Posts Tagged ‘Canada’

« Older Entries

Nanotechnology-enabled mineral foam wins Cleantech award

Wednesday, September 8th, 2010

The award is for developing a product which uses waste materials such as mine tailings, “high carbon” fly ash, etc. to create a composite which provides an alternative to cement. From the news item on Azonano,

ATI-Composites focuses on the development of light weight concrete or mineral foam which has the potential to impact the Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) market, the Structural Insulated Panels (SIP) market, as well as the pre-cast industry. The technology utilizes waste materials such as mine tailings, Class C, class F or “high carbon” fly ash, and/or agricultural waste such as rice hulls. The high strength, Fire Resistant nano-technology-based binder products (alternate to cement) can include ocean water use with no compromise in strength and performance. This is extremely significant with regard to water conservation and the reduction in GHG emissions as the emerging world transitions from rural to more urban population distribution.

You can find out more about the company here at its website. From the front page,

ATI-Composites is a privately owned, Canadian company dedicated to the research, development, production and code approvals of unique building products, systems and (fire retardant) components.

The company has operated in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada for over 12 years; the principals have been involved in product development, marketing and building code approvals for more than 20 years.

As for the competition (from the news item on Azonano),

The Clean 15 cleantech competition connects visionary large companies with Canadian cleantech opportunities. The relationships are intended to facilitate commercialization for Canada’s cleantech researchers and developers, as well as support and stimulate the country’s cleantech economy.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in business, environment, nanotechnology | No Comments »

Geoengineering and nanotechnology at the University of Calgary

Tuesday, September 7th, 2010

University of Calgary climate scientist David Keith suggests two ways to engineer the climate to avoid dangerous warming. According to the news item on Nanowerk,

“Releasing engineered nano-sized disks, or sulphuric acid in a condensable vapour above the Earth, are two novel approaches. These approaches offer advantages over simply putting sulphur dioxide gas into the atmosphere,” says David Keith, a director in the Institute for Sustainable Energy, Environment and Economy and a Schulich School of Engineering professor.

Keith, a global leader in investigating this topic, says that geoengineering, or engineering the climate on a global scale, is an imperfect science.

“It cannot offset the risks that come from increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If we don’t halt man-made CO2 emissions, no amount of climate engineering can eliminate the problems – massive emissions reductions are still necessary.”

Nevertheless, Keith believes that research on geoengineering technologies,their effectiveness and environmental impacts needs to be expanded.

“I think the stakes are simply too high at this point to think that ignorance is a good policy.”

… One study was authored by Keith alone, and the other with scientists in Canada, the U.S. and Switzerland.

Keith is talking about engineering the nanoparticles as thin disks whose electric or magnet materials would allow them to be levitated into the atmosphere and oriented to reflect the most solar radiation away from us. For example, if the particles could be engineered to drift towards the Poles (North and South), solar radiation could be reduced.  There’s more detail about this and his other suggestion in the news item.

Keith does note that these suggestions do not mean we should stop our efforts at curtailing greenhouse gas emissions,

Keith stresses that whether geoengineering technology is ever used, it shouldn’t be seen as a reason not to reduce man-made greenhouse gas emissions now accumulating in the atmosphere.

“Seat belts reduce the risk of being injured in accidents. But having a seat belt doesn’t mean you should drive drunk at 100 miles an hour,” he says.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in environment, nanotechnology | No Comments »

University of Alberta, research money, nanotechnology, and those recent Chairs of Excellence

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

While I’m well aware of their work in nanotechnology research, I did not realize that the University of Alberta was becoming “one of Canada’s powerhouse  research centres.” Here’s more from the Globe & Mail article by Josh Wingrove,

It started last week, with Industry Minister Tony Clement flying in, making a joke about football, announcing $500,000 in funding for nanotechnology research, and promptly leaving. [mentioned in my Aug. 17, 2010 posting]

A week later, a prestigious gathering of 50 delegates from leading Chinese and Canadian research institutions arrived, as well as an announcement Thursday of $200-million in federal research money.

It would be a busy two weeks for any school. But the delegates didn’t attend McGill University, the University of Toronto or the University of British Columbia, typically regarded as Canada’s top-ranked institutions.

Instead, they came to Edmonton’s University of Alberta, which has quickly become one of Canada’s powerhouse research centres. The U of A ranks second in total research funding, behind only U of T and up from fifth in 2006. This year, the U of A will spend $514-million on research, more than double its total from a decade ago.

The university has decided to spend more on research at a time when other departments on campus are experiencing budget cutbacks.

“From a societal point of view of course, research is increasingly conducted as applied research. It’s meant to solve problems,” she [Britta Baron, vice-provost] said. “The more selfish answer from the point of view of the individual university is your prestige, your ranking, depends mostly on the quality of your research. If you want to push yourself up, you need to invest in your research.”

The U of A is home to four of the nation’s 19 Canada Excellence Chairs announced three months ago, more than any other university. [emphasis mine]

I did post about the Canada Excellence Chairs May 20, 2010 when they were first announced and was recently alerted (thanks to Joel Burford of Alberta Innovates Technology Futures) to a youtube interview with one of the new U of A Canada Excellence Chairs, Thomas Thundat. His area of interest is  oil sands molecular engineering,

I’m not really sure what to make of all this other than the fact that competition amongst the universities in Canada seems to be heating up. I recall there was some outcry after a 2009 article by Paul Wells for MacLean’s where representatives from the ‘big five’ Canadian universities claimed they should get the lion’s share of funding for science research and postgraduates while Canada’s other universities should focus on undergraduate education. About 10 days later the other universities replied in an article by Cathy Gulli for MacLean’s. (Rob Annan at Don’t leave Canada behind commented on the controversy here and here.)

I would imagine these latest developments are a matter of some satisfaction for the folks at the U of A. It’ll be interesting to see how this all shakes out especially if there should be a federal election. Let’s not forget that Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper is from Alberta.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in nanotechnology, science policy | No Comments »

Nanocrystalline cellulose interview with Dr. Richard Berry of FPInnovations

Friday, August 27th, 2010

Nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) is one of the most searched items on this blog so it seemed like a good idea to send some questions about it to a Canadian company, FPInnovations, that has been a leader in  its development.  I Dr. Richard Berry, program manager for FPInnovations very kindly answered. First a little biographical information,

Dr. Richard Berry is the manager of the FPInnovations Chemical Pulping Program and he has been the leader of the nanotechnology initiative at FPInnovations for the last several years. Dr. Berry is a key contributor to ArboraNano. His scientific accomplishments include work on the elimination of chlorinated dioxins and the development of a variety of bleaching technologies. Dr. Berry has overseen the industrial application of his numerous inventions. He is the author of more than eighty peer-reviewed publications and patents. The prestigious 2009 Nano-industry award from NanoQuébec was given to him for his exceptional contribution to the development of Nanocrystalline Cellulose. The initiatives Dr. Berry has spearheaded in recent years have allowed Canada to position itself as a world leader in the development of this new nanotechnology industry.

Now for the  interview:

Q: In light of the new Domtar-FPInnovations plant [mentioned here in my July 16, 2010 posting] which is going to be built in Windsor, Québec, could you tell me a little about nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC). I have looked at your information sheet which notes that cellulose is: milled then hydrolyzed with the NCC separated and concentrated so it can be treated chemically for new uses.  In layperson’s terms, what’s cellulose?

A:         Cellulose is the most abundant polymer on earth and is the major constituent of all plants; cotton is 100% cellulose. Cellulose is made of chains of glucose molecules and these arrange into amorphous (soft) and crystalline (hard) regions. These structures provide flexibility and strength respectively to the fibres that are made of cellulose.

The hard crystalline regions are separated from the soft amorphous regions in the process that we are using which also causes the separation of the crystallites in the crystalline regions. These crystallites are nanocrystalline cellulose and have a needle shape approximately 200nm in length and 10 nm in diameter

Q: What does hydrolyze mean, in simple terms?

A:         Hydrolyze in this process means that we break the bonds between the glucose molecules. This reaction occurs far more rapidly in the soft amorphous regions of the cellulose structure leaving the hard crystalline regions largely intact

Q: As after all this processing, do you have nanocrystalline cellulose and how would you describe what nanocrystalline cellulose is?

A:         The process is to produce nanocrystalline cellulose but many of the processing steps are to ensure that the process is closed cycle and that the acid used is recovered and that the dissolved glucose can be separated to make energy, ethanol or higher value chemical products.

Nanocrystalline cellulose is the basic physical building block of plants which therefore have used nanotechnology for eons. The crystallites are the reinforcement elements providing strength in wood, paper and fibres.

Q: Does the process use up the entire log or are parts of it left over? What happens to any leftover bits?

A:         We are starting from the bleached chemical pulp which is, to a large extent, cellulose. The left over bits have actually been processed as part of the chemical pulp mill processes. The acid used is recovered and reused and the sugars are converted into other products; in the demonstration plant they will be converted into biogas.

Q: I understand you won’t want to give away any competitive advantages but could you describe at least partially the sort of chemical processing involved for these new applications?

A:         In some applications, there is no processing needed at all. In other applications, the formulation used allows the NCC to be effective. In further applications, surface modification is required to maximize the properties.

Q: Is the new plant (Domtar-FPInnovations) meant to be used for producing nanocrystalline cellulose particles for shipment elsewhere? Or will there be work on applications using the nanoparticles? If so, on which application(s) are you concentrating your efforts?

A:         The plant presently is for producing various grades of nanocrystalline cellulose for shipment elsewhere. The applications are being developed with partners in the new industry sectors that we are targeting. Amongst others, we have partners for applications in coatings, films and textiles.

Q: Is FPInnovations involved with the ArboraNano Centre of Excellence programme and its efforts to encourage NCC use in industries not usually associated with forest products? What might involvement entail?

A:         FPInnovations is one of the founding members and had a significant role in setting up ArboraNano.  Our involvement presently is as a supplier of NCC through our pilot plant in Pointe Claire and as members of both the Scientific Committee and Board of Arboranano.

Q: Assuming FPInnovations is attending the 2010 TAPPI [International Conference on Nanotechnology for the Forest Product Industry] in Finland, can you give me a preview of the company’s proposed presentation(s) at the conference?

A:         Representatives of FPInnovations will be at the conference but our involvement will be limited because much of the material we have developed is proprietary to ourselves and to the partners that we have. Our focus at this stage is commercial development.

Q: What kind of research is being done on possible health, safety and environment issues with regard to NCC?

A:         From the very beginning of our project, 20% of our funding has been spent on these issues. We are glad to say that the research has shown that NCC is in the category of “practically non toxic”, and mammalian studies done to assess inhalation, ingestion and dermal risk have all shown the material to be in the lowest category of risk. These results show that the size of a particle is not a determinant of its risk but as with chemicals it is the specific material that is critical in determining toxicity.

Q: Are there plans, at some point in the future, to list NCC on Charles McGovern’s Integrated Nano-Science Commodities Exchange or will your product be listed on some other commodities exchange?

A:         We do not view NCC at the moment as a commodity; it is a very specialized group of materials. We hope it will take a long time before it becomes a commodity.

Thank you very much Dr. Berry.

On a related matter, I was fortunate enough to receive a copy of the documentation that the Canadian federal government provided in response to Member of Parliament, Peter Julian’s (NDP), question about nanotechnology funding from 2005/6 – 2008/9. The response from Natural Resources Canada highlighted funding provided to FPInnovations in fiscal year 2007/8 of $2,308,000 and in fiscal year 2008/9,  a further, $3,2570,000 for a total of $5,565,000. Natural Resources Canada did not fund any nanotechnology research in 2005/6 or 2006/7.

One final note, former president and chief executive officer of FPInnovations, Ian de la Roche, PhD, will be the keynote speaker at the 10th Pacific Rim Bio-Based Composites Symposium Oct. 5-8, 2010 in Banff, Alberta. (Thanks to Joel Burford at Alberta Innovates Technology Futures for the information.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in nanotechnology | No Comments »

Tony Clement announces Canadian government nano investment in two Alberta firms

Tuesday, August 17th, 2010

Tony Clement, Canada’s Minister of Industry, announced investments totaling over $500,000 to two Alberta-based firms associated with nanotechnology. From the news release on Marketwire [ETA Aug.18.10: there's also this link to the item on Nanowerk],

The Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry, today announced contributions of $285,268 to Sonoro Energy Limited and $257,000 to IntelligentNano Incorporated from the National Research Council of Canada Industrial Research Assistance Program (NRC-IRAP). The funding supports innovative research and development projects that will assist both firms in developing high-tech solutions for global markets.

“Our government is investing in science and technology to create good jobs, strengthen the economy and improve the quality of life of Canadians,” said Minister Clement. “This government is supporting Canadian firms that successfully develop and apply innovative technologies. Canada’s Economic Action Plan is bolstering scientific research and commercialization, while creating good jobs and economic growth.”

Edmonton boasts Canada’s largest and most technologically advanced nanotechnology research infrastructure, centred around the National Institute of Nanotechnology (NINT). NINT is a joint initiative between the National Research Council of Canada, the University of Alberta, and the Government of Alberta.

So there you have it, the follow up to yesterday’s news flash. If you’re curious about the two companies, Sonoro is using the money to,

[support] a project that will seek to accelerate the commercial upgrading of heavy oil into synthetic crude, by small and medium- sized producers in remote areas. As the technology is both scalable and repeatable, Sonoro is actively pursuing heavy oil resource opportunities, particularly in remote global regions where there is heavy oil that could benefit from low-cost upgrading technology. Sonoro Energy has developed and patented a proprietary sonic reactor technology platform that transfers sonic energy on an industrial scale to physical, chemical or biological processes.

IntelligentNano will apply its funds towards,

further development of the “Sonacell,” a device for amplifying and accelerating the growth of therapeutic stem cells. Stem cells have an ability to self-renew and the potential to replace diseased and damaged tissues in the body, without the risk of rejection and side effects. Adults have a very small number of such cells; IntelligentNano has developed the “Sonacell,” which will make it possible to harvest and grow a sufficient quantity of a patient’s own stem cells for use in medical therapies. The “Sonacell” opens the door to the possibility of treatments for diseases like diabetes, arthritis, Parkinson’s and spinal cord injuries.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in energy, health and safety, nanotechnology | 1 Comment »

Simon Fraser University uses gold nanoparticles for anti-folding

Friday, August 6th, 2010

It always amazes me when something pops in my email and turns out to be related to one of my latest postings. Today, Simon Fraser University sent me a news release about Paul Li and his lab-on-a-chip work where he’s trying to keep DNA strands separate. From the news release,

A Simon Fraser University chemist who pioneered lab-on-a-biochip technology six years ago has struck gold in the research world again, this time literally.

Paul Li has combined nanoscale-sized-particles of gold with two powerful tools in molecular biology to make DNA analysis more than 10 times faster at room temperature, rather than previously required higher temperatures.

Li has sped up gene identification by fusing the slide-like microarray’s ability to identify known DNA gene sequences with the multi-channel microfluidic device’s ability to quickly analyse small amounts of liquid.

The palm-sized hybrid biochip is roughly the same thickness as the Canadian Loonie.

But what really makes the invention a biomedical gold mine is the addition of gold nanoparticles to the liquid being analysed on it. Mixed with DNA, tiny spheres of gold act as mini magnets that adhere to each of the DNA’s twin strands.

When the DNA is heated, the two strands separate. The gold nanoparticles keep them apart, which enables scientists to probe each strand with other pieces of DNA that are engineered to recognize known gene sequences.

“The key benefit of the gold is that it allows us to do our analysis at room temperature (25 degrees C),” explains Li. “That is half the conventional temperature needed, which requires the use of an apparatus that tolerates high temperatures.

“More importantly, DNA sequences with slight differences are now differentiated by the nanoparticle, but not by the high temperature.”

This invention will revolutionize researchers’ ability to probe biological samples and detect genes for forensic analysis, disease detection and drug development.

I may have stretched this just a bit by calling anti-folding but this process which uses the gold nanoparticles to keep the DNA strands from adhering to each other contrasts with the work mentioned in today’s earlier post, Folding, origami, and shapeshifting and an article with over 50,000 authors, where DNA was used to keep ensure that carbon nanotubes don’t adhere to each other.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in health and safety, nanotechnology | No Comments »

Nickel quantum dots and solar cells

Thursday, August 5th, 2010

Replacing gold with nickel in quantum dot solar cells could reduce costs by 40% – 80%. Researchers at the University of Toronto have shown that it is possible to do this. From the news item on Azonano,

At first, nickel did not appear to do the job. “It was intermixing with our quantum dots, forming a compound that blocked the current flow from the device,” says Dr. Ratan Debnath, first author on the group’s paper [in the July 12, 2010 issue of Applied Physics Letters]. Adding just one nanometer of lithium fluoride between the nickel and the dots created a barrier that stopped the contamination, and the cell’s efficiency jumped back up to the expected level.

This is the latest of several recent solar-cell milestones by the Canadian researchers. “We have been able to increase dramatically the efficiency of our photovoltaics over the last several years and continue to hold the performance world records,” Professor [Ted] Sargent said.

In addition to making solar cells cheaper to produce, the group is working on increasing the cells’ power-conversion efficiency to 10% before attempting commercialization.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in energy, nanotechnology | No Comments »

A tale of two countries and nanotechnology strategies (part 2 of an occasional series)

Monday, August 2nd, 2010

The US National Nanotechnology Initiative’s (NNI) tenth anniversary celebration titled, Nanotechnology Innovation Summit was announced about a week ago around the same time I received a copy of the documentation outlining the Canadian government’s expenditures on nanotechnology from the fiscal years 2005/6 to 2008/9.

The documentation which was issued in response to a question by Member of Parliament Peter Julian is some 80 pages that’s not organized in a way that makes for easy reading. (I interviewed Peter Julian, New Democratic Party, about his private member’s bill on nanotechnology here in part 1, part 2, and part 3.) Since there is no single nanotechnology funding hub, each ministry or funding agency issues its own records which is usually in the form of spreadsheets and each agency has its own organizing strategy. It’s going to take a little more time before I can make much sense of it but once I do, I’ll try to post it here.

Meanwhile, I found this July 26, 2010 news item about the NNI’s 10 anniversary on Nanowerk,

The Nano Science and Technology Institute (NSTI), in cooperation with the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO), announced today a National Nanotechnology Innovation Summit to mark the 10th anniversary of the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) to be held December 8-10, 2010 at the Gaylord National Hotel & Convention Center in National Harbor, MD. The event, in cooperation with OSTP and NNCO and organized by NSTI, with key support from the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), will serve as a forum for the nation’s nanotechnology innovators, investors, policy makers and leading corporate developers and integrators.

Since its formal launch in 2001 under President Clinton, the National Nanotechnology Initiative has strategically invested and coordinated over $12 billion in nanotechnology development. [emphasis mine] The NNI Nanotechnology Innovation Summit will spotlight revolutionary technologies from the 10-year NNI funding effort, with a special emphasis on showcasing commercially transformational technologies directly funded or catalyzed by the multi-agency partnership of the NNI. Participants will hear from some of the top researchers, industry leaders, technology investors and visionary policy makers of our time as they speak about the impact of nanotechnology innovation over the past 10 years and look toward the future.

Intriguing, yes? In the US, they can state they’ve spent 12B US over 10 years (I assume they can break those figures down) while in Canada, the figures don’t appear to have been aggregated even on agency by agency basis.

I think it comes down to a basic philosophical difference in how nanotechnology has been approached. In the US (and many other juridictions) it’s been treated as a specialty in and of itself. The approach makes sense since chemistry at the nanoscale is significantly different from chemistry at the macroscale.

In Canada, we seem to have taken the perspective that nanotechnology is a continuation of scientific exploration and while the particulars differ dramatically, nanotechnology itself is a logical progression of the scientific enterprise.

I don’t know that one approach is better than the other but the US approach makes funding questions a lot easier to answer.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in nanotechnology, science philosophy, science policy | 1 Comment »

The Jensen Project, researching, and the disappearing Canadian census long form

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

I couldn’t watch The Jensen Project (Friday, July 16, 2010) for more than about 3 or 4 minutes at a time as I had to keep channel surfing away from this bizarre ‘nanotechnology-themed’ tv movie. It was an awful fascination that kept me coming back.

I gather the writers did their science research by watching Agent Cody Banks (a 2003 Disney movie). They updated the concept so that the nanobots weren’t simple metal-munchers (the nanobots once unleashed would grab atoms to replicate themselves; they seem to particularly metal in the Agent Cody Banks movie. Now the nanobots (sometimes referred to as computers) were injectable (maybe they watched the Bionic Woman reboot?) into hapless victims whose biological processes could then be controlled by a phone app. That’s right. The nanobots could manipulate your hormones, your neurotransmitters and any number of other bodily systems so that you could be cured or killed at the touch of a fingertip by whoever was holding the phone/controller.

My favourite part was where the ‘evil ones’ had to procure a molecular assembler. There are only three or four in the world according to the story. Naturally, the evil chief scientist dashes off to pick one up and returns with it tucked under his arm. Yes, you wouldn’t worry about dropping it. After all, there’d be at least another two or three left in the world.

By comparison with The Jensen Project, Agent Cody Banks was a model of storytelling and scientific accuracy. The Disney movie correctly identified a fullerene (even if the actor was having trouble with the terminology). At least some of the character behaviour made sense and the story had a ‘tongue-in-cheek’ approach so the viewer could make allowances for the flights of fancy.

I searched for information about The Jensen Project as I was curious about any science consultation that might have taken place. Nada, there was no listing for a science consultant and, as far as I can tell, the writers have minimal writing experience (one or two writing credits including The Jensen Project) with some experience in production and none seems to have had a science background of any kind.

Regardless of how much experience you have, research is always important as we’re finding out if the discussion about the prospect that the Canadian long census form is about to disappear is any indication.

As Beth at The Black Hole noted,

All of this brings up questions about politicians’ understanding of the importance of data and evidence-informed practice, not to mention their ignoring the scientific experts on the matter – in this case, the statisticians at Stats Canada.

Beth did a little more investigating using Twitter,

This lead me to check out Clement’s [Tony Clement is the Cabinet Minister responsible for Statistics Canada] Twitter stream, where he referred to having a mandatory (as opposed to voluntary) long form as “state coercion” – I guess it’s fine to have the state “coerce” you to complete the short form – or, you know, obey any of our other laws – but they draw the line at the long form?

In response to a commenter who asked how the census discussion was relevant to science trainees (The Black Hole’s focus) and described the posting as ‘tory-bashing’,

… to call this random Tory bashing is pretty unfair. The census data is a tool that many scientists and social scientists use daily in their research. While it might not be directly relevant to whichever field of science you are in or thinking of when making this comment, it has a huge effect on trainees in epidemiology, public health, civil engineering, and even industry bound trainees. [emphases mine]

This blog is on issues affecting science trainees and a move like this which strips information from the public domain and many researchers is something we definitely see as having an effect.

Hope this helps explain a little why we found it important to post.

Dave [Note: Beth and Dave run the blog]

Interestingly, Tony Clement the minister defending this move fought against it according to Jeffrey Simpson in his July 17, 2010 column for the Globe and Mail,

Last fall, Prime Minister Stephen Harper decided his government would oppose the mandatory long-form census. Since then, nothing has changed his mind. His right-wing ideology and political instinct combined to make a policy that’s being denounced by almost every leading institution and commentator in Canada.

His decision was also opposed inside the government by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and by Industry Minister Tony Clement, who’s responsible for Statistics Canada, the agency that administers the census.

Both wrote to the Prime Minister, underscoring the importance of the mandatory long-form census to compile the most accurate statistics on which so much public policy and private-sector decision-making depends. [emphases mine]

Dave Bruggeman at Pasco Phronesis has also weighed in with some telling points (and sardonic humour which I haven’t reproduced here but do go and enjoy),

To the north, Canada is preparing for a census in 2011 (it does so every five years compared to ten for the U.S.), but is dealing with a very different methodological debate. The Conservative government, expressing a concern over the privacy of its citizens, has opted to make the census long form (distributed to twenty percent of the population, the remainder receive a short form asking for very basic information) voluntary. (Much like in the United States, you can be fined for not answering census questions.) However, the national privacy commissioner has received all of three complaints about the census since 2001, and Statistics Canada takes stringent measures to maintain confidentiality of census data (much like the U.S. Census Bureau), not releasing detailed census information for decades, if ever.

So the publicized rationale for the change does not reflect a statistically significant analysis of public opinion, but the anecdotes of a few people who caught the attention of Members of Parliament. [emphases mine]

Simpson goes on to suggest Harper’s possible  motivation,

What’s the point of all this, politically? There hasn’t been a hue and cry in years past about the fact that a fifth of Canadians have been required to fill out the long-form census. Past governments of both political stripes, like governments throughout the Western world, do something like this, and it’s one of the reasons why Statistics Canada is regarded internationally as one of the very best statistical agencies in the world.

… this sprang from Mr. Harper’s ideological core conviction about Big Government and, more important, a tactical political sense that here was an issue that could activate his party’s populist base – that could galvanize the core with bogus but potent arguments about the perils of the “nanny state,” the “elites,” the “bureaucrats,” the same sort of people who connive to take away your guns, raise your taxes and threaten your liberties, against whom only the Harper government stands resolute.

Personally, I’m wondering if this census storm isn’t simply a diversionary tactic.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in nanotechnology, science policy | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries