EPA Proposes SNUR for Four Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes

Another thing this could be is some kind of quality control in nanotube production. With this stuff so small we cannot see or touch it. Got lots of new emerging machines that can measure some of it.

How many variations can nano tubes take? Different sizes, shapes, lengths. From a brief look into this tech, a lot of work is done in liquid solutions when combining with other elements and layering the insides of these tubes. Different stuff does different things.

So for whatever reasons, 4 of these shapes are bad, so the rest are good? What kind of processes are required to ensure consistent and specific metrics are met when it comes to nano production.

For now there is the end product to see if things are working, results can be hazy depending on the application, especially on the biological stuff. Reports of what graphine oxide does to the circulatory system is make a mess of things as it is hard for the body to break down, lots of little splinters going all over the place.

It looks like such a complicated world the nano stuff, going to need some clear standards if a community can make any sense out of it.

a reply to: kwakakev

I was alerted to this EPA rule making by other manufacturers and we are going to be doing a coordinator response but restricting it to no manufacturing at all in the United States at this point is just absurd it’s too useful of a product for us to just allow the Chinese to take it and do whatever they want with it and us have no control over it. The United States would be in serious error to allow only foreign made multi wall carbon nanotube technology into the United States without having any kind of domestic production. This material is critical for Our future energy infrastructure like the very powerlines that our world uses will be made from this material. Of course you can also make armor systems out of it I’m sure that is concerning to some because it provides reinforcement at such a small scale level it makes incredibly strong ceramic or concrete or epoxy or resin type of materials incredibly strong. The electrical conductivity Is so high it’s on order of copper. We’re gonna find that we can’t live without this material and allow the Chinese to control it is just not gonna happen. All in all it’s going to be a busy month for me fighting for the survival of my company and this nascent United States born technology.

a reply to: kwakakev

Being a professional in the industry of this nascent technology I appreciate that it must be regulated but this does not mean that the US production of it should be eliminated. The fact is we should if anything if we are concerned with an environmental impact restrict imports and only allow very well regulated American companies to produce this technology and distribute it domestically. I would have no problem with that. My company will certainly conform to whatever standards the EPA Provides and we will conform to them. Do they think that the Chinese would conform to any sort of environmental controls over this material? I seriously doubt that is a factor of their concern. I think this rule making is to destroy American production of this important technology in its nascent stage while there is not a lot of investment money behind it to protect it. I’m going to know who authored that bit of policy shenanigans before the end of the day. Most of the money has gone to the Chinese. They have samples of our technology that they obtained from people trying to organize funding for our company. We have just started our crowd source funding effort on this so that will likely be our first pursuit and our lawfare against those who attempt this rule-making which will work against our company. This of course gives us the grounds to sue them for damages because it directly harms our attempt at funding our company at a critical early stage.

a reply to: machineintelligence

Very good. I hope things turn out well, not just for the nation but for the people that work directly with this technology too.

a reply to: beyondknowledge

The Cobalt oxide is only in one of the four multi-walled carbon nanotube designs, or at least, that is what I'm inferring from the National Law Review article. In trying to find the actual EPA SNUR issued, I noticed that a number of SNURs have been issued for various multi-walled carbon nanotubes for the last decade, but I have not seen a SNUR that outright bans domestic manufacture until now.

This manufacturing ban is not for all multi-walled carbon nanotubes, rather just for these four iterations.

I wonder where the research is that found these products so dangerous to americans and how those findings compare to the MSDS of the individual ingredients.

a reply to: DirtWasher
This restriction place is such an onerous barrier on manufacturers in the United States because it eliminates domestic production which makes no sense. Why would we give the entire market to the Chinese of something of such strategic important value to our defense industry and our energy infrastructure when the Biden administration has made it clear that they have $100 million to help spur domestic production developed in the United States for these batteries and we are making the material that is required to do that and it certainly fits within the classifications that they want to shut down for domestic production. Our company is happy to comply and will work well with regulators to ensure the safety of this product as it’s introduced into the environment in a respectful and safe manner. Do they really believe Chinese companies are going to have that kind of conformity to their proposed standards? I don’t see how that’s even reasonable to assume. This is clearly an attempt to destroy American manufacturing of this important material for no other reason than to give it to the Chinese. I’m gonna find out who authored this proposed ruling and I’m gonna make sure that that person‘s name is well-known and their motivations for doing this are laid bare and are clear to everyone.

a reply to: machineintelligence

I see what you are saying and I could agree with this assessment, but these are only 4 iterations being banned, and I'm guessing one or more of these specific iterations are critical to your company's R&D. Are there no alternative designs you could produce for your R&D? Would that be going back to square one designing from the ground up, so to speak?

a reply to: DirtWasher

The simple point in fact is that no other ruling has eliminated domestic product production of any form of multiwall carbon nanotubes and there have been rulings that I’ve been aware of since 2010 and a new one in 2018 and even in 2021 but none of them eliminated domestic production. That is the concern and there is no reason for that given in the proposed rulemaking. It’s just handing it to the Chinese and nothing more those will continue to be produced just not here in the United States.