0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop

        Nano: Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise?

        Gina Miller writes "Nanotechnology: Is It Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise? is the topic of an article at Power Electronics Technology dated March 1, 2002. Sam Davis, the Editor, invokes the $500 million National Nanotechnology Initiative and Pres. Bush's proposed increase in the program as evidence that nanotechnology should be taken seriously. Davis explains how re-arranging atoms could provide us with new semiconductors and improved integrated circuits. He cites the book Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, by Drexler, Peterson, and Pergamit (1991) and quotes Ralph C. Merkle of the Zyvex Corp on what nanotechnology will mean. And last but not least he notes the problems nanotechnology could bring in the form of deliberate abuse or accidents, and the Foresight Institute's draft of guidelines for developing nanotechnology to minimize those problems. He summarizes by asking "Although nanotechnology products are years away, is this a good thing, or bad? Is it an ethical problem, similar to nuclear energy with its good and bad points? Is it a threat to power electronics engineering and manufacturing as we know it? Is the 'march of science' going too far?" Is he worried primarily about threats to the job security of power electronics engineers?"

        Business Week takes a positive look at nanotech

        from the positively-breathless dept.
        A special edition of Business Week Magazine includes a number of items on nanotechnology, including an enthusiastic feature article ("The Tech Outlook: Nano Technology: No, its not all hype: these supertiny gizmos will transform our way of life", by Otis Port with Roger O. Crockett, 25 March 2002). The article notes the ongoing land-rush mentality of venture capitalists and large tech-oriented corporations into micro- and nano-scale technology R&D, as they are "pumping significant sums into nanotech research, as are governments around the world. A new study from CMP Cientifica [the Nanotechnology Opportunity Report], a market researcher in Madrid, says last year's worldwide government figure topped $1.2 billion (page 184). This year, the private and public sectors will probably spend $2 billion apiece on nano. . . . All told, venture capitalists and corporate funds will probably plow $1 billion into nano investments this year, twice what they invested in 2000, says S. Joshua Wolfe, a partner at New York's Lux Capital Group."

        The article surveys a limited range of recent research, mostly into carbon nanotubes and semiconductor nanowires, and notes the formation of the NanoBusiness Alliance last year, before concluding:

        The ultimate dream of nano engineers is an "assembler," which was first described in the writings of nanotech pioneer K. Eric Drexler, head of Foresight Institute in Palo Alto, Calif. It's a teensy robot that could be programmed to assemble atoms into gears and other components of nanomachines. That vision is still science fiction, says Raymond A. Kurzweil, author and president of Kurzweil Technologies Inc. But if assemblers can be developed, "they'll solve humanity's material needs," he adds. From molecules of dust and dirt, they would harvest the atoms needed to assemble computers, appliances, and other goods.

        New national center for micro, nanotech planned in UK

        from the World-Watch dept.
        According to an article in the Birmingham Post ("£80m bid for science center", by Richard Warburton, 18 March 2002), the West Midlands region of the UK is set to become the heart of Britain's science technology industry with a new £80 million (about U.S. $144 million) manufacturing complex that will create 10,000 jobs. The article says, "Plans have been drawn up for the world's largest centre for nanoscience to be based along the A38 technology corridor in Birmingham. . . . The city's universities, businesses and MPs [Members of Parliament] are pushing for the national centre for microsystems and nanotechnology which would draw on the region's international reputation for modern research and secure its place as the country's manufacturing hub."

        Small Times covers nanotech education in U.S., East Asia

        from the learning-curve dept.
        The online version of Small Times has begun an interesting new series of articles focusing on university-level educational efforts to develop and expand a workforce for emerging micro- and nano-scale technologies.

        NSF grant will help establish nanotech program in Idaho

        from the small-potatoes dept.
        According to a press release (14 March 2002), Boise State University has received a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) to help establish a state-wide nanotechnology research program in Idaho. An interdisciplinary team of Boise State scientists will be part of a statewide project to study and develop nanoscale materials. The Boise State phase of the project is financed by nearly $2 million in federal and matching state funds awarded to the university through the NSFís Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) program to support competitive research in Idaho.

        The Boise area hosts one of the fastest-growing regional high-tech economies in the U.S., and is home to Micron Semiconductor and the headquarters of Hewlett-Packardís Printing and Imaging Division.

        Texas gains, loses in jockeying for nanotech leadership

        from the win-some,-loose-some dept.
        According to an article in the Austin Business Journal ("SWT, UT ramp up for nanotech", by Stacey Higginbotham, 22 March 2002), Southwest Texas State University (SWT) and a new partnership among three other Texas universities are seeking millions of dollars in federal and private funding to promote nanotechnology in Texas. According to the article, a partnership between Rice University, the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Texas Dallas called SPRING, or the Strategic Partnership for Nanotechnology, is seeking "tens of millions" in federal and private grants to build or update nanotechnology centers at the three schools, says Paul Barbara, director of UT's Center for Nano and Molecular Sciences and Technology. SWT is seeking $5.5 million to create a research lab and workforce development program for nanotechnology called the Nanotechnology Failure Analysis, Materials, Evaluation and Education Center (NanoFAME).

        But as the Austin American-Statesman reports ("MIT steals away prominent UT nanotech scientist", by Cara Anna, 25 March 2002), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has managed to convince prominent nanotech researcher Angela Belcher, a University of Texas professor and a member of UT's new Center for Nano and Molecular Science and Technology, to leave the University of Texas at Austin and join MIT's new NanoMechanical Technology Laboratory as an associate professor in the fall. Additional coverage of this latest nanotech talent raid can be found in an Associated Press article ("Texas nanotech team heading to Northeast", 25 March 2002) that appeared in the Boston Herald.

        More background on U.S. nanotech funding for FY2003

        The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) has posted a presentation ("Research and Development FY 2003 National Nanotechnology Investment in the FY 2003 Budget Request by the President") made by M.C. Roco, NSF; Chair, National Science and Technology Council's subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) on February 13, 2002 at the AAAS/ASME Briefing, Washington, D.C. The presentation basically reiterates the information already note here on Nanodot on 5 February 2002.

        A popular update on things nanotech

        from the mass-media-mush dept.
        An article on the Washington Post ("Big Potential From Small Things", by Ariana Eunjung Cha, 21 March 2002) presents a superficial but reasonably well-written survey of "current events" in nanotechnolgy, focusing on increases in federal funding for nanotech research and the increasing interest from the venture capital community. As the article notes, "The debate has shifted from 'Will it happen?' to 'When will it happen?' " said Christine Peterson, president of the Foresight Institute.

        The article was also reposted on the Small Times website.

        Background on emerging european

        from the World-Watch dept.
        While thereís little said in it about nanotech per se, an article in the London-based Financial Times ("'Valley' in the Alps", by Jo Johnson, 26 February 2002) provides some interesting background on the history and current climate of the region around Grenoble, France as a long-standing technology center and incubator. Previous coverage of French high-tech center appeared here on Nanodot on 28 January 2002.

        James Heath will step down as CNSI head, maybe, in a while . . .

        from the what's-really-going-on-here? dept.
        An extensive article on the Small Times website ("Second top official to step down at California NanoSystems Institute", by Jayne Fried, 22 March 2002) reports that molecular computing researcher James Heath will step down as an acting co-director of the California NanoSystems Institute (http://www.cnsi.ucla.edu/) at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) . . . but not right away. Heath will be leaving UCLA to devote more time to research, and will join the faculty at California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. "It's a tough thing to do, to go to Caltech," Heath told Small Times. "This (CNSI) is my baby, but it comes down to when I go to bed at night I think about institute problems."

        According to the article, Heath expressed disappointment and frustration with the pace at which technology is moving from research labs to the marketplace within the University of California system. "UC has not been very strong in transferring intellectual property out into the world and making it happen," Heath said. Part of the reason is that the UC system is a "big company that is not quite as nimble as it could be."

        The report notes that Heath's departure leaves the multi-million dollar CNSI with co-director Evelyn Hu, a nanotech electrical and computer engineer at UC Santa Barbara, and Roy Doumani, acting chief operating officer. Hu is one of the founders of CNSI. "I won't deny Jim's leaving is something that is very sobering because he's had such an influence," Hu said. "We worked so closely together." The article also notes that although Heath will be at Caltech, Doumani said Heath "will remain active and be able to stay as a member of CNSI." The plan appears to be an open door policy in which scientists outside the UC system will participate in CNSI. "I hope to find a way to get Caltech involved in the institute," Heath said.

        As the title of the Small Times article reflects, Heath is the second major figure to announce departure from a CNSI leadership position in recent months. In January 2002, Martha Krebs left as director of CNSI for a broader role at UCLA. Krebs was also associate vice chancellor of UCLA for research, and said she will be devote herself full time to that job. Krebs was a key figure in establishing CNSI, and had moved to California a year ago from Washington, D.C., to become director of the institute. Previously, as science director at the U.S. Department of Energy, Krebs helped establish the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative.

        Privacy Overview

        This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.