Talk:Potential applications of graphene

Article is lacking in good details
It mightmainly stems from that sticky tape euphoria that had us all very pleased hype era when is was the wondermaterial of the day. I was doing materials science and I was happy for the field. Graphene in its many forms has taken a role in the world and continues to do so inreasingly. But the now more then a decade later, the novelty has worn off as it should so cooler heads can fullfill its potential.

If it was up to me a total redo/rewrite of the article is in oder to bring this to 2024, halfway 2025 and have the dream what might happen greatly hortened but most imortantly; update the predictions and dream for te next years and decades. (I came here lookinng for graphene coated/clad/encased copper or other decent conductors like Aluminium or Silver wire. I was not pleasant to scan through all the fluff and hype filler, it is imo not written to a standard that fits the science side of Wikipedia. Others have expressed many of these thoughts, yet I felt I had to comment; its my field, its poorly written, it will less informed dream about nothing burgers from years gone by and the info is lacking and the references and citations do not lead to an effient journey learning about that still amazing hexagon lattice. Hexagons are the bestagons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.72.133.202 (talk) 21:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Article Structure
This Article is already flagged for needing an update. If someone undertakes revising, I would recommend a clearer way to distinguish graphene and graphene oxide. Either has interesting applications, but they behave fundamentally different. Maybe, industrially realized applications can get their own category/form of highlighting as well.141.14.132.20 (talk) 09:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Waterproof coating?
This seems dubious, given that graphene is known for being completely permeable to water. E.g., Superpermeable Lfstevens (talk) 23:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The way its written seems completely wrong. If it were reworded to remove bias, its probably fine unless specific sources can be found that state the opposite Herravondure (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The article you link to speaks of graphene oxide. That's a different compound.141.14.132.20 (talk) 09:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Electric lamps
Should this application (BBC news item) be fitted in somewhere? I'm not sure where it would go.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  22:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


 * IMO The only meat in the news item is the text. The video of Colin Bailey is not a reliable source? I am not sure that the assertion 'a light bulb which could see energy bills reduced by around 10 per cent' is reliable either. 10% for a light source, or overall including all energy use? So finally to answer your question, yes, as it would add light bulbs to not just potential uses, but actual uses in the article. The article may need re-naming as potential becomes actuality. There is a tag 'out of date'.SovalValtos (talk) 22:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Which section would it go in, do you think? Not sure I understand how the article is sectioned up.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  22:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Here's a better source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3bcfbbee-d3ae-11e4-a9d3-00144feab7de.html#axzz3VnPe8yGZ
 * I'd put it in the section on light processing, but the info is pretty vague. (Why are they adding the graphene? How does it save energy and/or increase durability?) Lfstevens (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * FT requires a subscription, so BBC would have to do. P'raps better to wait until more details are available.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  18:47, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The Independent gives a little more info.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  18:49, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * And here's the FT story free - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3bcfbbee-d3ae-11e4-a9d3-00144feab7de.html. Apols.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  18:53, 29 March 2015 (UTC)


 * We had an edit conflict, but I am just pasting mine here.
 * This is the wrong article for ACTUAL applications. They should go in Graphene when no longer just potential. Thanks to User:Lfstevens) for another source, I share the concerns. I am too busy at present to help with sources, but I suspect better will appear soon. No need to rush into print as User:Tony Holkham says, though paywalls are allowable I think if desperate, we can wait. Let it be right.SovalValtos (talk) 19:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This app is potential until the product is released. I guess that's soon... Lfstevens (talk) 22:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Graphene solar cells
A graphene solar cells article would be created — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.197.27.145 (talk) 04:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Potential applications of graphene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130320001240/http://bucky-central.me.utexas.edu/RuoffsPDFs/179.pdf to http://bucky-central.me.utexas.edu/RuoffsPDFs/179.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

'By 2017, graphene electronics were being manufactured in a commercial fab on a 200 mm line.'
Hi. I'm not a materials guy - should 'fab' have read 'lab', or is their something I don't know? If a fab is a thing, what's the formal term? I think that would be better here.

Does a 200 mm line mean a 200 mm wide strip?

I only looked quickly, but I couldn't find a reference to the 200 mm thing in the linked reference.

Regards to all. Notreallydavid (talk) 15:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

(There's a foot-of-page ref below this note at the time of posting - it's nothing to do with me.)

As a nonlineair material
This could be mentioned too: see https://www.hzdr.de/db/Cms?pOid=56780&pNid=99 Genetics4good (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2019 (UTC)