brother's magical flying machines next?

    1. Re:Slowpoke by JabberWokky · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Slashdot is certainly prone to error, so I'm not going to defend this specific case, but it's not uncommon for a 17 year lapse between having a process progressing from an academic discovery to an industrial implementation. Using your example, it was a decade between the first flight and the first scheduled commercial flight (heck, even four years to the first passenger).

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    2. Re:Slowpoke by Sique · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is quite a difference between developing a process in a lab and making it industrially available. With your argument, the news about the ENIAC being functional in 1946 was no news, because Alan Turing developed the model of the Universal Machine already in 1936.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    3. Re:Slowpoke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA. It has the same year right in there, and states that they are attempting to commercialize the process.

    4. Re:Slowpoke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they wanted to wait for the patent to expire ...

    5. Re:Slowpoke by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Are we going to have stories about Wright brother's magical flying machines next?

      You never know

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:Slowpoke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. Because the Wrights did NOT 'invent' the flying machine.

      The first 'heavier than air' flight occurred in 1804
      The first 'man-carrying heavier than air' flight occurred around 1845
      The first 'powered heavier than air' flight occurred around 1848
      The first 'man-carrying controlled heavier than air' flight occurred around 1891
      The first 'man-carrying powered heavier than air' flight can be claimed to have occurred between 1881-1894

      By 1896-1904 various 'man-carrying powered controlled heavier than air' machines were being built, several of which made hops. Langley's Aerodrome epitomised the typical experience - crashing on take-off, but probably capable of flying. Finally the Wrights, with their cautious progressive experiments, managed to combine adequate stability, power and control to obtain a reliable machine.

      That was certainly a major advance. But I would not call it 'inventing a flying machine'...

  4. the problem with titanium by gTsiros · · Score: 1

    is not the manufacturing. it's "working" it.

    --
    Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
    1. Re:the problem with titanium by jbeaupre · · Score: 4, Informative

      I work with titanium. Buying 500 kg this week. It's not that bad. I'd use more of it if it were cheaper.

      You want to talk hard to work with, try gamma titanium aluminide. Blah! And I'm sure there is far worse stuff. Plutonium?

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    2. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Titanium is easy to work - simpler than steel to forge and it's easier to cut than similar strength steels.

    3. Re:the problem with titanium by a_hanso · · Score: 5, Funny

      You want to talk hard to work with, try gamma titanium aluminide.

      I think gamma titanium aluminide is managing my project.

    4. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the problem with titanium is that its currently incredibly expensive to refine it from its ore, if the costs of refining it the problems of "working" it aren't major hurdles compared to its . Its already used extensively in Aircraft frames were its weight to strength ratio make it economic despite its high cost. if the cost of refining it dropped by the amounts claimed we would see HUGE increases in the use of titanium.

    5. Re:the problem with titanium by tehcyder · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think if you were ordering 500kg of plutonium you would just have made the scariest post ever on slashdot.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    6. Re:the problem with titanium by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

      Are you making fan blades for a jet engine? Why is gamma titanium aluminide hard to work with?

    7. Re:the problem with titanium by ch0rlt0n · · Score: 5, Funny

      Face it, there's probably enough keywords there to have triggered alarm bells at the NSA anyway.

    8. Re:the problem with titanium by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've only used it for prototypes, but nothing aerospace. Which means either very expensive custom tooling for die casting or machining. And it won't quite machine like metal. Grinding works, but that's slow for complex shapes.

      It's not impossible to work with, just weird. Vibrates and makes the strangest sounds while machining.

      Now that I think about it, boralyn was worse. Tore up machine tools and gummed up grinding tools. You can cast, forge, and weld the stuff. But none of the parts I work with are amenable to those processes.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    9. Re:the problem with titanium by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is your manager brittle, expensive, and prone to making weird noises?

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    10. Re:the problem with titanium by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      You might be interested in this new process

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    11. Re:the problem with titanium by morethanapapercert · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I once posted elsewhere about what *I* think would be great subjects for video.slashdot.org, behind the scenes at the computer room of a major observatory for example. I think getting a video tour of your shop might be equally fascinating. Exotic boron and/or titantium alloys and it's not an aerospace application? I'm guessing racing bicycles or Formula 1 fabrication work. Either way, I'd love to see an interview where you discuss what it's like working with these unusual materials.

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    12. Re:the problem with titanium by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      If only I had mod points... That was great!

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    13. Re:the problem with titanium by necro81 · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure there is far worse stuff. Plutonium?

      Meh, from what I hear plutonium isn't all that hard to work. It machines well enough (the bomb industry can machine it into interesting revolved ellipsoids to fit into MIRV warheads). It is usually found and used as a pure metal. Pure metals tend to be pretty soft and ductile - it is only once you start alloying things that they gain their mechanically useful properties. The main downside is that you can't work it in the open air: the chips will burn, and because plutonium is a fantastically toxic metal, not to mention its radioactivity, you practically have to live in a hazmat suit to handle it.

    14. Re:the problem with titanium by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can safely hold a lump of the stuff (scientific samples) with your bare hands. It's warm, but otherwise completely safe because it only emits alpha or beta particles (I forget which). You wouldn't want to eat it or breathe in dust from a machining process, however.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    15. Re:the problem with titanium by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I work with titanium. Buying 500 kg this week. It's not that bad. I'd use more of it if it were cheaper.

      Much like women!

      But I wouldn't get them in 500kg packages.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    16. Re:the problem with titanium by jadv · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, gamma titanium aluminide works you!

    17. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems legit.

    18. Re:the problem with titanium by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Oh there is worse stuff. Have fun machining tungsten carbide, I'll be waiting here with a laser in case you decide your regular stuff isn't 'cut' out for the job!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    19. Re:the problem with titanium by weiserfireman · · Score: 1

      We don't machine tungsten carbide in our shop, but we do make some pure tungsten parts

      We buy it in 2' long rods from China. We have to buy a years worth at a time, lead time is so bad it is the only feasible way we have found to get any kind of price discount.

      Cheaper titanium would be useful for us too.

    20. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tungsten carbide is pretty straight forward to machine, whether with abrasives or EDM. At worst it just takes time and can consume more of the abrasive or electrode than other materials, but if you had it made into roughly the right shape in the first place, that shouldn't be an issue. I would much rather work on that than on some of the high temperature allows that work harden, requiring you to be very aggressive and take big cuts with a very rigid machine.

    21. Re:the problem with titanium by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Flatulence, while occasionally aromatic perhaps, does not count as weird.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    22. Re:the problem with titanium by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Depends on what isotope really. If it were Plutonium 238, there wouldn't be much to be afraid of. It would produce 122 kilowatts of heat, so storage would be an issue. You'd want to store it in lots of separate containers in a large, cooled space, or even outdoors. You would also need radiation shielding, but only a tiny amount of it. It's also toxic if consumed, but so are lots of things.

      So, not necessarily all that scary.

    23. Re:the problem with titanium by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      But I wouldn't get them in 500kg packages.

      Why not? Buy in bulk; 10 women bound together and wrapped in plastic (for shipping, of course) can be a wonderful source of fun

    24. Re:the problem with titanium by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > And I'm sure there is far worse stuff. Plutonium?

      Pure liquid HF? Tellurium polyazides? Chlorine trifluoride? Cyanogen azide? Selenophenol?

      1-diazidocarbamoyl-5-azidotetrazole?

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    25. Re:the problem with titanium by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Given what state ten plastic-wrapped women would be in when they arrived, I'd really rather not find out what you mean by "a wonderful source of fun".

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    26. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Not really. Worked in a (fairly large) fab shop. They 'worked' titanium all the time. Looks like aluminum, but hard like steel. Working it is easier than a lot of other materials (carbide for example). And also safer than working beryllium copper (which age hardens but gives off a nasty gas when cutting/shaping/sanding). In any event, its all 'workable' with an EDM (Electronic Discharge Machining). 1/1000 of an inch, any shape, so long as it can carry an electric current.

    27. Re:the problem with titanium by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how interesting it'd be as a video. I don't do much machining in my shop. There are some amazing people and shops out there and I value their expertise. All I could do is show my lab in the US and ramble about different projects.

      Still, I get to play with some fun stuff. I use exotic stuff because I design medical devices. Little tiny mechanisms with tight performance requirements. 95% of the time exotic materials don't help, but it's worth testing them. I've researched gold for one application (as a cost reduction!), sapphire for another, cobalt alloys for another (I love them!). I forget what I was playing with platinum for. Gobs of nitinol for several applications. None of them ever panned out.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    28. Re:the problem with titanium by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1
      there might not be much activity per se during a behind the scenes shop tour of your operation, but i can think of several things you could share with us nerds that we'd probably find interesting.:

      1) how you generate the requirements for a medical device, the brainstorming period before you start actually working on materials 2) How you test a material for a particular application, why cobalt alloys might be used for a particular implant rather than titanium or surgical stainless steel. 3) Your projects are the kind of thing we hear about a few years down the road when device X gets approval for human applications, you could give us a sneak peek (intellectual property restrictions permitting) of the sort of thing you are working on now that mght be approved for human use in the near future. 4) Obviously most of your materials are valuable enough that you do a fair bit of waste recovery, but I imagine you or some of your employees still manage to come up with nifty little doo-dads out of scrap pieces. Cobalt alloys make for real pretty jewellry pieces. 5) what's the machiniblilty of alloys like vitallium like? Do you see any medical applications for stuff like metallic micro-lattice, aerogel or aerographite? 6) What device were you looking at that boralyn for? There's a surprising paucity of info on that alloy, mostly related to a single company's bike frame. 7) I think your shop would be interesting, but you say that there are other amazing shops out there, can you point us to some of them?

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    29. Re:the problem with titanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would refer you to the twin towers of hubris and ignorance, as to whether the NSA is reading this. I don't want to sabotage the discussion, but I'll kida try to explode a few myths. It would practically take a militia to search and destroy all the misconceptions about new materials science technology. there must be between 235 and 238 such myths, with an enhanced list approaching 9/11 thousand. If you can imagine a new world, order ed around silicon instead of carbon, maybe robots could evolve. of course, the topic of the slow, boring work towards AI is so "afghanistan", few blog, twitter or post manifestos about it. its like we built a trojan horse and filled it with dirt bombs instead of soldiers.

    30. Re:the problem with titanium by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I make a back of the envelope calculation that there were several million kilos of plutonium in the Earth a century ago, and regardless of what we do in the next few centuries, there will still be several million kilos of the stuff in the Earth in, say, 2500.

      Of course, it's diluted by several billion billion times as much other non-threatening material.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  5. Owner "hopes", "thinks" and "hopes" again by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    Perhaps with enough investment, his dreams could become true?

    Protip: businesses that have a ready market crying out for the products that they claim to be able to make cheaply don't need to be spending time talking to the press.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  6. Tritanium by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2

    new technology that could reduce the prices of tantalum and titanium ten-fold.
     
    Noooooo, my huge cache of veldspar will become worthless! Oh titanium, not tritanium..... never mind.

    --
    Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    1. Re:Tritanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I had mod points :-)

    2. Re:Tritanium by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Get your ass to nullsec and mine something worthwhile ;)

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    3. Re:Tritanium by nintendoeats · · Score: 1

      I feel like even /. isn't quite nerdy enough for EVE jokes.

  7. "Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Reduce the prices ten-fold

    Really? I think you're trying to say "reduce by 90%".

    Or you could have just quoted TFA : "for less than a tenth of such powderâ(TM)s current price". But that's The Economist, their editors actually care about both the English language and making sense.

    1. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this company really will be giving away titanium and handing every recipient nine times its value in cash.

    2. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with tenfold?

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    3. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Informative

      Tenfold = ten times as much. Not one tenth. If you mean "one tenth" SAY "one tenth".
      "reduce tenfold" literally means take away ten times. i.e. 1-10 = -9 Since that's nonsense, we can only guess what they actually mean

      http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tenfold
      tenfold adjective. ten times as great or as numerous:

    4. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by jkflying · · Score: 1

      Take the price, say p. Then reduce it by 10p. Reduce means subtract, which leaves us with -9p. Do you see why it doesn't make sense?

      --
      Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    5. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English isn't my first language so I learned something new today. I tip my hat to you good sir.

    6. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same difference. That's how the English language works. "Tenfold" simply states that there's a ratio. It's left for you to figure out which way the numerator and denominator are placed. Also: "three times smaller" and "twice as small."

      If you try to claim some objective logic, analyze "twice as big" then. If something is "as big" one time as it is another time, its as big twice, or "twice as big." No, I don't think so, either.

    7. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As a scientist, I hear '-fold' used to refer to both increases and decreases at equal frequencies. 'Reduce by ten-fold' is a normal usage, despite your interpretation of this one dictionary's entry on the word.

    8. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if someone says "the price increased tenfold" would they mean the price is now 10p or 11p? Taking the words literally, as you have for reducing tenfold, it would be 11p, but I would guess that most people intend 10p -- not that it's right, but people tend to use such language in a very sloppy manner.

    9. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Eowaennor · · Score: 1

      Reduce tenfold seems legit, I've heard that used before meaning N / 10, increase tenfold would be N * 10

    10. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're confusing "reduce x-fold" with "x times less", which is a common and nonsensical marketing term.

      They're trying to say the same thing, but only one of them works. The other one makes you sound like a marketing goon.

    11. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      Think of it as the multiplicative inverse. The key word is 'reduce'. If he said: "increased the price tenfold" (to mean costing 10x as much), you wouldn't complain then. So I don't see what's wrong with it.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    12. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      The key word is 'reduce'. If he said: "increased the price tenfold" (to mean costing 10x as much), you wouldn't complain then.

      Because you can increase tenfold. Not reduce.He actually means reduce by 90%. Or reduce to one tenth. "Tenfold" is nonsense.

    13. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, if someone says "the price increased tenfold" would they mean the price is now 10p or 11p? Taking the words literally, as you have for reducing tenfold, it would be 11p, but I would guess that most people intend 10p -- not that it's right, but people tend to use such language in a very sloppy manner.

      "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone,"it means just what I choose it to mean --- neither more nor less."

    14. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      Everyone knew what it meant, including you, but putting that aside, mathematically and logically it is sound because:

      Increase 10 fold = Times by 10
      Decrease 10 fold = Divide by 10

      Even if it isn't commonly used (which I think it is anyway), I'd WANT to put that into common parlance just because it is so logical, concise and reasonable. Don't forget English is still an evolving language.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    15. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is only nonsense to people who, despite knowing what it actually means, refuse to acknowledge that it is pretty clear what it means and instead spend their time arguing over a problem that is not actually there.

      Such usage is quite common and unambiguous.

    16. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      From that logic, 'increase' would mean 'add', and yet we know it doesn't in this context of 'tenfold'.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    17. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Reduce ten-fold means "divide by ten". Remember that division is actually repeated subtraction. If you have 13 of something, what do you have to subtract from it 10 times to get 0? The answer is 1.3. That's also, not by coincidence, the answer to "what do you get when you divide 13 by 10?" and "what do you get when you have 13 and reduce it tenfold?"

    18. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by tragedy · · Score: 1

      To "reduce it by 10p" is not the same thing as "reduce it 10p". One is a way of describing subtraction and the other is a way of describing division.

    19. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. Replying to my own post here. I have to admit, on re-reading, it's too ambiguous for me to say that. I'm going to have to say that I'm flat out wrong on the post I'm replying to. For the "reduce tenfold" matter, however, you're definitely wrong. The "fold" part of "tenfold" implies repetition ten times, which, in this context, means division.

    20. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by pitchpipe · · Score: 1

      Reduce the prices ten-fold

      Really? I think you're trying to say "reduce by 90%".

      Hmm. I guess this is why english isn't a programming language.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    21. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by FranklinWebber · · Score: 1

      Hello tragedy,

      Your rationale suggests that "reduce ten-fold" would always be equivalent to zero. It seems that "reduce nine-fold" would be equivalent to "divide by ten", right?

      BTW, I have no problem with your conclusion, just with the rationale.

    22. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by FranklinWebber · · Score: 1

      Nevermind: increase or decrease ten-fold means nine times. Got it. Duh.

    23. Re:"Reduce the prices ten-fold"?? by benhattman · · Score: 1

      Finally titanium that's cheaper than dirt.

  8. Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by Freestyling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously, do the people posting these stories ever read TFA?

    "The metallic oxides are not *melted as with aluminum* but blended in powder form with a molten salt that serves as a medium and electrolyte."

    Wrong! The Hall-Héroult process (main Al production method) is exactly that! Dissolving alumina in molten cryolite to allow electrolysis without heating to alumina's melting point.

    So actually the apparent amazing breakthrough turns out to be, "oh hey, they found a new solvent to dissolve things in".

    Accurate facts please guys, leave the sensationalising by omission to the tabloids.

    1. Re:Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rate the facts guys...

      some of us are girls you insensitive clod!

      actually thats not true, as you were.

    2. Re:Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go back to your orgies you raellian

    3. Re:Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by ganv · · Score: 1

      Economist tech news seems to always have these breathless descriptions of new technologies that will change everything without bothering to understand the underlying science. Why let facts get in the way of a story that sells? At the root of it, I think some economists realize that the model of continuous exponential growth used in their models depends on continuous revolutionary break-throughs in energy technology and basic materials. Since the recent reality has only had incremental changes, they feel pressed to make up revolutions in hope that it will save their models.

    4. Re:Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the guys pretending to be lesbians on /. really are gay.

      There are no women on their 'private' IRC channel.

    5. Re:Poster fails to read TFA - as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got some bad news for you then. Even if titanium were a tenth of the current cost, money could still be made a plenty from the recycling of turnings. Shops I've worked in got paid quite a bit for collection of aluminum and iron turnings and waste (separate from the larger scrap pieces), so there is still plenty of business opportunity there.

  9. When all said and done by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Funny

    "A small UK company is bringing new technology online that could reduce the prices of tantalum and titanium ten-fold.

    When all said and done, who doesn't like cheap tan and tits

    1. Re:When all said and done by pokeparadox · · Score: 2

      Not with ten folds.

    2. Re:When all said and done by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      When all said and done, who doesn't like cheap tan and tits

      Me.

      I find Katie Price/Jordan and others who go for that particular look quite unattractive.

  10. Don't worry buyers by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Don't worry buyers; the manufacturers will be sure to pass this four-fold cost reduction on to you, their valued customer!

  11. If they can scale up this process.... by MtViewGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could literally change the world.

    Titanium--which is actually common in the soil--is an amazingly strong metal that is also quite corrosion resistant and can withstand very temperatures. Even with the expensive production processes used up till now, titanium was favored by the aerospace industry because of its strength and heat resistance and for making propeller blades for ship screws because they withstood the corrosive effects of seawater.

    With a vastly cheaper production process, it could make it possible to substantially lighten the weight of automobiles--which has the benefit of either lower petrol/diesel fuel consumption or needing a smaller battery pack (in the case of electric cars). And it means high-speed trains can be vastly lighter while still meeting safety standards for passenger train cars, which means smaller and more efficient traction motors on electric multiple unit (EMU) passenger trains.

    1. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by DiamondGeezer · · Score: 1

      No mod points, but you deserve them.

      --
      Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
    2. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do hope you're right, but, as per usual, my mind immediately heads off to the land of unforeseen consequences, to wit: That delightful decrease in vehicle weight, while saving zillions in energy costs, will come with its own hidden cost in the form of wind.

      As it stands now, only high-profile vehicles need worry about getting blown off the road when the wind really gets to roaring. Blizzards, Santa Ana's, Tropical Cyclones, that sort of thing.

      Now imagine some of those photos we've all seen of tractor trailers blown off of the roadway commingled with a cohort of automobiles.

      Nobody will consider this, nor do the least thing by way of mitigating against it, until the first high-profile event occurs, likely with a significant loss of life (read: numerous common folk, or one celebrity).

      But I still hope you're right.

    3. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      It isn't just the overall of weight of an automobile that can be lightened (we already have methods for that) but lightening the reciprocating mass of a vehicle. It won't work for things like cams or cranks due to the various titanium alloys being less ridged than the steel alloys at a given thickness but for things like gears, rods, and rockers it is a great option and is already used in very high performance engines where cost is not an option. Even though a thicker crank and cam made of titanium is still lighter than a steel one it still has a disadvantage of increased friction, due to increased bearing speed, which offsets the gains of having lighter components, where as things like rods and rockers don't have this issue. Some gears on high performance engines are already aluminum alloys but those are fairly low stress (timing gears most notably) but they still have steel teeth since aluminum would wear too quickly, so it would be possible to replace that steel with titanium for a modest decrease in reciprocating mass. You wouldn't see titanium pistons as forged aluminum alloy ones are already common place as they already can handle the stresses on them and are still lighter than titanium alloy ones would be. Now for things that don't need to be as ridged like drive shafts (propeller shafts as some call them), axles, or half shafts titanium would be a viable option there as well to decrease reciprocating mass.

      On the whole decreasing mass on vehicles is a good thing especially if the low mass components are as strong or stronger than the ones they replaced. There are already companies looking into using aluminum body panels that are lighter and just as strong as the mild steel ones currently used, the most notable is Fords planned usage in their upcoming F series trucks which is expected to save around 700 pounds.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    4. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 2

      FUD pure FUD
      Tractor trailers getting blown over aren't because of weight but because of the huge cross sectional area they present from the side. As far as vehicles getting blown all over the road it also is more a function of cross sectional area than weight. I have driven a Geo Metro and that got blown around less than my Jeep Cherokee and things like that can be mitigated by better under vehicle aerodynamics.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      There has already been a subtle shift in design aesthetic for commuter vehicles toward designs that aerodynamically hug the road. Reducing the weight of vehicles would indeed make them more likely to get blown around, so I would expect that swept surface aesthetic to continue in force, so that wind blown over the vehicle shoves it down onto the road.

      This would be especially important for luxury sports cars, since their market demographic is "rich thill seeker who likes to drive really fast." The same issue of vehicle flipover from wind would occur in a very fast moving, very light vehicle. (Strap some wings on, and you have an airplane, basically.) This means that aerofoil designs would be an absolute necessity for maintaining road safety for such vehicles.

      I would expect to see hood and tail "spoiler bars" that perform this function, with a higher up ride, and a lowered center of gravity.

      (Remember, an airplane's wing is swept to have a greater length of curvature on the top surface than on the bottom one, because the increased air velocity the air assumes to clear the greater distance reduces pressure on the top compared to the bottom. This is what lifts the airplane. We want the opposite. We want air to travel faster underneath the vehicle than over the top, so that atmospheric pressure forces the vehicle down onto the ground. For that, we would need a larger airgap between the ground and the chasis frame to accommodate that airflow. The vehicle might look a little funny, but it would solve the "wind makes it blow away" problem.)

    6. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      There are many factors contributing to designing a car so that it has negative aerodynamic lift, and I don't know them all. Nonetheless: at high speeds the underbody front and sides should be close to the ground, the rear high. The high rear creates a partial vacuum under the car, the low front and sides reduce the loss of that vacuum. The goal is not to "accommodate airflow" but prevent airflow.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by s122604 · · Score: 1

      it could make it possible to substantially lighten the weight of automobiles

      Possible but steel is actually better than titanium when it comes to the metallurgical property of toughness and fatigue resistance, and its cheap.
      Maybe some elements could be titanium-ized, but the body will probably be steel for the near future.

    8. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by BooMonster · · Score: 1

      Except that CAFE standards will require lower weights and more efficient engines, regardless of cost. If that means the cars last for a shorter time, so be it.

    9. Re:If they can scale up this process.... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I think you may be a bit optomistic. Titanium may actually be common, but how common are high quality ores? This benefits one step of the production process, but I really doubt that it would drop the price by a factor of 10. Perhaps 5, perhaps less. Unless I'm misunderstanding, and this allows one to use rather low quality ores as the basis of extraction.

      FWIW, the space shuttle was originally going to be made from Titanium, but it got switched to that ceramic tile system largely because the sources of Titanium ores were in a politically unstable part of the world. I believe that at the time it was called Rhodesia, but I don't know what it's called now, as I believe the country boundaries, as well as the names, have changed. (I think *THE* other source was the USSR. And what that translates into now I have even less idea, since I don't even know if it was in Sibera or the Caucasus mountains. Or elsewhere.)

      To me this implies that suitable metalic ores are not common, not even at a moderately increased price. So reducing the costs of extraction may have a limited effect.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  12. Titanium will become obsolete. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    This new technology would become obsolete as soon as we find a good source for unobtainium. But the smart money is on the administranium that would thwart any competitor from emerging.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Titanium will become obsolete. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This new technology would become obsolete as soon as we find a good source for unobtainium. But the smart money is on the administranium that would thwart any competitor from emerging.

      Would it not then stop being unobtanium and instead transmogrify to easilyobtanium?

  13. Tantalum won't be much effected by Troyusrex · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I happen to live close to the largest Tantalum processor in the world and so I've been following tantalum movements for a long time. The main constraint on Tantalum as it is isn't processing cost but supply of the mineral.

    At CURRENT extraction rates there's less than a 50 year supply so making the processing cheaper will just make it run out faster.It's possible some new sources will be found, but no apparent ones are on the horizon.

    1. Re:Tantalum won't be much effected by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

      Looking on or over the horizon in to outer space is much more difficult than looking up. Don't you know we'll be getting our tantalum from freakin' asteroids?

    2. Re:Tantalum won't be much effected by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      You assume the current, commercially viable, supply is all that is available. A newer, cheaper refining process can make sources that currently aren't commercially viable become viable.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    3. Re:Tantalum won't be much effected by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Cheaper refining processes don't automatically deal well with lower grade ores. Some do, most don't.

      One promissing approach is bioextraction. This is currently in use, I believe, in gold mining. Whether something analogous could be developed for other minerals is the question...but certainly doesn't seem implausible.

      Warning: Bioextraction is not a particularly environmentally friendly process. IIUC the extraction of gold involves soaking mine tailings in a pit of acidic water. It's also not fast. These extremeophiles aren't noted for their rapid rate of growth, and they need to eat the rocks to get at the gold (which they excrete because they don't want it). But even though they are extremeophiles, that doesn't mean that they aren't touchy about just what conditions are suitable for them to grow in. Just because they can grow where other bacteria can't doesn't mean they can grow anywhere, they have their own special requirements (which I don't know, but it apparently includes a very acidic environment).

      Note that after the bioextraction has run to completion, you are still left with something that you need to extract from the resultant mess. Only now it's in a form that may be more amenable to extraction by normal methods. Maybe it will dissolve in some particular regeant. With gold (IIUC) you end up with particles of metalic gold that are big enough to see. So now you use agitation to let the heavier particles settle to the bottom. Titanium, etc. would obviously need to be handled differently. Perhaps you could get them to excrete Titanium Acetate. That would be nice, if a bit implausible. It would depend on what bacteria would do the job, and how you could tailor it.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  14. reducing the cost of refined titanium by 90% by voss · · Score: 1

    Would be almost the start of a titanium revolution in industry. It would reduce the cost of everything from boat propellers to aircraft to bicycles.

    1. Re:reducing the cost of refined titanium by 90% by arse+maker · · Score: 1

      I wouldnt count on it :)

    2. Re:reducing the cost of refined titanium by 90% by Farmer+Pete · · Score: 1

      What? You think that the manufacturers wont pass on the savings to their customers? I can't believe that would happen. I mean, they would have to be incredibly greedy.

    3. Re:reducing the cost of refined titanium by 90% by frinkster · · Score: 1

      What? You think that the manufacturers wont pass on the savings to their customers? I can't believe that would happen. I mean, they would have to be incredibly greedy.

      Manufacturers would certainly avoid passing savings on to their customers as long as they can get away with it, but it would never last. The first manufacturer to reduce price by 10% (and still earn an exorbitant profit) to gain even a sliver of market share would trigger a price war that permanently brings the cost in line with reality.

    4. Re:reducing the cost of refined titanium by 90% by cusco · · Score: 1

      You mean the way that soda manufacturers barely make any profit on their product because the free market brings the price in line with 'reality'?

      One or two large manufacturers keeping their price artificially high will allow all the smaller manufacturers to maintain their prices only slightly lower. That's pretty much always the way the world works outside of RonPaulLand. Coca Cola and Pepsi have no intention of lowering the price on their flavored carbonic acid, and because they control 90 percent of the market they don't have to. If Jones Soda wants they can cut their prices down to bare-bones, but it still won't allow them to take over the market. There are a limited number of corporations with the ability to commercialize a product like cheap titanium, and what the final price ends up will be their decision, not the "Invisible Hand".

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  15. This is rubbish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Wake me up when it happens in some important country, like the US.

    P.S. We won't use it in any case. Because it wasn't invented it over here. Until we say it was. I 'll get onto the Wiki about that this afternoon...

  16. Vibranium is better! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adamantium is to hard to work with. It's a bitch when it cools. :(

  17. Cheaper Unobtanium by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    The world needs cheaper unobtanium, the big blue Smurfs put up a good fight.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  18. Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by Eloking · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most people, even on slashdot, don’t realize the huge potential of titanium.

    It's not only a better metal, it's perfect. In fact, if you mixed together aluminum and stainless steel together and tap the result with a magic wand to remove all its flaw (Resistance to corrosion, acid, rust etc.), you'll get titanium.

    Its light as aluminum, strong as steel, completely resistant to corrosion and quite abundant (given, it's not as abundant as iron and aluminum, but it's not that far either. You'll be surprised how much we use Ti in our everyday product). In fact, Ti as the "highest strength-to-weight ratio of any metal" (Reference: Wiki). And we're not even talking about alloy yet.

    Still, it got two main flaws:

    - First it's price. Because the Kroll process (actual process to make Ti) waste Magnesium, Ti cost a lot more than it should. But the new process should drop that problem if it ever enters mass production. And even if it'll always be more costly than aluminum or iron, don't forget that you need way less material to get the job done

    - The second flaw is the hash manufacturing process. Because of many factor like the Titanium thermal conductivity, it's a pain to manufacture. But the new advance in 3D printing "could" completely remove that flaw

    I may be a dreamer, but the day where you'll buy 3D printed Titanium shovel from your Walmart may not be that far.

    --
    Elok
    1. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by slinches · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Titanium is a very good material, but it isn't perfect. The fatigue capability is relatively low for its strength, especially in cast form. Strength at temperature is good, but far short of nickel based superalloys that are similar in cost. Low ductility and elastic modulus means it isn't easily formable and makes machining more difficult. It has limited resistance to wear due to lower hardenability. Oh, and it can catch on fire under the right conditions.

      Although, for many aerospace applications there's no substitute at almost any cost. It allows the weight of parts, that would otherwise need to be made of steel or nickel alloys, to be cut nearly in half (and that adds up quickly since it applies to a large portion of the main structural components in things like jet engines).

      If the price does drop drastically, I'd expect to start seeing Ti show up a lot more in areas like the automotive industry, where weight is important but it's use had been limited by cost.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    2. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by Eloking · · Score: 2

      I'll double-check this, but as far as I know all those flaw can be greatly reduced (if not eleminated) in some Ti alloy.

      --
      Elok
    3. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Titanium, like steel, has a fatigue or endurance limit; a stress below which no fatigue will occur. If a titanium piece is cyclically loaded below the fatigue limit it should never fail. So that's a plus.

       

    4. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by Artraze · · Score: 2

      Meh.

      First: It's 66% heavier than aluminum, and about half the strength of hardened steel.

      Don't get me wrong, titanium is pretty good stuff, but it still has trade offs beyond price. After all, it's only about 2-5 more expensive than stainless (depending on type of stainless form factor, etc) so if it was so clearly better, why is it so specialty?

      As a comparison:

      Aluminum:
      Vastly easier machine, vastly easier to cast (much lower melting point).
      In terms of strength/weight, aluminum is actually quite competitive with titanium (obviously depending on alloys): it's modulus of elasticity is very slightly better, and it's yield strength is within roughly 20%.
      Thus aluminum wins: not only is it's similar to titanium in terms of usable strength, it's more rigid because rigidity depends on the elasticity AND the thickness (i.e. modulus*area*thick^2). (The latter assumes a solid piece; using a 'hollow' design like a tube or ibeam would bring the stiffness of the pieces on-par.)

      Stainless Steel:
      Somewhat easier to machine and cast. While the melting point is comparable to titanium, titanium's is just hot enough to start causing problems with most common refractories. I'd also worry that it's a lot more reactive with could mean more difficulties. I'm not familiar with the practical casting of it, though, so I could be wrong.
      As far as steel is concerned, well, hardened 440C stainless wins in terms of yield strength and elasticity vs weight. It also achieves higher hardness for things like shafts and knives, and can be annealed for easier machining. Of course, one tradeoff is that the strength suffers pretty severely when not hardened (~1/4 of Ti vs weigth), so for larger pieces that can't be hardened effectively, titanium comes out on top. Also, the austenitic stainless steels (e.g. 304, 316) cannot be hardened, and so lack Ti's strength. (And, of course, similar elasticities means titanium will be more rigid, for the same reasons aluminum is.)

      Titanium does have its uses though: it had better corrosion resistance, better performance at high temperatures, etc. It's a good material it it's own right to be sure, but it's not perfect. If the price came down to be comparable to stainless I'd expect that usage would take off in a few areas, but especially when you account for difficulty of machining, don't expect to see it everywhere.

    5. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by slinches · · Score: 1

      I'm an aerospace engineer, so I have had a bit of experience with various metal alloys, but I'm no metallurgist.

      I know there are several other Ti alloys available, but there are only three that seem to be widely used. CP Ti (unalloyed, grades 1-4), Ti 6-4 and Ti 6-2-4-2

      There are some significant differences between these in strength and temperature capability, but nothing like the range of steel and nickel alloys that are available. Steel can range from barely better than aluminum in tensile strength to over twice the capability of the best Ti alloys and nickel superalloys can maintain strength similar to the some of the best steels at over 1000F.

      Titanium fills a niche for high strength at moderately high temperatures which lends itself well to many applications, but no material is perfect. There's always a balance of cost vs. weight/strength vs. environmental considerations and no one material will always prevail.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    6. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Although, for many aerospace applications there's no substitute at almost any cost. It allows the weight of parts, that would otherwise need to be made of steel or nickel alloys, to be cut nearly in half (and that adds up quickly since it applies to a large portion of the main structural components in things like jet engines).

      If the price does drop drastically, I'd expect to start seeing Ti show up a lot more in areas like the automotive industry, where weight is important but it's use had been limited by cost.

      My understanding was that the primary drivers for using titanium in aerospace were heat and fatigue characteristics, and that otherwise aluminium was almost always a better choice, if the design was capable of using it well. (Similar specific modulus of elasticity, so if you have the space you can use large-diameter tubing to get lower weight for the same performance.) As such, I'd expect to see automotive titanium used only in areas where volume or fatigue is a big concern. Are there other areas in which it would do well?

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    7. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      I actually use titanium alloy because of its great fatigue properties. I've cycled Ti64 at 50% of yield for 10^10 cycles without failure.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    8. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by slinches · · Score: 1

      I guess that really depends what you're comparing it to. Ti fatigue strength can be superior to almost all aluminums and even many standard stainless steels, but there are some nickel alloys that have an endurance limit at or above yield.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    9. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by slinches · · Score: 1

      True, if the temps. are low and there are no geometry constraints, aluminum would probably be the best choice regardless of cost. Although, I was thinking mostly about engine components. Cast Ti blocks would be stronger and reduce the need for cooling compared to aluminum and are still much lighter than steel/cast iron.

      As far as other areas go, there are already quite a few bicycle parts that are already available in Ti which would likely become much more popular if the price dropped significantly.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    10. Re:Titanium, the metal of the 21th century by jbeaupre · · Score: 1

      Cool. I never knew that about nickel alloys. Nickel is avoided in surgical products due to nickel alleriges. So as soon as I see nickel in the name, I move on.

      Still, I'm intrigued. I've seen titanium alloys do the same and thought it was a fluke. The stuff still broke, but after cycling a couple million times at 110% of yield.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  19. Search for cheap Ti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The search for cheap Ti has been going longer than Hunter and Kroll. They have tried all kinds of vapor phase and liquid salt reductions. Even if this new process worked you would not see cheap Ti. The purification and processing of Ti tends to be a pain in the behind. On the other hand I hope it works. A drop in price of 50% would open lots of new markets and uses. The oxide on the outside, like Al, is quite strong which results in Ti (and Ta, and Zr) being a excellent corrosion resistant material.

  20. Will not reduce the price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of the finished product. That price is determined by the same commodity traders that control the London Metals Market. These are the same thieves that control the price of all commodities. From the corn in your breakfast cereal to the gasoline in your car, the world's economies are held hostage by these speculators.

    1. Re:Will not reduce the price by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      I can grow corn in my back yard.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:Will not reduce the price by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      I do grow corn in my back yard. Actually, moving from the city into the country was somewhat eye-opening. I grow lots of stuff now, I get my eggs from the neighbours hens - for a price way below supermarket standard. Cutting out the middlemen makes for better food and lower prices....

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    3. Re:Will not reduce the price by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming that you're new in the countryside, so:

      Do remember that corn is nortorious for destroying the soil, and alternate it with, say, beans. My grandfather used a four field system, where one field was cotton, on field was alfalfa, one field vegetables (usually boysenberries, but it varied), and one field was pasture. (Alfalfa counts as a bean. So does vetch. But if you don't have a grazing animal it gets more difficult. Beans would work, though, but that's a lot of beans. For his cotton you could use corn.)

      OTOH, I don't know how much land you're talking about, so this may be overkill. For small plots you can plant corn and beans together. But you still need to let things lie fallow (or pasture) occasionally. (Artificial fertilizers don't solve this problem. If you depend on them, you'll destroy your land in a decade or so.)

      For that matter, you can raise chickens on the fallow land. That works well, especially for small holdings. But move them around, as chickens will eat every plant they can reach. One good plan is to design your chicken pen to be easily moved, and move it once a week. Chickens aren't too picky, and are quite willing to live on wheels, so an old trailer is good. Particularly if you have one where you can replace the floor with chickenwire. It's hard to beat chicken shit as fertilizer, but it's a bit concentrated. So you move the pen to sit over the area that was just used as a chicken yard, and the chicken yard into an adjoining area that has too many weeds.

      OTOH, listen to your neighbors. It's been decades since I lived out in the country. I told you about my grandfather, because *I* didn't do it or want to do it. Still, many people like the countryside. I disliked the continual work. I've got enough ideas of my own to keep me busy, and in the city is closer to bookstores and libraries. These days it's also closer to medical services (we all get older, unless we're unlucky).

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    4. Re:Will not reduce the price by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tips, mate. I am indeed new in the countryside, but then again, I am a biochemist by trade, so I get the theory. The practice, as you suggest, I get from the neigbors. We are talking about a rather small plot here - just a kitchen garden, basically. But I am moving the zones - what held corn last year will be beans this year. Also sowed some clover as green fertilizer in the autumn, to be dug under as soon as the soil is dry again. Also, compost. As for the bookstores and libraries - we are talking German countryside here, 10 minutes walk to the light rail connection and 30 minutes into the next major town with shops, museums, a philharmony, a decent theater :) best of both worlds.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:Will not reduce the price by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Nice. That sounds closer to the bookstores, etc. than I am.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:Will not reduce the price by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Well, as I said - Germany. The country is rather compact :) On the other hand - I used to live and work on the west coast in my grad student days. What we don't have here are the vast stretches of still untouched land like I have seen in the Mojave, in the Sierra - population density is just to high here to allow for something like that to still exist. Count your blessings :D

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  21. Isn't it obvious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't it obvious?

    Guns. He's making guns. Ones that you can get through airport security without being detected.

    You can sell those for an awful lot of money to the right people.

    1. Re:Isn't it obvious? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      With titanium? Try again, but stop to think a bit this time.

  22. Razor blades by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

    "Old Spice" markets disposable razors claimed to have blades of titanium. They dull very quickly and become effectively useless about 4 times faster than steel.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  23. Recycling and peak production by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    This development may lower things for a while and raise demand for a while until more expensive sources are found to replace the cheap ones that ran out quickly (due to increased demand.) This will be the peak for that resource and it'll not ever likely do that again. It may not even peak that much with the delay in production rate increase and the commodity traitors (misspelling intentional.)

    The real problem long term is recycling. We don't recycle most materials and won't until they become rare enough or costly enough to make recycling cost competitive. It might be already except that mining land fills is going to need many rare materials to start mining them... especially the ones where communities have been built on top.

  24. Combats steel prices by snadrus · · Score: 2

    Steel has gotten very expensive as China industrializes, which hurts many industries. Titanium is highly plentiful and if it could compete with steel on even a fraction of its markets then it would help reduce the world's demand. Fun unintended consequences may include a resurgence in building construction.

    --
    Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
  25. Things I won't work with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Here's a great set of blog posts by a chemist who describes the substances that are so awful or terrifying that he won't work with them. Great stories...

    http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/things_i_wont_work_with/

    1. Re:Things I won't work with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Things I won't work with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A must read for anyone that knows how to operate a fume hood or a hand grenade.

  26. Is steel expensive in China though? by ahfoo · · Score: 1

    Now I realize retail and wholesale are two different worlds but here in Taiwan retail I just bought 36 meters of 1" diameter 18 guage steel square tubing for about US$72.00. I thought that was quite cheap actually. 36 meters, that's over a hundred feet so about seventy cents a linear foot.

    I was just driving down south over the Chinese New Year and I saw nothing but truck after truck carrying steel rolls.

    I suspect steel has gotten expensive in some countries and not so much in others. Copper is the same way. Chinese copper is a heck of a lot cheaper than copper in the US. I was going to make some copper fittings and then I priced them from China and I could get them pre-made and shipped for cheaper than I could buy the raw metal in the States.