From Nanotech Briefs, on whose Editorial Advisory Board I am privileged to serve: “Nanotech Briefs announces the Second annual Nano 50™, the ultimate list of the top 50 technologies, products, and innovators that have significantly impacted – or will impact – key nanotechnology commercial markets, from automotive and electronics, to biomedical and materials. The Nano… Continue reading Nominate this year's Nano 50 by March 1
Robert Bradbury brings to our attention an article by John Markoff in The New York Times on the inclusion of nanotech into the semiconductor industry’s roadmap: “Nanotechnology is officially on the road map. A handful of futuristic chip-making technologies at the atomic scale have been added to an industry planning effort that charts the future… Continue reading Nanotech included in semiconductor industry roadmap
Carl Wherrett and John Yelovich over at The Motley Fool investor website take on the purveyors of FUD (a derogatory term implying the unreasonable or excessive promotion of fear, uncertainty, and doubt) on nanotechnology: “We are not advocating simply ignoring basic health and safety concerns as they may relate to nanotech, but we strongly urge… Continue reading Investor advisors defend nanotech against FUD
John Bartlett of U.S. EPA has let us know how and when to submit public comments on the recent EPA Nanotechnology White Paper draft: “EPA states in the notice that all comments received by January 31, 2006, will be shared with the external peer review panel that is being convened to review the White Paper.… Continue reading Deadline January 31 for comments to external review panel for EPA Nanotechnology White Paper
The Motley Fool’s Jack Uldrich on DuPont: “Essentially, DuPont is publicly acknowledging that there are possible risks in nanoscale material and nanoparticles; and it’s actively working to identify and — if feasible — minimize or eliminate those risks as quickly and efficiently as possible… “DuPont’s stance is a refreshing change from your typical corporate position,… Continue reading DuPont gets investor kudos for nanotech responsibility
From the folks who bring you Materials Today (i.e., Elsevier), there’s also Nano Today. It’s an occasional supplement to the main publication, both of which are free of charge to those who meet their circulation profile. Sign up here. Selected articles are available free to all on the Nano Today website. For the December 2005… Continue reading Nano Today: free supplement to Materials Today
California’s Blue Ribbon Task Force on Nanotechnology (on which I am privileged to serve) issued its final report today. From Keay Davidson of the SF Chronicle: “In effect, it calls for a nanotech version of the state’s stem cell initiative, another instance in which the Golden State jumped on a high-tech bandwagon that many claim… Continue reading California aims to expand nano role
Criticism from a Nobel physicist seems to be triggering a re-thinking of nanotech strategy in Russia. A decision on the proposed new, more tightly coordinated Federal Target Program is expected by March. Current funding for 2005 is said to be $49 million, and it’s hard to get much done at that level. —Christine
Chuck Jaffe of MarketWatch discourages average investors from investing in today’s early nano fund: “It’s not that nanotechnology is a bad business or that exchange-traded funds are a poor idea. It’s that the combination of the two, at this point in time, can’t deliver what investors like Roger really want, namely an intense focus on… Continue reading Average investors discouraged in finding nanotech pure-play
California’s Blue Ribbon Task Force on Nanotechnology — on which I am I proud to serve — will hold its final meeting this coming Monday. The public portion of the meeting begins at 1 PM (press at 12:30 PM). Hope to see you there: “California State Controller Steve Westly and Congressman Mike Honda will receive… Continue reading California nano task force final meeting is open to public
