Donate
Donate

Gaming the Future: The Book!

Month: April 2002

Assessing the environmental impact of nanotech

An extensive article in Science News Magazine ("Taming High-Tech Particles: Cautious steps into the nanotech future", by Jessica Gorman, 30 March 2002) says that nanotechnology "appears to be a new industry in the making. However, as nanomaterials approach commercial development, some researchers are beginning to look at the potential consequences of putting the new materials into the environment or the body. These scientists' goal is to launch preemptive strikes against any problems that might arise down the line."

The article focuses on research at the new Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN) at Rice University in Houston, one of six new national Nanoscale Science and Engineering Centers (NSECs) established by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) in September 2001 (see Nanodot post from 27 September 2001). The Rice CBEN was also host to a workshop on the possible environmental impacts of nanotechnology in December 2001 (see Nanodot post from 17 December 2001).

The potential environmental impacts of nanotech materials and devices will also be the focus of new research programs recently announced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For more information, see the Nanodot post from 15 March 2002.

Thanks to Mr_Farlops for bringing the Science News item to our attention. He also comments: "Poorly designed nanotechnology could lead to pollution. For example, anti-cancer smart bullets like Sloan-Kettering's nanogenerator and the "Gottingen grenade" could lead to problems if these molecular parts, intentionally designed to infiltrate cells, began to accumulate in the tissues of wild animals and plants. Some nanomachine parts, designed to be as inert as possible like chlorofluorocarbons, may also build up unless some measures are taken to break them down."

Investors Chronicle features nanotechnology

An extensive article in the UK-based Investors Chronicle ("The Next Big Thing Will Be Very, Very Small", by Bill Bows, 1 March 2002) offers some pretty fantastic numbers for the potential nanotech market:

The market for products and processes supported by nanotechnology is estimated to be worth between $20bn and $50bn. Technology-focused investment bank Evolution Capital believes this could grow to $150bn by 2005 and to more than $1trillion by 2010. Mark Welland, professor of nanotechnology at Cambridge University, proclaims: "In the past 30 years the computer chip has revolutionised the way we communicate. Over the next 30 years we will see a revolution of an even greater dimension through nanotechnology."

The article goes on to state:

By bringing the manufacturing process down to the nanoscale, huge advances are possible in creating products that are more versatile, more energy- efficient and more powerful than those currently available. Nanotechnology promises to transform a wide range of scientific fields from precision and electromechanical engineering and mainstream biological and chemical sciences, to medical research.

The remainder of the article takes a look at the venture investment environment in the UK and compares it to developments in the U.S., and concludes with some sound advice:

However revolutionary the advent of nanotechnology appears, hype, from any source, should be avoided, says [a UK venture capitalist]. "We need to deal in reality not hype," he says. "If you want to create sustainable shareholder value you have to be able to deliver something that is going to perform and grow going forward."

U.S. presidential science advisor advocates nanotech

from the good-advice dept.
For some insight into the decision by the Bush administration to request a 17% increase in funding for the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative, read the transcript of an address ("Science Based Science Policy") by the head of the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) and presidential Science Advisor John Marburger to the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Boston on 15 February 2002. Although Marburger was discussing R&D funding as a whole, it is significant that he repeatedly raised the need to support research and development in the field of nanotechnology during his address.

A pair of muddled articles in the Philadelphia Inquirer

An article in the Philadelphia Inquirer ("The tiniest building blocks", by Faye Flam, 1 April 2002) presents a rather muddled view of recent research by David Luzzi and others at the University of Pennsylvania into novel carbon structures, including fullerene molecules inside nanotubes, which the article rather grandiosely describes as "a new form of matter". The article also makes a number of highly disparaging remarks about the prospects for advanced nanotechnology systems . . . as if carbon nanotube research were the end point, rather than a faltering first step. The article is accompanied by a short sidebar that gives an equally muddled presentation on the use of self-assembly to create some interesting nanotube arrays.

[Additional information about the nanotube ìpeapodî research referred to in the article can be found in Nanodot posts from 3 January and 1 March 2002.]

Magnetic Properties of Nanocrystals

Gina Miller writes "More on the magnetic properties of nanocrystals in United Press International's Nanotech could power future magnets (30 March 2002), an interview with Laura Henderson Lewis, materials scientist at Brookhaven National Laboratory's Department of Applied Science. "Tomorrow's supermagnets could be made of molecule-sized chunks of materials that normally would never interact, possibly creating magnetic fields strong enough to levitate trains at room temperature…" Lewis studies how magnetic materials perform and interact at the micro- and nano-scale, which involve groups of hundreds of atoms or even single molecules. Because magnetic atoms only affect other atoms a nanometer or so distant, engineering the structure of materials on the nanometer scale provides unique opportunities to control the magnetic properties of the materials. The methods mentioned for achieving nanometer scale control of structure are, however, not especially molecular – rapid solidification and milling with steel balls. For other coverage of nanomaterials research at Brookhaven National Laboratory, see Nanodot post of March 22, 2002 Brookhaven Lab launches nanomaterials research effort"

Nano: Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise?

Gina Miller writes "Nanotechnology: Is It Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise? is the topic of an article at Power Electronics Technology dated March 1, 2002. Sam Davis, the Editor, invokes the $500 million National Nanotechnology Initiative and Pres. Bush's proposed increase in the program as evidence that nanotechnology should be taken seriously. Davis explains how re-arranging atoms could provide us with new semiconductors and improved integrated circuits. He cites the book Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, by Drexler, Peterson, and Pergamit (1991) and quotes Ralph C. Merkle of the Zyvex Corp on what nanotechnology will mean. And last but not least he notes the problems nanotechnology could bring in the form of deliberate abuse or accidents, and the Foresight Institute's draft of guidelines for developing nanotechnology to minimize those problems. He summarizes by asking "Although nanotechnology products are years away, is this a good thing, or bad? Is it an ethical problem, similar to nuclear energy with its good and bad points? Is it a threat to power electronics engineering and manufacturing as we know it? Is the 'march of science' going too far?" Is he worried primarily about threats to the job security of power electronics engineers?"

DNA Computer Solves Complex Problem

Gina Miller writes "AScribe reports on March 14, 2002 Using 'Nature's Toolbox,' DNA Computer Solves Complex Problem; Molecular Technology May One Day Outstrip Computers. Leonard Adleman, computer science professor at USC famed for his 1994 demonstration that DNA could be used for computation, has now used a DNA based computer to solve a logic problem (a 20-variable instance of the NP-complete three-satisfiability (3-SAT) problem) that required an exhaustive search of more than a million possibilities. Unlike the simple problem solved by his 1994 demonstration, which could easily be solved by a human with pencil and paper, no human could solve this problem without the aide of a computer. Although the current massively parallel DNA computer could not match the performance of a modern electronic serial computer, it could have advantages in certain situations. "We've shown by these computations that biological molecules can be used for distinctly non-biological purposes," Adleman said. "They are miraculous little machines. They store energy and information, they cut, paste and copy." For another approach to computation with DNA, see the Nanodot post from 23 November 2001."

Nanorods: Nanometer-sized crystalline oxide rods e

Gina Miller writes "An article in the March 4, 2002 issue of Chemical & Engineering News ("Three-Element Nanorods: Nanometer-sized crystalline oxide rods exhibit useful properties" by Mitch Jacoby) reports that researchers at Harvard University, led by assistant chemistry professor Hongkun Park, have succeeded in using a solution chemistry procedure to prepare single-crystal nanorods composed of transition metal oxides. Specifically, they made nanorods of barium titanate (BaTiO3) and strontium titanate (SrTiO3) with diameters ranging from 5 to 60 nm and lengths exceeding 10 micrometers. These nanocrystals have interesting electrical and magnetic properties. "The group has demonstrated that the materials are promising candidates as media for high-density data storage. The new synthesis strategy may be extended to other classes of materials and provides new opportunities for investigations in piezo- and ferroelectricity, magnetoresistivity, and other areas." (For another recent breakthrough with inorganic nanorods possessing useful electrical properties, see this Nanodot post from 30 March 2002.)"

Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin Podcast Spotify
0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop
    Continue Shopping

      Search Foresight Institute