Category: Media Mentions

from the death-by-committeee dept.
An article in the Philadelphia Business Journal ("Coalition aims to aid startups", by Peter Key, 29 March 2002) tells of yet another organization aimed at fostering economic development being established in Pennsylvania. According to the article, "five Philadelphia universities, a business incubator and an economic development organization have joined forces to boost the number of technology and life-science startups in the region. Called the Commercialization Working Group, its first task will be to help the Port of Technology incubator in University City bring technological innovations to market." One of the efforts to be supported is the Nanotechnology Institute, a venture among the University of Pennsylvania, Drexel University and the Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Southeastern Pennsylvania, a state-funded economic development organization. An official said the timing for the group is right because it comes after smaller efforts by the region's schools and tech organizations to work together, such as the Nanotechnology Institute.

Well, maybe. For all the organizational dithering over the past year or two, Pennsylvania hasnít yet got much real results to show from its nanotechnology programs (see Nanodot posts from 30 July and 17 December 2001, and 9 November 2000.

from the World-Watch dept.
The Asahi Shimbun in Japan ran an interview Koji Omi, Japanese State Minister in Charge of Science and Technology Policy ("Koji Omi: Unite nanotechnology with biotechnology", 8 April 2002), about the government's future strategy and outlook on the subject of nanotechnology. Some interesting comments by Mr. Omi:

• Although Japanese nanotechnology is said to be advanced, actually, I am very worried about its future. While companies are conducting research that looks five years ahead, none of them is directed at 20 years into the future. Traditionally the Japanese idea of nanotechnology has been molecular-level processing to expand the capacity of integrated circuits by reducing the size of circuit elements used in information technology. Silicon is the material currently used to make circuit elements. When I visited the United States in January and exchanged views with top-class researchers in Washington and elsewhere, they all agreed that the days of silicon as circuit element material are numbered. The question is how can we beat the limits of silicon. I think nanotechnology can serve as a means to overcome the problem.
• I visited the newly established Beckman Institute at the California Institute of Technology. Specialists in physics, chemistry, biology and computer science are doing research in the same room. I also met with researchers at such top-level U.S. universities as Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford and University of California, Berkeley. They all shared the view that from now on, such interdisciplinary research will become increasingly important. . . . In Japan, however, research systems are sectionalized. Physicists study physics, chemists concentrate on chemistry and biologists engage in biological research. Researchers don't even know what their colleagues in other field are doing in the lab next door. At this rate, I am worried that we would eventually lose the competition as all-around players. Even when capable talent enters an important field of research, they may be able to lead the race up to a point but could soon run into a wall.
• [A planned graduate school university in Okinawa] will have a 500-strong faculty and the same number of students. In keeping with European and American universities, the school year will start in September and all classes will be held in English. In terms of education and research, the central subject will be biology but it will be merged with physics, chemistry and information technology. In other words, it will be a fusion of nanotechnology and biotechnology.

A not-very-informative article in InfoWorld ("CTO Forum: Drexler declares nanotechnology victory", by Mark Jones, 10 April 2002) gives a brief summary of remarks made by K. Eric Drexler, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Molecular Manufacturing and Foresight Board Chair, at the InfoWorld CTO Forum on 9 April 2002. According to the article, "After 30 years, Dr. K. Eric Drexler Tuesday night declared that debate over the validity of nanotechnology [had been] 'won by default'. . . . The Foresight Institute chairman who first coined the term nanotechnology in 1971 dissected what has only until recent times been an overlooked debate. 'It's time to argue for the future with nanotechnology,' he said."

from the World-Watch dept.
A rather rambling article that appeared in the China Daily ("Winning a high-profile niche in nano technology", by Bao Xinyan and He Sheng, 26 March 2002) tries to summarize a report issued by the Chinese Academy of Sciences titled "High Technology Development in China, 2002", which includes coverage of advances in nano-scale science, materials and technology. According to the article, the report notes that "Most of the accomplishments were made in areas of research and development of nano materials, whereas advances in the areas of nano-electronics and nano biological research are still rather meager. . . . This is in sharp contrast with research at the forefront of nano technology in the world, which focuses on the research and development of nano-sized machinery and electronics." The article also includes comments from prominent Chinese researchers and administrators.

from the me,-too dept.
For some reason, the University of Illinois felt compelled to issue a press release (5 April 2002) to note the participation of UI researchers from the Frederick Seitz Materials Research Laboratory in collaborative work with two of the U.S. national Nanoscale Science and Engineering Centers established by the National Science Foundation in September 2001 (see Nanodot post from 27 September 2001). The release notes that the NSF Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center for Directed Assembly of Nanostructures is a partnership among the UI, the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y., and the Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M.

from the World-Watch dept.
An article in the Canadian National Post ("Nanotech revolution is coming (wait for it)", by Jill Vardy, 29 March 2002) repeats many of the increasingly common shibboleths regarding the emerging nanotech sector, including cautions about nano-hype: "Growing hype and bigger R&D budgets won't change the fact this science is still years away from practical application"

"I think we do have to be careful about managing expectations of the investment community and the public," said Dan Waynor, acting director-general of Canada's new National Institute of Nanotechnology, which is being set up in an engineering school at the University of Alberta's Edmonton campus while it waits for its own building. The $C120-million (about $US 75.3 million) institute, paid for by the federal and Alberta governments and the university, will eventually employ 150 National Research Council staff, 70 professors and 250 students doing nanotechnology research. "It will become a major centre for nanotechnology research on a global scale," Dr. Wayner said. Specifics of the institute's nanotechnology research plans will be unveiled in late April.

"There is a tremendous amount of hype around nanotechnology. But at the same time this is extremely important technology," said James Hollenhorst, director of the Electronics Research Laboratory at Agilent Technologies. "The investment community is interested in really exciting basic science work in universities and other labs … but what's getting attention right now is stuff that for the next 10 years or so will not be ready for real commercial business applications."

Dr. Wayner agrees that we're still years away from the big commercial and medical breakthroughs that nanotechnology promises. "There may be short-term applications of nanotechnology but most experts agree the payoff is 10 to 15 years down the road. We don't know enough about the science of nanotechnology yet to have a clear sense of what the economic impact will be in the next 10 years. But it will be enormous. It will be transformational and revolutionary."

For more information on Canadaís nanotechnology programs, see the Nanodot post from 11 January 2002.

from the World-Watch dept.
An article in the The Press ("Boost for researchers", by Tara Ross, 27 March 2002), a regional publication serving the South Island of New Zealand, reports that the University of Canterbury's Nanostructure Engineering, Science and Technology (Nest) Group will get significant funding through its partnership with Victoria in the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology. In March, the New Zealand national government announced that five centers that would share its new and hotly contested $NZ60 million (about $US 26.2 million) Centre of Research Excellence (CORE) funding. The McDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, a partnership between Canterbury and Victoria Universities, has been awarded $NZ3.6 million (about $US 1.57 million) annually from the CORE fund. Some additional detail can be found in another article from New Zealand InfoTech ("New frontier in computing lies in the minuscule", by Judy Voullaire, 8 April 2002),

For additional background on the CORE funding for nanotech research in New Zealand, see the Nanodot post from 8 March 2002.

from the World-Watch dept.
According to an article in the Korea Herald ("Korea earmarks W200 bil. for nanotech", by Yang Sung-jin, 13 March 2002) South Korea will invest 203.1 billion won (about $US 153 million) in nanotechnology this year and seek a revision of related laws to accelerate NT projects, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) said on 12 March 2002. The ministry said it will expand research, facilities and manpower in the nanotech sector during 2002. Accordingly, the 2002 investment figure of 203.1 billion won is up 93% from 105.2 billion won (about $US 79 million) last year.

"Nanotechnology is still a fledgling technology and there's a great shortage of seasoned engineers. Therefore, one of the major focuses of the NT initiative is to secure as many high-quality nanotechnology engineers as possible," the ministry said.

Last year, the science ministry drew up a ten-year master plan to nurture [nanotechnology] in an initial step to catch up with the global trend. The long-term plan breaks down into three stages until 2010, with the government pouring 1.37 trillion won (about $US 1.03 billion) in state and private investments into the project in a bid to pave the way for the introduction of a nanotech infrastructure within five years. According to the report, the plan calls for the production of "at least 10 cutting-edge NT products and produce 13,000 NT experts by 2010 in a bid to compete with other advanced countries."

For more information on South Korean nanotech initiatives, see the Nanodot post from 16 January 2002.