Recently there have been a spate of media articles triggered by a July 13 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office to the effect that, as an LA Times piece put it: “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is failing to protect the public from tens of thousands of toxic compounds because it has not gathered… Continue reading Let's put nanotechnology in larger chemical context
In an Alternet article called The Evolution of Frankenfoods?, there’s a comment on voluntary controls on nanotech: “Jennifer Sass of the Natural Resources Defense Council worries that industry will get its way on voluntary, rather than enforceable, regulations. ‘Having these kinds of joint partnerships and collaborative efforts is a good thing,’ she says, ‘But without… Continue reading Nanotechnology controls: Voluntary or required?
Robert Bradbury writes: “Re: House Hearing on: “Nanotechnology: Where Does the U.S. Stand?” June 29, 2005. Sean Murdock’s testimony (pdf available) has some very illuminating graphs and some interesting observations such as: Next, the government must fully and effectively utilize the SBIR and ATP programs to enhance commercialization activity. Many member companies speak of the… Continue reading House Hearing on Nanotechnology: Where Does the U.S. Stand?
Robert Bradbury brings our attention to Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2006. He writes: “Though the abstract mentions cutting the NNI by 2.5% to $1.1B the report itself mentions nanotechnology 4 times and several of those are in the context of specific areas that are to receive increased funding (so it isn’t clear to me… Continue reading Confusion on 2006 NNI budget
[Update: Welcome, Instapundit readers. If you would like future nanotech news emails, just type your email address in the “Free Registration” box to the right.–CP] In the Summer 2005 Issues in Science and Technology, two of the primary White House advocates for the original U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative, Neal Lane and Tom Kalil, issue a… Continue reading Original NNI advocates issue warning plus 8 recommendations
We in the U.S. who are interested in nanotech tend to focus on NSF, but DoE deserves substantial attention as well. See their overview page, and then download the pdf brochure on their nanoscale science research centers (worth the effort for the illustrations alone): Center for Functional Nanomaterials, Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies, Center for Nanophase… Continue reading Unsung hero of nanotech: U.S. Department of Energy
Bored with the U.S. NNI? Check out the Iranian NanoTechnology Initiative. It’s a beautiful site due to the pretty alphabet, which is unfortunately completely unreadable by me, Google, or Babelfish. How about a translation of some key elements, readers in Iran? (Credit: Elaine Tschorn)
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) has issued its five-year review of the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative. You can read the whole 60-page pdf, or just Howard Lovy’s humorous summary. Or, go with my summary: They like it.
