Science Policy
- PDF / 1,398,232 Bytes
- 5 Pages / 612 x 792 pts (letter) Page_size
- 94 Downloads / 141 Views
SCIENCE POLICY Incorporating WASHINGTON NEWS and policy news from around the world.
Massive Scare over Tiny Tech North Americans reading the European press might think they have landed on another planet, where the laws of science are very different. In the United States, for example, the media paints nanotechnology as a great new scientific opportunity, one that will rival the IT and biology booms of the late 20th century. Newspapers in the United Kingdom, on the other hand, carry headlines proclaiming this new approach to materials science as a threat to civilization as we know it. Nanotechnology made the transition from “Big Idea” to harbinger of doom in record time. For nuclear power and genetically modified (GM) crops, there were at least brief interludes when the headlines described commercialization and how much money would accrue to the successful innovators. Now, researchers working on nanomaterials are so concerned about image problems that they eschew, as they put it, “the N-word.” Bob Humphreys, head of the Strategic Technology Group in the materials and
MRS BULLETIN/NOVEMBER 2004
specialty chemicals company ICI, said “The ‘nano’ word is overused. I prefer to think of it as ‘small technology.’ The important thing is how small does it need to be to solve your problems.” Several reasons have developed for staying off the nano bandwagon. Playing down expectations is one—or as one observer said, avoiding “hype fatigue”— but more important in Europe is the attack from environmentalists. When Prince Charles this past year expressed concern over potential dangers of nanotechnology, media coverage announced his statements as an alarm over “gray goo” wreaking havoc as self-replicating “nanomachines” smothered the planet. Stung by what it saw as an ill-informed comment, the scientific community went on the offensive. This was not easy after previous debacles over mad cow disease and GM crops. No amount of reassurance would work. Prince Charles has since clarified his views in a commentary published in the July 11, 2004, issue of the Independent, a
respected newspaper. In his article, the Prince of Wales remains concerned that the European Union’s research program for nanotechnology provides “only an estimated 5 per cent of total funding…on examining the environmental, social and ethical dimensions of these technologies.” The U.K. government commissioned a study from two leading research institutions. The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering assembled a high-powered committee to investigate nanotechnology and its implications. After reviewing the state of the science and technology, the committee’s report examined possible health effects, social and ethical issues, and regulatory aspects. The report said, “Much of nanoscience is concerned with understanding the properties of materials at the nanoscale and the effects of decreasing the size of materials or the structured components of materials…. Nanoscale particles can exhibit, for example, different electrical, optical, or magnetic properties fro
Data Loading...
