Category: Nanodot

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the wake of recent raids for top nanotechnology research talent among academic research programs (see Nanodot posts from 26 March and 27 March 2002), an article in the Cleveland, Ohio Plain Dealer ("Universities need to court top-tier researchers", by Barb Galbincea, 31 March 2002), universities in Ohio are a bit worried about being able to attract and retain its own researchers in the field. "We need the people who conduct the research," said UO Akron President Luis Proenza. Just as important, adds KSU President Carol Cartwright, is having the wherewithal to keep a prized researcher. "You live in fear that they will be recruited by someone else," she said. "I've got a 'watch' list in my head." The article notes that "For colleges and universities, especially many strapped state-assisted institutions, attracting and keeping top-tier scholars can be a difficult business. The best researchers expect larger salaries and expensive labs."

An article in the Houston Business Journal ("Houston poised to play key role in 'nanotechnology revolution' ", by Jennifer Darwin, 29 March 2002) asserts that:

Houston is in a position to lead what is being called the "nanotechnology revolution." But the city can only maintain that status as long as local scientists keep coming up with new innovations and industry players establish new collaborations.

Well, maybe. The article goes on to report on the comments of experts in the nanotechnology field at the Houston Technology Center Forum on 21 March 2002 entitled "Houston: Leading the Nanotechnology Revolution."

An article in the Philadelphia Inquirer ("The tiniest building blocks", by Faye Flam, 1 April 2002) presents a rather muddled view of recent research by David Luzzi and others at the University of Pennsylvania into novel carbon structures, including fullerene molecules inside nanotubes, which the article rather grandiosely describes as "a new form of matter". The article also makes a number of highly disparaging remarks about the prospects for advanced nanotechnology systems . . . as if carbon nanotube research were the end point, rather than a faltering first step. The article is accompanied by a short sidebar that gives an equally muddled presentation on the use of self-assembly to create some interesting nanotube arrays.

[Additional information about the nanotube ìpeapodî research referred to in the article can be found in Nanodot posts from 3 January and 1 March 2002.]