Category Archives: business

Lockheed Martin upgrades to 1000+ Qubit D-Wave system

D-Wave Systems, a Canadian quantum computing company, seems to be making new business announcements on a weekly basis. After last week’s US Los Alamos National Laboratory announcement (Nov. 12, 2015 posting) , there’s a Nov. 16, 2015 news item on Nanotechnology Now,

Harris & Harris Group, Inc. (NASDAQ:TINY), an investor in transformative companies enabled by disruptive science, notes that its portfolio company, D-Wave Systems, Inc., announced that it has entered into a multi-year agreement with Lockheed Martin to upgrade the company’s 512-qubit D-Wave Two™ quantum computer to the new D-Wave 2X™ system with 1,000+ qubits.

A Nov. 16, 2015 D-Wave Systems news release provides more details about the deal,

D-Wave Systems Inc., the world’s first quantum computing company, today announced that it has entered into a multi-year agreement with Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) to upgrade the company’s 512-qubit D-Wave Two™ quantum computer to the new D-Wave 2X™ system with 1,000+ qubits. This represents the second system upgrade since Lockheed Martin became D-Wave’s first customer in 2011 with the purchase of a 128 qubit D-Wave One™ system. The agreement includes the system, maintenance and associated professional services.

“Our mission is to solve complex challenges, advance scientific discovery and deliver innovative solutions to our customers, which requires expertise in the most advanced technologies,” said Greg Tallant, Lockheed Martin fellow and lead for the University of Southern California-Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center (QCC). “Through our continued investment in D-Wave technology, we are able to push the boundaries of quantum computing and apply the latest technologies to address the real-world problems being faced by our customers.”

For quantum computing, the performance gain over traditional computing is most evident in exceedingly complex computational problems. This could be in areas such as validating the performance of software or vehicle planning and scheduling. With the new D-Wave system, Lockheed Martin researchers will be able to explore solutions for significantly larger computational problems with improved accuracy and execution time.

The new system will be hosted at the University of Southern California-Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center, which first began exploring the power of quantum computing with the D-Wave One, the world’s first quantum computer.

The installation of the D-Wave 2X system will be completed in January 2016.

Who knows what next week will bring for D-Wave, which by the way is located in Vancouver, Canada or, more accurately, Burnaby?

US Los Alamos National Laboratory catches the D-Wave (buys a 1000+ Qubit quantum computer from D-Wave)

It can be euphoric experience making a major technical breakthrough (June 2015), selling to a new large customer (Nov. 2015) and impressing your important customers so they upgrade to the new system (Oct. 2015) within a few short months.* D-Wave Systems (a Vancouver-based quantum computer company) certainly has cause to experience it given the events of the last six weeks or so. Yesterday, in a Nov. 11, 2015, D-Wave news release, the company trumpeted its sale of a 1000+ Qubit system (Note: Links have been removed),

D-Wave Systems Inc., the world’s first quantum computing company, announced that Los Alamos National Laboratory will acquire and install the latest D-Wave quantum computer, the 1000+ qubit D-Wave 2X™ system. Los Alamos, a multidisciplinary research institution engaged in strategic science on behalf of national security, will lead a collaboration within the Department of Energy and with select university partners to explore the capabilities and applications of quantum annealing technology, consistent with the goals of the government-wide National Strategic Computing Initiative. The National Strategic Computing Initiative, created by executive order of President Obama in late July [2015], is intended “to maximize [the] benefits of high-performance computing (HPC) research, development, and deployment.”

“Los Alamos is a global leader in high performance computing and a pioneer in the application of new architectures to solve critical problems related to national security, energy, the environment, materials, health and earth science,” said Robert “Bo” Ewald, president of D-Wave U.S. “As we work jointly with scientists and engineers at Los Alamos we expect to be able to accelerate the pace of quantum software development to advance the state of algorithms, applications and software tools for quantum computing.”

A Nov. 11, 2015 news item on Nanotechnology Now is written from the company’s venture capitalist’s perspective,

Harris & Harris Group, Inc. (NASDAQ:TINY), an investor in transformative companies enabled by disruptive science, notes that its portfolio company, D-Wave Systems, Inc., announced that Los Alamos National Laboratory will acquire and install the latest D-Wave quantum computer, the 1000+ qubit D-Wave 2X™ system.

The news about the Los Alamos sale comes only weeks after D-Wave announced renewed agreements with Google, NASA (US National Aeronautics and Space Administration), and the Universities Space Research Association (USRA) in the aftermath of a technical breakthrough. See my Oct. 5, 2015 posting for more details about the agreements, the type of quantum computer D-Wave sells, and news of interesting and related research in Australia. Cracking the 512 qubit barrier also occasioned a posting here (June 26, 2015) where I described the breakthrough, the company, and included excerpts from an Economist article which mentioned D-Wave in its review of research in the field of quantum computing.

Congratulations to D-Wave!

*’It can be euphoric selling to your first large and/or important customers and D-Wave Systems (a Vancouver-based quantum computer company) certainly has cause to experience it. ‘ changed to more accurately express my thoughts to ‘It can be euphoric experience making a major technical breakthrough (June 2015), selling to a new large customer (Nov. 2015) and impressing your important customers so they upgrade to the new system (Oct. 2015) within a few short months.’ on Nov. 12, 2015 at 1025 hours PST.

A couple of lawyers talk wrote about managing nanotechnology risks

Because they are lawyers, I was intrigued by a Nov. 4, 2015 article on managing nanotechnology risks by Michael Lisak and James Mizgala of Sidley Austin LLP for Industry Week. I was also intrigued by the language (Note: A link has been removed),

The inclusion of nanotechnologies within manufacturing processes and products has increased exponentially over the past decade. Fortune recently noted that nanotechnology touches almost all Fortune 500 companies and that the industry’s $20 billion worldwide size is expected to double over the next decade. [emphasis mine]

Yet, potential safety issues have been raised and regulatory uncertainties persist. As such, proactive manufacturers seeking to protect their employees, consumers, the environment and their businesses – while continuing to develop, manufacture and market their products – may face difficult choices in how to best navigate this challenging and fluid landscape, while avoiding potential “nanotort,”  [emphasis mine] whistleblower, consumer fraud and regulatory enforcement lawsuits. Doing so requires forward-thinking advice based upon detailed analyses of each manufacturer’s products and conduct in the context of rapidly evolving scientific, regulatory and legal developments.

I wonder how many terms lawyers are going to coin in addition to “nanotort”?

The lawyers focus largely on two types of nanoparticles, carbon nanotubes, with a special emphasis on multi-walled carbon nantubes (MWCNT) and nano titanium dioxide,

Despite this scientific uncertainty, international organizations, such as the International Agency for Research on Cancer [a World Health Organization agency], have already concluded that nano titanium dioxide in its powder form and multi-walled carbon nanotube-7 (“MWCNT-7”) [emphasis mine] are “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” As such, California’s Department of Public Health lists titanium dioxide and MWCNT-7 as “ingredients known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive toxicity as determined by the authoritative scientific bodies.”  Considering that processed (i.e., non-powdered) titanium dioxide is found in products like toothpaste, shampoo, chewing gum and candies, it is not surprising that some have focused upon such statements.

There’s a lot of poison in the world, for example, apples contain seeds which have arsenic in them and, for another, peanuts can be carcinogenic and they can also kill you, as they are poison to people who are allergic to them.

On the occasion of Dunkin’ Donuts removing nano titanium dioxide as an ingredient in the powdered sugar used to coat donuts, I wrote a March 13, 2015 posting, where I quote extensively from Dr. Andrew Maynard’s (then director of the University of Michigan Risk Science Center now director of the Risk Innovation Lab at Arizona State University) 2020 science blog posting about nano titanium dioxide and Dunkin’ Donuts,

He describes some of the research on nano titanium dioxide (Note: Links have been removed),

… In 2004 the European Food Safety Agency carried out a comprehensive safety review of the material. After considering the available evidence on the same materials that are currently being used in products like Dunkin’ Donuts, the review panel concluded that there no evidence for safety concerns.

Most research on titanium dioxide nanoparticles has been carried out on ones that are inhaled, not ones we eat. Yet nanoparticles in the gut are a very different proposition to those that are breathed in.

Studies into the impacts of ingested nanoparticles are still in their infancy, and more research is definitely needed. Early indications are that the gastrointestinal tract is pretty good at handling small quantities of these fine particles. This stands to reason given the naturally occurring nanoparticles we inadvertently eat every day, from charred foods and soil residue on veggies and salad, to more esoteric products such as clay-baked potatoes. There’s even evidence that nanoparticles occur naturally inside the gastrointestinal tract.

You can find Andrew’s entire discussion in his March 12, 2015 post on the 2020 Science blog. Andrew had written earlier in a July 12, 2014 posting about something he terms ‘nano donut math’ as reported by As You Sow, the activist group that made a Dunkin’ Donuts shareholder proposal which resulted in the company’s decision to stop using nano titanium dioxide in the powdered sugar found on their donuts. In any event, Andrew made this point,

In other words, if a Dunkin’ Donut Powdered Cake Donut contained 8.9 mg of TiO2 particles smaller than 10 nm, it would have to have been doused with over 1 million tons of sugar coating! (Note update at the end of this piece)

Clearly something’s wrong here – either Dunkin’ Donuts are not using food grade TiO2 but a nanopowder with particle so small they would be no use whatsoever in the sugar coating (as well as being incredibly expensive, and not FDA approved).  Or there’s something rather wrong with the analysis!

If it’s the latter – and it’s hard to imagine any other plausible reason for the data – it looks like As You Sow ended up using rather dubious figures to back up their stakeholder resolution.  I’d certainly be interested in more information on the procedures Analytical Sciences used and the checks and balances they had in place, especially as there are a number of things that can mess up a particle analysis like this.

Update July 14: My bad, I made a slight error in the size distribution calculation first time round.  This has been corrected in the article above.  Originally, I cited the estimated Mass Median Diameter (MMD) of the TiO2 particles as 167 nm, and the Geometric Standard Deviation (GSD) as 1.6.  Correcting an error in the Excel spreadsheet used to calculate the distribution (these things happen!) led to a revised estimate of MMD = 168 nm and a GSD of 1.44.  These may look like subtle differences, but when calculating the estimated particle mass below 10 nm, they make a massive difference.  With the revised figures, you’d expect less than one trillionth of  a percent of the mass of the TiO2 powder to be below 10 nm!! (the original estimate was a tenth of a millionth of a percent).  In other words – pretty much nothing!  The full analysis can be found here.

Update November 16 2014.  Based on this post, As You Sow checked the data from Analytical Sciences LLC and revised the report accordingly.  This is noted above.

It would seem that if there are concerns over nano titanium dioxide in food, the biggest would not be the amounts ingested by consumers but inhalation by workers should they breathe in large quantities when they are handling the material.

As for the MWCNTs, they have long raised alarms but most especially the long MWCNTs and for people handling them during the course of their work day. Any MWCNTs found in sports equipment and other consumer products are bound in the material and don’t pose any danger of being inhaled into the lungs, unless they should be released from their bound state (e.g. fire might release them).

After some searching for MWCNT-7, I found something which seems also to be known as Mitsui MWCNT-7 or Mitsui 7-MWCNT (here’s one of my sources). As best I understand it, Mitsui is a company that produces an MWCNT which they have coined an MWCNT-7 and which has been used in nanotoxicity testing. As best I can tell, MWCNT is MWCNT-7.

The lawyers (Lisak and Mizgala) note things have changed for manufacturers since the early days and they make some suggestions,

One thing is certain – gone are the days when “sophisticated” manufacturers incorporating nanotechnologies within their products can reasonably expect to shield themselves by pointing to scientific and regulatory uncertainties, especially given the amount of money they are spending on research and development, as well as sales and marketing efforts.

Accordingly, manufacturers should consider undertaking meaningful risk management analyses specific to their applicable products. …

First, manufacturers should fully understand the life-cycle of nanomaterials within their organization. For some, nanomaterials may be an explicit focus of innovation and production, making it easier to pinpoint where nanotechnology fits into their processes and products. For others, nanomaterials may exist either higher-up or in the back-end of their products’ supply chain. …

Second, manufacturers should understand and stay current with the scientific state-of-the-art as well as regulatory requirements and developments potentially applicable to their employees, consumers and the environment. An important consideration related to efforts to understand the state-of-the-art is whether or not manufacturers should themselves expend resources to advance “the science” in seeking to help find answers to some of the aforementioned uncertainties. …

The lawyers go on to suggest that manufacturers should consider proactively researching nanotoxicity so as to better defend themselves against any future legal suits.

Encouraging companies to proactive with toxicity issues is in line with what seems to be an international (Europe & US) regulatory movement putting more onus on producers and manufacturers to take responsibility for safety testing. (This was communicated to me in a conversation I had with an official at the European Union Joint Research Centre where he mentioned REACH regulations and the new emphasis in response to my mention of similar FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) regulations. (We were at the 2014 9th World Congress on Alternatives to Animal Testing in Prague, Czech republic.)

For anyone interested in the International Agency for Research on Cancer you can find it here.

Nano and Japan and South Korea

It’s not always easy to get perspective about nanotechnology research and commercialization efforts in Japan and South Korea. So, it was good to see Marjo Johne’s Nov. 9, 2015 article for the Globe and Mail,

Nanotechnology, a subfield in advanced manufacturing [?] that produces technologies less than 100 nanometres in size (a human hair is about 800 times wider), is a burgeoning industry that’s projected to grow to about $135-billion in Japan by 2020. South Korea’s government said it is aiming to boost its share of the sector to 20 per cent of the global market in 2020.

“Japan and Korea are active markets for nanotechnology,” says Mark Foley, a consultant with NanoGlobe Pte. Ltd., a Singapore-based firm that helps nanotech companies bring their products to market. “Japan is especially strong on the research side and [South] Korea is very fast in plugging nanotechnology into applications.”

Andrej Zagar, author of a research paper on nanotechnology in Japan, points to maturing areas in Japan’s nanotechnology sector: applications such as nano electronics, coatings, power electronic, and nano-micro electromechanical systems for sensors. “Japan’s IT sector is making the most progress as the implementations here are made most quickly,” says Mr. Zagar, who works as business development manager at LECIP Holdings Corp., a Tokyo-based company that manufactures intelligent transport systems for global markets. “As Japan is very environmentally focused, the environment sector in nanotech – fuel-cell materials, lithium-ion nanomaterials – is worth focusing on.”

A very interesting article, although don’t take everything as gospel. The definition of nanotechnology as a subfield in advanced manufacturing is problematic to me since nanotechnology has medical and agricultural applications, which wouldn’t typically be described as part of an advanced manufacturing subfield. As well, I’m not sure where biomimicry would fit into this advanced manufacturing scheme. In any event, the applications mentioned in the article do fit that definition; its just not a comprehensive one.

Anyone who’s read this blog for a while knows I’m not a big fan of patents or the practice of using filed patents as a measure of scientific progress but in the absence of of a viable alternative, there’s this from Johne’s article,

Patent statistics suggest accelerated rates of nanotech-related innovations in these countries. According to StatNano, a website that monitors nanotechnology developments in the world, Japan and South Korea have the second and third highest number of nanotechnology patents filed this year with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

As of September, Japan had filed close to 3,283 patents while South Korea’s total was 1,845. While these numbers are but a fraction of the United States’ 13,759 nanotech patents filed so far this year, they top Germany, which has only 1,100 USPTO nanotech patent filings this year, and Canada, which ranks 10th worldwide with 375 filings.

In South Korea, the rise of nanotechnology can be traced back to 2001, when the South Korean government launched its nanotechnology development plan, along with $94-million in funding. Since then, South Korea has poured more money into nanotechnology. As of 2012, it had invested close to $2-billion in nanotech research and development.

The applications mentioned in the article are the focus of competition not only in Japan and South Korea but internationally,

Mr. Foley says nanofibres and smart clothing are particularly hot areas in Japan these days. Nanofibers have broad applications and can be used in water and air filtration systems. He points to Toray Industries Inc. and Teijin Ltd. as leaders in advanced fibre technology.

“We’ve also seen advances in smart clothing in the last year or two, with clothing that can conduct electricity and measure things like heart rate, body temperature and sweat,” he says. “Last year, a sporting company in Japan released smart clothing based on Toray technology.”

How did Foley determine that ‘smart clothing’ is a particularly hot area in Japan? Is it the number of patents filed? Is it the amount of product in the marketplace? Is it consumer demand? And, how do those numbers compare with other countries? Also, I would have liked a little more detail as to what Foley meant by ‘nanofibres’.

This is a very Asia-centric story, which is a welcome change from US-centric and European-centric stories on this topic, and inevitably, China is mentioned,

As the nanotechnology industry continues to gain traction on a global scale, Mr. Foley says Japan and South Korea may have a hard time holding on to their top spots in the international market; China is moving up fast from behind.

“Top Chinese researchers from Harvard and Cambridge are returning to China, where in Suzhou City they’ve built a nanocity with over 200 nanotechnology-related companies,” he says …

The ‘nano city’ Foley mentions is called Nanopolis or Nanopolis Suzhou. It’s been mentioned here twice, first in a Jan. 20, 2014 posting and again in a Sept. 26, 2014 posting. It’s a massive project and I gather that while some buildings are occupied there are still a significant percentage under construction.

Bicycle tyres, graphene, and a cycling revolution

Despite the wording in an Oct. 29, 2015 news item on Azonano you are not being invited to visit a factory (Note: A link has been removed),

Vittoria and Directa Plus host a unique opportunity to get an inside view in the factory where pristine Graphene is produced.

Not only will a select audience get a first-hand experience in seeing the blocking patent-protected end-to-end manufacturing process, they are exclusively selected to share the story of a material that is making it possible for Vittoria to lead a cycling revolution.

You are being invited to view this video,

An Oct. 26, 2015 Vittoria press announcement, which originated the news item, waxes eloquent about its graphene-producing partner, Directa Plus, and its new ‘graphene tyres’,

Directa Plus started its journey in 2005 [emphasis mine], in a time when a number of companies joined a race in blocking patents that would give them a huge head start in the market for recently isolated material Graphene.

With a philosophy of environmental neutrality, Directa Plus chose a unique clean direction that eventually gave them the edge in the bulk manufacturing of pristine Graphene nanoplatelets. At exactly the right time for both companies, the chairmen met each other at a function. When the application of Graphene became a logical next step, Vittoria offered the challenge to try and make this material work for cycling wheels and tires.

With continuous and significant investments, Vittoria is always seeking the cutting edge in cycling performance products through innovation. Through the Directa Plus-Vittoria partnership, both companies have unlocked a whole new level.

Unique Properties of Revolutionary Material Graphene

The guided tour immediately makes clear that the state of the art facilities of Directa Plus set the bar for next generation manufacturing. In a very white and clean environment, every step in the manufacturing process takes place in a very compact area and provide a different product with a dedicated purpose.

The company is extremely proud of the achievement to have zero impact on the environment. Both Vittoria and Directa Plus share an intense focus on quality, safety, health and environmental protection and this is clearly visible throughout the factory tour. After a close look at the overall production plant, the super-expansion process, the exfoliation and the output of 30 tons of Graphene end products in various shapes and forms, unique real-life applications are demonstrated.

One of the Graphene Plus’ products is a super-performant adsorbent towards hydrocarbons for water and soil purification. As demonstrated in the presence of the attendees, a highly polluted water tank is filtered with Graphene resulting in potable water.

Safety requirements prevent a live fireresistance demo, but Directa Plus shows a video that demonstrates the ability to treat a material with Graphene to achieve a completely non-flammable end result. Additional practical applications were illustrated through Vittoria best practices: commercial products, available for sale worldwide.

The Vittoria Best Practices: Carbon, Rubber, Special Applications

Vittoria introduced Graphene-enhanced carbon wheels for high performance road and MTB wheels in 2014. In close collaboration with Directa Plus, Vittoria will also soon introduce full carbon clinchers that can be mounted as a tubeless system.

In September this year, Vittoria announced a massive revision of its product range that includes the fastest road tire ever measured, as well as the best uncompromised competitive products for road racing in the market.

Furthermore, a highly innovative combination of Graphene and Vittoria’s 4C (4 compound) technology has enabled the introduction of more strength, more grip and greater durability for performance MTB tires. Vittoria even extended its newfound Graphene expertise to deliver fast-rolling and durable city tires that bring the greatly enhanced rubber properties to all consumers.

Perhaps the most remarkable achievement of all is the combined expertise of Directa Plus for
Graphene and the tire construction capabilities of Vittoria’s manufacturing facility Lion Tyres, dedicated to the special application of electric mountain bike tires. Again leveraging the 4C technology and specific Graphene-enhanced compounds, Vittoria has now developed 2 tires that can handle the electric engine torque as well as the roughest of terrains seemingly without effort.

No Compromise.

Effectively, the introduction of Graphene allows for natural material barriers of rubber to be removed, which means that there is no longer the need for compromises between speed, grip, durability and puncture resistance. All these features are now reaching their maximum possibilities.

Full carbon wheels will also reach new heights. With the application of Graphene, the natural properties of carbon are pushed way beyond natural limits in lateral stiffness, impact strength, weight reduction and heat dissipation, just to highlight a few key areas. The features of carbon are now extended to withstand the high pressure of tubeless mounted tires even under heavy braking circumstances without compromise.

In short, this is why Vittoria has started a cycling revolution.

Directa Plus started its graphene journey very early when you consider that the material was not successfully isolated until 2004 by Andre Geim and Konstantin (Kostya) Novosolov at the University of Manchester.

A perovskite memristor with three stable resistive states

Thanks to Dexter Johnson’s Oct. 22, 2015 posting on his Nanoclast blog (on the IEEE [Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers]) website, I’ve found information about a second memristor with three terminals, aka, three stable resistive states,  (the first is mentioned in my April 10, 2015 posting). From Dexter’s posting (Note: Links have been removed),

Now researchers at ETH Zurich have designed a memristor device out of perovskite just 5 nanometres thick that has three stable resistive states, which means it can encode data as 0,1 and 2, or a “trit” as opposed to a “bit.”

The research, which was published in the journal ACS Nano, developed model devices that have two competing nonvolatile resistive switching processes. These switching processes can be alternatively triggered by the effective switching voltage and time applied to the device.

“Our component could therefore also be useful for a new type of IT (Information Technology) that is not based on binary logic, but on a logic that provides for information located ‘between’ the 0 and 1,” said Jennifer Rupp, professor in the Department of Materials at ETH Zurich, in a press release. “This has interesting implications for what is referred to as fuzzy logic, which seeks to incorporate a form of uncertainty into the processing of digital information. You could describe it as less rigid computing.”

An Oct. 19, 2015 Swiss National Science Foundation press release provides context for the research,

Two IT giants, Intel and HP, have entered a race to produce a commercial version of memristors, a new electronics component that could one day replace flash memory (DRAM) used in USB memory sticks, SD cards and SSD hard drives. “Basically, memristors require less energy since they work at lower voltages,” explains Jennifer Rupp, professor in the Department of Materials at ETH Zurich and holder of a SNSF professorship grant. “They can be made much smaller than today’s memory modules, and therefore offer much greater density. This means they can store more megabytes of information per square millimetre.” But currently memristors are only at the prototype stage. [emphasis mine]

There is a memristor-based product on the market as I noted in a Sept. 10, 2015 posting, although that may not be the type of memristive device that Rupp seems to be discussing. (Should you have problems accessing the Swiss National Science Foundation press release, you can find a lightly edited version (a brief [two sentences] history of the memristor has been left out) here on Azonano.

Jacopo Prisco wrote for CNN online in a March 2, 2015 article about memristors and Rupp’s work (Note: A link has been removed),

Simply put, the memristor could mean the end of electronics as we know it and the beginning of a new era called “ionics”.

The transistor, developed in 1947, is the main component of computer chips. It functions using a flow of electrons, whereas the memristor couples the electrons with ions, or electrically charged atoms.

In a transistor, once the flow of electrons is interrupted by, say, cutting the power, all information is lost. But a memristor can remember the amount of charge that was flowing through it, and much like a memory stick it will retain the data even when the power is turned off.

This can pave the way for computers that will instantly turn on and off like a light bulb and never lose data: the RAM, or memory, will no longer be erased when the machine is turned off, without the need to save anything to hard drives as with current technology.

Jennifer Rupp is a Professor of electrochemical materials at ETH Zurich, and she’s working with IBM to build a memristor-based machine.

Memristors, she points out, function in a way that is similar to a human brain: “Unlike a transistor, which is based on binary codes, a memristor can have multi-levels. You could have several states, let’s say zero, one half, one quarter, one third, and so on, and that gives us a very powerful new perspective on how our computers may develop in the future,” she told CNN’s Nick Glass.

This is the CNN interview with Rupp,

Prisco also provides an update about HP’s memristor-based product,

After manufacturing the first ever memristor, Hewlett Packard has been working for years on a new type of computer based on the technology. According to plans, it will launch by 2020.

Simply called “The Machine”, it uses “electrons for processing, photons for communication, and ions for storage.”

I first wrote about HP’s The Machine in a June 25, 2014 posting (scroll down about 40% of the way).

There are many academic teams researching memristors including a team at Northwestern University. I highlighted their announcement of a three-terminal version in an April 10, 2015 posting. While Rupp’s team achieved its effect with a perovskite substrate, the Northwestern team used a molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) substrate.

For anyone wanting to read the latest research from ETH, here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Uncovering Two Competing Switching Mechanisms for Epitaxial and Ultrathin Strontium Titanate-Based Resistive Switching Bits by Markus Kubicek, Rafael Schmitt, Felix Messerschmitt, and Jennifer L. M. Rupp. ACS Nano, Article ASAP DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.5b02752 Publication Date (Web): October 8, 2015

Copyright © 2015 American Chemical Society

This paper is behind a paywall.

Finally, should you find the commercialization aspects of the memristor story interesting, there’s a June 6, 2015 posting by Knowm CEO (chief executive officer) Alex Nugent waxes eloquent on HP Labs’ ‘memristor problem’ (Note: A link has been removed),

Today I read something that did not surprise me. HP has said that their memristor technology will be replaced by traditional DRAM memory for use in “The Machine”. This is not surprising for those of us who have been in the field since before HP’s memristor marketing engine first revved up in 2008. While I have to admit the miscommunication between HP’s research and business development departments is starting to get really old, I do understand the problem, or at least part of it.

There are two ways to develop memristors. The first way is to force them to behave as you want them to behave. Most memristors that I have seen do not behave like fast, binary, non-volatile, deterministic switches. This is a problem because this is how HP wants them to behave. Consequently a perception has been created that memristors are for non-volatile fast memory. HP wants a drop-in replacement for standard memory because this is a large and established market. Makes sense of course, but its not the whole story on memristors.

Memristors exhibit a huge range of amazing phenomena. Some are very fast to switch but operate probabilistically. Others can be changed a little bit at a time and are ideal for learning. Still others have capacitance (with memory), or act as batteries. I’ve even seen some devices that can be programmed to be a capacitor or a resistor or a memristor. (Seriously).

Nugent, whether you agree with him or not provides, some fascinating insight. In the excerpt I’ve included here, he seems to provide confirmation that it’s possible to state ‘there are no memristors on the market’ and ‘there are memristors on the market’ because different devices are being called memristors.

Superconducting graphene from Saint Jean Carbon (a Canadian company)

An announcement from Saint Jean Carbon helps to paint a picture of one Canadian graphene research and commercialization effort. From an Oct. 26, 2015 news item on Azonano,

Saint Jean Carbon Inc., a carbon sciences company engaged in the development of natural graphite properties and related carbon products is pleased to announce that it has completed an initial phase of research and development (R&D) work on the development of superconducting graphene.

An Oct. 22, 2015 Saint Jean Carbon news release, (also on Marketwired) which originated the news item, explains the company’s interest in superconducting graphene,

The result of the work has produced graphene that possibly may have magnetic properties; Magnetic properties are what is needed if the material is used in superconducting applications. This is believed to be a first. The encouraging result is just the very first step with many more tests to complete. Hopefully, this puts the project on the path towards the development of a low-temperature superconductor that leverages key properties of graphene.

Superconductivity is defined as a quantum mechanical phenomenon that offers the potential for zero electrical resistance. The ability to operate with no electrical resistance at or near room temperature holds significant potential in a wide range of product and technology applications. This include high-performance smart grids, electric power transmission, transformers, power storage devices, electric motors used in vehicle propulsion as in maglev trains, magnetic levitation devices, spintronic devices and superconducting magnetic refrigeration. Solving this puzzle; would have enormous technological importance.

The work has been based on the identification of the growing understanding of the magnetic properties (the ability to repel magnetic fields) of graphene. These properties could play a crucial role in enhancing superconductivity and therefore make it a good candidate for continued efforts to realize its potential. To truly understand the magnetic properties, the material has been sent to a third party for full magnetometer temperature testing; this is believed to be the only way to get accurate nano material measurements. The tests are very complex and time consuming but will provide us with absolute definitive measurements and a clear path forward for possible applications. Upon completion of the tests (estimated to be completed by October 28th 2015), the company will release the results. [emphases mine] Elements of the research work have relied on a patented (nanoparticle ultrasound separation) system designed to isolate and create large quantities of graphene cost effectively.

Company management must feel quite confident about the results of their testing to issue this ‘preview’ news release which goes on to highlight the advantages of using Canadian graphite for producing graphene,

The base graphite used in the research program was very pure, which minimized the need for costly and environmentally harsh purification. In addition, the graphene that was produced has excellent electrical/thermal connectivity; large high surface area, very good wettability, and had some promise of magnetic properties.

The production method has been initially shown to be less aggressive and significantly more cost effective than other processes such as the Hummers Method. This should further improve the overall ability to produce base material for many other needed applications for graphene today. The process may greatly shorten the time to market, and we are encouraged that there are already real needs for the material in all sorts of applications including polymers, epoxies and other coatings. The company plans to work with industry partners to develop a solution based application that can be developed today and be in use in a short time frame.

The next phase of the joint research effort is to prepare a bench scale system capable of producing larger quantities of high purity graphene samples for potential industry partners. Mr. Ogilvie commented, “We believe our working relationship with the university teams is an excellent opportunity to leverage Saint Jean’s graphite experience and assets while simultaneously expanding our focus on critical new carbon-based opportunities such as graphene superconductors. As one of the next steps in our go-forward plan is to quickly advance the product applications by working with a number of companies and potential strategic partners. Given the potential of graphene in everything from quantum computing to energy storage, Saint Jean has been encouraged by the breadth and depth of these preliminary discussions. As the work unfolds we look forward to keeping our shareholders actively informed on our continued efforts and results.” Dr. Don MacIntyre, the Company’s geologist, P. Geo., and Qualified Person, reviewed and approved the technical and scientific information in this release.

While the company’s executive offices are in Ontario with a second office in Alberta (company contact page), the graphite mines are in Québec (from  the news release),

About Saint Jean

Saint Jean is a publicly traded carbon sciences company with interest graphite mining claims on five 100% Company owned properties located in the province of Quebec in Canada. The five properties include the Walker property, a past producing mine, the Wallingford property, the St. Jovite property, East Miller and Clot property. For information on Saint Jean’s other properties and the latest news please go to the website:

Saint Jean Carbon’s chief executive officer (CEO) has an interesting carbon background (from the Management page),

Mr. Ogilvie brings a wealth of knowledge to the graphite sector. Mr. Ogilvie has been extensively involved in several start-ups, including emerging graphite companies, for over 33 years. He most recently served as Chief Executive Officer and Director for both Mega Graphite Inc. and Canada Carbon. Prior to this, in 2007 Mr. Ogilvie led a private investment group in the redevelopment and turnaround of Industrial Minerals Inc. (now known as Northern Graphite [emphasis mine] Corporation (NGC-TSX.V), a junior mining company that is presently developing one of the largest large-flake natural graphite deposits in the world. Mr. Ogilvie has direct experience in the development of technologies related to the production of graphite ores and the operation of global graphite markets for base and high purity graphite products.

Northern Graphite was last mentioned here in a March 9, 2015 post (scroll down about 50% of the way) featuring a report about the worldwide graphite market. In a Feb. 6, 2012 post, the first one about Northern Graphite, the focus is on the flakes.

Final comment: It seems like quite the month for Canadian graphene efforts of all stripes; I wrote an October 19, 2015 post featuring a new international graphene foundation (GO Foundation for graphene commercialization) being launched in Canada.

Siberian carbon nanotube industry

I like to focus on the Russians from time to time as I find their nanotechnology strategy quite interesting. The government created an agency, RUSNANO Corporation whose mandate has changed at least once since its beginning. Two things that have remained consistent is Anatoly Chubais who leads the organization and the nanotechnology focus. Here’s the latest news in an Oct. 16, 2015 news item in the Siberian Times,

Some 28% of total greenhouse gas emissions ste the result of  production of traditional materials, such as steel, cement, paper, aluminium and plastics, said Anatoly Chubais.

Yet the use of single-walled carbon nanotubes lower the consumption of materials in production and thus reduces emissions. Now OCSiAl, a portfolio company of Rosnano, has created the world’s first industrial production technology of single-walled carbon nanotubes, he said.

The unique technology of synthesis of single-walled carbon nanotubes, which can be used as an additive for most materials, was developed in Russia at production plant Graphetron 1.0, created and launched in Novosibirsk’s university and research satellite Akademgorodok.

… In the past year were made 200 kg of nanotubes.  This year will be about one ton, and in the next two – three years it is planned to reach an annual level of 30 – 40 tons. For reference – the global market last year, offered only two tons.’

Chubais said that ‘our calculations show that if the rate of use of materials with nano-additive grows as we expect – and we have a fairly conservative assumptions – by 2030, the volume of emission reductions from this factor will be equal to, or greater than, reducing the volume of emissions from the use of all renewable energy in the world.’

OCSiAl have published a ‘Manifesto of the Carbon Century’ where they argue  for the production of more effective materials. …

Given the scantiness of the information I get about RUSNANO and Russian nanotechnology efforts it’s difficult to infer much from this or my Sept. 12, 2014 posting (the most recent posting till now) where Chubais proposed creating a joint China-Russian nanotechnology investment fund. As for OCSiAL (I was unaware of just how close the Russian connection is), a Nov. 18, 2014 posting was the most recent one to feature the company, which proposed opening a production plant in Israel.

GO Foundation for graphene commercialization launched

I’ve often wondered where Canada is with regard to graphene research and commercialization. At least one of my questions has been partly answered by the formation of a new graphene foundation. from an Oct. 12, 2015 news item on Azonano,

NAATBatt International of the United States; Phantoms Foundation of Spain, and; Grafoid Inc. of Canada [emphasis mine], are pleased to announce the launch of GO Foundation (Graphene Organization Foundation), a not-for-profit organization dedicated to supporting graphene innovation and commercialization for the betterment of humanity.

The About GO webpage provides more information about the Canadian contribution,

Our multi-purpose mission is to accelerate the time to commercialization of graphene-related technologies – on a globally accessible basis – while serving as a permanent fixture at the center of graphene innovation.

With significant support from the Government of Canada [emphasis mine] and donations from major international organizations engaged in graphene technologies development, the GO Foundation’s Co-Founders are: Grafoid Inc. of Canada; U.S.-based NATTBatt International, and; the Phantoms Foundation of Spain.

As an accelerator, our vision is to provide a neutral ground for collaboration among all graphene-related stakeholder/applicants to eliminate technological and other impediments to commercial success.

And, as an advocate for broad industrial acceptance of transformative, disruptive graphene technologies in materials and product development, the Foundation holds the capabilities to bridge knowledge chasms between business and science through the organization and promotion of international graphene conferences and scientific symposia.

By raising graphene’s universal profile, the Foundation succeeds by inspiring growth from unique, disruptive industrial-scale technologies that produce new high technology jobs from commercial ventures spun out of the Foundation’s acceleration initiatives.

GoFoundation-Logo-Final-PANTONE [sic]
The Foundation’s incubator/accelerator strategy succeeds by lessening time-to-market developments by drawing down the accumulated scientific, engineering and business expertise and other practical intangibles supplied by GO and its multinational partners …

It’s not much information but It’s more than I had before. BTW, the organization’s office is located in Ontario, Canada.

Nanotechnology is an enabling technology not an industry sector

Over the years I’ve heard people point out that nanotechnology isn’t really a technology in the traditional sense. It is instead a means of describing applied science performed at the molecular level.  In short, chemistry, physics, engineering, and biology at the molecular level.

An Oct. 9, 2015 article by Kevin Kelleher for Time magazine points that fact out in detail focusing largely on the business end of things (Note: Links have been removed),

Of all the investment fads and manias over the past few decades, none have been as big of a fizzle as the craze for nanotech stocks. Ten years ago, venture capitalists were scrambling for investments, startups with “nano” in their names flourished and even a few nanotech funds launched hoping to track a rising industry.

Back in 2005, the year when nanotech mania peaked, a gold rush mentality took hold. There were 1,200 nanotech startups worldwide, half of them in the U.S. VCs invested more than $1 billion in nanotech in the first half of the decade. Draper Fisher Jurvetson had nearly a fifth of its portfolio in the nanotech sector, and Steve Jurvetson proclaimed it “the next great technology wave.”

Ten years on, precious few of the nanotech stocks and venture-backed startups have delivered on their investment promise. Harris & Harris and Arrowhead are both trading at less than a tenth of their respective peaks of the last decade. Invesco liquidated its PowerShares Lux Nanotech ETF in 2014, after it underperformed the S&P 500 for seven of the previous eight years.

And many of the surviving companies that touted their nanotech credentials or put “nano” in their names now describe themselves as materials companies, or semiconductor companies, or – like Arrowhead – biopharma companies, if they haven’t changed their names entirely.

The rebranding process has been an interesting one to observe. I had Neil Branda  (professor at Simon Fraser University [Vancouver, Canada] and executive director of their 4D Labs) explain to me last year (2014) that nanotechnology was a passé term, it is now all about advanced materials.

They’re right and they’re wrong. I think rebranding companies is possible and a good idea. Locally, Pangaea Ventures is now an Advanced Materials venture capitalism company. Coincidentally, Neil Branda’s startup (scroll down about 15% of the way), Switch Materials, is in their portfolio.

However, the term nanotechnology is some 40 years old and represents an enormous social capital investment. While it’s possible it will disappear that won’t be happening for a long, long time.