I think William raised a good point. If these artillery shells are 5x more lethal, does that mean 5x the explosive force? Whatever the percentage or factor, it's greater explosive force which means they're likely to be more dangerous to store, as well as to deploy.
I would be concerned about the stability of the materials under various conditions. Unstable ordinance just sounds like it would be really unpleasant. The reason for this concern is that it seems to me that materials that are able to explode would be a bit more reactive, and thus less likely to be completely stable. But perhaps there is another answer.
Jhankwitz, you are right. Every year government is spending billion of USD for military R&D inorder to strengthen the national security and weapon systems. I think the same technology can also be use for common peoples benefit also. For example, the light weight materials using in space craft can be used for making artificial limbs etc.
500 percent more lethal just means 5x more lethal. Although that's a lot, considering the fragments will release both kinetic and chemical energy. The only non-military use I can imagine is for the other apps of explosives, such as mining work, although I don't see what chemical energy will bring to that effort. It would be interesting to know what chemicals are involved.
Although plastics make up only about 11% of all US municipal solid waste, many are actually more energy-dense than coal. Converting these non-recycled plastics into energy with existing technologies could reduce US coal consumption, as well as boost domestic energy reserves, says a new study.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.