Nano World: More funds on nano risk needed

November 18, 2005

Investigations of the environmental and health implications of nanotechnology are so important that industry and environmentalist groups, normally thought of as opposed toward each other, both told Congress they would support redirecting existing nanotechnology research funds toward such work.

"If nanotechnology is to fulfill its enormous economic potential, then we have to invest more right now in understanding what problems the technology might cause," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Science Committee in a Thursday hearing. "This is the time to act, before we cause problems. This is the time to act, when there is a consensus among government, industry and environmentalists."

Nanotechnology is anticipated to benefit medicine, electronics and "every facet of our lives," noted Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., but the very properties that make nanomaterials so promising in applications, such as their unusual properties when compared to bulkier counterparts, "make them potentially troubling when they come in contact with people and the environment." For instance, their small size could allow them to unintentionally slip into the bloodstream and into the brain or other organs, said Richard Denison, senior scientist for environmentalist group Environmental Defense in Washington, D.C.

According to Clayton Teague, director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, the federal government will invest nearly $39 million in the next fiscal year on research and development focused on understanding any potential health and environmental risks "posed by exposure to nanomaterials and nanoproducts."

But environmentalist and industry groups agree that $39 million is not enough. Denison noted that DuPont Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Chad Holliday and Environmental Defense president Fred Krupp called for $100 million in such funding in a Wall Street Journal op-ed in June.

"Organizations as diverse as environmental NGOs, large chemical companies, nanotech startups, insurance companies and investment firms all agree that the federal government should be immediately directing many more of the dollars it is currently investing in nanotechnology development toward identifying and assessing the potential risks of nanomaterials to human health and the environment," Denison said.

Matthew Nordan, senior analyst at nanotechnology analyst firm Lux Research in New York, proposed the creation of an international nanoparticle toxicology authority to help coordinate today's splintered efforts. He also recommended the U.S. government establish a $100 million to $200 million national nanotechnology toxicology initiative. Such research should be publicly funded to avoid skepticism of environmental and health research conducted by the companies that are manufacturing nanomaterials, said Krishna Doraiswamy, research planning manager at DuPont Central Research and Development.

"While this level of risk research spending will represent a significant increase over current levels, it is still less than 10 percent of the overall federal budget for nanotechnology development," Denison said. "It is a modest investment compared to the benefits of risk avoidance and to the $1 trillion contribution that nanotechnology is projected to make to the world economy by 2015."

Copyright 2005 by United Press International

Explore further: Nano-software offers enhanced protection to both workers and industry

Related Stories

The promise and peril of nanotechnology

March 26, 2014

Scientists at Northwestern University have found a way to detect metastatic breast cancer by arranging strands of DNA into spherical shapes and using them to cover a tiny particle of gold, creating a "nano-flare" that lights ...

Nanotechnology: A risky frontier?

November 5, 2009

Inside a cramped back room at Rushford Hypersonic, a start-up headquartered in southeastern Minnesota, sits a cube-like machine that throws a mean atomic fastball. At the push of a button, the reactor hurls atoms toward a ...

Engineers explore environmental concerns of nanotechnology

February 1, 2010

As researchers around the world hasten to employ nanotechnology to improve production methods for applications that range from manufacturing materials to creating new pharmaceutical drugs, a separate but equally compelling ...

EarthTalk: What is 'nanotechnology'?

May 25, 2009

Dear EarthTalk: What is "nanotechnology"? I've heard that nanoparticles are already in consumer products, yet we haven't really studied their potential health impacts. (Dan Zeff, San Francisco)

Recommended for you

Study finds 'rudimentary' empathy in macaques

December 1, 2015

(—A pair of researchers with Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and Université Lyon, in France has conducted a study that has shown that macaques have at least some degree of empathy towards their fellow ...

Scientists overcome key CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing hurdle

December 1, 2015

Researchers at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard and the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT have engineered changes to the revolutionary CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing system that significantly cut down on "off-target" ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (1) Jan 05, 2009
Nanotechnology can certainly be deadly and it's pivotal to study it's implications ASAP.

It's also clearly in best interest of the industry itself as a few well publicized cases of nano related deaths can quickly antagonize public and cripple the market. Once set negative image can take generations to correct, the case of atomic energy is a good example of the fear the invisible can inspire.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.