Hey, these are some notes that resulted from a lot of reading for a
nanotechnology presentation in school. It might be too late but I hope
you find it helpful (maybe some sources are lacking for quotes).
Gluck.
Upshot in Nanotechnology
In U.S. funding for Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), which started at
$270 million in 2000 is now set to approach 2005. Worldwide
government-funded nano research has gone from $500 million in 1997 to
over $3.5 in 2004.
775 companies and organizations in U.S. alone are engaged in nanotechnology.
Already 130 nano-based products on the market
And U.S. estimates, nanotech economy will be worth $1 trillion by 2012.
Efforts Towards Precautionary Measures
Most observers (aside from ETC group activists) agree that its too
early to start regulating
Greenpeace chief scientist says materials considered hazardous until
proven otherwise
Head of NNI agrees that caution must be taken and initiatives are visible:
Has funded studies of the social, ethical, and environmental
implications of nanotech
NNI currently devotes 11% of its budget on health and environmental
studies ($106 million)
EPA has sponsored three extramural grant programs, 32 nanotech
environmental studies
NSF gave Colvin at Rice $10.5 million to explore effect of
nanomaterials on aqueous sys.
National Toxicology Program will spend $5 million a year by 2008
NIOSH has established 6 year program on nanoparticle toxicology.
Corporations that invest heavily in the field are also scrambling to
get a handle on the safety of nanomaterials?they don?t want to make a
vested investment and have problems with it
Companies should let consumers know up front which products contain nanomaterials:
showcasing benefits of technology while letting individuals decide
whether to consume
Panzera?s article (June 2004)
?While legal liabilities will be a limiting force in the drive to
profit from nanoparticles, exactly what is legally safe or in
compliance with regulations is not firmly established.?
(may lie in further results of toxicity tests)
Chlorinated Solvents
ECSA (European Chlorinated Solvent Association) ? will follow their
guidelines in our plant
Further, will ask them to help us ensure safe production, as they are
committed to help
(1,1,1 trichloroethane has been banned as of 1995)
Three principle solvents: methylene chloride, perchloreoethylene, trichloroethylene
Do not deplete ozone layer, no evidence that they cause cancer in
humans, contribution to global warming, acid rain, and smog is
neglible
Facts have been researched extensively, substantiated by years of
experience of manufacture and use of chlorinated solvents, rigorous
scientific testing and review of scientific literature.
Degrade within 6-8 days (trichloroethylene) or 5-6 months (other two),
non are bioaccumulative
Rice Interview with Colvin (director)
Are dangers of nanomaterials well understood?
We can learn a lot from particle toxicologists and bioengineers but
impacts of small nano-engineered particles (under 20 nm)?information
isn?t available
Nanomaterials are diverse and it will be a while before substantial
data is available
Colvin: ?you have to weight the amazing benefits of nanotech against
what is now not a well understood risk.?
When asked if there should be regulations on nanotech, Colvin: ?in the
next few years?no.?
?ultimately people have to make a cost-versus-benefits decision?
?society will be forced to make a decision in the absence of data?
Natotechnology ? ability to do things on the scale of atoms and
molecules to exploit the novel properties found at that scale
Nanoscale structures operate on mesoscale, an area where both
classical and quantum physics influence behavior.
Two fabrication processes:
top-down (creating nanostructures by machining down)
scanning probe microscope, optical techniques, lithographics
bottom-up (creating structures atom by atom, molecule by molecule)
self-assembly, organic/inorganic hybrid structures, software modelling
most of current nanotech exists uses top-down and advancement of
bottom-up is an indirect measure of the progress of the industry
major plus: nanotechnology is anticipated to yield significant
advances in catalyst tech.
enables the production of wide range of materials and fuels
huge expected market impact for novel materials and process
(over $340 billion in next decade)
Nanoparticle coatings (possibly for building materials) have been
shown to possess increased hardness when compared with conventional
coatings.
For textiles, incorporation of nanoparticles and capsules into
clothing lead to increased lightness and durability, and ?smart?
fabrics that can change their properties dep. on env.
Nanotubes (50-100 times stronger than steel at 1/6 weight) are
presumed to be building material of the future (make possible the
dream of space elevator)
However, field is already over saturated
In order to make things you need fabrication tools. Tools provide
means for characterization during R&D, large-scale manufacturing, and
support for quality control.
Governments are strategically interested in nanotech?so that when
applications become signif. countries exploit opportunities in full
(has the ability to shift balance of military power and affect global
balance of power in the energy markets)
Global R&D public investment is increasing rapidly (503% between ?97 and ?02)
US is world leader in nanotech research?Nanotechnology Initiative
(NNI) founded 2000
¼ of all publications are related to nanotech
avg growth rate of nanopatents in 1990s was 7%
but ¼ of patents focuses on instrumentation (indicating beginning of
development phase)
Japan leads the Far East in funding and focuses mostly on microbots,
Germany leads Europe
ETC says that by 2012, the entire market will be dependent on nanotech.
Effect that nanotech will have during next decade is difficult to
estimate because of potentially new and unanticipated applications.
NSF feels computing and pharmaceuticals will benefit early but first
products will be introduced to markets where price doesn?t matter
Moore?s law ? processing power of ICs doubles every 18 months
theoretically reaches 100 nm scale in 2004 and optical lithography is obsolete
semiconductor challenges: limits to reduction of scale for
transistors, overheating limits
molecular nanoelectronics (solution) offer the smallest electronics
theoretically possible
molecular memory, processors that use self-assembly combined with top-down
however will not be developed within 15 years because of cost efficiency issues
pharmaceuticals and medicine ? reduced unwanted side effects, lower
doses open possibilities
transition from drug discovery by screening to purposeful engineering
of target molecules
nanoparticles can enter tumour pores (cancer treatment)
nanocapsules help therapeutic agent evade immune system
energy ? significant changes in lighting technology in over next 10-15 years
can reduce worldwide consumption of energy by more than 10%
PV (photovoltaic) production may be 20 years before becomes competitive
nanorods: long term possibility for cheap and efficient solar cells
defense ? cleaner, safer, less collateral damage
spending by big firms in 2002 is anticipated to match or even exceed
government spending
transnational companies often carry out their own nano-tech related
R&D: they recognize that nanotech is likely to disrupt their current
productions and they have to be ready
investment community have decided that nanotech is ?next big thing?
investment groups funding was projected to increase to $1 billion in 2003.
Some proponents blow possible advantages out of proportion with utopic
vision, setting very high expectations that cannot be met
Actual steps needed for molecular manufacturing (bottom-up):
1. suitable molecular building blocks must be found
2. ability to assemble complex structures
3. systems design and engineering
Nanobots have amazing possibilities in long-term but nothing great in short term
ideal realization poses ?Holy Grail? of nanotechnology in a General Assembler
(can build any type of macromolecule required piece by piece)
Professor Smalley feels that there are fundamental limitations that
make dream imposs.
Difficult to foresee nanotechnology outcomes so difficult to predict
specific threats and risks from current trends.
?virtually no one has been tracking the potentially negative impacts
of nanotechnology?s present day products (ETC Group, 2002a)
Environmental concerns:
Non-biodegradable pollutants that scientist have little understanding of
Micro versions of products have undergone testing but nano versions remain untested
Nanomaterials provide large and active surface for adsorbing
contaminants, thus providing avenue for rapid and long-range transport
in underground water
Nanomaterials can bind to common harmful substances in environment and
infiltrate humans
Researchers report that nanoparticles can penetrate living cells and
accumulate in animal organs
Little work has been done to ascertain possible effects of
nanomaterials on living systems
Nanoparticles can effect protein structure by direct interaction
Can allow harmful materials to slip by immune system
?it is possible to speculate that nanoscale inorganic matter is
generally biologically inert?
Has not been determined what happens if large quantities of material
are absorbed by human.
Self-replicating nanorobots can convert natural environment into ?nanomass?
possible runaway replication of inflexible, unadaptable machines
(something to fear)
Sociopolitical concerns ? disruptive nature of nanotech in terms of
economy and foreign relat.
Medical ethics ? worries about genetic discrimination:
How can you fix an anomaly and make it normal without defining what ?normal? is?
Nano-divide ? current IT divide between powers and third-world
countries will be exacerbated
Destructive uses ? fears of nano-technological arms race
Industry objective is to launch strikes against any problems with
public acceptance of nanotech
(attempt to educate the public on these matters started as early as 1986)
White House Fact Sheet (2000) promised that impact of nanotechnology
on society from legal, ethical, social, economic, and workforce
preparation perspectives would be studied.
Theorizing about consequences of nanoparticles accumulating in food
chain is insufficient for practical conclusions
Scientists, however, reluctant to invest in discovering how bad these
materials are because they are too interested in showing how good
these materials can be (curing diseases and such)
Precautionary approach ? regulatory action can be taken before
conclusive evidence (possibility)
Nanotech advocates allude to broad interdisciplinary scope of the
field to undermine many possible regulationist policies (since its so
broad, how do you decide what to regulate)
?While there is no way of knowing, a priori, the unintended and higher
order consequences of nanotechnology, the participation of
environmental and social scientists in the field may allow for
important issues to be identified earlier?and necessary corrective
actions??
But remember that R&D steps are being taken by same corporations that manufacture |
