I would (and will, actually), but the TEM spatial resolution is crucial to what I am doing.

Thank you, I saw that reference too, but it was behind a paywall and not in our library collection.  I guess I have my answer now, I just need to find a supplier for fullerite or glassy carbon in TEM-friendly form.  I guess I could also try grinding some glassy carbon up and evaporate it onto a grid from an alcohol suspension if bulk samples are all that are available.  Another quick question, in case you know.  Can one be confident that a product labeled as glassy carbon will always be ~100% sp2?  I see lots of papers taking this for granted, and it does make sense given the synthesis temperature, but I haven't seen any spectroscopic characterization showing that is the case (MW Raman, NEXAFS, NMR, etc.).

I would go for glassy carbon for an sp2 type standard.

(also, just to save some effort in the future, the position of the plasmon EELS peak can be used for sp2/sp3 ratio)

Carbon nanotubes are entirely composed of sp2 bonds, however defect sites in CNTs i.e., open ends, vacancies etc form sp3 sites within their structures. Such sp3/sp2 ratio can be evaluated by Raman spectroscopy. e.g by evaluating the D band to G band ratio which in other terms is useful in quantifying sp2 network , quality and crystallinity of CNTs. (I have published few articles on this topic, please find in my page). Compared to CVD (chemical vapor deposition) synthesized CNTs, Arc discharge method grown CNTs are of high quality and of more sp2 content.

Thank you Matthew and Khurram,

I'll look into preparing these standards for putting into the TEM.  I have seen that you can get the hybridization ratio from the plasmon band (much as in XPS), although I need to look closer to see how reliable it is.  I like the idea of using CNT's as a standard, as it seems likely getting an electron transparent layer to stick to a TEM grid might be fairly easy.

Best,

Brandon