The headline would be more accurate if it said “fire-retardant” rather than “fireproof”. The article this one is based on includes much more detail and quotes from the paper:...
The headline would be more accurate if it said “fire-retardant” rather than “fireproof”. The article this one is based on includes much more detail and quotes from the paper: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1043562
This strategy achieves a long ignition time of 116 s, low total heat release of 0.7 MJ/m2, low total smoke production of 0.063 m2, and low peak CO concentration of 0.008 kg/kg.
I stopped caring about this tech when I realised it was IIRC 70% epoxy, so it's more accurately described as transparent epoxy with some wood additives. It's just not sufficiently better than...
I stopped caring about this tech when I realised it was IIRC 70% epoxy, so it's more accurately described as transparent epoxy with some wood additives. It's just not sufficiently better than transparent rock to care about.
Except that the new process uses sodium silicate, not epoxy. I’ve used sodium silicate as a crack stabilizer for lapidary work - it essentially creates silicon dioxide polymer (mechanical...
Except that the new process uses sodium silicate, not epoxy. I’ve used sodium silicate as a crack stabilizer for lapidary work - it essentially creates silicon dioxide polymer (mechanical properties closer to quartz than glass) when catalyzed with acid. This is a faster version of the same natural process that creates fossilized wood.
Aside from the leftover cellulose in the bamboo cells, the resulting transparent material should be very flame resistant (sodium silicate is already widely used as a structural timber fire retardant), and largely chemically inert (no toxic runoff).
The article notes that transparent wood is preferable to glass in part because of issues with glass's sustainability, but I wasn't aware of any particular sustainability issues with glass. It's...
The article notes that transparent wood is preferable to glass in part because of issues with glass's sustainability, but I wasn't aware of any particular sustainability issues with glass.
It's mostly just silica sand, which the Earth's crust is absolutely teeming with, and glass can just be recycled over and over, but you really don't need to because of how common sand is. Glass in a landfill doesn't biodegrade, but after a long time, erosion just turns it back into sand.
Just speculation from my side. My main bet would be energy costs during production. It takes a considerable amount to melt glass. I am also fairly sure that recycling glass has some limitations...
Just speculation from my side.
My main bet would be energy costs during production. It takes a considerable amount to melt glass.
I am also fairly sure that recycling glass has some limitations specifically when talking about colors.
Where the silica sand comes from might also be a factor. There is a lot of it but, is it easily accessible, pure enough, etc?
I have read articles that sand suitable for concrete is becoming scarce. Edit, sand suitable for concrete used in constructing tall buildings. I don't know what sand suitable for glass needs to be...
I have read articles that sand suitable for concrete is becoming scarce. Edit, sand suitable for concrete used in constructing tall buildings.
I don't know what sand suitable for glass needs to be like.
The "sand suitable for concrete" is, AIUI, an inaccurate oversimplification. There's some stuff to do with the sand being 10% stronger concrete, and easier to work (more forgiving on water? I...
The "sand suitable for concrete" is, AIUI, an inaccurate oversimplification. There's some stuff to do with the sand being 10% stronger concrete, and easier to work (more forgiving on water? I forget), but we don't actually need it.
I get my information on the topic from articles like this one and this I am more than happy to be schooled on the topic. I'm curious and would like to learn.
I get my information on the topic from articles like this oneand this I am more than happy to be schooled on the topic. I'm curious and would like to learn.
The headline would be more accurate if it said “fire-retardant” rather than “fireproof”. The article this one is based on includes much more detail and quotes from the paper: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1043562
But the best source is probably to just read the introduction to the original paper, which is very accessibly written: https://spj.science.org/doi/10.34133/research.0317
Thank you for adding value to the discussion
I stopped caring about this tech when I realised it was IIRC 70% epoxy, so it's more accurately described as transparent epoxy with some wood additives. It's just not sufficiently better than transparent rock to care about.
Except that the new process uses sodium silicate, not epoxy. I’ve used sodium silicate as a crack stabilizer for lapidary work - it essentially creates silicon dioxide polymer (mechanical properties closer to quartz than glass) when catalyzed with acid. This is a faster version of the same natural process that creates fossilized wood.
Aside from the leftover cellulose in the bamboo cells, the resulting transparent material should be very flame resistant (sodium silicate is already widely used as a structural timber fire retardant), and largely chemically inert (no toxic runoff).
So interesting to learn that it's similar to the natural process of wood petrification(?) Thanks for sharing!
The article notes that transparent wood is preferable to glass in part because of issues with glass's sustainability, but I wasn't aware of any particular sustainability issues with glass.
It's mostly just silica sand, which the Earth's crust is absolutely teeming with, and glass can just be recycled over and over, but you really don't need to because of how common sand is. Glass in a landfill doesn't biodegrade, but after a long time, erosion just turns it back into sand.
Am I missing something here?
Just speculation from my side.
My main bet would be energy costs during production. It takes a considerable amount to melt glass.
I am also fairly sure that recycling glass has some limitations specifically when talking about colors.
Where the silica sand comes from might also be a factor. There is a lot of it but, is it easily accessible, pure enough, etc?
I have read articles that sand suitable for concrete is becoming scarce. Edit, sand suitable for concrete used in constructing tall buildings.
I don't know what sand suitable for glass needs to be like.
The "sand suitable for concrete" is, AIUI, an inaccurate oversimplification. There's some stuff to do with the sand being 10% stronger concrete, and easier to work (more forgiving on water? I forget), but we don't actually need it.
I get my information on the topic from articles like this one and this I am more than happy to be schooled on the topic. I'm curious and would like to learn.