By Patti Glaza, Small Times staff

Apr. 6, 2007 — Many players have a vested interest in understanding the impact of barriers to commercializing nanotechnology. The US government, having invested several billion dollars in research and development since the start of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, is no exception.

On April 3, 2007, Small Times was invited to observe the first in a series of roundtable discussions initiated by a Department of Commerce project and held at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry in Portland, Oregon. The Department of Commerce is working with the University of Illinois-Springfield to develop a report intended to help policymakers ensure that the full potential of nanotechnologies can be realized.

The issues and concerns raised during the meeting will inform this report; they point to serious challenges that many players in our ecosystem are facing today. Participants included representatives from Fortune 500 companies (HP, Intel), start-ups (AcryMed, Nantero, Voxtel), tool suppliers (FEI), academia and national labs (Oregon State, University of Oregon, PNNL), investment firms (OVP, Northwest Technology Ventures, Guggenheim), and state and federal government (US Senate, US Dept. of Commerce, Oregon Economic and Community Development Dept.). In addition to participating, a key organizer of the roundtable was Skip Rung from Oregon Nanoscience and Microtechnologies Institute (ONAMI ), an organization aiming to help break down the barriers identified.

The discussion was initiated by the U.S. Department of Commerce. (Photo: Oregon Museum of Science and Industry)

Although the meeting was short, Under Secretary for Technology at the US Department of Commerce, Robert Cresanti, did an impressive job of using the time effectively. Senator Ron Wyden, a critical supporter of nanotechnology on the Hill, participated in the first part of the session. Key issues from the meeting were:

Infrastructure investment. Unlike Internet companies, nanotechnology developers cannot work out of their garages. Expensive equipment and sophisticated environments are required for conducting nanotech research and product development. Venture capitalists don’t like to put their money into fixed equipment, and the cost of procuring some of the necessary tools reaches far beyond the typical small-business bank loan. Participants stated clearly that the government has an important role in continuing to invest in, and make available to industry, advanced technology resource labs. To keep some high-volume manufacturing in the U.S., this investment will be critical as the technologies move into mass production.

Intellectual property protection. Start-ups expressed frustration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Long waits for patent award decisions make it difficult for them to get venture funding and to secure corporate partners. In response, Cresanti noted that the issue was well understood at the highest levels, but that the training and retention of qualified patent examiners was proving to be extremely difficult. Once trained, nano patent examiners are able to secure private industry jobs at three times the salary provided by the USPTO, which is limited in its ability to counter-offer due to strong union forces.

Technology transfer. How to leverage the volume of intellectual property that is being generated in the universities and government-funded laboratories was a major concern of the US Dept. of Commerce, as much of the federal funding goes to early-stage research. Suggestions on improving technology transfer included investing in experienced technology transfer agents that can identify opportunities, ease the time burden for inventors to protect their research, and simplify licensing. The ability of Stanford University’s tech transfer office to complete a licensing deal in two hours was noted as a ‘best case’ example, in addition to the Chinese giving their researchers ready access to top patent attorneys.

Workforce. Concern regarding qualified labor was echoed by almost all industry participants, both as an immediate issue today and a bigger issue for tomorrow. The ability to motivate and incent upcoming generations to study math, science, and engineering will be critical to keeping nanotechnology research and industry on US soil. A popular idea is the need to find a nanotechnology-focused goal able to fire imaginations as did the 1960s space race. Paul Burrows from PNNL says the late Dr. Richard Smalley already identified that goal: meeting the not-so-distant energy crisis.

Environment, health, and safety. These concerns centered mainly on how to educate the public on the true benefits and risks of technology, and the ability of federal regulatory bodies (e.g., EPA and FDA) to work appropriately. The lack of a coordinated industry response to the barrage of misinformation in the mass media was noted as a problem. Start-up executives expressed worry about poorly informed regulations and unnecessary reporting/study hurdles.

Continued government support. As Sam Angelos from Hewlett-Packard so appropriately stated, nano development is a marathon, not a sprint. There is worry that government monetary support will be derailed due because of the long gestation period to demonstrate ROI, in addition to the potential environment, health, and safety fallout. With much of the rest of the world ramping up investment in nanotechnology, there is fear that the US will fall behind if it does not continue to prioritize resources for nanotechnology research and commercialization.

Throughout the discussion, panelist after panelist made an extremely important point: Public-private partnerships can make a significant economic development impact on regional communities. Songs of praise for ONAMI and its ability to help facilitate solving of immediate challenges to commercializing micro and nanotechnologies were loud and clear.

As details from the meeting are made public, Small Times will provide links to relevant resources.

Apr. 5, 2007 — Waters Corp. and Symyx Technologies announce the integration of Waters’ NuGenesis Scientific Data Management System (SDMS) with the Symyx Software Electronic Lab Notebook (ELN). By making the software products compatible with one another, the companies say scientists will more easily access, share, use, and document scientific information generated by multiple sources.

According to Patrick Martell, director of Waters Laboratory Informatics, “The regulatory and competitive environments in which modern pharmaceutical and chemical products are developed demand the highest standards of compliance and efficiency. This new integration of our products helps our customers keep pace with these demands.”

Scientists using Symyx ELN software will be able to directly retrieve data and documents stored in the SDMS system, saving time and effort. Laboratories looking to couple NuGenesis SDMS version 7.0 with the Symyx ELN software will get a configurable off-the-shelf software solution with intelligent tools to enhance R&D, project data management productivity, and collaboration/communication.

Apr. 4, 2007 — The Economic Times of India reports that the country’s government is planning to pump 10 billion rupees (about $233 million) in the next five years to create a nanotechnology industry “from the scratch.” Read the full story.

By Marcy Koff, Small Times staff

Nanotechnology: From the Science to the Social is a follow-up to a 2003 report.

Apr. 5, 2007 — The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) in the U.K. has released a new report titled, Nanotechnology: From the Science to the Social, by Professor Stephen Wood, Professor Richard Jones, and Alison Geldart.

The report is a follow-up to The Social and Economic Challenges of Nanotechnology, published in 2003 by the ESRC. The original report investigated discussions about the emergence of nanotechnology and what this might mean for society.

The purpose of this second report is to outline the general trend in the discussions on nanotechnology’s future, to provide a context for future discussions of issues that social science might address. The authors outline how the debate was initially framed and then present an overview of literature that details the social and economic aspects of nanotechnology that has appeared since. Conclusions focus on the major developments in the debate and draw out the implications of these and omissions in the discussion for the social science agenda.

The analysis is based on literature published between July 2003 and April 2006 and includes articles in academic journals, non-governmental organization (NGO) reports, government and government-body reports, and articles in the popular science literature.
According to the authors, the social side of the debate should be broadened to include a wider set of issues, more economics, and more consideration of the social processes through which nanotechnology as an area develops and nanotechnology products emerge.

Apr. 3, 2007 — The Australian Nano Business Forum (ANBF) has formally launched a Sydney-based New South Wales Chapter, with support from the NSW Department of State and Regional Development. Attendees at the launch announcement represented a spectrum of nanotechnology interests including manufacturing, research, media and government.

Ms. Tina Rankovic, CEO of the ANBF, gave the keynote address outlining the opportunities for Australian industry that nanotechnology presents, and describing the role of the ANBF. She highlighted the versatility of nanotechnology and the range of Australian industries that are potentially affected.

Mr. Lu Papi of Lu Papi and Associates, appointed Interim Chairman of the ANBF NSW Chapter, will be responsible for NSW industry events.

According to the ANBF, New South Wales is home for some of Australia’s most exciting nanotechnology companies, particularly in the ITC sector. Supercapacitor manufacturer cap-XX is housed in Sydney and was named a 2005 Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum. Peregrine Semiconductors is Australia’s only manufacturer of sapphire-based integrated circuitry. And AZoNano is an information service for the nanotechnology industry, while Nanosonics is a company specializing in hygienic treatments for medical instruments.

The NSW Chapter of the ANBF owes much of its strength to the Nanotechnology Network set up by Mr. Kim Leevers of the University of Western Sydney.

Swager displays Nomadics’ Fido Explosives Detector, a bomb-detection device based on his amplified chemical sensors. (Photo: Business Wire)

Apr. 3, 2007 — Dr. Timothy M. Swager has been awarded the $500,000 Lemelson-MIT Prize, considered by many the most-prestigious cash prize for invention in the United States. “The originality, practicality and timeliness of Dr. Swager’s inventions made him a stand-out candidate,” said Merton Flemings, director of the Lemelson-MIT Program. “For instance, soldiers and Marines in Iraq are already benefiting from his explosive-detection inventions, and his molecular wire inventions will likely find application in a wide range of healthcare, environmental and security areas.”

Among his many inventions, Swager and his colleagues invented amplifying fluorescent polymers that can attract nitro aromatic molecules, a class of chemicals typically used in explosives. In most molecular sensors, the strength of the emitted signal is proportional to the number of target molecules reaching the sensor. Therefore, they are usually not sensitive enough to detect very small trace amounts of the target substance.

Swager, John D. MacArthur Professor of Chemistry and department head at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, reasoned that if he designed a polymer chain that would carry a signal except when a single target molecule struck the chain, he would have an extraordinarily sensitive detector. Thus, if the target molecule were TNT, a bomb detection device could be constructed from the polymer. “Imagine a string of holiday lights,” Swager explained. “If I break one bulb, then that strand goes down. Moreover, imagine if I wire a bunch of strands together. If I break a single bulb in any one of them, then that brings the whole thing down. That broken bulb represents the TNT molecule or vapor you’re trying to find. The interruption tells you something’s there.” The TNT molecules can bind anywhere along the polymer chain.

In 2001, Swager licensed his patented polymer technology to Nomadics, now a unit of ICx Technologies, for use in that company’s Fido Explosives Detector, so named for its ability to simulate a bomb-sniffing dog. “Within some classes of chemicals, it can actually smell as well as a dog,” Swager said. American soldiers in Iraq are using Fido devices attached to a robotic platform for deployment to hard-to-reach and dangerous areas, or as a portable, hand-held monitor to analyze people, clothing and automobiles.

In 2005, Fido earned the U.S. Army Greatest Invention Award. According to General (Retired) Paul J. Kern, the former U.S. Army senior military advisor in Research, Development and Acquisition, “¿one could easily estimate that hundreds of individuals have avoided serious injury or death as a result of Swager’s chemical inventions.”

In addition to their use in explosives detection, Swager’s molecular wire sensors have many other possible applications, from detecting environmental pollutants to early-stage cancer cells.