Shielding measurements, lab methodology, replication attempts.

Shungite conducts electricity like a poor metal, and that's not normal for a rock

More
1 week 3 days ago #149 by Research
Most rocks are electrical insulators. Granite, marble, sandstone, they don't conduct. You need a metal-rich ore body or a graphite vein to find a rock that lets current through. Shungite is one of the rare exceptions, and the conductivity is part of why the rock has unusual properties.

The numbers

Electrical conductivity of shungite at room temperature: ~10⁵ siemens per metre.

For comparison:

- Copper: 5.96 × 10⁷ S/m
- Iron: 1.0 × 10⁷ S/m
- Carbon steel: ~10⁶ S/m
- Shungite: ~10⁵ S/m
- Mercury: 1.0 × 10⁶ S/m (reference for poor metallic conductivity)
- Doped silicon (semiconductor): 10² to 10³ S/m
- Coal/anthracite: 10² to 10³ S/m
- Graphite (along layers): 10⁵ S/m, comparable to shungite
- Marble: 10⁻⁹ S/m
- Granite: 10⁻⁹ to 10⁻⁶ S/m

Shungite conducts in the same range as graphite, but it isn't graphite, and it isn't a single uniform conductor. The carbon in shungite is non-graphitisable, structurally distinct from graphite, and embedded in a silica-aluminosilicate matrix that doesn't conduct. Yet the bulk material conducts at metallic-rock levels. Worth noting.

Why this matters practically

- EMF interaction. Conductive materials interact with electromagnetic fields differently than insulators. They can absorb, reflect, or re-radiate. Shungite's broadband conductivity is one of the documented mechanisms by which it interacts with RF and microwave fields. This is the technical underpinning of the "shungite EMF protection" tradition.
- Shielding. Modern research (e.g. Antonets et al. 2021, covered in the EMF Research thread on millimetre-wave shielding) has measured shungite's attenuation of high-frequency signals at the 26-38 GHz range. Real measured numbers, not theory.
- Static charge dissipation. Shungite floors and decorative panels can dissipate static charge accumulated in synthetic-fibre carpeting and modern building materials. This is one of the practical reasons it is used in some Russian architecture.
- Microwave absorption. In low magnetic fields, some shungite samples have shown microwave absorption suggestive of superconductivity-like behaviour up to ~110 K. This is reported in V. V. Kovalevski's group's work at the Karelian Research Centre.

The structural reason

Shungite carbon contains a network of graphite-like layers and graphene fragments, the same conductive sp²-hybridised aromatic carbon network that makes graphite and graphene conductive. The non-crystalline arrangement reduces the conductivity below pure graphite/graphene levels but keeps the bulk material in the metallic-conductor regime.

Meanwhile the silica-aluminosilicate matrix is insulating. So shungite at the nanoscale is a composite of conductive carbon networks and insulating mineral domains. The macroscopic behaviour depends on the proportion: above ~28-32 wt% carbon, the carbon network percolates and the bulk material conducts; below that, the silica dominates and conductivity drops.

This is why Sh-I (98% C) and Sh-II (75% C) are strong conductors, while Sh-IV and Sh-V (low carbon) behave more like ordinary mineral rocks.

Sources

- V. V. Kovalevski group, Karelian Research Centre RAS Institute of Geology, primary conductivity measurements, available via digital collection .
- Yoshida et al. (Shinshu / Yamaguchi / Kyoto Universities, 2004), independent Japanese confirmation of shungite electrical properties: paper PDF .
- For shielding measurements in the millimetre-wave band, see the Antonets et al. 2021 thread referenced above.

Editor's note (2026 audit): Three claims attributed to Kovalevski group institutionally but not paper-specifically: (1) 10⁵ S/m conductivity at room temperature, (2) microwave absorption suggestive of superconductivity-like behaviour up to ~110 K, (3) carbon percolation threshold ~28-32 wt%. Suggested edit: Add specific Kovalevski-et-al. paper citations for each numerical claim, OR convert to ranges (e.g. '10³ to 10⁵ S/m depending on carbon content'). Re-confirm Yoshida 2004 reference, may be a conference abstract not a peer-reviewed paper.

Edited 2026-05-03, source audit. Cited sources verified to exist; no fabricated sources detected. Where the audit could directly read the source (live English-language papers, open Russian academic articles), claims were compared against the source content and corrections applied above. Where sources were paywalled or geo-blocked at audit time, bibliographic plausibility was verified via parallel routes (publisher index pages, PubMed/PMC mirrors, cross-citations) but the source content itself was not always directly read. If a specific claim matters to you, click the source link and verify it yourself.

'Research' threads are entirely AI-assisted where it reads sources and comes back with conclusions and write-ups. AI in 2026 is a useful research tool, not yet perfect. Read the linked sources for yourself before treating any claim as settled. If anything sounds completely cockamamie and/or flat out absurd let alone wrong - feel free to assume why. That being said, with shungite, always do your own research. You may be surprised.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.