Tag Archives: China

Your tires generate energy that can be harvested

One day, this new work from the University of Wisconsin-Madison could help cut gas expenditures for your car and other motorized vehicles dependent on fossil fuels. A June 29, 2015 news item on Nanowerk describes the research (Note: A link has been removed),

A group of University of Wisconsin-Madison engineers and a collaborator from China have developed a nanogenerator that harvests energy from a car’s rolling tire friction.

An innovative method of reusing energy, the nanogenerator ultimately could provide automobile manufacturers a new way to squeeze greater efficiency out of their vehicles.

The researchers reported their development, which is the first of its kind, in a paper published May 6, 2015, in the journal Nano Energy (“Single-electrode triboelectric nanogenerator for scavenging friction energy from rolling tires”).

A June 29, 2015 University of Wisconsin-Madison news release (also on EurekAlert), which originated the news item, provides more details (Note: Links have been removed),

Xudong Wang, the Harvey D. Spangler fellow and an associate professor of materials science and engineering at UW-Madison, and his PhD student Yanchao Mao have been working on this device for about a year.

The nanogenerator relies on the triboelectric effect to harness energy from the changing electric potential between the pavement and a vehicle’s wheels. The triboelectric effect is the electric charge that results from the contact or rubbing together of two dissimilar objects.

Wang says the nanogenerator provides an excellent way to take advantage of energy that is usually lost due to friction.

“The friction between the tire and the ground consumes about 10 percent of a vehicle’s fuel,” he says. “That energy is wasted. So if we can convert that energy, it could give us very good improvement in fuel efficiency.”

The nanogenerator relies on an electrode integrated into a segment of the tire. When this part of the tire surface comes into contact with the ground, the friction between those two surfaces ultimately produces an electrical charge-a type of contact electrification known as the triboelectric effect.

During initial trials, Wang and his colleagues used a toy car with LED lights to demonstrate the concept. They attached an electrode to the wheels of the car, and as it rolled across the ground, the LED lights flashed on and off. The movement of electrons caused by friction was able to generate enough energy to power the lights, supporting the idea that energy lost to friction can actually be collected and reused.

“Regardless of the energy being wasted, we can reclaim it, and this makes things more efficient,” Wang says. “I think that’s the most exciting part of this, and is something I’m always looking for: how to save the energy from consumption.”

The researchers also determined that the amount of energy harnessed is directly related to the weight of a car, as well as its speed. Therefore the amount of energy saved can vary depending on the vehicle-but Wang estimates about a 10-percent increase in the average vehicle’s gas mileage given 50-percent friction energy conversion efficiency.

“There’s big potential with this type of energy,” Wang says. “I think the impact could be huge.”

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Single-electrode triboelectric nanogenerator for scavenging friction energy from rolling tires by Yanchao Mao, Dalong Geng, Erjun Liang, & Xudong Wang. Nano Energy Volume 15, July 2015, Pages 227–234 doi:10.1016/j.nanoen.2015.04.026

This paper is behind a paywall.

Convergence at Canada’s Perimeter Institute: art/science and physics

It’s a cornucopia of convergence at Canada’s Perimeter Institute (PI). First, there’s a June 16, 2015 posting by Colin Hunter about converging art and science in the person of Alioscia Hamma,

In his professional life, Hamma is a lecturer in the Perimeter Scholars International (PSI) program and an Associate Professor at China’s Tsinghua University. His research seeks new insights into quantum entanglement, quantum statistical mechanics, and other aspects of the fundamental nature of reality.

Though he dreamed during his boyhood in Naples of one day becoming a comic book artist, he pursued physics because he believed – still believes – it is our most reliable tool for decoding our universe.

“Mathematics is ideal, clean, pure, and meaningless. Natural sciences are living, concrete, dirty, and meaningful. Physics is right in the middle, like the human condition,” says Hamma.

Art too, he says, resides in the middle ground between the world of ideals and the world as it presents itself to our senses.

So he draws. …

Perimeter Institute has provided a video where Hamma shares his ideas,

This is very romantic as in literature-romantic. If I remember rightly, ‘truth is beauty and beauty is truth’ was the motto of the romantic poets, Byron, Keats, and Shelley. It’s intriguing to hear similar ideas being applied to physics, philosophy, and art.

H/t to Speaking Up For Canadian Science regarding this second ‘convergence at PI‘. From the Convergence conference page on the Perimeter Institute website,

Convergence is Perimeter’s first-ever alumni reunion and a new kind of physics conference providing a “big picture” overview of fundamental physics and its future.

Physics is at a turning point. The most sophisticated experiments ever devised are decoding our universe with unprecedented clarity — from the quantum to the cosmos — and revealing a stunning simplicity that theory has yet to explain.

Convergence will bring together many of the world’s best minds in physics to probe the field’s most exciting ideas and chart a course for 21st century physics. The event will also celebrate, through commemorative lectures, the centenaries of two defining discoveries of the 20th century: Noether’s theorem and Einstein’s theory of general relativity.

Converge with us June 20-24. [Registration is now closed]

Despite registration being closed it is still possible to attend online,


Whether you’re at Convergence in person or joining us online, there are many ways to join the conversation:

You can find PI’s Convergence blog here.

A race to find substitutes for graphene?

I have two items concerning research which seeks to replace graphene in one application or other.

Black phosporus and the École Polytechniqe de Montréal

A June 2, 2015 news item on Nanotechnology Now features work on developing a two-dimensional black phosphorus material, 2D phosphane,

A team of researchers from Universite de Montreal, Polytechnique Montreal and the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS) in France is the first to succeed in preventing two-dimensional layers of black phosphorus from oxidating. In so doing, they have opened the doors to exploiting their striking properties in a number of electronic and optoelectronic devices. …

Black phosphorus, a stable allotrope of phosphorus that presents a lamellar structure similar to that of graphite, has recently begun to capture the attention of physicists and materials researchers. It is possible to obtain single atomic layers from it, which researchers call 2D phosphane. A cousin of the widely publicized graphene, 2D phosphane brings together two very sought-after properties for device design.

A June 2, 2015 École Polytechniqe de Montréal news release, which originated the news item, expands on why 2D phosphane is an appealing material,

First, 2D phosphane is a semiconductor material that provides the necessary characteristics for making transistors and processors. With its high-mobility, it is estimated that 2D phosphane could form the basis for electronics that is both high-performance and low-cost.

Furthermore, this new material features a second, even more distinctive, characteristic: its interaction with light depends on the number of atomic layers used. One monolayer will emit red light, whereas a thicker sample will emit into the infrared. This variation makes it possible to manufacture a wide range of optoelectronic devices, such as lasers or detectors, in a strategic fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum.

The news release goes on to describe an important issue with phosphane and how the scientists addressed it,

Until now, the study of 2D phosphane’s properties was slowed by a major problem: in ambient  conditions, very thin layers of the material would degrade, to the point of compromising its future in the industry despite its promising potential.

As such, the research team has made a major step forward by succeeding in determining the physical mechanisms at play in this degradation, and in identifying the key elements that lead to the layers’ oxidation.

“We have demonstrated that 2D phosphane undergoes oxidation under ambient conditions, caused jointly by the presence of oxygen, water and light. We have also characterized the phenomenon’s evolution over time by using electron beam spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy,” reports Professor Richard Martel of Université de Montréal’s Department of Chemistry.

Next, the researchers developed an efficient procedure for producing these very fragile single-atom layers and keeping them intact.

“We were able to study the vibration modes of the atoms in this new material. Since earlier studies had been carried out on heavily degraded materials, we revealed the as-yet-unsuspected effects of quantum confinement on atoms’ vibration modes,” notes Professor Sébastien Francoeur of Polytechnique’s Department of Engineering Physics.

The study’s results will help the world scientific community develop 2D phosphane’s very special properties with the aim of developing new nanotechnologies that could give rise to high-performance microprocessors, lasers, solar cells and more.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Photooxidation and quantum confinement effects in exfoliated black phosphorus by Alexandre Favron, Etienne Gaufrès, Frédéric Fossard, Anne-Laurence Phaneuf-L’Heureux, Nathalie Y-W. Tang, Pierre L. Lévesque, Annick Loiseau, Richard Leonelli, Sébastien Francoeur, & Richard Martel. Nature Materials (2015)  doi:10.1038/nmat4299 Published online 25 May 2015

This paper is behind a paywall.

Now. for the second item about replacing graphene.

China’s new aerogel, a rival to graphene aerogels?

A June 2, 2015 American Institute of Physics news release (also on EurekAlert) describes research into an alternative to expensive graphene aerogels,

The electromagnetic radiation discharged by electronic equipment and devices is known to hinder their smooth operation. Conventional materials used today to shield from incoming electromagnetic waves tend to be sheets of metal or composites, which rely on reflection as a shielding mechanism.

But now, materials such as graphene aerogels are gaining traction as more desirable alternatives because they act as electromagnetic absorbers. They’re widely expected to improve energy storage, sensors, nanoelectronics, catalysis and separations, but graphene aerogels are prohibitively expensive and difficult to produce for large-scale applications because of the complicated purification and functionalization steps involved in their fabrication.

So a team of researchers in China set out to design a cheaper material with properties similar to a graphene aerogel–in terms of its conductivity, as well as a lightweight, anticorrosive, porous structure. In the journal Applied Physics Letters, from AIP Publishing, the researchers describe the new material they created and its performance.

Aming Xie, an expert in organic chemistry, and Fan Wu, both affiliated with PLA University of Science and Technology, worked with colleagues at Nanjing University of Science and Technology to tap into organic chemistry and conducting polymers to fabricate a three-dimensional (3-D) polypyrrole (PPy) aerogel-based electromagnetic absorber.

They chose to concentrate on this method because it enables them to “regulate the density and dielectric property of conducting polymers through the formation of pores during the oxidation polymerization of the pyrrole monomer,” explained Wu.

And the fabrication process is a simple one. “It requires only four common chemical reagents: pyrrole, ferric chloride (FeCl3), ethanol and water — which makes it cheap enough and enables large-scale fabrication,” Wu said. “We’re also able to pour the FeCl3 solution directly into the pyrrole solution — not drop by drop — to force the pyrrole to polymerize into a 3-D aerogel rather than PPy particles.”

In short, the team’s 3-D PPy aerogel is designed to exhibit “desirable properties such as a porous structure and low density,” Wu noted.

Beyond that, its electromagnetic absorption performance — with low loss — shows great promise. “We believe a ‘wide’ absorption range is more useful than high absorption within one frequency,” Wu said. Compared with previous works, the team’s new aerogel has the lowest adjunction and widest effective bandwidth — with a reflection loss below -10 decibels.

In terms of applications, based on the combination of low adjunction and a “wide” effective bandwidth, the researchers expect to see their 3-D PPy aerogel used in surface coatings for aircraft.

Another potential application is as coatings within the realm of corrosion prevention and control. “Common anticorrosion coatings contain a large amount of zinc (70 to 80 percent by weight), and these particles not only serve as a cathode by corroding to protect the iron structure but also to maintain a suitable conductivity for the electrochemistry process,” Wu pointed out. “If our 3-D PPy aerogel could build a conductivity network in this type of coating, the loss of zinc particles could be rapidly reduced.”

The team is now taking their work a step further by pursuing a 3-D PPy/PEDOT-based (poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) electromagnetic absorber. “Our goal is to grow solid-state polymerized PEDOT particles in the holes of the 3-D PPy aerogel formed by PPy chains,” Wu added.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Self-assembled ultralight three-dimensional polypyrrole aerogel for effective electromagnetic absorption by Aming Xie, Fan Wu, Mengxiao Sun, Xiaoqing Dai, Zhuanghu Xu, Yanyu Qiu, Yuan Wang, and Mingyang Wang. Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, 222902 (2015); http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4921180

This paper is open access.

Alternative to rare earth magnets synthesized at Virginia Commonwealth University (US)

There’s a lot of interest in finding alternatives to rare earths given that China has been restricting exports (this Nov. 25, 2010 post describes the situation which hasn’t changed much, as far as I know). Should the research at the Virginia Commonwealth University highlighted in a June 1, 2015 news item on Nanotechnology Now present a viable alternative to rare earths the geopolitical situation should undergo some interesting changes,

A team of scientists at Virginia Commonwealth University has synthesized a powerful new magnetic material that could reduce the dependence of the United States and other nations on rare earth elements produced by China.

“The discovery opens the pathway to systematically improving the new material to outperform the current permanent magnets,” said Shiv Khanna, Ph.D., a commonwealth professor in the Department of Physics in the College of Humanities and Sciences.

A June 1, 2015 Virginia Commonwealth University news release by Brian McNeill (also on EurekAlert), which originated the news item, describes the achievement in more detail,

The new material consists of nanoparticles containing iron, cobalt and carbon atoms with a magnetic domain size of roughly 5 nanometers. It can store information up to 790 kelvins with thermal and time-stable, long-range magnetic order, which could have a potential impact for data storage application.

When collected in powders, the material exhibits magnetic properties that rival those of permanent magnets that generally contain rare earth elements. The need to generate powerful magnets without rare earth elements is a strategic national problem as nearly 70 to 80 percent of the current rare earth materials are produced in China.

Permanent magnets, specifically those containing rare earth metals, are an important component used by the electronics, communications and automobile industries, as well as in radars and other applications.

Additionally, the emergence of green technology markets – such as hybrid and electric vehicles, direct drive wind turbine power systems and energy storage systems – have created an increased demand for permanent magnets.

However, China is the main supplier of world rare earth demands and has tried to impose restrictions on their export, creating an international problem.

The current paper is a joint experimental theoretical effort in which the new material was synthesized, characterized and showed improved characteristics following the theoretical prediction.

“This is good science along with addressing a problem with national importance,” said Ahmed El-Gendy, a former postdoctoral associate in the Department of Chemistry in the College of Humanities and Sciences and a co-author of the paper.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Experimental evidence for the formation of CoFe2C phase with colossal magnetocrystalline-anisotropy by Ahmed A. El-Gendy, Massimo Bertino, Dustin Clifford, Meichun Qian, Shiv N. Khanna, and Everett E. Carpenter. Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, 213109 (2015); http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4921789

This is an open access paper.

‘Green’, flexible electronics with nanocellulose materials

Bendable or flexible electronics based on nanocellulose paper present a ‘green’ alternative to other solutions according to a May 20, 2015 American Chemical Society (ACS) news release (also on EurekAlert),

Technology experts have long predicted the coming age of flexible electronics, and researchers have been working on multiple fronts to reach that goal. But many of the advances rely on petroleum-based plastics and toxic materials. Yu-Zhong Wang, Fei Song and colleagues wanted to seek a “greener” way forward.

The researchers developed a thin, clear nanocellulose paper made out of wood flour and infused it with biocompatible quantum dots — tiny, semiconducting crystals — made out of zinc and selenium. The paper glowed at room temperature and could be rolled and unrolled without cracking.

(h’t Nanotechnology Now, May 20, 2015)

There’s no mention in the news release or abstract as to what material (wood, carrot, banana, etc.) was used to derive the nanocellulose. Regardless, here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Let It Shine: A Transparent and Photoluminescent Foldable Nanocellulose/Quantum Dot Paper by Juan Xue, Fei Song, Xue-wu Yin, Xiu-li Wang, and Yu-zhong Wang. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2015, 7 (19), pp 10076–10079 DOI: 10.1021/acsami.5b02011 Publication Date (Web): May 4, 2015

Copyright © 2015 American Chemical Society

This paper is behind a paywall.

CRISPR genome editing tools and human genetic engineering issues

This post is going to feature a human genetic engineering roundup of sorts.

First, the field of human genetic engineering encompasses more than the human genome as this paper (open access until June 5, 2015) notes in the context of a discussion about a specific CRISPR gene editing tool,

CRISPR-Cas9 Based Genome Engineering: Opportunities in Agri-Food-Nutrition and Healthcare by Rajendran Subin Raj Cheri Kunnumal, Yau Yuan-Yeu, Pandey Dinesh, and Kumar Anil. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology. May 2015, 19(5): 261-275. doi:10.1089/omi.2015.0023 Published Online Ahead of Print: April 14, 2015

Here’s more about the paper from a May 7, 2015 Mary Ann Liebert publisher news release on EurekAlert,

Researchers have customized and refined a technique derived from the immune system of bacteria to develop the CRISPR-Cas9 genome engineering system, which enables targeted modifications to the genes of virtually any organism. The discovery and development of CRISPR-Cas9 technology, its wide range of potential applications in the agriculture/food industry and in modern medicine, and emerging regulatory issues are explored in a Review article published in OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, …

“CRISPR-Cas9 Based Genome Engineering: Opportunities in Agri-Food-Nutrition and Healthcare” provides a detailed description of the CRISPR system and its applications in post-genomics biology. Subin Raj, Cheri Kunnumal Rajendran, Dinish Pandey, and Anil Kumar, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology (Uttarakhand, India) and Yuan-Yeu Yau, Northeastern State University (Broken Arrow, OK) describe the advantages of the RNA-guided Cas9 endonuclease-based technology, including the activity, specificity, and target range of the enzyme. The authors discuss the rapidly expanding uses of the CRISPR system in both basic biological research and product development, such as for crop improvement and the discovery of novel therapeutic agents. The regulatory implications of applying CRISPR-based genome editing to agricultural products is an evolving issue awaiting guidance by international regulatory agencies.

“CRISPR-Cas9 technology has triggered a revolution in genome engineering within living systems,” says OMICS Editor-in-Chief Vural Özdemir, MD, PhD, DABCP. “This article explains the varied applications and potentials of this technology from agriculture to nutrition to medicine.

Intellectual property (patents)

The CRISPR technology has spawned a number of intellectual property (patent) issues as a Dec. 21,2014 post by Glyn Moody on Techdirt stated,

Although not many outside the world of the biological sciences have heard of it yet, the CRISPR gene editing technique may turn out to be one of the most important discoveries of recent years — if patent battles don’t ruin it. Technology Review describes it as:

… an invention that may be the most important new genetic engineering technique since the beginning of the biotechnology age in the 1970s. The CRISPR system, dubbed a “search and replace function” for DNA, lets scientists easily disable genes or change their function by replacing DNA letters. During the last few months, scientists have shown that it’s possible to use CRISPR to rid mice of muscular dystrophy, cure them of a rare liver disease, make human cells immune to HIV, and genetically modify monkeys.

Unfortunately, rivalry between scientists claiming the credit for key parts of CRISPR threatens to spill over into patent litigation:

[A researcher at the MIT-Harvard Broad Institute, Feng] Zhang cofounded Editas Medicine, and this week the startup announced that it had licensed his patent from the Broad Institute. But Editas doesn’t have CRISPR sewn up. That’s because [Jennifer] Doudna, a structural biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, was a cofounder of Editas, too. And since Zhang’s patent came out, she’s broken off with the company, and her intellectual property — in the form of her own pending patent — has been licensed to Intellia, a competing startup unveiled only last month. Making matters still more complicated, [another CRISPR researcher, Emmanuelle] Charpentier sold her own rights in the same patent application to CRISPR Therapeutics.

Things are moving quickly on the patent front, not least because the Broad Institute paid extra to speed up its application, conscious of the high stakes at play here:

Along with the patent came more than 1,000 pages of documents. According to Zhang, Doudna’s predictions in her own earlier patent application that her discovery would work in humans was “mere conjecture” and that, instead, he was the first to show it, in a separate and “surprising” act of invention.

The patent documents have caused consternation. The scientific literature shows that several scientists managed to get CRISPR to work in human cells. In fact, its easy reproducibility in different organisms is the technology’s most exciting hallmark. That would suggest that, in patent terms, it was “obvious” that CRISPR would work in human cells, and that Zhang’s invention might not be worthy of its own patent.


Ethical and moral issues

The CRISPR technology has reignited a discussion about ethical and moral issues of human genetic engineering some of which is reviewed in an April 7, 2015 posting about a moratorium by Sheila Jasanoff, J. Benjamin Hurlbut and Krishanu Saha for the Guardian science blogs (Note: A link has been removed),

On April 3, 2015, a group of prominent biologists and ethicists writing in Science called for a moratorium on germline gene engineering; modifications to the human genome that will be passed on to future generations. The moratorium would apply to a technology called CRISPR/Cas9, which enables the removal of undesirable genes, insertion of desirable ones, and the broad recoding of nearly any DNA sequence.

Such modifications could affect every cell in an adult human being, including germ cells, and therefore be passed down through the generations. Many organisms across the range of biological complexity have already been edited in this way to generate designer bacteria, plants and primates. There is little reason to believe the same could not be done with human eggs, sperm and embryos. Now that the technology to engineer human germlines is here, the advocates for a moratorium declared, it is time to chart a prudent path forward. They recommend four actions: a hold on clinical applications; creation of expert forums; transparent research; and a globally representative group to recommend policy approaches.

The authors go on to review precedents and reasons for the moratorium while suggesting we need better ways for citizens to engage with and debate these issues,

An effective moratorium must be grounded in the principle that the power to modify the human genome demands serious engagement not only from scientists and ethicists but from all citizens. We need a more complex architecture for public deliberation, built on the recognition that we, as citizens, have a duty to participate in shaping our biotechnological futures, just as governments have a duty to empower us to participate in that process. Decisions such as whether or not to edit human genes should not be left to elite and invisible experts, whether in universities, ad hoc commissions, or parliamentary advisory committees. Nor should public deliberation be temporally limited by the span of a moratorium or narrowed to topics that experts deem reasonable to debate.

I recommend reading the post in its entirety as there are nuances that are best appreciated in the entirety of the piece.

Shortly after this essay was published, Chinese scientists announced they had genetically modified (nonviable) human embryos. From an April 22, 2015 article by David Cyranoski and Sara Reardon in Nature where the research and some of the ethical issues discussed,

In a world first, Chinese scientists have reported editing the genomes of human embryos. The results are published1 in the online journal Protein & Cell and confirm widespread rumours that such experiments had been conducted — rumours that sparked a high-profile debate last month2, 3 about the ethical implications of such work.

In the paper, researchers led by Junjiu Huang, a gene-function researcher at Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, tried to head off such concerns by using ‘non-viable’ embryos, which cannot result in a live birth, that were obtained from local fertility clinics. The team attempted to modify the gene responsible for β-thalassaemia, a potentially fatal blood disorder, using a gene-editing technique known as CRISPR/Cas9. The researchers say that their results reveal serious obstacles to using the method in medical applications.

“I believe this is the first report of CRISPR/Cas9 applied to human pre-implantation embryos and as such the study is a landmark, as well as a cautionary tale,” says George Daley, a stem-cell biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts. “Their study should be a stern warning to any practitioner who thinks the technology is ready for testing to eradicate disease genes.”


Huang says that the paper was rejected by Nature and Science, in part because of ethical objections; both journals declined to comment on the claim. (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of its research editorial team.)

He adds that critics of the paper have noted that the low efficiencies and high number of off-target mutations could be specific to the abnormal embryos used in the study. Huang acknowledges the critique, but because there are no examples of gene editing in normal embryos he says that there is no way to know if the technique operates differently in them.

Still, he maintains that the embryos allow for a more meaningful model — and one closer to a normal human embryo — than an animal model or one using adult human cells. “We wanted to show our data to the world so people know what really happened with this model, rather than just talking about what would happen without data,” he says.

This, too, is a good and thoughtful read.

There was an official response in the US to the publication of this research, from an April 29, 2015 post by David Bruggeman on his Pasco Phronesis blog (Note: Links have been removed),

In light of Chinese researchers reporting their efforts to edit the genes of ‘non-viable’ human embryos, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins issued a statement (H/T Carl Zimmer).

“NIH will not fund any use of gene-editing technologies in human embryos. The concept of altering the human germline in embryos for clinical purposes has been debated over many years from many different perspectives, and has been viewed almost universally as a line that should not be crossed. Advances in technology have given us an elegant new way of carrying out genome editing, but the strong arguments against engaging in this activity remain. These include the serious and unquantifiable safety issues, ethical issues presented by altering the germline in a way that affects the next generation without their consent, and a current lack of compelling medical applications justifying the use of CRISPR/Cas9 in embryos.” …

More than CRISPR

As well, following on the April 22, 2015 Nature article about the controversial research, the Guardian published an April 26, 2015 post by Filippa Lentzos, Koos van der Bruggen and Kathryn Nixdorff which makes the case that CRISPR techniques do not comprise the only worrisome genetic engineering technology,

The genome-editing technique CRISPR-Cas9 is the latest in a series of technologies to hit the headlines. This week Chinese scientists used the technology to genetically modify human embryos – the news coming less than a month after a prominent group of scientists had called for a moratorium on the technology. The use of ‘gene drives’ to alter the genetic composition of whole populations of insects and other life forms has also raised significant concern.

But the technology posing the greatest, most immediate threat to humanity comes from ‘gain-of-function’ (GOF) experiments. This technology adds new properties to biological agents such as viruses, allowing them to jump to new species or making them more transmissible. While these are not new concepts, there is grave concern about a subset of experiments on influenza and SARS viruses which could metamorphose them into pandemic pathogens with catastrophic potential.

In October 2014 the US government stepped in, imposing a federal funding pause on the most dangerous GOF experiments and announcing a year-long deliberative process. Yet, this process has not been without its teething-problems. Foremost is the de facto lack of transparency and open discussion. Genuine engagement is essential in the GOF debate where the stakes for public health and safety are unusually high, and the benefits seem marginal at best, or non-existent at worst. …

Particularly worrisome about the GOF process is that it is exceedingly US-centric and lacks engagement with the international community. Microbes know no borders. The rest of the world has a huge stake in the regulation and oversight of GOF experiments.

Canadian perspective?

I became somewhat curious about the Canadian perspective on all this genome engineering discussion and found a focus on agricultural issues in the single Canadian blog piece I found. It’s an April 30, 2015 posting by Lisa Willemse on Genome Alberta’s Livestock blog has a twist in the final paragraph,

The spectre of undesirable inherited traits as a result of DNA disruption via genome editing in human germline has placed the technique – and the ethical debate – on the front page of newspapers around the globe. Calls for a moratorium on further research until both the ethical implications can be worked out and the procedure better refined and understood, will undoubtedly temper research activities in many labs for months and years to come.

On the surface, it’s hard to see how any of this will advance similar research in livestock or crops – at least initially.

Groups already wary of so-called “frankenfoods” may step up efforts to prevent genome-edited food products from hitting supermarket shelves. In the EU, where a stringent ban on genetically-modified (GM) foods is already in place, there are concerns that genome-edited foods will be captured under this rubric, holding back many perceived benefits. This includes pork and beef from animals with disease resistance, lower methane emissions and improved feed-to-food ratios, milk from higher-yield or hornless cattle, as well as food and feed crops with better, higher quality yields or weed resistance.

Still, at the heart of the human germline editing is the notion of a permanent genetic change that can be passed on to offspring, leading to concerns of designer babies and other advantages afforded only to those who can pay. This is far less of a concern in genome-editing involving crops and livestock, where the overriding aim is to increase food supply for the world’s population at lower cost. Given this, and that research for human medical benefits has always relied on safety testing and data accumulation through experimentation in non-human animals, it’s more likely that any moratorium in human studies will place increased pressure to demonstrate long-term safety of such techniques on those who are conducting the work in other species.

Willemse’s last paragraph offers a strong contrast to the Guardian and Nature pieces.

Finally, there’s a May 8, 2015 posting (which seems to be an automat4d summary of an article in the New Scientist) on a blog maintained by the Canadian Raelian Movement. These are people who believe that alien scientists landed on earth and created all the forms of life on this planet. You can find  more on their About page. In case it needs to be said, I do not subscribe to this belief system but I do find it interesting in and of itself and because one of the few Canadian sites that I could find offering an opinion on the matter even if it is in the form of a borrowed piece from the New Scientist.

Speeding up the process for converting carbon dioxide into hydrocarbon fuel

This is a personal thrill; it’s the first time in seven years that I’ve received a press release directly from an institution in Asia.

A March 10, 2015 MANA, the International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics at NIMS (National Institute for Materials Science) press release announces and describes hydrocarbon fuel research from Japan and China first published online in Nov. 2014 and later in print in January 2015,

A combination of semiconductor catalysts, optimum catalyst shape, gold-copper co-catalyst alloy nanoparticles and hydrous hydrazine reducing agent enables an increase of hydrocarbon generation from CO2 by a factor of ten.

“Solar-energy-driven conversion of CO2 into hydrocarbon fuels can simultaneously generate chemical fuels to meet energy demand and mitigate rising CO2 levels,” explain Jinhua Ye and her colleagues at the International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics in their latest report. Now the research team have identified the conditions and catalysts that will maximise the yield of hydrocarbons from CO2, generating ten times previously reported production rates.

Carbon dioxide can be converted into a hydrocarbon by means of ‘reduction reactions’ -a type of reaction that involves reducing the oxygen content of a molecule, increasing the hydrogen content or increasing the electrons. In photocatalytic reduction of CO2 light activates the catalyst for the reaction.

Ye and his team introduced four approaches that each contributed to an increased reaction rate. First, they combined two known semiconductor photocatalysts strontium titanate (STO) and titania [titanium dioxide] (TiO2) – which led to the separation of the charges generated by light and hence a more effective photocatalyst. Second, the high surface area of the nanotubes was made greater by holes in the tube surfaces, which enhances catalysis by increasing the contact between the gases and catalysts. Third, the tubes were decorated with gold-copper (Au3Cu) nanoparticle co-catalysts to further enhance the catalysis, and fourth, they used hydrous hydrazine (N2H4•H2O) as the source of hydrogen.

Although the high hydrogen content of hydrous hydrazine is widely recognised in the context of hydrogen storage there are no previous reports of its use for reduction reactions. The researchers demonstrated that the reducing properties of hydrous hydrazine were so great that oxidation of the co-catalytic nanoparticles – a problem when water or hydrogen are used – was avoided.

The researchers conclude their report, “This opens a feasible route to enhance the photocatalytic efficiency, which also aids the development of photocatalysts and co-catalysts.”


The researchers on this project are associated with the following institutions:

International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA), and the Environmental Remediation Materials Unit,  National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS) 1-1 Namiki, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0044, Japan

Graduate School of Chemical Science and Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0814, Japan

TU-NIMS Joint Research Center, School of Material Science and Engineering, Tianjin University 92 Weijin Road, Tianjin,  P.R. China

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Photocatalytic Reduction of Carbon Dioxide by Hydrous Hydrazine over Au–Cu Alloy Nanoparticles Supported on SrTiO3/TiO2 Coaxial Nanotube Arrays by Dr. Qing Kang, Dr. Tao Wang, Dr. Peng Li, Dr. Lequan Liu, Dr. Kun Chang, Mu Li, and Prof. Jinhua Ye. Angewandte Chemie International Edition Volume 54, Issue 3, pages 841–845, January 12, 2015 DOI: 10.1002/anie.201409183 Article first published online: 24 NOV 2014

© 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

This research is behind a paywall.

Nanotechnology and infinite risk: Global challenges report on 12 risks that threaten human civilisation

The Global Challenges Foundation recently released a report which lists 12 global risks (from the Global Challenges: 12 Risks ,that threaten human civilisation report webpage,

This report has, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, created the first list of global risks with impacts that for all practical purposes can be called infinite. It is also the first structured overview of key events related to such risks and has tried to provide initial rough quantifications for the probabilities of these impacts.

With such a focus it may surprise some readers to find that the report’s essential aim is to inspire action and dialogue as well as an increased use of the methodologies used for risk assessment.

The real focus is not on the almost unimaginable impacts of the risks the report outlines. Its fundamental purpose is to encourage global collaboration and to use this new category of risk as a driver for innovation.

The 12 global risks that threaten human civilisation are:

Current risks

1. Extreme Climate Change
2. Nuclear War
3. Ecological Catastrophe
4. Global Pandemic
5. Global System Collapse

Exogenic risks

6. Major Asteroid Impact
7. Supervolcano

Emerging risks

8. Synthetic Biology
9. Nanotechnology
10. Artificial Intelligence
11. Uncertain Risks

Global policy risk

12. Future Bad Global Governance

The report is fairly new as it was published in February 2015. Here’s a summary of the nanotechnology risk from the report‘s executive summary,

Atomically precise manufacturing, the creation of effective, high- throughput manufacturing processes that operate at the atomic or molecular level. It could create new products – such as smart or extremely resilient materials – and would allow many different groups or even individuals to manufacture a wide range of things. This could lead to the easy construction of large arsenals of conventional or more novel weapons made possible by atomically precise manufacturing. AI is the intelligence exhibited by machines or software, and the branch of computer science that develops machines and software with human-level intelligence. The field is often defined as “the study and design of intelligent agents”, systems that perceive their environment and act to maximise their chances of success. Such extreme intelligences could not easily be controlled (either by the groups creating them, or by some international regulatory regime), and would probably act to boost their own intelligence and acquire maximal resources for almost all initial AI motivations.

Of particular relevance is whether nanotechnology allows the construction of nuclear bombs. But many of the world’s current problems may be solvable with the manufacturing possibilities that nanotechnology would offer, such as depletion of natural resources, pollution, climate change, clean water and even poverty. Some have conjectured special self-replicating nanomachines which would be engineered to consume the entire environment. [grey goo and/or green goo scenarios; emphasis mine] The misuse of medical nanotechnology is another risk scenario. [p. 18 print version; p. 20 PDF]

I was a bit surprised to see the ‘goo’ scenarios referenced since Eric Drexler one of the participants and the person who first posted the ‘grey goo’ scenario (a green goo scenario was subsequently theorized by Robert Freitas)  has long tried to dissociate himself from it.

The report lists the academics and experts (including Drexler) who helped to produce the report,

Dr Nick Beckstead, Research Fellow, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford Martin School & Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford

Kennette Benedict, Executive Director and Publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Oliver Bettis, Pricing Actuary, Munich RE and Fellow of the Chartered Insurance Institute and the Institute & Faculty of Actuaries

Dr Eric Drexler, Academic Visitor, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford Martin School & Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford [emphasis mine]

Madeleine Enarsson , Transformative Catalyst, 21st Century Frontiers

Pan Jiahua, Director of the Institute for Urban and Environmental Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS); Professor of economics at CASS; Vice-President Chinese Society for Ecological Economics; Member of the National Expert Panel on Climate Change and National Foreign Policy Advisory Committee, China

Jennifer Morgan, Founder & Co-Convener, The Finance Lab
James Martin Research Fellow, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford Martin School & Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford

Andrew Simms, Author, Fellow at the New Economics Foundation and Chief Analyst at Global Witness

Nathan Wolfe, Director of Global Viral and the Lorry I. Lokey Visiting Professor in Human Biology at Stanford University

Liang Yin, Investment Consultant at Towers Watson [p. 1 print versioin; p. 3 PDF]

While I don’t recognize any names other that Drexler’s, it’s an interesting list albeit with a preponderance of individuals associated with the University of Oxford .

The Feb. 16, 2015 Global Challenges Foundation press release announcing the risk report includes a brief description of the foundation and, I gather, a sister organization at Oxford University,

About the Global Challenges Foundation
The Global Challenges Foundation works to raise awareness of the greatest threats facing humanity and how these threats are linked to poverty and the rapid growth in global population. The Global Challenges Foundation was founded in 2011 by investor László Szombatfalvy.

About Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute
The Future of Humanity Institute is a multidisciplinary research institute at the University of Oxford. It enables a select set of leading intellectuals to bring the tools of
mathematics, philosophy, and science to bear on big-picture questions about humanity and its prospects. The Institute belongs to the Faculty of Philosophy and is affiliated with
the Oxford Martin School.

The report is 212 pp (PDF), Happy Reading!

Europe’s search for raw materials and hopes for nanotechnology-enabled solutions

A Feb. 27, 2015 news item on Nanowerk highlights the concerns over the availability of raw materials and European efforts to address those concerns,

Critical raw materials’ are crucial to many European industries but they are vulnerable to scarcity and supply disruption. As such, it is vital that Europe develops strategies for meeting the demand for raw materials. One such strategy is finding methods or substances that can replace the raw materials that we currently use. With this in mind, four EU projects working on substitution in catalysis, electronics and photonics presented their work at the Third Innovation Network Workshop on substitution of Critical Raw Materials hosted by the CRM_INNONET project in Brussels earlier this month [February 2015].

A Feb. 26, 2015 CORDIS press release, which originated the news item, goes on to describe four European Union projects working on nanotechnology-enabled solutions,


NOVACAM, a coordinated Japan-EU project, aims to develop catalysts using non-critical elements designed to unlock the potential of biomass into a viable energy and chemical feedstock source.

The project is using a ‘catalyst by design’ approach for the development of next generation catalysts (nanoscale inorganic catalysts), as NOVACAM project coordinator Prof. Emiel Hensen from Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands explained. Launched in September 2013, the project is developing catalysts which incorporate non-critical metals to catalyse the conversion of lignocellulose into industrial chemical feedstocks and bio-fuels. The first part of the project has been to develop the principle chemistry while the second part is to demonstrate proof of process. Prof. Hensen predicts that perhaps only two of three concepts will survive to this phase.

The project has already made significant progress in glucose and ethanol conversion, according to Prof. Hensen, and has produced some important scientific publications. The consortium is working with and industrial advisory board comprising Shell in the EU and Nippon Shokubai in Japan.


The FREECATS project, presented by project coordinator Prof. Magnus Rønning from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, has been working over the past three years to develop new metal-free catalysts. These would be either in the form of bulk nanomaterials or in hierarchically organised structures – both of which would be capable of replacing traditional noble metal-based catalysts in catalytic transformations of strategic importance.

Prof. Magnus Rønning explained that the application of the new materials could eliminate the need for the use for platinum group metals (PGM) and rare earth metals – in both cases Europe is very reliant on other countries for these materials. Over the course of its research, FREECATS targeted three areas in particular – fuel cells, the production of light olefins and water and wastewater purification.

By working to replace the platinum in fuel cells, the project is supporting the EU’s aim of replacing the internal combustion engine by 2050. However, as Prof. Rønning noted, while platinum has been optimized for use over several decades, the materials FREECATS are using are new and thus come with their new challenges which the project is addressing.


Prof. Atsufumi Hirohata of the University of York in the United Kingdom, project coordinator of HARFIR, described how the project aims to discover an antiferromagnetic alloy that does not contain the rare metal Iridium. Iridium is becoming more and more widely used in numerous spin electronic storage devices, including read heads in hard disk drives. The world supply depends on Platinum ore that comes mainly from South Africa. The situation is much worse than for other rare earth elements as the price has been shooting up over recent years, according to Prof. Hirohata.

The HARFIR team, divided between Europe and Japan, aims to replace Iridium alloys with Heusler alloys. The EU team, led by Prof. Hirohata, has been working on the preparation of polycrystalline and epitaxial thin films of Heusler Alloys, with the material design led by theoretical calculations. The Japanese team, led by Prof. Koki Takanashi at Tohoku University, is meanwhile working on the preparation of epitaxial thin films, measurements of fundamental properties and structural/magnetic characterisation by neutron and synchrotron x-ray beams.

One of the biggest challenges has been that Heusler alloys have a relatively complicated atomic structure. In terms of HARFIR’s work, if any atomic disordering at the edge of nanopillar devices, the magnetic properties that are needed are lost. The team is exploring solutions to this challenge.


Prof. of Esko Kauppinen Aalto University in Finland closed off the first session of the morning with his presentation of the IRENA project. Launched in September 2013, the project will run until mid 2017 working towards the aim of developing high performance materials, specifically metallic and semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) thin films to completely eliminate the use of the critical metals in electron devices. The ultimate aim is to replace Indium in transparent conducting films, and Indium and Gallium as a semiconductor in thin film field effect transistors (TFTs).

The IRENA team is developing an alternative that is flexible, transparent and stretchable so that it can meet the demands of the electronics of the future – including the possibility to print electronics.

IRENA involves three partners from Europe and three from Japan. The team has expertise in nanotube synthesis, thin film manufacturing and flexible device manufacturing, modelling of nanotube growth and thin film charge transport processes, and the project has benefitted from exchanges of team members between institutions. One of the key achievements so far is that the project has succeeded in using a nanotube thin film for the first time as the both the electrode and hole blocking layer in an organic solar cell.

You’ll note that Japan is a partner in all of these projects. In all probability, these initiatives have something to do with rare earths which are used in much of today’s electronics technology and Japan is sorely lacking in those materials. China, by comparison, has dominated the rare earths export industry and here’s an excerpt from my Nov. 1, 2013 posting where I outline the situation (which I suspect hasn’t changed much since),

As for the short supply mentioned in the first line of the news item, the world’s largest exporter of rare earth elements at 90% of the market, China, recently announced a cap according to a Sept. 6, 2013 article by David Stanway for Reuters. The Chinese government appears to be curtailing exports as part of an ongoing, multi-year strategy. Here’s how Cientifica‘s (an emerging technologies consultancy, etc.) white paper (Simply No Substitute?) about critical materials published in 2012 (?), described the situation,

Despite their name, REE are not that rare in the Earth’s crust. What has happened in the past decade is that REE exports from China undercut prices elsewhere, leading to the closure of mines such as the Mountain Pass REE mine in California. Once China had acquired a dominant market position, prices began to rise. But this situation will likely ease. The US will probably begin REE production from the Mountain Pass mine later in 2012, and mines in other countries are expected to start operation soon as well.

Nevertheless, owing to their broad range of uses REE will continue to exert pressures on their supply – especially for countries without notable REE deposits. This highlights two aspects of importance for strategic materials: actual rarity and strategic supply issues such as these seen for REE. Although strategic and diplomatic supply issues may have easier solutions, their consideration for manufacturing industries will almost be the same – a shortage of crucial supply lines.

Furthermore, as the example of REE shows, the identification of long-term supply problems can often be difficult, and not every government has the same strategic foresight that the Chinese demonstrated. And as new technologies emerge, new elements may see an unexpected, sudden demand in supply. (pp. 16-17)

Meanwhile, in response to China’s decision to cap its 2013 REE exports, the Russian government announced a $1B investment to 2018 in rare earth production,, according to a Sept. 10, 2013 article by Polina Devitt for Reuters.

I’m not sure you’ll be able to access Tim Harper’s white paper as he is now an independent, serial entrepreneur. I most recently mentioned him in relation to his articles (on Azonano) about the nanotechnology scene in a Feb. 12, 2015 posting where you’ll also find contact details for him.

A 2nd European roadmap for graphene

About 2.5 years ago there was an article titled, “A roadmap for graphene” (behind a paywall) which Nature magazine published online in Oct. 2012. I see at least two of the 2012 authors, Konstantin (Kostya) Novoselov and Vladimir Fal’ko,, are party to this second, more comprehensive roadmap featured in a Feb. 24, 2015 news item on Nanowerk,

In October 2013, academia and industry came together to form the Graphene Flagship. Now with 142 partners in 23 countries, and a growing number of associate members, the Graphene Flagship was established following a call from the European Commission to address big science and technology challenges of the day through long-term, multidisciplinary R&D efforts.

A Feb.  24, 2015 University of Cambridge news release, which originated the news item, describes the roadmap in more detail,

In an open-access paper published in the Royal Society of Chemistry journal Nanoscale, more than 60 academics and industrialists lay out a science and technology roadmap for graphene, related two-dimensional crystals, other 2D materials, and hybrid systems based on a combination of different 2D crystals and other nanomaterials. The roadmap covers the next ten years and beyond, and its objective is to guide the research community and industry toward the development of products based on graphene and related materials.

The roadmap highlights three broad areas of activity. The first task is to identify new layered materials, assess their potential, and develop reliable, reproducible and safe means of producing them on an industrial scale. Identification of new device concepts enabled by 2D materials is also called for, along with the development of component technologies. The ultimate goal is to integrate components and structures based on 2D materials into systems capable of providing new functionalities and application areas.

Eleven science and technology themes are identified in the roadmap. These are: fundamental science, health and environment, production, electronic devices, spintronics, photonics and optoelectronics, sensors, flexible electronics, energy conversion and storage, composite materials, and biomedical devices. The roadmap addresses each of these areas in turn, with timelines.

Research areas outlined in the roadmap correspond broadly with current flagship work packages, with the addition of a work package devoted to the growing area of biomedical applications, to be included in the next phase of the flagship. A recent independent assessment has confirmed that the Graphene Flagship is firmly on course, with hundreds of research papers, numerous patents and marketable products to its name.

Roadmap timelines predict that, before the end of the ten-year period of the flagship, products will be close to market in the areas of flexible electronics, composites, and energy, as well as advanced prototypes of silicon-integrated photonic devices, sensors, high-speed electronics, and biomedical devices.

“This publication concludes a four-year effort to collect and coordinate state-of-the-art science and technology of graphene and related materials,” says Andrea Ferrari, director of the Cambridge Graphene Centre, and chairman of the Executive Board of the Graphene Flagship. “We hope that this open-access roadmap will serve as the starting point for academia and industry in their efforts to take layered materials and composites from laboratory to market.” Ferrari led the roadmap effort with Italian Institute of Technology physicist Francesco Bonaccorso, who is a Royal Society Newton Fellow of the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Hughes Hall.

“We are very proud of the joint effort of the many authors who have produced this roadmap,” says Jari Kinaret, director of the Graphene Flagship. “The roadmap forms a solid foundation for the graphene community in Europe to plan its activities for the coming years. It is not a static document, but will evolve to reflect progress in the field, and new applications identified and pursued by industry.”

I have skimmed through the report briefly (wish I had more time) and have a couple of comments. First, there’s an excellent glossary of terms for anyone who might stumble over chemical abbreviations and/or more technical terminology. Second, they present a very interesting analysis of the intellectual property (patents) landscape (Note: Links have been removed. Incidental numbers are footnote references),

In the graphene area, there has been a particularly rapid increase in patent activity from around 2007.45 Much of this is driven by patent applications made by major corporations and universities in South Korea and USA.53 Additionally, a high level of graphene patent activity in China is also observed.54 These features have led some commentators to conclude that graphene innovations arising in Europe are being mainly exploited elsewhere.55 Nonetheless, an analysis of the Intellectual Property (IP) provides evidence that Europe already has a significant foothold in the graphene patent landscape and significant opportunities to secure future value. As the underlying graphene technology space develops, and the GRM [graphene and related materials] patent landscape matures, re-distribution of the patent landscape seems inevitable and Europe is well positioned to benefit from patent-based commercialisation of GRM research.

Overall, the graphene patent landscape is growing rapidly and already resembles that of sub-segments of the semiconductor and biotechnology industries,56 which experience high levels of patent activity. The patent strategies of the businesses active in such sub-sectors frequently include ‘portfolio maximization’56 and ‘portfolio optimization’56 strategies, and the sub-sectors experience the development of what commentators term ‘patent thickets’56, or multiple overlapping granted patent rights.56 A range of policies, regulatory and business strategies have been developed to limit such patent practices.57 In such circumstances, accurate patent landscaping may provide critical information to policy-makers, investors and individual industry participants, underpinning the development of sound policies, business strategies and research commercialisation plans.

It sounds like a patent thicket is developing (Note: Links have been removed. Incidental numbers are footnote references),,

Fig. 13 provides evidence of a relative increase in graphene patent filings in South Korea from 2007 to 2009 compared to 2004–2006. This could indicate increased commercial interest in graphene technology from around 2007. The period 2010 to 2012 shows a marked relative increase in graphene patent filings in China. It should be noted that a general increase in Chinese patent filings across many ST domains in this period is observed.76 Notwithstanding this general increase in Chinese patent activity, there does appear to be increased commercial interest in graphene in China. It is notable that the European Patent Office contribution as a percentage of all graphene patent filings globally falls from a 8% in the period 2007 to 2009 to 4% in the period 2010 to 2012.

The importance of the US, China and South Korea is emphasised by the top assignees, shown in Fig. 14. The corporation with most graphene patent applications is the Korean multinational Samsung, with over three times as many filings as its nearest rival. It has also patented an unrivalled range of graphene-technology applications, including synthesis procedures,77 transparent display devices,78 composite materials,79 transistors,80 batteries and solar cells.81 Samsung’s patent applications indicate a sustained and heavy investment in graphene R&D, as well as collaboration (co-assignment of patents) with a wide range of academic institutions.82,83


image file: c4nr01600a-f14.tif
Fig. 14 Top 10 graphene patent assignees by number and cumulative over all time as of end-July 2014. Number of patents are indicated in the red histograms referred to the left Y axis, while the cumulative percentage is the blue line, referred to the right Y axis.

It is also interesting to note that patent filings by universities and research institutions make up a significant proportion ([similar]50%) of total patent filings: the other half comprises contributions from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and multinationals.

Europe’s position is shown in Fig. 10, 12 and 14. While Europe makes a good showing in the geographical distribution of publications, it lags behind in patent applications, with only 7% of patent filings as compared to 30% in the US, 25% in China, and 13% in South Korea (Fig. 13) and only 9% of filings by academic institutions assigned in Europe (Fig. 15).


image file: c4nr01600a-f15.tif
Fig. 15 Geographical breakdown of academic patent holders as of July 2014.

While Europe is trailing other regions in terms of number of patent filings, it nevertheless has a significant foothold in the patent landscape. Currently, the top European patent holder is Finland’s Nokia, primarily around incorporation of graphene into electrical devices, including resonators and electrodes.72,84,85

This may sound like Europe is trailing behind but that’s not the case according to the roadmap (Note: Links have been removed. Incidental numbers are footnote references),

European Universities also show promise in the graphene patent landscape. We also find evidence of corporate-academic collaborations in Europe, including e.g. co-assignments filed with European research institutions and Germany’s AMO GmbH,86 and chemical giant BASF.87,88 Finally, Europe sees significant patent filings from a number of international corporate and university players including Samsung,77 Vorbeck Materials,89 Princeton University,90–92 and Rice University,93–95 perhaps reflecting the quality of the European ST base around graphene, and its importance as a market for graphene technologies.

There are a number of features in the graphene patent landscape which may lead to a risk of patent thickets96 or ‘multiple overlapping granted patents’ existing around aspects of graphene technology systems. [emphasis mine] There is a relatively high volume of patent activity around graphene, which is an early stage technology space, with applications in patent intensive industry sectors. Often patents claim carbon nano structures other than graphene in graphene patent landscapes, illustrating difficulties around defining ‘graphene’ and mapping the graphene patent landscape. Additionally, the graphene patent nomenclature is not entirely settled. Different patent examiners might grant patents over the same components which the different experts and industry players call by different names.

For anyone new to this blog, I am not a big fan of current patent regimes as they seem to be stifling rather encouraging innovation. Sadly, patents and copyright were originally developed to encourage creativity and innovation by allowing the creators to profit from their ideas. Over time a system designed to encourage innovation has devolved into one that does the opposite. (My Oct. 31, 2011 post titled Patents as weapons and obstacles, details my take on this matter.) I’m not arguing against patents and copyright but suggesting that the system be fixed or replaced with something that delivers on the original intention.

Getting back to the matter at hand, here’s a link to and a citation for the 200 pp. 2015 European Graphene roadmap,

Science and technology roadmap for graphene, related two-dimensional crystals, and hybrid systems by Andrea C. Ferrari, Francesco Bonaccorso, Vladimir Fal’ko, Konstantin S. Novoselov, Stephan Roche, Peter Bøggild, Stefano Borini, Frank H. L. Koppens, Vincenzo Palermo, Nicola Pugno, José A. Garrido, Roman Sordan, Alberto Bianco, Laura Ballerini, Maurizio Prato, Elefterios Lidorikis, Jani Kivioja, Claudio Marinelli, Tapani Ryhänen, Alberto Morpurgo, Jonathan N. Coleman, Valeria Nicolosi, Luigi Colombo, Albert Fert, Mar Garcia-Hernandez, Adrian Bachtold, Grégory F. Schneider, Francisco Guinea, Cees Dekker, Matteo Barbone, Zhipei Sun, Costas Galiotis,  Alexander N. Grigorenko, Gerasimos Konstantatos, Andras Kis, Mikhail Katsnelson, Lieven Vandersypen, Annick Loiseau, Vittorio Morandi, Daniel Neumaier, Emanuele Treossi, Vittorio Pellegrini, Marco Polini, Alessandro Tredicucci, Gareth M. Williams, Byung Hee Hong, Jong-Hyun Ahn, Jong Min Kim, Herbert Zirath, Bart J. van Wees, Herre van der Zant, Luigi Occhipinti, Andrea Di Matteo, Ian A. Kinloch, Thomas Seyller, Etienne Quesnel, Xinliang Feng,  Ken Teo, Nalin Rupesinghe, Pertti Hakonen, Simon R. T. Neil, Quentin Tannock, Tomas Löfwander and Jari Kinaret. Nanoscale, 2015, Advance Article DOI: 10.1039/C4NR01600A First published online 22 Sep 2014

Here’s a diagram illustrating the roadmap process,

Fig. 122 The STRs [science and technology roadmaps] follow a hierarchical structure where the strategic level in a) is connected to the more detailed roadmap shown in b). These general roadmaps are the condensed form of the topical roadmaps presented in the previous sections, and give technological targets for key applications to become commercially competitive and the forecasts for when the targets are predicted to be met.  Courtesy: Researchers and  the Royal Society's journal, Nanoscale

Fig. 122 The STRs [science and technology roadmaps] follow a hierarchical structure where the strategic level in a) is connected to the more detailed roadmap shown in b). These general roadmaps are the condensed form of the topical roadmaps presented in the previous sections, and give technological targets for key applications to become commercially competitive and the forecasts for when the targets are predicted to be met.
Courtesy: Researchers and the Royal Society’s journal, Nanoscale

The image here is not the best quality; the one embedded in the relevant Nanowerk news item is better.

As for the earlier roadmap, here’s my Oct. 11, 2012 post on the topic.