i only occasionally read this forum anymore, but since there seems to be some confusion, here goes..

from this pdf: https://www.monash.edu/assets/pdf/industry/graphene-oxide-reinforced-concrete.pdf

we find this paragraph:

"Laboratory tests show that only 0.05% of GO is needed to improve flexural strength of an OPC matrix from between 41% to 59% and compressive strength from between 15% to 33%."

and then this paragraph:

"Laboratory tests also show that the

addition of 0.05% GO improves pore

structure and decreases total porosity

from 32.6% to 28.2%, providing higher

compressive strength and a more

durable product."

.05 percent is 1 part in 2000. if we're measuring by weight instead of volume (which i assume), it means that we'll use 1 pound of GO per metric ton of concrete. This is the figure lariplast came up with too.

and then there's this:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11771-016-3139-4

"Functionalized graphene nano-sheets (FGN) of 0.01%−0.05% (mass fraction) were added to produce FGN-cement composites in the form of mortars. Flow properties, mechanical properties and microstructure of the cementitious material were then investigated. The results indicate that the addition of FGN decreases the fluidity slightly and improves mechanical properties of cement-based composites significantly. The highest strength is obtained with FGN content of 0.02% where the flexural strength and compressive strength at 28 days are 12.917 MPa and 52.42 MPa, respectively."

----

keep in mind that going from .05 percent to .02 percent of the concrete lowers the cost per ton. but even with using less than half as much graphene, we still could not fully supply the concrete industry.

if our GO lowers the project costs, everyone will want to use it. and prices for it could rise to twice normal in that case. at .05 percent we'd need 4.1 billion pounds to satisfy industry demands. at .02 we'd need 1.64 billion pounds per year of graphene.

30k tons is only 60 million pounds. nowhere near enough to supply the estimated demand in either case. we'd have to ramp up production to keep up.

plus, our graphene seems to give better results than any other graphene that lariplast has tested. and we shouldn't be suprised by that at all considering how well it has performed in other tests.

all this just means that the price per ton will likely have to be greater than $60,000.

and i'll just restate that since GO reduces the project cost, everyone will want to use it. all 1.64 to 4.1 billion pounds of it. and only when the price rises high enough to raise the project costs will some of the projects get weeded out.

at present, no other industry can afford to pay these prices. but that might change if battery companies change from graphite to graphene. then look out.