What Would You Say?

After a yearlong hiatus, I thought it was about time that I got back on the nano-horse and giddy-yupped into some new thoughts and understandings regarding that tiny little thing we call “nanotechnology.”

As previous readers understand, when I say “nanotechnology” I mean all nanoscale technologies, of which there are thousands today and millions on the technological horizon.

In late 2009, I presented several thought-leaders with the same question that I had asked in years past. “If you had the attention of the entire world, what would you say about nanoscale technologies?”

The answers that I received bring us a step closer to realizing that there continues to be an urgent need for society to pay attention to the mind-boggling rapid growth in our understanding and implementation of nanoscale technologies. Let me put it another way: We are learning more about (and more really important stuff about) why things are different at the nanoscale.

There are maybe a few hundred individuals who understand advanced technologies and can articulate their impact as well as these contributors. (Full disclosure: these folks are long-time, long distance, global-connectivity friends and associates. I seriously respect their individual and collective understanding of and opinions regarding advanced technologies. Mike Treder, Robert A. Freitas Jr. , Neil Gordon, Jack Uldrich and Vic Peña are just some of the world-class minds who you should spend a small part of your time listening to, if you do not do so already.)


From the Futurist

From the futurist we learn that nanoscale technologies are simply another set of new technologies that we need to understand and prepare for. How important are they? They are important on the order of: today and every day that follows, we will be introduced to another of thousands of new products that owe their technological and market leadership to “nanotechnology.” Today and every day that follows we will be confronted by decisions regarding whether or not to allow a nanotech-enabled product into the market; whether or not to pull an existing product from the market because it is simply connected to “nanotech” (or is in fact faulty in some way, thereby tarnishing with the same brush every other nano-enable product). As sure as the day after today is tomorrow, nanotech-enabled products will create a huge stir within society. How well we adapt to those products depends on how much we pay attention, today.


From the Medical Scientist

From the medical scientist we learn that “Medical nanorobotics holds the greatest promise for curing disease and extending the human healthspan.” Cool! Count me in! Nanotech-enabled machines roving around in my body, repairing cellular damage, detecting disease and malfunction, and generally keeping me a fit old son, yeah, count me in. Make me smarter you say?! COUNT ME IN!


From the economists/business men

And from the economists/business men we learn that critically important dollars are not being spent on nanoscale technologies, but are instead being squandered on “business as usual” and politics. Why, oh why, do we sit ineffectively by and watch as our leaders, of both parties, waste our dollars and squander both our future and our grandchildren’s heritage?

We also learn to have a sense of excitement regarding the short- and long-term potential of nanoscale technologies (in spite of our leader’s ineptitude, short-term-gains mindset and back-room dealings).

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. -- Winston Churchill, November 1947


What can we learn from this? Depends on who you are. Average citizens may feel a bit overwhelmed by the exceeding complexity of the science, the enormous potential for societal change, and/or the continued nonsensical meddling in the markets by our elected officials. Scientists, economists, innovators, inventors, investors, and savvy business folk know without a doubt that nano-enabled technologies, followed by the inevitable advanced products, will create massive shock-waves in each of their respective areas. By the way, that means if you can answer “Yes” to “Do you live on Planet Earth?” then count on the fact that the future is going to present us with an increasingly complex and exuberantly abundant supply of new technologies that will change our lifestyles and force us sit up and pay attention.

Of course, that is just my take; the futurist, the medical scientist, and the economists/business men may hit you from a totally divergent p-o-v, and yet I bet we all agree that “May you live in interesting times” never meant as much as it does right here, right now (are you paying attention yet?)

Rocky Rawstern, March 15, 2010

Here are their answers


Mike Treder – Our Future Depends on Us / Technology is Only a Tool

Every technology—no matter how powerful—is never a solution in itself. It is only a tool, to be used by its owners for good or for ill. This is as true for nanotechnology as it was for electricity or for the printing press before it.

We should never fall into the trap of looking for or expecting our technologies to save us. Emerging technologies—whether nanotech or AI or synthetic biology do not emerge into nor from a vacuum. They are always developed within a context of political reality, amidst the daily tussle over regulation, funding, and proper usage. They do not arise fully-grown and pristine, but are hammered out, molded, shaped, and modified through endless discussions in corporate boardrooms and the halls of government.

Thus, the color of our future depends much more on us—that is, on our political practices and choices—than on our technologies.

(c) 2010 Mike Treder

Mike Treder is the managing director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, is a prolific writer, speaker, and activist with a background in media and communications. He has published dozens of articles and papers and been interviewed numerous times by the media. As an accomplished presenter on the societal implications of emerging technologies, Mr. Treder has addressed conferences and groups around the world, including in the U.S., Canada, Great Britain, Spain, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, and Brazil.

Treder co-founded the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN) in 2002 and served as its executive director for six years. CRN promotes public awareness and education about the implications of molecular manufacturing, with the aim of creating and implementing wise, comprehensive, and balanced plans for global management of the technology. Treder currently sits on the Board of Advisors for CRN.

In addition to his work with the IEET, Mike Treder is a consultant to the Millennium Project of the American Council for the United Nations University, serves on the Scientific Advisory Board for the Lifeboat Foundation, is a member of the New York Academy of Sciences, a consultant to the Future Technologies Advisory Group, and a member of the World Future Society.

Visit ieet.org/index.php/IEET/bio/treder/



Robert A. Freitas Jr. – Molecular Manufacturing and Medical Nanorobotics

The ultimate tool of nanomedicine is the medical nanorobot – a robot the size of a bacterium, composed of molecule-size parts somewhat resembling macroscale gears, bearings, and ratchets. Like a regular robot, a nanorobot may be made of many thousands of mechanical parts, such as bearings and gears, composed of strong diamond-like material. A nanorobot will have motors to make things move, and perhaps manipulator arms or mechanical legs for mobility. It will have a power supply for energy, sensors to guide its actions, and an onboard computer to control its behavior. Medical nanorobotics holds the greatest promise for curing disease and extending the human healthspan.

To build medical nanorobots, we need to create a new technology called molecular manufacturing. Molecular manufacturing is the production of complex atomically precise structures using positionally controlled fabrication and assembly of nanoparts inside a nanofactory. We’ve published the first description of a complete set of tools and positionally controlled reactions that should enable building small bits of perfect diamond crystal, based on extensive analysis and quantum chemistry simulations of a large number of potential tooltips and reaction sequences.

Ralph Merkle and I founded the Nanofactory Collaboration to coordinate a combined experimental and theoretical R&D program to design and build the first working diamondoid nanofactory. This long-term effort is developing the initial technology of positionally controlled mechanosynthesis of diamondoid structures using engineered tooltips and simple molecular feedstock. One of our international colleagues is undertaking direct experiments to build and validate several of our proposed mechanosynthesis tooltips.

(c) 2010 Robert A. Freitas Jr.

Robert A. Freitas Jr., J.D., published the first detailed technical design study of a medical nanorobot ever published in a peer-reviewed mainstream biomedical journal and is the author of Nanomedicine, the first book-length technical discussion of the medical applications of nanotechnology and medical nanorobotics. Volume I was published in October 1999 by Landes Bioscience while Freitas was a Research Fellow at the Institute for Molecular Manufacturing (IMM) in Palo Alto, California. Freitas published Volume IIA in October 2003 with Landes Bioscience while serving as a Research Scientist at Zyvex Corp., a nanotechnology company headquartered in Richardson, Texas during 2000-2004. Freitas is now completing Nanomedicine Volumes IIB and III and is also consulting on diamond mechanosynthesis, molecular assembler design, and nanofactory implementation as Senior Research Fellow at IMM. He won the 2009 Feynman Prize in nanotechnology for theory, the 2007 Foresight Prize in Communication, and the 2006 Guardian Award from Lifeboat Foundation.

Visit www.rfreitas.com



Neil Gordon – 2009 was a bad year for nanotechnology

The financial demise of long established nanotechnology companies such as Nanogen, Evident Technologies, Luna Innovations, and NanoDynamics may be an expected fall-out of the economic downturn. However, the real impact of the financial crisis to nanotechnology is more pronounced.

Technology ventures need funding to develop and commercialize new products. Greater investments are required for advanced offerings employing nanotechnology because of the long time horizon for adopting nanotech into end user products or processes. Not only do nano-enabled products offer the potential for better, faster, cheaper and more environmentally-friendly applications, they also bring high tech R&D and manufacturing jobs that will be in demand for decades to come. So with unprecedented government stimulus spending one might expect a boom time for nanotech companies on the cusp of commercialization.

However, what we are seeing is completely different. Money is being used:

- to reward financiers for bad investment decisions instead of infusing capital to early stage ventures and Series A venture capitalists.
- to create government programs that will increase the cost of health care instead of new technologies for lowering the cost of health care.
- for preventing the spread of a flu strain that killed less than 10% of the infected people from a typical seasonal flu rather than funding new technologies for treating more virulent diseases
- for deploying under-effective counter-terrorism activities instead of new surveillance technologies for the early detection of explosives, illegal drugs, infected people, toxic food, and contaminated water
- to finance bankrupt automobile companies to manufacture the same cars that caused the bankruptcies rather than funding disruptive production and performance innovations that will be competitive against low cost cars from China and India.
- for middlemen to manage and extract fees from carbon cap-and-trade schemes rather acquiring prototypes employing breakthrough energy technologies

So where does nanotechnology stand at the end of 2009? Apparently at the bottom of the 2009 priority list. 2010 appears to be an equally disappointing year.

(c) 2010 Neil Gordon

Neil is the CEO of Early Warning, a NASA spin-off company and co-inventor of the world’s first inline diagnostic nano-biosensor that automatically detects pathogenic bacteria, viruses and parasites in water in under 3 hours. He was previously the President of the Canadian NanoBusiness Alliance, and head of a nanotechnology consulting practice at Sygertech where he was involved in over 20 nanotechnology projects over the last 10 years.

Visit http://www.earlywarninginc.com/

and

nanoscale-materials-and-nanotechnolog.blogspot.com/2009/01/neil-gordon-goes-to-market.html



Jack Uldrich – The impact of nanotechnology is going to be huge

To those who don't believe nanotechnology will change the world in the near future just because it hasn't accomplished much in the last 20 years, consider this little quiz: If a single lily pad began doubling on a pond on the first day of June and doubled each day thereafter until the entire pond was covered by the end of the month, on Day 20 what percentage of the pond would be covered with lily pads?

The answer is one-tenth of one percent. That's right, .1%! What happens over the next 10 days is a little short of amazing -- the entire pond gets covered. Such is the nature of exponential growth.

Now, advances in nanotechnology aren't quite experiencing exponential growth but they are close and over the course of the next decade nanotechnology's impact on material sciences, medicine, and energy are -- like the lily pads' spread over pond in the last few days -- going to be extraordinary."

(c) 2010 Jack Uldrich

jumpthecurve.net
unlearning101.com
Follow Jack at http://twitter.com/jumpthecurve


Vic Peña – The future is here and achievable!

About five years ago, I responded to a similar question. Like this. At that time I was firmly convinced that we had reached an historic milestone in the evolution of science, namely the foundation for the research and development of nanoscale technologies. I still have this conviction. In fact, I am more enthusiastic of the possibilities open to the human experience through nanoscale technologies. “The future is here and achievable.”

The future is here. We are achieving it (especially during the last decade) by accelerating, building, and evolving the principles upon which nanoscale technologies research and development thrive. We have created myriad nano-applications for development and commercialization not generally known or available in the past. We have brought the future to the present and are progressing towards greater achievement.

At the same time, we can say we are not the yet. Achievement in nanoscale technologies is an evolutionary process integrating all disciplines of science. And, we recognize that nanoscale achievement is critically dependent on education and funding. In the United States, the National Nanotechnology Initiative is at the forefront in promoting these. Admittedly, these are subject to the vagaries of societal and economic factors, but consider the advances made in nanoscale technologies.

Imagine what is achievable in our now and present future.

So, what do I say about nanoscale technologies? The future is here and achievable!

(c) 2010 Vic Peña

Co-Founder, nanoTITAN, Inc. (now shuttered)
Former Member, President’s Council of Advisers in Science and Technology (PCAST), Nanotechnology Technical Advisory Group (NTAG)
Former Chairman, Nanotechnology Committee, Northern Virginia Technology Council
Former Member Nanotechnology Advisory Committee, The Virginia House of Delegates
Founding Member Initiative for Nanotechnology in Virginia


In closing

I would like to close with the response from Ray Kurzweil from the previous Q&A. Why am I closing with this quote? Because it best illustrates the immediacy of the need for us to start paying attention (with graphs and charts and things that even I can understand!). (1)

When we have full molecular manufacturing, we will be able to create any physical products we need from information files just as we can create music, movies, and books from pure information today. In about twenty years, the original goals of communism ("from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs") will be achieved not through forced collectivism but through the information technologies of nanotechnology and artificial intelligence.

When will we have full molecular manufacturing? About 10 years after people stop laughing about the difficulty of building the first nanofactory. Let me put it another way: sometime within the next 15 years, possibly a lot sooner. Does that give us enough time to prepare? Certainly, but only if we start now.

May you live in interesting times!

Rocky Rawstern

(1) http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0134.html?printable=1


From the previous Q & A:

http://nanoscale-materials-and-nanotechnolog.blogspot.com/2006/12/nanotechnology-q-pt-i.html

http://nanoscale-materials-and-nanotechnolog.blogspot.com/2006/12/nanotechnology-q-pt-i-more.html

http://nanoscale-materials-and-nanotechnolog.blogspot.com/2006/12/nanoscale-materials-q-pt-i.html

http://nanoscale-materials-and-nanotechnolog.blogspot.com/2006/12/nanotechnology-q-pt-i-more_21.html

Memo to Pres. Obama: Advanced Nanotechnology - What, When, and Why

"Nanotechnology is the engineering of functional systems at the molecular scale. In its advanced form, which should be achieved within the next decade or two, the technology will allow a revolution in manufacturing—building powerful products with atomic precision from the bottom up—and could fundamentally alter our ability to confront challenging issues such as climate change.

Some experts confidently predict that once exponential general-purpose molecular manufacturing is achieved, our worries about global warming and climate change will be over. A relatively simple solution like tiny balloons fitted with adjustable mirrors could, they say, give us all the control we will need to moderate warming and create preferred climate conditions."

Mike Treder
Executive Director
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
http://CRNano.org

In the Blink of an Eye

Drexler's original definition of nanotechnology was "the ability to
construct shapes, devices and machines with atomic precision and to
combine them into a wide range of products inexpensively." Since then,
however, nanotechnology has come quite a ways from this purely
theoretical understanding, according to Rocky Rawstern, editor of
Nanotechnology Now.

Says Rawstern, "I have seen Mercedes-Benz using nanoparticle paint
that helps prevent wear and other companies make [nanotech] golf balls
that reduce slice, nanopowder aluminum for better rockets, stainless-
steel metal for injection-molding, nanosilver particles for anti-
bacterial and disinfectant agents, fullerenes (nanoparticles of
tungsten disulfide) as lubricants, and the list goes on."

According to Rawstern, there are several contemporary definitions of
nanotechnology, of which at least three were "created by different
groups, each with their own agenda."

"Nanotechnology has evolved via a terminology drift and purposeful
misapplication to mean anything smaller than microtechnology," says
Rawstern, "but without referring to mechanisms that have been
purposefully built from nanoscale components, as was originally
intended. This 'evolved' version of the term is more properly
labeled "nanoscale bulk technology,' while the original meaning is now
labeled "molecular nanotechnology' or 'molecular manufacturing (MM).'"

In addition to Drexler's theoretical definition is a working format is
maintained by the National Nanotechnology Initiative, a federal
research and development program established to coordinate nanoscale
science, engineering and technology, which includes:

• development of research and technology at the atomic, molecular or macromolecular levels, in the length scale of approximately 1 nm to 100 nm range
• creation and use of structures, devices and systems that have novel properties and functions because of their small and/or intermediate size
• ability to control or manipulate on the atomic scale

According to Rawstern, the third definition comes from "the nano-
charlatans of the world, who have hijacked the term and are using it
to promote products that are neither nanoscale mechanisms nor
nanoscale materials" by any industry definition.

"Read the news most any day and you will find one or more nano-posers
promoting their wares, none of which are "nanotechnology' in any
meaningful sense of the term," he says. "Their definition: anything we
can slap the label nanotechnology on and get away with."

Inner Space

If Rawstern sounds a little irked, it's not because the field of
nanotechnology is expanding at an exponential rate (some analysts
predict the nanomaterials market will reach $1.4 billion in 2008);
rather, the financial and resource investment necessary to adequately
fund successful nanotech research is too great to squander on
pretenders.

Yet for all this hype, Rawstern says, this technology remains on the
drawing board, not purposefully pursued by any known entity, but
promoted by several. "It has yet to be proven, primarily because there
has been no substantial investment in developing a proof of concept,"
he adds.

What's To Come

The intermarriage of nanotechnology and imaging promises to be a long and prosperous one, with glimpses of additional advances, from imaging to interventional techniques, coming as fast as research allows. Sitharaman, for one, hopes his work will lead to cellular-level diagnosis of treatment efficacy and possibly even spur development of future medicine delivery systems.

"The rational leap of this technology should be to attach antibodies and peptides to these contrast agents to treat diseases," says Sitharaman. "You can attach different kinds of molecules to the fullerene for a more specific sequencing approach. Since they show such high relaxivity rates, we should hopefully be able to look at individual cells."

Of a similar mind is Rawstern, who also believes nanotechnology will expand its presence into the field of drug delivery systems, aided by imaging advances.

"In the next five years, I expect to see human trials on gold nanoshells come to a conclusion regarding their viability," says Rawstern. "They represent a potential end to the scourge of many cancers and an end to the suffering of thousands, if not millions, in the coming decade. Nanosuspension technology, which makes poorly soluble drugs with increased absorption rates, also looks promising. There are many more possibilities; more than anyone would have guessed only 10 years ago."

"No informed person doubts that developments at the nanoscale will be significant," says Rawstern. "We debate the time-frame, the magnitude and the possibilities, but not the likelihood for large-scale change. The least-speculative views suggest that we're in for changes of an order that justifies – if not demands – our undivided attention. Will we be ready?"

CRN at 5 years

The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN) at five years.

An overview of their accomplishments, disappointments, and plans for the future.

“We chose to go back and review what we believed and what we said when we started CRN, and to ponder and report on what we have learned since then.”

Well worth your time reading. In fact, please read this update on CRN and it’s mission.

The most telling paragraph:

It’s interesting to note that while CRN’s time frame for the expected development of molecular manufacturing has shifted back by approximately five years, the mainstream scientific community’s position has been moving forward, from a point of ‘never’, to ‘maybe by the end of the century’, to ‘not until at least 2050’, and now to ‘perhaps around 2030 or so’. These projections might not yet match up exactly with CRN’s, but the gap is steadily shrinking.

If I have said it once I have said it a thousand times:

No informed person doubts that developments at the nanoscale will be significant. We debate the time frame, the magnitude and the possibilities, but not the likelihood for large-scale societal change. The least-speculative views suggest that we're in for changes of an order that justifies--if not demands--our undivided and immediate attention.

Will we be ready?

http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2008/02/crn-at-five-yea.html

One of the best places to stay informed about preparing for advanced nanotechnologies is at The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (crnano.org).

Interesting Bits

A great bit on the Singularity starts with an article by Michael Anissimov, and follows up with a discussion. Read about how “The word “Singularity” has been losing meaning for a while now” and “Rather than any single idea, Singularity has become a signifier used to refer to a general cluster of ideas, some interrelated; some, blatantly not. These ideas include: exponential growth, transhuman intelligence, mind uploading, singletons, popularity of the Internet, feasibility of life extension, some developmentally predetermined “next step in human evolution”, feasibility of strong AI, feasibility of advanced nanotechnology, some odd spiritual-esque transcension, and whether or not human development is primarily dictated by technological or social forces."

"Quite frankly, it’s a mess.” To which I’d agree, in the sense that there are many opposing points of view and conflicting ideologies as to make this a topic that will remain contentious, and worth reading about.

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/?p=504

----------------------------

The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology announced “a series of professional-quality scenarios of a near-future world in which exponential general-purpose molecular manufacturing becomes a reality.”

As a participant in the first CRN Task Force Scenario Project I would like to invite readers to consider these “what ifs” as worthwhile reading for anyone wishing to expand their understanding of advanced nanotechnologies and their implications.

And for those of you who would like to step off the sidelines and get in the game, consider this “You can participate in a discussion of these scenarios (and anything else you'd like to bring up) by joining our CRN-talk Yahoo group.”

http://www.crnano.org/CTF-Scenarios.htm

The Weekly Roundup

Jeff Wacker, a futurist with Plano-based Electronic Data Systems Corp., said the evolution of nanotech into the consumer arena will be marked by three phases. "I think there's the mild, I think there's the wild, and I think there's the magical," he said. At the "mild" end of the scale in the next few years are lighter, stronger, frictionless and more efficient upgrades to existing materials, such as in airplane wings, solar panels and batteries.

At the "magical" conclusion, 10 years or more down the road, consumers can expect to see nano assemblers, minuscule factories using billions of molecule-size machines to build nearly any product imaginable out of a pile of raw materials.

RR: Another deep thinker who believes, as many others do, that advances in the nanosciences will lead to molecular manufacturing.

To learn more, visit: http://crnano.org/

From: Small molecules, big impact
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=21916


Nanostellar, Inc., a leader in nano-engineered catalyst materials, today announced a first in diesel emissions technology: the introduction of gold as an oxidation catalyst. Nanostellar's NS Gold™ catalyst enables manufacturers of light- and heavy-duty diesel engines to reduce noxious emissions by as much as 40 percent more than existing pure-platinum catalysts at equal cost. Nanostellar introduced its first-generation product, based on a platinum and palladium alloy, in mid-2006, and it achieved 25%-30% higher performance than commercial pure-platinum catalysts. NS Gold™, Nanostellar's second-generation product, delivers a further 15%-20% performance increase.

RR: This is great news for the environment. As oil and gas prices rise and concern for the environment turns to action, expect to see technologies like this begin to make a difference.

From: Nanostellar Introduces Gold in Oxidation Catalyst That Can Reduce Diesel Hydrocarbon Emissions by as Much as 40 Percent More Than Commercial Catalysts
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=21935


FriCSo, Inc., a developer and manufacturer of environmentally friendly technology and polymer-based devices that create a friction reduction nanolayer on moving parts, today announced that a test conducted by the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology found that FriCSo's Surface Engineering Treatment (SET) highly reduces particulate matter emissions, increases engine mechanical efficiency, and reduces fuel consumption.

RR: ditto my previous comment.

From: New Nanolayer-based Technology Highly Reduces Engine Emission and Improves Fuel Consumption
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=21933


The use of nanotechnology is an innovation in the development of surface coatings, particularly in relation to UV absorbing and penetration. In meeting this challenge, Nanovations has introduced a new VOC-free technology for clear impregnating wood protection.

RR: Nanovations has recently released several new nanotech-enabled products. See http://www.nanovations.com.au/ then click on Products.

From: Nanovations introduces surface protection for woods
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=21999


There seems to be an arms race going on among nanotechnology investment and consulting firms as to who can come up with the highest figure for the size of the "nanotechnology market". The current record stands at $2.95 trillion by 2015.

RR: An excellent article! Michael Berger debunks the hyper-hyped “trillion dollar” figures being casually thrown around. “…trillion-dollar forecasts for an artificially constructed ‘market’ are an irritating, sensationalist and unfortunate way of saying that sooner or later nanotechnologies will have a deeply transformative impact on more or less all aspects of our lives.”

From: Debunking the trillion dollar nanotechnology market size hype
http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=1792.php


Billionaire investor Wilbur Ross, who has made most of his money restructuring failed companies in such unglamorous industries as steel, coal, and most recently, textiles, is not the kind of guy to jump on the latest technology fad. Therefore, when someone like Ross begins investing in nanotechnology, I believe it serves as further validation that the technology is moving into the mainstream.

RR: Jack Uldrich (Access Team member -- access-nanotechnology.com/our-team.htm) sums it up nicely “My point here is that Ross is not a venture capitalist. He is a practical, experienced businessman with a great nose for turning around companies. If he's investing in nanotech, it's not because he thinks it's a fad, but because he thinks there's great value in these companies.”

From: Nanotech Wins a Convert
http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2007/04/18/nanotech-wins-a-convert.aspx


"Nanotechnology could not only change our whole economy and the quality of life of Russian people, but can also drastically change all our perception about modern warfare." Sergei Ivanov, Russian first deputy prime minister
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070419/63937318.html

Russian President Vladimir Putin has urged the government to ensure the effective spending of the major funds that will be invested in the development of nano-technologies. “This is a line of business the state will spare no effort or funds to develop,” Putin said at a conference devoted to the development of this branch of science. “The question is how to ensure this be arranged for properly and the funds be spend (sic) effectively. He said nanotechnology will lay the groundwork for new weapon systems, both offensive and defensive.

Russia is currently concentrating material and human resources to produce arm systems based on nanotechnologies, President Vladimir Putin said.
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22063

Russia will pour over US$1 billion (€740 million) in the next three years into equipment for nanotechnology research as it uses massive oil and gas export earnings… Ivanov predicted that 90 percent of nanotechnology developments would be used for civilian purposes and 10 percent for military purposes. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/technology/EU-TEC-Russia-Nanotechnology.php

RR: This one is pieced together from three articles. Given the thousands of scientists at large in Russia, combined with the billion dollar investment, expect to see significant progress in the nanosciences.



Since the 1960s, the best way to isolate precise instruments like atomic-force and scanning-tunneling microscopes along with fab tools from vibration was passive air tables that support weight on a cushion of air. A recent alternative is using active electronic feedback to send cancelling forces that damp out oscillations in springs.

RR: Good news on the “tools” front.

From: 'Negative stiffness' used to damp vibrations
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22059


A domestic water filter that uses metal nanoparticles to remove dissolved pesticide residues is about to enter the Indian market. Its developers at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in Chennai (formerly Madras) believe it is the first product of its kind in the world to be commercialized. 'Based on consumption patterns of a typical Indian household, the filter is designed to have enough nanomaterials to provide 6000 litres of pesticide-free water for one year,' Pradeep said. 'After that, the company will recycle the filters to recover the silver.'

RR: At an estimated cost of £115 ($230) it may find difficulties entering the US market in any quantity. I can buy water that has been micron filtered, UV irradiated, charcoal and reverse osmosis filtered for 25 cents per gallon at the local food mart. At $230 for the filter, it would cost about $7 per gallon, which may be an acceptable figure for areas with pesticide residue problems.

From: Pesticide filter debuts in India
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22073


Nanoexa announced today that its subsidiary Decktron will combine technologies to develop lithium batteries that will outperform currently available batteries. The batteries could end up in plug-in electric hybrid vehicles.

RR: Yet another entry in the rapidly expanding list of companies that are vying for king of the nanotech-enabled battery market. Given the incentives (think global warming, massive pollution, and peak oil) I don’t doubt that before the dust settles there will be many more companies trying to cash in on this seemingly lucrative market.

From: High-Performance Batteries Could Solve Energy Storage Problem for HEVs
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22046


G24 Innovations Limited (G24i), a Cardiff -based company that aims to revolutionise solar power by leading the development of extremely lightweight, flexible solar cells, is to sponsor a competition with students from Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design to design a product that uses the company's cutting edge technology.

RR: Good news, and another indicator that alternative energy technologies are being taken seriously.

From: Cardiff sponsors solar energy contest
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22045


Curcumin, an element found in the cooking spice turmeric has long been known to have positive effects against certain types of cancer. Effective treatments based on curcumin however have been limited due to its poor dissolving capabilities in water based substances, leading to low absorption rates when ingested. Researchers affiliated with the Institute for NanoBioTechnology at Johns Hopkins University report to have overcome this problem by encapsulating free curcumin with a polymeric nanoparticle, creating nanocurcumin.

RR: I find it encouraging that scientists continue looking to nature in an effort to deal with one of mankind’s most deadly killers. Add “nanocurcumin” to your list of nano-things to watch.

From: Polymer Coated Curcumin Promises Effective Against Cancer
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22076


The ability to eliminate waste and toxins from production processes early on, to create more efficient and flexible solar panels, and to remove contaminants from water, is becoming an exciting reality with nanotechnology. This "green nanotechnology" involves designing nanoproducts for the environment and with the environment in mind.

RR: Live webcast, Thursday, April 26, 2007, 10:00 - 11:00 a.m.

From: Green Nanotechnology: It’s Easier Than You Think
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22051


The global search for a sustainable energy supply is making significant strides at Wake Forest University as researchers at the university's Center for Nanotechnology and Molecular Materials have announced that they have pushed the efficiency of plastic solar cells to more than 6 percent.

RR: Given the rising cost of silicon, couple with the need for alternative energy sources, efficient plastic solar cells (should they become more efficient and/or cheap) may make, as they say “plastic devices the photovoltaic of choice.”

From: Plastic solar cell efficiency breaks record at WFU nanotechnology center
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22027


Industrial Nanotech, Inc. (Pink Sheets:INTK), an emerging global leader in nanotechnology, announced today that it has entered into negotiations with a Fortune 100 company for the incorporation of the Company's patented nanotechnology based coating, Nansulate®, into their products. The Company estimates the value of the project to be approximately 4.5 million dollars annually once an agreement is reached.

RR: These guys are everywhere with their insulation product. Keep an eye on them as they break into new industries.

From: Industrial Nanotech, Inc. Enters Negotiations with Major Electronics Manufacturer
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=22009


For custom reports on nanotech and cleantech news and developments, please contact me at rocky at access-nanotechnology.com

Contact me at the same address to discuss a complimentary evaluation of your project needs. Or visit http://access-nanotechnology.com/

Nanotechnology Q&A, Pt I ~more

Ray Kurzweil is a 21st Century Renaissance man; inventor, entrepreneur, writer, futurist and much more.

His write-up at Wikipedia gives you a brief glimpse into an extraordinary mind:

"Kurzweil was the principal developer of the first omni-font optical character recognition system, the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind, the first CCD flatbed scanner, the first text-to-speech synthesizer, the first electronic musical instrument capable of recreating the sound of a grand piano and other orchestral instruments (which he developed at the urging of Stevie Wonder, who was amazed by his OCR reading machine), and the first commercially marketed large-vocabulary speech recognition system. He has founded nine businesses in the fields of OCR, music synthesis, speech recognition, reading technology, virtual reality, financial investment, medical simulation, and cybernetic art."

Bill Gates dubbed him "the best at predicting the future of artificial intelligence."

He has been described by the Wall Street Journal as "the restless genius."

In 2001 he wrote an essay, "The Law of Accelerating Returns," where he laid out one of his most well known theories, concerning the exponential growth pattern of technologies.

It states, in short:

"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense 'intuitive linear' view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the twenty first century—it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The 'returns,' such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity—technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."

Recently I had a chance to catch up with him, and posed the following question: "If you had the attention of the entire world, what would you say regarding molecular manufacturing?"

Here is his response: "When we have full molecular manufacturing, we will be able to create any physical products we need from information files just as we can create music, movies, and books from pure information today. In about twenty years, the original goals of communism ("from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs") will be achieved not through forced collectivism but through the information technologies of nanotechnology and artificial intelligence."

Learn more about Ray Kurzweil at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil

Nanotechnology Predictions

Today I thought I’d hit you with a few of my favorite predictions and statistics. While I do not necessarily agree with them all, I do respect the groups and individuals that produced them, and therefore believe that we need to pay attention to them. When taken as a whole, I believe they indicate that great deal of expedient thought needs to be given the field of nanotechnology. If there is one “for sure” you can take away from this, it is that nanotechnologies have the potential to impact society in ways both profound and unfathomable. The time to start planning for the consequent disruptive change is now.


"This technology (nanotechnology) also holds the promise of broad societal implications. By 2015, products in which nanotechnology plays a key role will require more than 2 million workers and produce about $1 trillion in products annually. These estimates are from leading experts in large companies with related nanotechnology programs in the United States, Japan and Europe."

~Mihail C. Roco, Senior Advisor, NSF and Chair, U.S. National Science and Technology Council's Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology. http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060205/OPINION/602050382/1002


"Nanotechnology is approaching a phase change that will see it spread exponentially across manufactured goods in the next 10 years. In 2004, $13 billion worth of products will incorporate emerging nanotechnology, less than one-tenth of 1% of global manufacturing output. In 2014, we project that this figure will rise to $2.6 trillion -- 15% of manufacturing output in that year."

From: Sizing Nanotechnology's Value Chain
http://www.nanotechwire.com/news.asp?nid=1248


“Energy is the largest business in the world. The growing thirst for fossil-fuel based energy by developing economies in Asia, compounded by political strife in energy-rich areas of the world, has created an unprecedented demand and a volatile supply. Solar energy has long been recognized as a potential solution - 175,000 terawatts of solar energy hit the earth every day, three-thousand times the amount we would need to power the entire world. Nanotechnology is at the forefront of solar cell development from the mechanism from capturing light to the means to convert it into electricity and conduct the power to the devices that need it.”

From: NanoBusiness 2007 to Focus on CleanTech, Highlighting Nanotechnology’s Role in Improving the Environment
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070321005760&newsLang=en


“U.S. demand for nanotechnology medical products will increase over 17 percent per year to $53 billion in 2011, says The Freedonia Group, Inc., a Cleveland-based industry research firm. Afterwards, the increasing flow of new nanomedicines, nanodiagnostics, and nanotech-based medical supplies and devices into the US market will boost demand to more than $110 billion in 2016.”

From: Demand for nanotech-based medicine grows
http://www.smalltimes.com/articles/article_display.cfm?Section=ONART&C=Bio&ARTICLE_ID=287462&p=109

To view more worthwhile quotes, visit the Quotes page at my consulting team site.

Interview with Neil Gordon of the Canadian NanoBusiness Alliance

Today I would like to share with you an interview I did with my friend and colleague Neil Gordon. Neil is the president of the Canadian NanoBusiness Alliance (CNBA). Neil specializes in nanotechnology commercialization and global initiatives.

In their own words, the CNBA is “a nanotechnology association and facilitator,” with a duel mission:

1. To establish a Canadian National Nanotechnology Initiative including the creation of commercially-oriented nanotech hubs, the promotion of nanotechnology in Canada, and the promotion of Canadian nanotechnology capabilities internationally.

2. To develop major nanotechnology initiatives across the globe.

RR: What are your concerns regarding a nanotechnology-enabled military and/or homeland security department?

With all of the amazing progress made by humankind during the twentieth century in political, social, technological and economic endeavors, it is maddening to accept that military and homeland security must take such a prominent role in our society today. That being said, the nanotechnology community has a unique opportunity to help our government agencies develop technologies to better protect human life and dignity, along with the values we believe in. My biggest concern is the long time duration for characterizing the specifications to defend against new types of threats, then develop, test and deploy better systems that meet these unprecedented requirements.

RR: What is being done vs. what (in your opinion) should be done to prepare for advanced nanotechnologies and their use by the military and homeland security departments?

The technology and end-user communities along with their funders need to better coordinate new standards, specifications, development plans and investments to reduce the time for new solutions coming to market. One example where this coordination is taking place is CANEUS. CANEUS is a NASA-led initiative between multiple government agencies in the US and allied countries, and with the private sector that is coordinating “collaborative” investments and developments of Micro-Nano-Technologies (MNTs) for the aerospace industry.

Read the entire interview here http://www.nanotech-now.com/products/nanonewsnow/issues/027/027.htm#Gordon

Interview with Judith Light Feather

RR: What is your vision regarding the changes that nanotechnology will bring to society?

The long-term vision involves programmable matter and molecular assembly of products whereby humans will move from their 'wage slave' survival mode to a more creative lifestyle that allows them time to learn and create. Everyone should have the same learning opportunities to develop skills and talents to their maximum ability, sharing the results with their neighbors and families. Intellectual property developed from humanity will have the value for exchange now given to mundane products. The properties of nanomaterials which repel dirt and grime, when put into building materials, flooring, glass, appliances and automobiles, will finally free mankind from many of the time consuming chores that take up their precious few leisure hours. Improved clothing and recreation equipment will enhance the lifestyles of society, along with more time to learn new skills and create new ideas for culture benefits.


RR: How can government and educational institutions address the need for significantly larger numbers of nano-educated college grads?

The problems in the universities, regarding the lack of students interested in science reflects back to our main education issues in elementary schools. Until our government leaders realize that the Department of Education was created with no authority to mandate curriculum on a national level, but are permitted to mandate National Testing on the sub-standard curriculum which local schools boards make the decisions to accept, nothing will change.


RR: If you could sit down with the leaders of every country and talk to them about the development of nanotechnology, what issues would you focus on?

We recently had this conversation with the leaders of Thailand and Vietnam concerning development of courses for education and the future technology. The first issue we focused on was types of education modules that would reach all ages and develop into a lifelong learning situation. Education is always first, then the research, then the technology. Culture was an important issue as each country strives to preserve their identity while becoming competitive in a global society. Communication between scientific disciplines and each other was also top on the list. The ability to form relationships and share information in friendship and trust was the result of this first effort.


To read the entire interview, visit:
http://www.nanotech-now.com/Judith-LightFeather-interview.htm

It is the year 2030

Get your motor runnin…

Even if it is silent. Fuel cells will finally bring about the “quiet car.” No sound when it “starts up” and none (other than the advanced composite tires on the road) as it moves along. You will, however, be able to broadcast sound effects; give it the sound of a 1970 SS 454 Chevelle, or tune it to be a street racer, or… And you won’t be needing those keys; biometrics will allow your car to recognize you as long as your wrist-comp remains connected to your personal ‘net. Once you approach close enough for the stereoscopic cameras to “verify” you, your car will automatically unlock the doors, prep your specified seat position and controls, upload your destination coordinates, and await your verbal command to get moving. Oh yeah, unless your override, all commands will be verbal, except steering, acceleration, and braking when in manual mode.

Head out on the highway…

Well, OK, it’ll be a sensor-monitored and -controlled highway. While drivers from 2007 will recognize it as such, functionally it will be very different. For one, you won’t need to do the driving, your car (assisted by the highway network) will do the driving for you. You’ll get to catch up on your email, do your nails, or any one of a million other tasks, all the while the hwy-net does the work. Need to arrive at your destination in less time than the tourists? No problem, just tell your car to choose one of the faster lanes.

Lookin’ for adventure…

How about a 100-mile long public track that simulates various driving conditions, including 90-degree banks, obstacle courses, and virtual landscapes? It will have the same sensor system as the highway, above, but will allow you to control steering, braking, and speed. Your new 2030 Pontiac NanoScorpion (built in a factory by trillions of nanomachines) will take you around the track at speeds as high as your body is able take the G-forces. Should you choose the “high speed” section of the track, wearing your military-grade flight suit enables you to withstand much higher G’s.

Or whatever comes my way.

Coming your way in 2030 will be “cars” serving as dial-a-ride public transport, autonomous ambulances (as well as manned versions with built in diagnosis and treatment functionality), recreation-specific, recyclable, fuel cell powered wonders.

They will not pollute when running, or when being dismantled for recycling. The processes used to construct them (and their materials) will contribute less to the waste stream and to general pollution (and may even amount to zero waste). They will protect you in crashes that today would turn you into a tangled mess, while avoiding over 90% of those that early 21st Century drivers experienced. They will also be highly customizable to their owner’s tastes, and convertible from one format (such as “dune buggy”) to another (such as “highway cruiser”) by simply mounting a new body (ten minutes at a “body shop”) and reconfiguring the suspension.

It is 2030, and things have definitely changed

Can you imagine driving in any major city, and being able to safely breathe the air?

Can you imagine being free from the idiocy surrounding the use of petroleum? Free from the latest nut case with a bomb, a grudge, or a fervor-of-the-week membership.

Imagine tomorrow’s automotive technologies; technologies that will allow your “car” to perform feats of exquisite ballet; coming to fetch you, delivering you on time, and giving you time to relax or catch up on your stuff. Protecting you from harm and being gentle on the environment, drastically reducing humanity’s negative impact on the Earth.

2057 - The Body

Last night I watched 2057 – The Body. See yesterday’s post on The City, and Tuesday’s bit on The World for more on the series.

The theme for this production could be titled "A Day In The Life Of A Regular Guy" or "How Falling Out A Window Can Save Your Life."

As were the first two in the series, The Body is the highest-grade of educational production. The CGI is flawless, and the acting quite good. The science is plausible, and the near-future technologies promising.

Covered here: Intelligent homes, city-wide ‘net, privacy concerns, flying cars, artificial blood products, very advanced diagnosis, treatment, imagery, and printed organs, robotic sentries, robotic surgery, and remote surgery (teleoperation).

Again, I highly recommend this production. In fact, I will be talking it up every chance I get, and will write a blog note on the series as a whole, shortly.

Michio Kaku once again makes a very pertinent statement: "One thing we know for sure, hold onto your hats because, in the next 50 years, its gonna be a wild ride!"

To learn more about this program, visit:
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/2057/about/about.html

Nanotech Videos

Over the weekend, and in the course of doing research for a client, I happened upon YouTube’s nanotechnology video collection.

Let’s start with a summary of the best.

For a bit of history, I recommend the series titled Nanotopia (parts 1 through 6).

Although a bit dated, there is a good nanoscale materials primer by Sandia National Lab, titled Nanotechnology - Thinking Big in a Nano sized World.

There are also a couple futuristic presentations, such as Nanotechnology – Age of Convergence (nanomedicine) and for the military-minded, see Nanotechnology – Super Soldier Suit.

Included in the list is an excerpt from “N” is for Nanotechnology. I reviewed this one in 2005 (see http://www.nanotech-now.com/N-is-for-nanotechnology-review.htm). You can order a copy of the full 30-minute video from my review page.

Nanotech Assembler and Nanofactory Animation are low-rez versions of the nanofactory video, from an excellent production by Lizard Fire Studios in collaboration with Dr. K. Eric Drexler. I recommend visiting http://www.lizardfire.com/html_nano/themovies.html where you can choose from one of three versions.

There are several short productions that cover university work, including Bruker AXS and SUNY CNSE Nanotechnology Customer, Inside CNSE – GetNANO, and Duffield Hall Nanotechnology Center Engineering Quad Cornell (a student with a camcorder).

In the “pluck your heart-strings” category, there is a PSA titled First Lego League: Nanotechnology and HIV/ADIS. This one might also be listed under “futuristic” – the context makes it hard to determine if they are talking about near-term nanomedicine or nanorobotic enabled medicine.

I also found 2 videos promoting a product that makes claims that, in my opinion, are dubious at best. Curiously enough, YouTube has them listed in several categories, including “pyramid scheme” and “scam.” They are The Lifewave Patch Hospital and What is Nanotechnology? Don’t expect to learn about nanotechnology from these two.

When I had completed my research, I counted over 2 dozen videos, and over 2 dozen different and sometimes conflicting definitions of “nanotechnology.” Given this wide variation in definitions, it should come as no surprise that governments and regulatory bodies around the world are having a hard time figuring out how and when to apply regulations to products that incorporate nanoscale materials.

…and there are a bunch of clips from movies, adverts, high school productions, etcetera, most of which can only be classified as having a very loose relationship to nanotechnology. The point being that whereas 5 years ago there were less than a handful of videos available over the internet, today there are dozens.

See them all, here http://youtube.com/results?search_query=nanotechnology

Muddying the waters

The History channel is rerunning a 2004 episode titled “Doomsday Tech” in which they profile 4 scenarios, including gray goo.

If you want to learn about nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing, don’t count on this program for instruction; it is both confusing and incomplete.

If, however, you want to learn more about global warming, peak oil, nuclear Armageddon, a new ice age, this looks like a good program to watch.

They point out that the “stunning level of technological progress human beings have achieved in a very short time” has a dark side “we’ve reached a pivotal moment in human history when we as a species possess technologies that could destroy us.”

Yes, gloom and doom; but what did you expect with that title?

Not all of it though: they also discuss alternate energy in the forms of wind power, solar power, tidal (wave) power, hybrid cars, geothermal and hydrogen (fuel cells), so it’s not all a bad trip.

My earlier point about not counting on this program to learn about nanotech starts with scenario #4: Gray Goo. Everybody that has paid attention to this issue knows that gray goo is more of a public perception issue rather than a scientific one. My friends at the Center for Responsible talk about this issue in depth at Grey Goo is a Small Issue (www.crnano.org/BD-Goo.htm). To put it in plain terms, molecular manufacturing doesn’t need self-replicating nanorobots (a.k.a. free-floating autonomous assemblers, as was highlighted in the program).

Much more important and likely molecular manufacturing "bad news" scenarios include (but are not limited to) this list, compiled by CRN:

Economic disruption from an abundance of cheap products
Economic oppression from artificially inflated prices
Personal risk from criminal or terrorist use
Personal or social risk from abusive restrictions
Social disruption from new products/lifestyles
Unstable arms race
Collective environmental damage from unregulated products
Black market in nanotech (increases other risks)
Competing nanotech programs (increases other risks)
Attempted relinquishment (increases other risks)

Back to the program. I also find fault in the way they use “nanotechnology” and “molecular manufacturing” interchangeably, as if the terms meant the same thing. At one time they did, but the day is long since past when old-school scientists and industry co-opted the term “nanotechnology” and rewrote its definition to mean “materials in the .1 nm to 100 nm range, which often exhibit unique properties.” Whereas “molecular manufacturing” means “the building of complex structures by mechanochemical processes.”

Their descriptions (backed by background images of a nanofactory) serve only to further confuse an already confusing subject. At one moment they talk about tiny robots, and at another about super strong materials.

And not once do they talk about the nanofactory, which is featured prominently as background animations.

All in all, a very confusing portrayal of a very important topic; one which left me disappointed with an organization known for its unbiased and accurate programs.

Don’t get me wrong, I did like the information about the first three scenarios. They seem to follow conventional wisdom, and present it in no scarier terms than other portrayals I have seen and read.

One thing I took away from the program, which I watched three times, was a closing quote by Sir Martin Rees:

What we’re seeing in this century is new technologies, which produce greater risk and greater opportunities. We have to insure that we can harness the opportunities and avoid the risks of misuse.

His quote absolutely applies to molecular manufacturing.

To learn more about nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing, visit:

What is Nanotechnology? - http://www.crnano.org/whatis.htm

What are the benefits? - http://www.crnano.org/benefits.htm

What are the dangers? - http://www.crnano.org/dangers.htm


You can buy the video here http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=74178 or watch your listings for a repeat of the program.

British Breakthrough Highlights Nanotechnology Policy Gap

Breaking my rule again today, for an important press release by my friends at the Center for Responsible Nanotechnolgy. You'll be seeing this in quite a few other places soon, and likely hearing plenty about it later.

NEW YORK, January 24, 2007 - An urgent need for new nanotechnology
policy is highlighted by breakthrough results from a recent British
government funded project. For the first time ever, a group of
high-level scientists assembled for the purpose of inventing something
as close as they could get to the long-sought nanotechnology goal of
building precise products atom by atom. The remarkably advanced
projects those scientists produced -- which they hope to complete in
three to five few years -- suggest that the era of molecular
manufacturing could arrive far more swiftly than previously imagined.

"What this shows, even more strongly than before, is the critical
necessity of additional work on implications and policy," said Mike
Treder, Executive Director of the Center for Responsible
Nanotechnology (CRN). "Existing nanotechnology policies, and most
proposed policies, do not address huge new areas of concern raised by
tomorrow's revolutionary manufacturing potential. That gap could be
calamitous."

Nanofactories will use vast arrays of tiny machines to fasten single
molecules together quickly and precisely, allowing engineers,
designers, and potentially anyone else to make powerful products at
the touch of a button. In a single week of intense interdisciplinary
work, an "IDEAS Factory on the Software Control of Matter" produced
three ground-breaking research proposals that bring the nanofactory
concept closer to reality. The project was sponsored by the UK's
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), a national
science agency that also will fund the proposals.

"If, as expected, nanofactories can be used to build more
nanofactories, then the impacts on society may be extreme," said
Treder. "From remarkable advances in health care, environmental
repair, and poverty reduction, to severe economic disruption,
political upheaval, and the possibility of a new arms race: all these
implications and more must be understood. Now it appears that our time
to prepare is getting shorter."

The goals of the IDEAS Factory project were audacious: to make
progress toward the vision of a "matter compiler" that could build
atomically precise products under computer control. The
forward-looking proposals coming from the IDEAS Factory should expand
expectations as to what's possible at the nanoscale, and hold the
potential to accelerate the development of nanofactory systems.

"This shows that molecular manufacturing, which has been considered a
far-future result of nanotechnology, is now a fruitful topic for
current scientific attention," said CRN Director of Research Chris
Phoenix. "We expect that the IDEAS Factory will be a trend leader,
inducing other nanoscientists to use molecular manufacturing as an
inspiration and target for their work."

Participants in the IDEAS Factory designed research projects using an
innovative process in which scientists from many different fields work
together to bypass the conventional limitations of their fields. The
three proposals they developed are expected to accomplish in just a
few years what might have taken twenty with traditional approaches.
Funding has already been assured by the EPSRC and experimental work
will begin shortly.

ABOUT CRN

The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (http://CRNano.org) has been
raising awareness about the severe societal and environmental
implications of advanced nanotechnology, and the urgent need for new
policy, since 2002. CRN is an affiliate of World Care, an
international, non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization. The opinions of CRN
do not necessarily represent those of World Care.

MORE INFORMATION

What is the IDEAS Factory? - http://tinyurl.com/ahptw
What is nanotechnology? - http://crnano.org/whatis.htm
What is molecular manufacturing? - http://crnano.org/BD-5MinMM.htm
What is a nanofactory? - http://crnano.org/bootstrap.htm

---

This is the paragraph that you should keep in mind in the coming weeks, and the one that will generate a lot of chatter:

For the first time ever, a group of high-level scientists assembled for the purpose of inventing something as close as they could get to the long-sought nanotechnology goal of building precise products atom by atom. The remarkably advanced projects those scientists produced -- which they hope to complete in three to five few years -- suggest that the era of molecular manufacturing could arrive far more swiftly than previously imagined.

The Basics, Pt. II

In keeping with my post titled The Basics, Pt. I I’d like to present an interview I did with my friend Vic Peña, CEO, nanoTITAN, Inc., and Member of the PCAST Nanotechnology Technical Advisory Group (NTAG).

Please talk about some of the social, legal, cultural, ethical, religious, philosophical and political implications of molecular nanotechnology (MNT, a.k.a. molecular manufacturing or MM).

I believe that molecular nanotechnology will profoundly impact the entire socio-economic-technological spectrum of the human experience for the betterment of all humankind. This profound impact will be progressive, with increasing promise to improve the lives of humankind.

As MNT becomes reality, challenges to the framework and values of our present societies worldwide will surface. The legal profession, and political entities, will find that current laws and policies will have to be improved to meet the demands of intellectual property protection, producers' liability, and consumer protection. Most certainly also, National Security.

Concurrent with the development of MNT, political involvement in the establishment of laws and oversight needs to occur. International covenants and treaties will have to be developed to assure the lawful, orderly, and peaceful proliferation of MNT's promise. I would see something akin to the Geneva Convention as a set of guidelines from which to establish an international standard for the use and implementation of MNT worldwide. This said, I would not like a constraining bureaucracy to impede the research and development of the scientific and technological discoveries yet to take place, "for the betterment of all mankind."

There is an educational aspect to this also, as not only will our schools and universities be required to graduate scientists and engineers, but whole new generations of business, law, policy, and social studies graduates will be needed to provide the societal balance required for MNT to have a beneficial effect on humankind.

Finally, ethical, religious, and philosophical beliefs will be tasked, and the tenets upon which these beliefs are built will have to withstand some of the assaults that they will surely experience. Science can be a powerful argument, and our values built upon ethics, religion and philosophy must recognize that a whole new era is upon us.

In your opinion, what should be done - starting right now - to mitigate (if not eliminate) the potential downsides to MNT, as well as to maximize the potential upsides?

I stated earlier, that we (our National Leadership) should be considering a Geneva Convention like structure to focus on the peaceful evolution and development of MNT. Additionally, Educational Institutions as well as Academia should begin preparing for the demands that MNT will bring upon us all. I believe that if people are educated both as a work force, and as consumers, the advantages of MNT will be demanded and the nefarious uses that it can pose will be constrained or at least controlled.

Regarding the nanoscale sciences: Talk a little about education, where we're doing it right, where improvements can be made, and why.

I think that we, the United States of America, are not producing enough talent in the sciences and technologies to maintain our lead in nanotechnology. But beyond the scientists and engineer nanotechnologists, we need to focus on the requirements that nanotechnology will put on our business, legal, policy, and social graduates. One great program recently came to my attention, and that is the "Nano*High" Program at UC Berkley, where every Saturday, lectures and lab tours are offered for free to any interested high school student. This is a great model and should be emulated Nation-wide.

Read the entire interview here

My Dream

We have within our grasp a technology that may enable the elevation of all humanity.

Nanotechnology holds the potential to create a world of abundance where no one is lacking for basic needs. Those needs include adequate food, safe water, a clean environment, housing, medical care, education, public safety, fair labor, unrestricted travel, artistic expression and freedom from fear and oppression.

Let me share with you the vision of Dr. K. Eric Drexler and some of the things that become practical with mature nanotechnology (molecular manufacturing):

Nearly free consumer products
PC's billions of times faster then today
Safe and affordable space travel
Virtual end to illness, aging, death
No more pollution and automatic cleanup of existing pollution
End of famine and starvation
Superior education for every child on Earth
Reintroduction of many extinct plants and animals
Terraforming Earth and the Solar System (RR: and move some of our "eggs" out of this one basket we call Earth)

Everything I know and understand about nanotechnology tells me that the time is near when every man, woman and child can live their dream, without cost to another. "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is the birthright of all, and with a bit of luck and a lot of planning, it just may be within our reach.

As a great man (*) once said "Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children."

How can you help ensure that MM is developed in safety and for all people? I encourage you to support the mission of the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and that of the Foresight Nanotech Institute (crnano.org and foresight.org).

(*) http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

The Basics, Pt. I

I had been looking for a way to help folks understand some of the basic re: nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing when I had an epiphany: how better than to let the experts talk.

Hence, the following, and interview I did with Mike Treder and Chris Phoenix, co-founders of the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (crnano.org).

Treder and Phoenix are leaders in an attempt to both understand the potential for molecular manufacturing and plan for the many roads it may lead us down. They are among a handful of intelligent, forthright and dedicated individuals who have made it their mission in life to look for safe paths that lead to benefits for all the world’s people and downside outcomes for none.

RR: Please describe the difference between molecular manufacturing and other kinds of nanotechnology.

The basic difference is that molecular manufacturing aims to achieve direct programmable control of reactions between individual molecules. Other kinds of nanotechnology produce small and useful objects, but they do it with equipment that is very limited in its ability to inject information to the nanoscale. Most nanotech products are small, simple, or both. Molecular manufacturing is an approach that connects information technology directly to the nanoscale.

Programmable construction of molecular tools will create new ways to manipulate the nanoscale. The smaller the tools, the more material they can process per second-especially relative to their size. Also, the inherent precision of molecule-forming reactions will make it easier to build precise and highly functional products. As the tools shrink and improve, molecular manufacturing will become able to build its own construction equipment. This "nano building nano" approach will allow rapid scaleup of production capacity: exponential manufacturing. Although even primitive molecular manufacturing will be useful, the achievement of exponential manufacturing will be revolutionary.

RR: Do you see the development of that sort of molecular manufacturing as a natural progression from today's nanotech research, or will it require significant new scientific breakthroughs?

We see it as a natural progression. The main breakthrough needed is not in science, but in scientists: the recognition that molecular manufacturing is a very powerful approach to the nanoscale. This is not to downplay the work that will be required to develop it. But we're close to the point, if not already there, where molecular manufacturing can be developed by a very large-scale engineering effort comparable to the Manhattan Project.

Although the goals and methods of molecular manufacturing are straightforward applications of today's science, the achievement of exponential manufacturing could be a very significant practical milestone. The products it could build will depend on the choice of materials and the sophistication of the software. But from what we know so far, it looks like new and powerful products could be developed too quickly for sensible policymaking.

RR: Which kind of nanotechnology has the most significant near-term and long-term concerns, and what are they?

There are two basic concerns associated with today's nanoscale technologies. One is that any powerful technology can have undesirable societal effects. The other concern associated with nanoscale technologies is that some of those technologies produce nanoparticles, and some kinds of nanoparticles are unknown and possibly hazardous classes of chemicals. Industry and regulators should not assume that nanoparticles are safe, and the public and special interest groups should not assume that nanoparticles are dangerous. Ordinary smoke and dirt have been full of nanoparticles for billions of years. But even when they're made of familiar materials, nanoparticles can have new properties that mean they should be treated like any other unfamiliar chemical.

The real nanotechnology revolution will begin with the shift from the production of new materials and products to the production of new systems of production. When we achieve the ability to do automatic, programmed, atomically-precise manufacturing, and when those new systems of production can, on command, produce copies of themselves, then we will have entered the age of exponential general-purpose molecular manufacturing. We expect this to occur ten to fifteen years from now, though with sufficient effort it could conceivably happen in less than ten years.

But when it comes, it will be dramatically transformative. All areas of society will be affected, and unless adequate preparations are made, the economic and geopolitical destabilization could be severely disruptive.


Read the full interview here
http://www.nanotech-now.com/products/nanonewsnow/issues/020/020.htm


Center for Responsible Nanotechnology

Our Vision

Advanced nanotechnology may build machines that are thousands of times more powerful—and hundreds of times cheaper—than today's devices. The humanitarian potential is enormous; so is the potential for misuse. The vision of CRN is a world in which molecular manufacturing is widely used for productive and beneficial purposes, and where malicious uses are limited by effective administration of the technology.

Our Mission

CRN acts to raise awareness of the issues. We believe that even a technology as powerful as molecular manufacturing can be used wisely and well—but that without adequate information, unwise use will be far too common. The mission of CRN is to raise awareness of the issues presented by nanotechnology: the benefits and dangers, and the possibilities for responsible use.

Our Purpose

In order to provide well-grounded and complete information, clear explanation, and workable proposals, CRN studies, clarifies, and researches the issues involved—political, economic, military, humanitarian, and technological. CRN presents the results for both technical and popular audiences, and works to supply the information as effectively as possible. The purpose of CRN is to investigate the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of molecular manufacturing, and to educate those who will influence its use or be affected by it.

To learn more, visit these links

Timeline for Molecular Manufacturing
http://www.crnano.org/timeline.htm

Bridges to Safety, and Bridges to Progress
http://www.crnano.org/Bridges.htm

Thirty Essential Nanotechnology Studies
http://www.crnano.org/studies.htm

The ethics of advanced technologies

Today, I had an email conversation with The NanoEthics Group Research Director, Patrick Lin. Patrick informed me of an upcoming nanoethics symposium (*) for the International Journal of Applied Philosophy. "Comprised of papers from some of the most respected thinkers in the field, the symposium is the first in nanoethics to appear in a leading academic philosophy journal - highlighting the increasing urgency and attention surrounding nanotechnology's ethical and societal implications."

The following is an abstract from their paper that introduces the symposium:

Nanoethics is a contentious field for several reasons. Some believe it should not be recognized as a proper area of study, because they believe that nanotechnology itself is not a true category but rather an amalgamation of other sciences, such as chemistry, physics and engineering. Critics also allege that nanoethics does not raise any new issues but rather revisits familiar ones such as privacy. This paper answers such criticisms and sets the context for the papers that follow in this nanoethics symposium.

Here is my reply to Patrick regarding the abstract:

Is your justification for the study of nanoethics that nanotechnologies will have such huge impact that they deserve study in their own rights? It seems to me that you could turn the critic’s complaint of "not a true category but rather an amalgamation of other sciences" around and say "it is precisely because nanotechnologies will broadly impact all these old-school categories that we need to study it."

And here is Patrick’s reply:

Actually, my justification for the pursuit of nanoethics is a three-pronged argument, in which what you mentioned might only be part of it. Basically:

(1) There's no reason for us to accept the litmus test that "in order for X to be a category/field in its own right, it must pick out unique issues not already covered elsewhere." Under this litmus test, we might have to collapse chemistry and biology into the single field of physics (which governs the interactions of all physical matter, including chemical elements and emergent biological processes), but that doesn't seem right. Also, if this litmus test were right, we could also perhaps argue that "bioethics" should not be recognized as a proper field of study, since its questions could be reduced to familiar ones in the pre-existing fields of privacy (patient rights), autonomy (right to die), theology (abortion), etc.

(2) Even if that were a good litmus test before, nanotechnology - and its ethics - seems to break the old rules insofar that nanotech itself is an amalgamation of other fields (unless you want to bite the bullet and argue that nanotechnology itself should not be recognized as a field of its own; but this seems to be a losing fight given the amount of money being poured into nanotech as its own area of research...nanotech already has a life of its own).

(3) Nanoethics does in fact raise unique issues not found elsewhere (e.g., the invisibility cloak, molecular manufacturing) or at least adds a significantly new dimension to related debates (e.g., privacy, economic justice).

Also, my argument above is more a semantic one and not so much a call to action. I'm not sure that many people would argue that we do not need to study the possible impacts of the set of technologies that make up "nanotechnology"; the need to worry about our future should be more or less clear already. Rather, their argument is more that we don't need to create a new field of study called "nanoethics" because those questions are already being investigated in bioethics, computer ethics, etc.

However, I would disagree with their argument: by neatly categorizing those questions under the umbrella of "nanoethics," we highlight the fact that nanotechnology is so far-reaching and will be directly responsible for profound changes to our world. Perhaps those who argue otherwise are trying to slip nanotechnology "under the radar" by not giving it or its ethics a name, i.e., "you don't need to worry about nanotech; it's really just a repackaging of familiar sciences and issues"…but I don't buy that - nanotech/ethics appears to be greater than the sum of its parts...


(*) For more information about the journal or its latest symposium on nanoethics, see www.pdcnet.org/ijap.html

For the introductory paper by The Nanoethics Group, see www.nanoethics.org/paper10807.html

To read the entire announcement, visit the Nanotechnology Now Press Release section www.nanotech-now.com/current-months-press.htm

Got 'fac?

My friends at crnano.org, Mike Treder and Chris Phoenix, recently posed the question "No Replicators Until 2075?" Their ~260 words are the best explanation I've read regarding this issue.

Mike sums it up nicely "If too many people are convinced that we won't see these things for 50 or 100 years, it's almost certain that the world will be caught unaware, and then reactions to such a transformative and disruptive new technology could be chaotic and catastrophic. Much better that we start studying and preparing now, instead of putting it off."

In December 2006, Mike and Chris celebrated the four-year anniversary of CRN's founding. In that short time they have come a long way towards helping stakeholders understand the issues surrounding MM. I support their mission.