nanotechnology: maximizing benefits, minimizing downsides 2 october 2003, paris christine peterson...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
220 views
TRANSCRIPT
Nanotechnology: maximizing benefits, minimizing downsides
2 October 2003, Paris
Christine Peterson
Foresight Institute
Terminology confusion 1. Technology a lot smaller than microtechnology:
nanoscale bulk technology 2. Technology enabling control at the level of
individual atoms: from U.S. NSF “The essence of nanotechnology is the ability to work at the molecular level, atom by atom, to create large structures with fundamentally new molecular organization”
3. Nanomachines with atomic precision #1 is short-term, #2 longer-term, #3 longest Word has become a marketing tool in U.S.
Why the buzz?World can be divided into bits
(information) and “stuff” (atoms) Investors just got burned by bits in the
dot.com bustCurrent enthusiasm for nanotech is
investors’ rediscovery of “stuff”Jazzy new label for chemistry,
materials science, applied physicsBut that’s okay—they are exciting
Will there be a dot.com-style nanotech bust?Already “too many” nanotube
companies?Funding “too many” is normal for new
technologies, not clear it’s avoidableSome reforms among analystsNanotech gives physical products, not
“eyeballs” (viewers of Internet ads)Reason to think that a bubble can be
avoided
Near-term products:mostly materials Drug delivery, medical implants, sensors (bio
& chemical), solar energy (photovoltaic or direct hydrogen production), batteries, displays & e-paper, nanotube and nanoparticle composites, catalysts, coatings, alloys, insulation (thermal & electrical), filters, glues, abrasives, lubricants, paints, fuels & explosives, textiles, hard drives, computer memory, optical components, etc. (from TNT Weekly, published by Cientifica out of Spain, France)
Not an integrated “industry”Near-term applications showing up
invisibly in existing products (higher strength, safety, sensitivity, accuracy, overall performance). Incremental.
Above can be a problem for venture capital
Term useful for gov’t interaction and cross-industry tech transfer
Shared challenges? Yes: legal, PR
Where is work occurring?Switzerland, Sweden, France,
Germany, U.K. are major players in Europe
Complaints that EU work is slowed by need to balance funding among participating countries
Both research and early products are widespread in U.S. (esp. Calif, Texas)
No clear geographic winner in U.S. yet & there may not be (no “Nano Valley”?)
What’s the bottleneck to commercialization? Lots of unexploited science: see Foresight
Conferences and Feynman Prizes (“Rembrandts in the Attic”)
In US: VC, corporate, angel funding available Delay is evolutionary process of looking at
each exp’t phenomenon, picturing a new technology, and identifying an early business opportunity
Individuals who can do this: rare, valuable, cross-disciplinary (hire from other industries)
From science to product ideaVariation & selection process: broad
function, narrower use, specific application, first product definition
Requires both creativity and knowledge of large number of applications and processes
Hard to get mindshare of top creativesScrounge, lubricate, brainstorm, extract
via questioning
Collaborative international online project incubatorCross-sector: Businesses, governments,
academic institutions as partnersEnable more rapid identification of
complementary projects, partnersExpose project concepts to community
of interest in controlled fashionAlready used by other industries, e.g.
RITAnet, Access5 (aerospace)Contact www.amtech-usa.org
Online recruitment across national boundaries International cooperation enhanced by
talent moving between Europe & U.S.U.S. workers not aware of European
projects and vice versaExperienced cross-border jobs
facilitator has entered the nanotech area
WorkingIn-Nanotechnology.com
Patent process a challenge Patent offices overwhelmed Annually, over 300,000 total applications in
US; over 3000 granted to IBM alone Hard for new companies to keep track Hard for patent offices to hold onto expert
staff, esp. true in hot areas like nanotech Hard for examiners to make good decisions,
under 6 hours/each for prior art search Litigation, high legal expenses = advantage
to large companies; non-IP countries
Patent process a challenge, II Given complexity, patents can be issued for
“inventions” that are obvious, found in nature, appear in prior art. Chilling effect, litigation
Overly-broad patents not necessarily good for industry (what if: html, alphabet)
Cannot depend on legal profession to fix this voluntarily — for them the system “works”
Patents not always the answer: Run Faster! Sometimes based on misrepresentation,
patents can work their way into standards
Avoiding GM-style backlash Avoid arrogance of GM-food companies Prey, Bill Joy in Wired, Greenpeace UK
report: some over-reaction from establishment
Stay calm, do not “shoot from hip”, pick a spokesperson internally or other
Engage cluefully with media, government (not “just” a PR function) — European firms have advantage at this
Consistent message (PopSci poked fun) If word becomes negative, co’s will drop
Has nanotech been overhyped?U.S. funders are solidly supportive, able
to recognize and discount both hype & anti-hype. Europe still somewhat put off by hype.
Problems arise when there’s confusion on timescales (1st through 4th generation: 2000-2020) in popular press and business press. Hard to prevent.
Hard to overstate long-term potential
Tools for looking ahead to long-term nanotechLaws of physicsLaws of economicsLaws of human natureResult: technological advance to the
limits allowed by natureProcess does not result in a time
estimate (but everyone wants one)Does result in molecular machine
systems
Molecular machine systems: longer-termNew way of viewing matterToday, can have atomic precision or
large complex structures, not bothWant both togetherGoal: Direct control down to molecular
level, not indirect control as today (e.g. drugs, surgery) for products of any size
Can change/improve structure of all physical things including human body
Basis of advanced nanotech:Molecular machinesUsed by nature in plants and animals,
which can be thought of as complex systems of molecular machines
Now learning to design and build new molecular machine systems
Goal: nanosystems for manufacturing complex, atomically-precise products of any size (from cubic-micron mainframes to aircraft carriers)
Differential gear design (cutaway)
Molecular machine systems for manufacturing (schematic)
Why molecular machines? Why are molecular machines so important,
compared to molecular materials, sensors, electronics?
Machines can make all the others better NNI 2004 budget: “The initiative focuses on
long-term research on the manipulation of matter at the atomic and molecular levels, giving us an unprecedented ability to create building blocks for advanced products such as new classes of devices as small as molecules and machines as small as human cells.”
Molecular manufacturing with molecular machine systemsExtreme decrease in direct
manufacturing costs (not insurance, legal, tariffs)
Extreme decrease in pollutionExtreme increase in device complexity
possible (e.g. medical)Extreme increase in software/design
challenge
Timing of molecular machine systems “We tend to overestimate short-term
tech change, underestimate long-term”Timing estimates are guessesAs an engineering goal, it depends on
funding and focus If delay in focused effort: 25 years?Probable international competition for
economic, military advantageCrash program estimate 10-15 years
Four issues for policymakersNear-term environmental and health
issues from nanoparticles, nanotubesMid-term patent difficulties: errors harm
industry & public interest, strain international relations
Long-term “grey goo” concern overblown, already covered by Foresight Guidelines safety rules
Long-term arms control issues are real, very challenging (e.g. chem, bio)
Europe/US relationsDiffering attitudes toward Precautionary
Principle likely to continue, for fundamental cultural reasons
May result in ongoing friction on nanoproduct safety: trade conflict?
Differing attitudes toward overly-broad patents may extend to nanotech
U.S. could use European patent influence: how can this be facilitated?
Opportunity for joint projectU.S. likely to declare Apollo-style project
for molecular machine systems, possibly with defense orientation
U.S. “go it alone” strategy could be headed off by European project — ideally announced earlier — leading to joint Europe/U.S. effort
Powerful technologies are best shared among the democracies, at least NATO
For more information, both short-term and long-termwww.foresight.org — main site, see
Foresight Update technical newsnanodot.org — news site & database11th Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology
9-12 Oct 2003, San FranciscoForesight Vision Weekend, May 2004Chemical & Engineering News, TNT
Weekly, Nanotech Opportunity Report