Nanotechnology A Policy Primer

Posted on August 11, 2010 by Robert Oszakiewski

The Congressional Research Service, in March of this year, released a report, "Nanotechnology: A Policy Primer", written by John F. Sargent, Jr., a specialist in Science and Technology Policy. The primer's first section focuses on a review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). A table showing funding from various government agencies and departments for NNI shows that from FY 2006 to FR 2010, the Department of Defense (DOD) has been the largest single source of funding. However, this is about to change. In FY 2011, DOD will fall to 4th place, preceded by the Department of Energy (DOE), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). This shifting of the majority of funding from DOD  may reflect a normal path of evolution; DOD has long been a source of funding for new technologies that eventually develop non-military uses. It may also reflect that future DOD budgets will not be as robust as they have been in the last few years.

Noting that "In the longer term, nanotechnology may deliver revolutionary advances with profound economic and societal implications", Part 2 of the CRS report considers briefly area that may be most affected by nanotech:

Detection and treatment technologies for cancer

"Clean, inexpensive, renewable power through energy creation, storage and transmission technologies"

Universal Access to clean water supplies, both in the US and less developed nations:  " Nanotechnology water desalination and filtration systems may offer affordable, scalable and portable water filtration systems".

"High density memory devices", improving the performance of computers and other devices.

Improved, more abundant crop yields and nutrition: " Higher crop yields might be achieved using nanoscale sensors that detect the presence of a virus or disease infecting particle . . . . Nanotechnology also offers the potential for improved nutrition. Some companies are exploring the development of nanocapsules that release nutrients targeted at specific parts of the body at specific times".

Self-healing materials

"Sensors that can warn of minute levels of toxic and pathogens in air, soil, or water."

Remediation of contaminated sites: ". . .  nanoscale particles . . . may offer more effective and less costly solution to environmental contamination."

The report also discusses other selected issues, primarily US competitiveness with other nations in the  nanotech area, using public and private investment, scientific papers published and cited, and patents issued as measurement parameters. The report notes that while the United States still leads all other nations in these areas, that lead has diminished over the last few years, with Japan, Germany and the People's Republic of China (PRC) poised to assume the lead. In these areas, the potential loss of US competitiveness is reflected in the debates in the media and Congress over free trade agreements (FTAs) and government policy towards the manufacturing sector and how best to aid it.

The report concludes with brief considerations of (1) environmental, health and safety implications of nanotechnology, (2) nanomanufacturing, and (3) public attitudes toward and understanding or misunderstanding of nanotech issues, noting that public support for nanotech tends to be greatest among those with advanced degrees and higher incomes.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Department of Defense is Watching "Nanomaterials"

Posted on December 14, 2006 by Michael E. Heintz
The United States Department of Defense's Materials of Evolving Regulatory Interest Team (MERIT) recently announced that it added "nanomaterials" to its emerging contaminants watch list.  The DoD defines "emerging contaminants" as those chemicals and materials with a "perceived or real threat to human health or environment," an "evolving regulatory interest," and "either no peer reviewed health standard or an evolving standard."  In addition, an emerging contaminant may have "insufficient human health data/science," or "new detection limits," or "new exposure pathways."

The watch list however, is different from the emerging contaminants action list.  The watch list includes those materials that DoD believes have a "probable mission or budge impact."  DoD then monitors events surrounding the listed material while conducting "rough impact analysis."  Other materials found on the watch list include: tungsten and its alloys, lead, beryllium, dichlorobenzenes, and dioxins, among others.  "DoD places materials on the Watch List when they are identified through the scanning phase as potentially affecting one or more DoD business areas. While the exact nature and magnitude of the potential impacts are unknown, the Department has identified these materials as having a potential to affect DoD functions. As a result, DoD is conducting Phase I assessments for each of these materials."

The difference between the watch list and action list is that under the watch list the DoD monitors developments concerning the listed material while expending minimal resources.  If the material is upgraded to the action list,  DoD has determined that the material is likely to impact the department, and it performs detailed analysis on the material while possibly expending "significant" resources on understanding the material.  Other activities performed once a material is upgraded to the action list include undertaking risk management actions and pollution prevention efforts by DoD.

This listing of nanomaterials, without more information, is interesting for a number of reasons.  First, the DoD's watch and action lists are selective in nature. There are only eighteen materials on these lists in total, so the addition of nanomaterials is significant.  We therefore see this action as a step towards regulation of nanotechnology by DoD's recognition of nanomaterials as potentially impacting department operations and the environment.  Second, it is hard to know what DoD will be watching by posting "nanomaterials" on its watch list.  Given the different types and functions of nanomaterials and nanoparticles, a blanket listing is vague at best.  However, because the DoD elected to list nanomaterials at all is proof that federal agencies are increasing their focus on nanotechnology in general.

While this listing does not cause any regulatory actions to be taken by DoD, an upgrade to the action list could certainly mean a significant change in course as to how one of the country's largest agencies addresses nanotechnology.
Tags: , , , , , ,