Both natural and social scientists describe the relationship between nature and nanotechnology in a range of different ways. Each of these descriptions can be understood as a type of narrative — a story that begins with particular presuppositions and ends in support for particular areas of nanotechnology development. Although these narratives are different in many ways, each is usually told as a matter of fact, as a simple description of the way things are. Unfortunately, this often masks the beliefs that underlie each of the different narratives and the research directions in which they tend to lead.

By establishing a conceptual framework that categorizes the range of narratives that are used to describe the relationship between nature and nanotechnology, including the preferences and presuppositions embedded in each of these narratives, I hope that this article will contribute to more informed discussion and deliberation on the directions in which nanotechnology is moving. With this in mind, I want to tell you a story. Actually, I want to tell you nine stories — nine narratives of nature and nanotechnology that I have heard from scientists working in the field.

Read the full article here.

That's the surprising finding from a team of University of Wisconsin-Madison communications researchers who have spent the past two years studying public attitudes toward embryonic stem cell research. Reporting in the most recent issue of the International Journal of Public Opinion, the researchers say that scientific knowledge - for many citizens - has an almost negligible effect on how favorably people regard the field.

"More knowledge is good - everybody is on the same page about that. But will that knowledge necessarily help build support for the science?" says Dietram Scheufele, a UW-Madison professor of life sciences communication and one of the paper's three authors. "The data show that no, it doesn't. It does for some groups, but definitely not for others."

Along with Dominique Brossard, a UW-Madison professor of journalism and mass communication, and graduate student Shirley Ho, Scheufele used national public opinion research to analyze how public attitudes are formed about controversial scientific issues such as nanotechnology and stem cells. What they have found again and again is that knowledge is much less important than other factors, such as religious values or deference to scientific authority.

Read the full article here.

Risk assessment performed in tandem with research into beneficial applications will help researchers make better decisions about how nanotechnology is used in the future, says Jon Links, professor at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and INBT’s director of Health and Environment research. “The history of technological research and development is full of examples of unrecognized risks to health and the environment—chlorofluorocarbons or asbestos are examples,” Links says. ”It is imperative to study potential risks to human health and the environment hand-in-hand with benefit-driven research and development. Doing so provides the best chance to minimize risk, because risk assessment can inform research and development at an early stage, leading to alternative pathways.”

Read the full article here.

Synthetic biology seeks to apply the principles of engineering to biological systems and processes. Scientists believe that it may lead to new applications, such as new energy production systems, medical therapies, biological computers and innovative ways to clean up hazardous waste. In common with other modern technologies, it is potentially controversial because it raises issues of ownership, misuse, unintended consequences, and accidental release.

The report, 'Synthetic Biology: social and ethical challenges', has been written by Andrew Balmer and Paul Martin of the Institute for Science and Society, University of Nottingham, a leading research centre working on the impact of new technology. It reviews what synthetic biology is, where it has come from, and where it is going, as well as making recommendations to research funders and the scientific community about how social and ethical issues should be addressed. These include…

Read the full article here.

…H.R. 5940 assigns responsibility to a senior White House official to ensure that a detailed implementation plan for Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) research is developed and executed – a plan that specifies both near-term and long term objectives, provides a timeline for achieving the near-term objectives, and identifies the funding, by objective and by agency, necessary to carry it out. The legislation also requires the plan to be responsive to recommendations from the NNI external advisory committee and requires the development of a publicly accessible database containing every EHS research project supported under the NNI.

Read the full article here.

The 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, signed by President Bush In 2003, codified the NNI as a cross-agency research and development initiative focused on knowledge generation to underpin new technological advances.  In this, the NNI has been an unqualified success. Even accounting for research re branding (“nano” is most definitely a broad church), the NNI has stimulated tremendous advances in understanding how materials behave and can be manipulated at the nanoscale; and the new possibilities that open up as a result.  But as an R&D initiative, the NNI has struggled to bridge the gap between innovative science and sustainable technologies.

This year the 2003 Act is up for reauthorization, and both the U.S. House and Senate are looking to further support the potential economic and social benefits that nanotech R&D promises. The bill just passed by the House (by a vote of 407 to 6) is an important step towards ensuring nanotechnology’s use in the service of society.  Still to come is a Senate bill addressing the reauthorization, but the signs are positive that as nanotechnology begins to grow up, the emphasis is shifting from generating new knowledge to using it wisely.

Read the full article here.

The market is broken down into applications of nanomaterials, nanotools and nanodevices. Of these, nanomaterials dominated in 2007, accounting for 87% of the market. Worth an estimated $10.8 billion in 2008, this segment should reach $18.7 billion in 2013, for a CAGR of 11.7%.

…The largest end-user markets for nanotechnology in 2007 were environmental remediation (56% of the total market), electronics (20.8%) and energy (14.1%). Electronics, biomedical and consumer applications have much higher projected growth rates than other applications over the next 5 years (i.e., 30.3%, 56.2% and 45.9%, respectively.) In contrast, energy applications are projected to grow at a CAGR of only 12.6% and environmental applications should actually decline by an average of 1.5% per year.

Read the full article here.

In launching this sponsorship program the Working Party agreed a priority list of nanomaterials for testing (based on materials which are in or close to commerce) as well as a list of endpoints for which they should be tested.

The Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials1 was established in 2006 to help member countries efficiently and effectively address the safety challenges of nanomaterials. OECD has a wealth of experience in developing methods for the safety testing and assessment of chemical products.

Read the full article here.

"The students here are very impressive," Richter said, lauding the high level of education at Sharif. "I expect to hear a lot more from you all in the future."

…Iran's determination to develop what it says is a nuclear energy program is part of a broader effort to promote technological self-sufficiency and to see Iran recognized as one of the world's most advanced nations. The country's leaders, who three decades ago wrested the government away from a ruler they saw as overly dependent on the West, invest heavily in scientific and industrial achievement, but critics say government backing is sometimes erratic, leaving Iran's technological promise unfulfilled.

Still, Iranian scientists claim breakthroughs in nanotechnology, biological researchers are pushing the boundaries of stem cell research and the country's car industry produces more cars than anywhere else in the region.

Read the full article here.

RNCOS has recently added a new Market Research Report titled, "Nanotechnology Market Forecast to 2011" to its report gallery. This updated and detailed research evaluates the past, current and future scenario of the global nanotechnology market coupled with an overview on its emerging trends. The report segments the nanotechnology market by application, patent and R&D investment. It discusses the nanotechnology market by key countries showing their prominence in the sector together with the emerging nations in the domain.

…Key Findings:

- The rapidly commercializing nanotechnology market presents potential market in various industrial sectors including energy, textiles and life sciences.
- The market for nanotechnology in manufacturing goods is forecasted to grow at a CAGR of 33% during the period from 2007 to 2015.
- The market for nanotechnology into consumer products is projected to grow at an AAGR of 9.4% from 2005 to 2010.
- The global spending on nanotechnology grew by 29% in 2006 with government share standing at 52% followed by corporate and venture capitalist spending.
- Nanotechnology investments by the government were initially led by Europe, North America and Japan. However, countries such as Russia, China, Brazil, Turkey and India have joined the trend and are making significant investments into the sector.
- Asia-Pacific is anticipated to be the most important region for the sales of nanotechnology products in near future, followed by the US and Europe at similar level.

Read the full article here.

In light of mounting concerns regarding the potential toxicity of some nanomaterials, scientists have designed a rapid screening tool to help predict which ones are likely to be harmful. Hundreds of nanotechnology-based products are already on the market--in everything from sunscreens and cosmetics to paints and car bumpers--and many more are in the pipeline. However, studies assessing the safety of nanomaterials are limited. As a result, scientists and policy makers have been calling for more systematic reviews of the risks that these nanoscale materials might pose to human health.

Given the large diversity of engineered nanomaterials, which can vary in their chemical makeup, size, shape, and coating, assessing their toxicity has been a challenge. Studies in animals are expensive and time consuming, and although testing nanomaterials in cell cultures can yield useful information, different cell types can respond differently to the same nanomaterial.

"Nanomaterials are really complex, and if you just carry out one or two tests, you're going to miss something," says Andrew Maynard, chief science advisor to the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, in Washington, DC. What's more, results from experiments in cells often don't match those from animal studies.

Read the full article here.

Prized for their high electrical and thermal conductivity, tensile strength, and toughness, carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are the building blocks of nanotechnology.

…That's why the major focus of exhibits at the show was on laboratory, R&D, and manufacturing tools for the nanotech industry. From raw materials -- got tubes? -- to precisely engineered atomic force microscopes (AFMs), molecular printers, and ultrasonic liquid processors, and vibration isolation units.

Read the full article here.

As part of its ongoing Speaker Series, CNS-UCSB hosted Dr. Fred Block, Professor of Sociology at the University of California at Davis, in May 2008 to deliver a public talk entitled, "Where Do Innovations Come From? Lessons for Nanotechnology."

Do you have trouble sticking to a diet? Have patience. Within 10 years, Dr. Kurzweil explained, there will be a drug that lets you eat whatever you want without gaining weight.

Worried about greenhouse gas emissions? Have faith. Solar power may look terribly uneconomical at the moment, but with the exponential progress being made in nanoengineering, Dr. Kurzweil calculates that it’ll be cost-competitive with fossil fuels in just five years, and that within 20 years all our energy will come from clean sources.

Are you depressed by the prospect of dying? Well, if you can hang on another 15 years, your life expectancy will keep rising every year faster than you’re aging. And then, before the century is even half over, you can be around for the Singularity, that revolutionary transition when humans and/or machines start evolving into immortal beings with ever-improving software.

At least that’s Dr. Kurzweil’s calculation. It may sound too good to be true, but even his critics acknowledge he’s not your ordinary sci-fi fantasist. He is a futurist with a track record and enough credibility for the National Academy of Engineering to publish his sunny forecast for solar energy.

Read the full article here.