Tag Archives: Cientifica

Graphene bits from the UK’s National Physical Laboratory and Cientifica

In the first bit of this week’s graphene news, the UK”s National Physical Laboratory (NPL) has joined the Graphene Stakeholders Association according to an Aug. 5, 2013 NPL news release,

The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) has joined the Graphene Stakeholders Association (GSA) as a lifetime member. NPL will work closely with the GSA to promote the responsible development of graphene and graphene-enabled technologies and applications.

“We foresee a significant role for NPL in the GSA in helping to develop common and accepted nomenclature, definitions, standard metrology and testing methods that will help foster and facilitate the development of graphene and graphene-enabled applications globally,” stated GSA co-founder, Stephen Waite. “We are delighted with NPL’s decision to join the GSA and look forward to working closely with Andrew Pollard and his colleagues in the months and years ahead,” says Waite.

NPL’s Andrew Pollard, who joins the GSA’s Advisory Board, said: “NPL has a leading role in the development of measurement techniques and international standards for graphene and 2-D materials, and the formation of the GSA is extremely well-timed as graphene progresses from the research laboratory to commercialisation. This partnership between two organisations with such well-aligned aims should enable the widely-predicted growth of a global graphene industry.”

I mentioned the founding of the Graphene Stakeholders Association in an April 23, 2013 posting. At the time I noted the group’s very interesting Graphene Industry Information page, which features these tidbits,

China has published more graphene patents than any other country, at 2,204, ahead of 1,754 for the U.S., 1,160 for South Korea, and 54 for the U.K.

South Korea’s Samsung has more graphene patents than any single company.

Nokia is part of the 74-company Graphene Flagship Consortium that is receiving a €1 billion ($1.35 billion) grant that the E.U. announced in January 2013.

Nokia, Philips, U.K. invention stalwart Dyson, weapons and aerospace company BAE Systems, and others have committed £13 million ($20.5 million) to a graphene development center [Cambridge Graphene Centre as per my Jan. 24, 2013 posting] at Cambridge University, to go along with £12 million ($18.9 million) from the British government. [Also, there’s a new National Graphene Institute being built in Manchester, UK {my Jan. 14, 2013 posting}.]

….

Graphene is prohibitively expensive to make today. As recently as 2008, it cost $100 million to produce a single cubic centimeter of graphene.

Researchers are working on methods to reduce the cost of manufacturing and help make graphene a ubiquitous fabrication material.

Graphene film companies face major commercialization hurdles, including reducing costs, scaling-up the substrate transfer process, overcoming current deposition area limitations, and besting other emerging material solutions.

This leads to the 2nd bit of graphene news, Cientifica (a business consultancy focusing on emerging technologies) has released its Graphene Opportunity Report, from the report’s webpage (Note: Links have been removed),

A decade ago when we published the first edition of the Nanotechnology Opportunity Report, there were predictions of untold riches for early investors, the replacement of all manufacturing as we know it, and the mythical trillion-dollar market.

Cientifica went against the grain by predicting that it would be hard for anyone to make money from nanomaterials, and that the real value would be in the applications. This has been borne out by the failure of even large global companies such as Mitsubishi Chemical and Bayer to make much headway with fullerenes and carbon nanotubes, and the failure of countless smaller nanomaterials producers.

On the other hand companies making use of nanomaterials, Germany’s Magforce Technologies and the US based BIND Therapeutics have shown what can be achieved when nanomaterials are applied to large addressable markets, in this case drug delivery.

Is Graphene The New Nanotech?

A similar amount of hype currently surrounds graphene, with wild predictions of applications ranging from microelectronics to water
treatment. This report examines these claims and taking the rational approach for which Cientifica is known, considers how valid these are and evaluates the chances of success.

We also look in detail at the graphene producers. Graphene comes in a wide range of forms, each with its own particular set of addressable applications. No one producer covers all applications and many are destined to be niche players. As with nanomaterials, many companies currently producing graphene are destined to burn brightly and then be unceremoniously snuffed out when scale up or access to applications fails to materialise.

..

As with all Cientifica reports, we look beyond the hype and take a rational and dispassionate look at the entire graphene value chain, from graphite to THz electronics. There will be long-term winners, and we indicate what strategies are required to join this small elite band, and we provide a wealth of lessons from our previous experience in nanotechnologies and life sciences.

Most importantly, we look beyond the narrow graphene or nanotechnology worlds and assess graphene’s chances of success in competing with a wide range of other technologies, many of which have not been considered by those concentrating solely on graphene.

The Graphene Opportunity Report is available at GBP 2000/EUR 2300/USD 3000.

You can access the report’s Table of Contents here.

New ‘smart’ textiles market report from Cientifica

I’ve written about Cientifica and its reports before including their previous ‘smart’ textiles report (Nanotechnologies for Textile Markets published in April 2012; scroll down about 1/2 way) in (coincidentally) a May 15, 2012 posting about textiles and nanotechnology.

Today I received notification that the 2013 report is available for purchase. Here’s more about this year’s report from the Smart Textiles and Nanotechnology: Applications, Technologies and Markets Cientifica market report webpage,

Expanded and revised for 2013, over 264 pages “Smart Textiles and Nanotechnologies: Applications Technologies and Markets” looks at the technologies involved, the companies applying them, and the impact on sectors including apparel, home, military, technical and medical textiles.

Detailed market figures are given from 2012-2022, along with an analysis of the key opportunities, illustrated with 123 figures and 14 tables.

With over a billion Bluetooth enabled devices on the market, ranging from smartphones to set top boxes, and new technologies such as energy scavenging or piezoelectric energy generation being made possible by the use of nanotechnologies , there are opportunities for the textile industry in new markets ranging from consumer electronics to medical diagnostics.

This report provides an in-depth presentation of recent developments in nanotechnology applied to smart textiles and provides market opportunities to 2022. The market is segmented by

Clothing & Apparel
Home Textiles
Military Textiles
Medical Textiles
Sport Textiles
Technical and Smart Textiles

Companies mentioned in this report include:

AdidasAdvanPro Limited
Advanced Nano Products, Inc.AiQ Smart Clothing Inc.

Arc’teryx,
Asahi Kasei
Avelana
Balton Sp. Z.o.o
BASF
Beijing ChamGo Nano-Tech CoBelt Tech
BigSky Technologies LLC

Canada Goose,

Cocona Fabric
Cook Medical
CTT Group
Cyanine Technologies srlDaniel Hechter,

Duke University, USA
DuPont
DuPont Speciality ChemicalsDuro Textiles
Eddie Bauer

Formosa Taffeta
Forster Rohner AG
Foster Miller

Gap
Greenyarn

Kao Corp.
Kao Corp. Japan
Kennedy & Violich ArchitectureKing’s Metal Fiber Technologies

Lee Jeans
Levi StrauusLG Chem
LiberecLindstrand Technologies
LLBean
Lockheed Martin Corp
Louis Vuitton
Mammut,
Marks & SpencerMC10
Misfit Wearables
Mitsubishi
Mitsubishi
Nano Phase Technologies Corporation (NTC)

Nanyan Textiles
nCoat, Inc
New Balance
Nike
Nordstrom
NovaThera

Philips Lighting
Piedmont Chemical Industries, Inc
Pikeur
Polo Ralph LaurenPolar Elektro

Samsung

Sony
SparkFunSphelar Power Corp.
Suzutora
Takeda Chemical Industries
Teijin Fibres Ltd
Texnology Nano Textile (China), Ltd.Tex-Ray

United Textile Mills

Unexpectedly, I noticed a couple of Canadian entries in the company list: Arc’teryx and Canada Goose.

You can find out more about Cientifica on its About Us page,

Cientifica was founded as CMP Cientifica in Madrid in 1997 in order to meet the advanced analytical needs of the European Space Agency.

By 2000 the company was already meeting the increasing demand for information on emerging technologies to both the business and academic communities. Cientifica also launched Europe’s largest nanotechnology conference; TNT 2000, the world’s first conference dealing with investing in nanotechnologies; I2Nano, and the worlds first weekly information source dedicated to Nanotechnology; TNT Weekly.

In 2002 Cientifica published the first edition of  ‘The Nanotechnology Opportunity Report’, described by NASA as “the defining report in the field of nanotechnology.”

Cientifica is distinct from all other companies providing consulting and information services. It combines knowledge and expertise in both the science and business of emerging technologies, with nearly 20 years’ experience in the field of science and research, and nearly 10 years’ providing information on the business and science of emerging technologies.  Cientifica employees are all highly experienced technical project managers and familiar not only with the commercialization of technology but also with the technology transfer of science from the laboratory to the marketplace.

The cost of this latest ‘smart’ textiles report is: GBP 1499.00 / USD 2349.00.

EmTech México 2013

MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) produces an annual emerging technologies conference (EmTech) on its own home ground of Cambridge, MA and also in India (mentioned in my Mar. 5, 2010 posting; scroll down 2/3 of the way), in China, in Spain (mentioned in my Oct. 28, 2011 posting; scroll down about 1/4 of the way) and, of particular interest to me, in México.

The ‘nanotechnology’ bombings in México in 2011 and in early 2013, mentioned most recently in my Mar. 14, 2013 posting, provide an interesting backdrop to the upcoming conference (EmTech México 29-30 mayo, 2013 • Ciudad de México).

The speaker list for the conference is, as expected, heavy with MIT faculty but it also boasts someone I’ve featured here from time to time, Tim Harper of Cientifica. Here’s the description they have for Tim (from the EmTech México speaker [biography] page),

Tim Harper es uno de los principales expertos en la comercialización de nanotecnología y de tecnologías emergentes. Le interesan además la biología sintética, la medicina regenerativa y la geoingeniería.

Harper es un emprendedor, inversor en tecnologías emergentes y asesor gubernamental en materia de estrategia tecnológica. Es fundador y CEO de Cientifica, la empresa más respetada a nivel mundial en materia de información nanotecnológica y pronósticos meteorológicos. Harper fue cofundador de la empresa Nanosight, donde desarrolló un innovador sistema de detección de nanopartículas.

Perteneció al  equipo de  ingenieros de la Agencia Espacial Europea en el centro de I+D en Norrdwijk (Países Bajos). Allí contribuyó decisivamente al lanzamiento del primer microscopio de fuerza atómica en el espacio, donde nunca se había analizado el polvo cósmico.

En 1999, Harper organizó en Sevilla (España) la primera conferencia del mundo sobre inversión en nanotecnología. Desde entonces dirige con éxito el World Nanoeconomic Congress en cuatro continentes. En el año 2002 fundó la European NanoBusiness Association, una sociedad sin ánimo de lucro cuyo objetivo es promover la competitividad europea en materia de nanotecnología.

I gather the conference will be held  in Spanish. My skills in this language are almost nonexistent but relying heavily on my poor French, here’s a rough translation of the first paragraph,

Tim Harper is an expert on the commercialization of nanotechnology and other emerging technologies. He also maintains a professional interest in the fields of synthetic biology, regenerative medicine, and geoengineering.

Here are a few of the other speakers listed on the EmTech México conference’s Ponentes page,

  • Jason Pontin, Director de MIT Technology Review
  • Mario Molina, Premio Nobel de Química (1995)
  • Niels Van Duinen, Director de Desarrollo de Negocio Internacional de Philips Lighting
  • Carlo Ratti, Director del grupo Senseable City Lab en el MIT
  • Marcelo Coelho, Diseñador e investigador del grupo Fluid Interfaces en el MIT Media Lab
  • Juan Pablo Puerta, Director de Ingenería, Etsy
  • Marisa Viveros, Vicepresidenta de Cyber Security Innovation de IBM

You can check out all of the Emtech conferences on this page.

One last note, MIT has its own baggage viz the recent suicide of Aaron Swartz. This essay on Wikipedia offers one of the more neutral descriptions. I’ve excerpted the introduction, (Note: Links and footnotes have been removed),

Aaron Hillel Swartz (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013) was an American computer programmer, writer, political organizer and Internet activist.

Swartz was involved in the development of the web feed format RSS,[ the organization Creative Commons,] the website framework web.py and the social news site Reddit, in which he was an equal partner after its merger with his Infogami company. Swartz also focused on sociology, civic awareness and activism. In 2010, he became a research fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Research Lab on Institutional Corruption, directed by Lawrence Lessig. He founded the online group Demand Progress, known for its campaign against the Stop Online Piracy Act.

On January 6, 2011, Swartz was arrested by MIT police on state breaking-and-entering charges, in connection with the systematic downloading of academic journal articles from JSTOR. Federal prosecutors eventually charged him with two counts of wire fraud and 11 violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, charges carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines plus 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution and supervised release.

On January 11, 2013, two years after his initial arrest, Swartz was found dead in his Crown Heights, Brooklyn apartment, where he had hanged himself.

MIT president L. Rafael Reif has since ordered a review of MIT’s role in the tragedy noted in the Wikipedia essay and elsewhere. The essay on Aaron Swartz offers a fairly comprehensive overview of Swartz’s life and accomplishments, as well as, his legal situation and the circumstances surrounding his death.

A suicide is a complex event and it is not possible to hold any one person or institution to blame, tempting as it may be. Nonetheless, it must be said that it seems oddly dissonant that MIT which prides itself on its technological advancements  and membership in an elite, forward-thinking research community would be party to an action where prosecutors seemed more intent on punishment than on any principle of law relating to research and its dissemination. Whatever one thinks of Swartz’s actions, it is clear he was acting out of a spirit of civil disobedience (trying to set publicly funded research free).

In fact, the emerging technologies of yesteryear are have social impacts today such that the ways in which we view research and the scientific process are changing prompting questions such as ‘Who gets access to information and ideas?’ and, as  importantly, ‘When?’

I wonder if any of these events, the multiple bombings in México and MIT’s role in the Swartz case and suicide will have any sort of impact on this conference. I doubt it; there wasn’t a single philosopher on the speaker’s list.

Jason Pontin

Director de MIT Technology Review

Goodish article for beginners—Pangaea Ventures on the state of nanotechnology

Purnesh Seegopaul, General Partner, Pangaea Ventures Ltd., headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, has written a Jan. 21, 2013 posting, The State of Nanotechnology, for the company blog, which offers a good primer on nanotechnology along with a bit of a sales pitch,

Nanomaterials are of particular interest and at Pangaea Ventures, our focused approach on advanced materials gives us an exceptional grasp of leading-edge innovations and emerging companies developing and commercializing nano-enabled products. Engineered nanomaterial building blocks include inorganic nanoparticles, nanofibers, nanowires, quantum dots, nanotubes, nanoporous materials, dendrimers, plasmons, metamaterials, superlattices, metal organic frameworks, clays, nanocomposites, and the carbon-based nanotubes, graphene, fibers, fullerenes, and activated materials. These nanostructures are incorporated in bulk forms, coatings, films, inks, and devices. Graphene, the latest addition to the nanotech toolkit not only garnered the 2010 Nobel Prize (Geim and Nuvoselov [sic]) but also projected to extend Moore’s law in nanoelectronics. Nanobiomedical applications would allow targeted drug delivery in cancer treatment. Of course, nano-enabled products are expected to be competitive in terms of cost, performance and safety.

I do have a problem with Seegopaul’s stance on intellectual property (IP); I reported on the nanotech IP bonanza (4000 in the US for 2012)  in my Jan. 4, 2013 posting,

Companies need to understand that intellectual property is an important consideration and the IP landscape is getting busy. US patent publications in the 977 nanotech class established by the USPTO are expected to reach 4000 in 2012.

Tim Harper, Chief Executive Officer of Cientifica (the company is cited in Seegopaul’s posting) isn’t particularly enthusiastic about patents either, from Harper’s Jan. 15, 2013 posting about graphene (a nanomaterial) on the Cientifica blog, Insight,

The UK has a number of companies producing decent quality graphene – a prerequisite for any applications – and the history of nanotechnology shows us that filing huge numbers of patents is no guarantee of commercial success.

The Cientifica mention in Seegopaul’s posting was made in the context of government funding,

Nanotechnology enjoys generous funding support. Cientifica recently estimated that governments around the world invested $67 billion over the last 11 years and projected $0.25 trillion in investments from all sources by 2015! [emphasis mine] The USA is expected to spend about $1.7 billion in 2012 and $1.8 billion has been requested for 2013. I expect that nations will continue to pour significant funding into nanotechnology.

Tim Harper gave an interview about  his company’s report Global Funding of Nanotechnologies and its Impact that was published in my July 15, 2012 posting.

Seegopaul’s posting is a good introduction, despite my concern over his IP stance, to nanotechnology but the title does seem to be stretching it a bit. Panagaea Ventures has been mentioned here before (May 14, 2010 posting) in the context of a local Vancouver-based smart window company, SWITCH Materials, which was founded by Neil Branda who was himself mentioned here in a Jan. 15, 2013 posting about the Canadian government funding of the Prometheus Project; a global innovation hub at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver.

FrogHeart’s 2012, a selective roundup of my international online colleagues, and other bits

This blog will be five years old in April 2013 and, sometime in January or February, the 2000th post will be published.

Statisticswise it’s been a tumultuous year for FrogHeart with ups and downs,  thankfully ending on an up note. According to my AW stats, I started with 54,920 visits in January (which was a bit of an increase over December 2011. The numbers rose right through to March 2012 when the blog registered 68,360 visits and then the numbers fell and continued to fall. At the low point, this blog registered 45, 972 visits in June 2012 and managed to rise and fall through to Oct. 2012 when the visits rose to 54,520 visits. November 2012 was better with 66,854 visits and in December 2012 the blog will have received over 75,000 visits. (ETA Ja.2.13: This blog registered 81,0036 in December 2012 and an annual total of 681,055 visits.) Since I have no idea why the numbers fell or why they rose again, I have absolutely no idea what 2013 will bring in terms of statistics (the webalizer numbers reflect similar trends).

Interestingly and for the first time since I’ve activated the AW statistics package in Feb. 2009, the US ceased to be the primary source for visitors. As of April 2012, the British surged ahead for several months until November 2012 when the US regained the top spot only to lose it to China in December 2012.

Favourite topics according to the top 10 key terms included: nanocrystalline cellulose for Jan. – Oct. 2012 when for the first time in almost three years the topic fell out of the top 10; Jackson Pollock and physics also popped up in the top 10 in various months throughout the year; Clipperton Island (a sci/art project) has made intermittent appearances; SPAUN (Semantic Pointer Arichitecture Unified Network; a project at the University of Waterloo) has made the top 10 in the two months since it was announced); weirdly, frogheart.ca has appeared in the top 10 these last few months; the Lycurgus Cup, nanosilver, and literary tattoos also made appearances in the top 10 in various months throughout the year, while the memristor and Québec nanotechnology made appearances in the fall.

Webalizer tells a similar but not identical story. The numbers started with 83, 133 visits in January 2012 rising to a dizzying height of 119, 217 in March.  These statistics fell too but July 2012 was another six figure month with 101,087 visits and then down again to five figures until Oct. 2012 with 108, 266 and 136,161 visits in November 2012. The December 2012 visits number appear to be dipping down slightly with 130,198 visits counted to 5:10 am PST, Dec. 31, 2012. (ETA Ja.2.13: In December 2012, 133,351 were tallied with an annual total of 1,660,771 visits.)

Thanks to my international colleagues who inspire and keep me apprised of the latest information on nanotechnology and other emerging technologies:

  • Pasco Phronesis, owned by David Bruggeman, focuses more on science policy and science communicati0n (via popular media) than on emerging technology per se but David provides excellent analysis and a keen eye for the international scene. He kindly dropped by frogheart.ca  some months ago to challenge my take on science and censorship in Canada and I have not finished my response. I’ve posted part 1 in the comments but have yet to get to part 2. His latest posting on Dec. 30, 2012 features this title, For Better Science And Technology Policing, Don’t Forget The Archiving.
  • Nanoclast is on the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) website and features Dexter Johnson’s writing on nanotechnology government initiatives, technical breakthroughs, and, occasionally, important personalities within the field. I notice Dexter, who’s always thoughtful and thought-provoking, has cut back to a weekly posting. I encourage you to read his work as he fills in an important gap in a lot of nanotechnology reporting with his intimate understanding of the technology itself.  Dexter’s Dec. 20, 2012 posting (the latest) is titled, Nanoparticle Coated Lens Converts Light into Sound for Precise Non-invasive Surgery.
  • Insight (formerly TNTlog) is Tim Harper’s (CEO of Cientifica) blog features an international perspective (with a strong focus on the UK scene) on emerging technologies and the business of science. His writing style is quite lively (at times, trenchant) and it reflects his long experience with nanotechnology and other emerging technologies. I don’t know how he finds the time and here’s his latest, a Dec. 4, 2012 posting titled, Is Printable Graphene The Key To Widespread Applications?
  • 2020 Science is Dr. Andrew Maynard’s (director of University of Michigan’s Risk Science Center) more or less personal blog. An expert on nanotechnology (he was the Chief Science Adviser for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, located in Washington, DC), Andrew writes extensively about risk, uncertainty, nanotechnology, and the joys of science. Over time his blog has evolved to include the occasional homemade but science-oriented video, courtesy of one of his children. I usually check Andrew’s blog when there’s a online nanotechnology kerfuffle as he usually has the inside scoop. His latest posting on Dec. 23, 2012 features this title, On the benefits of wearing a hat while dancing naked, and other insights into the science of risk.
  • Andrew also produces and manages the Mind the Science Gap blog, which is a project encouraging MA students in the University of Michigan’s Public Health Program to write. Andrew has posted a summary of the last semester’s triumphs titled, Looking back at another semester of Mind The Science Gap.
  • NanoWiki is, strictly speaking, not a blog but the authors provide the best compilation of stories on nanotechnology issues and controversies that I have found yet. Here’s how they describe their work, “NanoWiki tracks the evolution of paradigms and discoveries in nanoscience and nanotechnology field, annotates and disseminates them, giving an overall view and feeds the essential public debate on nanotechnology and its practical applications.” There are also Spanish, Catalan, and mobile versions of NanoWiki. Their latest posting, dated  Dec. 29, 2012, Nanotechnology shows we can innovate without economic growth, features some nanotechnology books.
  • In April 2012, I was contacted by Dorothée Browaeys about a French blog, Le Meilleur Des Nanomondes. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to have been much action there since Feb. 2010 but I’m delighted to hear from my European colleagues and hope to hear more from them.

Sadly, there was only one interview here this year but I think they call these things ‘a big get’ as the interview was with Vanessa Clive who manages the nanotechnology portfolio at Industry Canada. I did try to get an interview with Dr. Marie D’Iorio, the new Executive Director of Canada’s National Institute of Nanotechnology (NINT; BTW, the National Research Council has a brand new site consequently [since the NINT is a National Research Council agency, so does the NINT]), and experienced the same success I had with her predecessor, Dr. Nils Petersen.

I attended two conferences this year, S.NET (Society for the Study of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies) 2012 meeting in Enschede, Holland where I presented on my work on memristors, artificial brains, and pop culture. The second conference I attended was in Calgary where I  moderated a panel I’d organized on the topic of Canada’s science culture and policy for the 2012 Canadian Science Policy Conference.

There are a few items of note which appeared on the Canadian science scene. ScienceOnlineVancouver emerged in April 2012. From the About page,

ScienceOnlineVancouver is a monthly discussion series exploring how online communication and social media impact current scientific research and how the general public learns about it. ScienceOnlineVancouver is an ongoing discussion about online science, including science communication and available research tools, not a lecture series where scientists talk about their work. Follow the conversation on Twitter at @ScioVan, hashtag is #SoVan.

The concept of these monthly meetings originated in New York with SoNYC @S_O_NYC, brought to life by Lou Woodley (@LouWoodley, Communities Specialist at Nature.com) and John Timmer (@j_timmer, Science Editor at Ars Technica). With the success of that discussion series, participation in Scio2012, and the 2012 annual meeting of the AAAS in Vancouver, Catherine Anderson, Sarah Chow, and Peter Newbury were inspired to bring it closer to home, leading to the beginning of ScienceOnlineVancouver.

ScienceOnlineVancouver is part of the ScienceOnlineNOW community that includes ScienceOnlineBayArea, @sciobayarea and ScienceOnlineSeattle, @scioSEA. Thanks to Brian Glanz of the Open Science Federation and SciFund Challenge and thanks to Science World for a great venue.

I have mentioned the arts/engineering festival coming up in Calgary, Beakerhead, a few times but haven’t had occasion to mention Science Rendezvous before. This festival started in Toronto in 2008 and became a national festival in 2012 (?). Their About page doesn’t describe the genesis of the ‘national’ aspect to this festival as clearly as I would like. They seem to be behind with their planning as there’s no mention of the 2013 festival,which should be coming up in May.

The twitter (@frogheart) feed continues to grow in both (followed and following) albeit slowly. I have to give special props to @carlacap, @cientifica, & @timharper for their mentions, retweets, and more.

As for 2013, there are likely to be some changes here; I haven’t yet decided what changes but I will keep you posted. Have a lovely new year and I wish you all the best in 2013.

Bio-pharmaceutical teaser from India’s Centre for Knowledge Management of Nanoscience and Technology (CNMKT)

The Dec. 13, 2012 Nanowerk Spotlight article about India’s bio-pharmaceutical industry and its nanotechnology efforts was written by Vivek Patel of India’s Centre for Knowledge Management of Nanoscience and Technology (CMKNT) and appears to be an excerpt of a larger report to be released at a later date. The article is well worth reading and might be eye-opening for some folks,

Chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, osteoporosis and cardiovascular among others are not well diagnosed, because symptoms of these diseases are often less apparent (progress slowly) than acute and communicable diseases. With the rapid urbanization and the unhealthy lifestyles, the disease profile in India is gradually shifting towards an ample growth in the chronic diseases segment. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), India has the highest number of patients with diabetes and 60 percent of the world’s cardiac patients belong to India (read more: “Background Paper: Burden of Disease in India“; pdf). It is also estimated that India has the largest number of coronary artery disease related deaths in the world. The bio-pharmaceutical industry expert says that the chronic disease-related therapeutics is the fastest growing segment in the Indian pharmaceutical market.

Patel offers an analysis of the current nanotechnology-enabled bio-pharmaceutical industry in India,

Nanotechnology-enabled bio-pharmaceutical R&D and products in the Indian industry are still in the early stages of evolution. Only modest amount of investments have been made so far and most of projects are moving through different phases of research/clinical trials (phase I-III), even though a few nano-based drug delivery systems have already reached the market. The Indian bio-pharmaceutical industry is witnessing business opportunity trends such as merger & acquisitions/takeovers/collaborations/in-licensing, increase in R&D investments, innovations in healthcare and drug delivery as well as product penetration into the tier I to tier VI markets to make significant inroads into nanomedicine and nanodiagnostics. CKMNT believes that these trends, along with the favourable macroeconomics and growth drivers, nanotechnology will propel Indian bio-pharmaceutical industry to the next level of growth. It is expected that in the next 10-20 years, market will be flooded with nano-based medicines and drug delivery systems as well as nano-enabled ultrasensitive and rapid detection devices for diagnostics and therapy.

Cientifica, an international consulting firm which specializes in emerging technologies and business, authored two analyses of the international business context for nano drug delivery systems, one is a free white paper overview and the other is a full report. The company also issued a full market report on nanotechnology-enabled medical diagnostics. (Note 1: Cientifica is offering some of its 2012 reports [the drug delivery and diagnostics reports are included in the sale] at a discount price of up to 80% until Dec. 31, 2012. Contact Cientifica at +44 7887 497630 or +44 7894 708989 or email info@cientifica.com for pricing. Special academic discounts are also available. Note 2: The FrogHeart blog does not receive any monies whatsover from Cientifica.)

Getting back to the analysis of the nanotechnology-enabled bio-pharmaceutical industry in India, Patel provides a list of the most prolific Indian companies in this sector,

Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. (erstwhile Dabur Pharmaceuticals Ltd.) made its foray into the field of oncology with the launch of ‘Nanoxel’, which is a novel nanoparticle-enabled formulation of Paclitaxel in 2007. …

Lupin Ltd., one of the world’s largest producers of tuberculosis drugs, with 12 factories and six research centres in India and Japan, has launched ‘Genexol-PM’ (paclitaxel nanoparticle) nanomedicine for cancer treatment by tie-up with the South Korean company Samyang Corporation. …

Cipla Ltd., one of the world’s largest generic pharmaceutical companies with a presence in over 170 countries, has successfully developed and manufactured Paclitax Nab (nanoparticle albumin bound) product for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in 2012.

Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company Ltd. is engaged in creating new drugs and delivery systems such as ‘Paclitaxel Injection Concentrate for Nanodispersion (PICN)’and ‘Docetaxel Injection Concentrate for Nanodispersion (DICN)’. …

In 2012, Venus Remedies Ltd. has launched two nanotechnology-enabled products for arthritis and cancer treatments, respectively. The brand Taxedol consists of Docetaxel in nanoparticle form and company claims that it gives 11 % higher cancer cell killing potential as compared to existing Docetaxel…

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (erstwhile Zydus Cadila) has successfully developed and launched nanotechnology-based ‘Oxalgin Nanogel’ formulation for the pain management therapy (arthritis, backache, joint pain etc.).

Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the active pharmaceutical ingredients manufacturer has entered into collaboration (50:50 joint ventures) with Nanoparticle M/s. Biochem, Inc., USA to develop gold nanoparticles-enabled radioactive medicine to treat prostate cancer.

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. has established a joint venture company, CPL Biologicals Pvt. Ltd., in partnership with M/s. Novavax Inc., USA to develop, manufacture and sell nanotechnology-based novel therapeutic and prophylactic vaccines, biological therapeutics and diagnostics in India. …

As noted earlier, this article does appear to be a teaser for a more comprehensive report due at a later date,

A comprehensive report on “Indian Nanotechnology Market: Technologies, Applications and Opportunities” is slated to be released by CKMNT in the future. Interested readers may please contact Mr. Vivek Patel at vivek@ckmnt.com or info@ckmnt.com for further details.

Help the European Commission understand nanoelectronics possibilities

Cientifica, a leading consultancy on emerging and other technologies, is conducting an online survey on nanoelectronics (Key Digital Goods survey) in collaboration with the European Commission. From the July 16, 2012 Cientifica announcement,

 2020 Nanoelectronics

Help us to help the European Commission to understand our digital future.

In collaboration with the European Commission [EC] we are trying to determine which key digital goods based on nanoelectronics will be important in the future.

While the EC takes advice from various expert groups involved in industry and research, we want to know what you, the end-users think.

The Key Digital Goods survey can be found here.

BTW, I notice that 2020 Nanoelectronics echoes name for the new European Commission science funding programme, 2020 Horizon, which comes online next year (2013) as the current one, Framework Programme 7, is being phased out now. For anyone curious about Cientifica, I have an interview with the company’s Chief Executive Officer, Tim Harper, in my July 15, 2011 posting about his company’s report on nanotechnology and global funding.

Textiles to offer protection from malaria and more about nanotechnology-enabled textiles

Textiles that harvest our energy to recharge the batteries for phones and other portable devices (for example, US Army research in my May 9, 2012 posting and British soldiers prepare to conduct field tests in my April 5, 2012 posting), that protect us from poison gases (my page on nanotechnology and textiles on the Nanotech Mysteries wiki), that clean pollution from the air (my Feb. 24, 2012 posting about Catalytic Clothing), and more  are currently being developed. It seems textiles used for passive protection and decoration and other forms of personal enhancement (body shapers, ‘lifts and separates’)  are becoming more active. One of the latest developments is a textile that protects from malaria. From the May 8, 2012 news item on Nanowerk,

A Cornell University scientist and designer from Africa have together created a fashionable hooded bodysuit embedded at the molecular level with insecticides for warding off mosquitoes infected with malaria, a disease estimated to kill 655,000 people annually on the continent.

Though insecticide-treated nets are commonly used to drive away mosquitoes from African homes, the Cornell prototype garment can be worn throughout the day to provide extra protection and does not dissipate easily like skin-based repellants. By binding repellant and fabric at the nanolevel using metal organic framework molecules – which are clustered crystalline compounds – the mesh fabric can be loaded with up to three times more insecticide than normal fibrous nets, which usually wear off after about six months.

“The bond on our fabric is very difficult to break,” said Frederick Ochanda, postdoctoral associate in fiber science and apparel design (FSAD) in the College of Human Ecology and a native of Kenya. “The nets in use now are dipped in a solution and not bonded in this way, so their effectiveness doesn’t last very long.”

I’m assuming that this design will be reworked to accommodate more average bodies (from Cornell University’s  ChronicleOnline April 30, 2012 article by Ted Boscia,

Sandy Mattei models a design by Matilda Ceesay '13, an FSAD apparel design major from Gambia, at the Cornell Fashion Collective spring fashion show April 28 on campus. Credit: Mark David Vorreuter

Boscia gives details,

The colorful garment, fashioned by Matilda Ceesay ’13, an FSAD apparel design major from Gambia, debuted at the Cornell Fashion Collective spring fashion show April 28 [2012] on campus. It consists of an underlying one-piece bodysuit, hand-dyed in purple, gold and blue, and a mesh hood and cape containing the repellant. The outfit is one of six in Ceesay’s collection, which she said “explores and modernizes traditional African silhouettes and textiles by embracing the strength and sexuality of the modern woman.”

Ceesay and Ochanda, who works with FSAD Associate Professor Juan Hinestroza, partnered with Laurie Lange, graduate student in Professor Kay Obendorf’s lab, to refine the process for capturing insecticides on the MOF-coated cloth. Hinestroza called the resulting garment “fashionable and functional, with the potential to create a new generation of durable and effective insecticide mosquito protection nets.”

The researchers are not pinning all of their hopes on the body suit (from Boscia’s April 30, 2012 article),

Ultimately, Ceesay and Ochanda hope the outfit they developed will serve as a prototype to drive new technologies for fighting the spread of malaria. On the horizon, Ochanda said, is an MOF fabric that releases repellant in response to changes in temperature or light — offering wearers more protection at night when mosquitoes are on the hunt. At minimum, they hope the technology can be applied to create longer lasting insecticide-laden bed nets.

Despite the use of mosquito nets, “people are still getting sick and dying,” Ceesay said. “We can’t get complacent. I hope my design can show what is possible when you bring together fashion and science and will inspire others to keep improving the technology. If a student at Cornell can do this, imagine how far it could go.”

Both the designer and scientist have a very personal stake in creating textiles that will repel malaria-borne mosquitoes (from Boscia’s article),

Ochanda and Ceesay, from opposite sides of the continent, both have seen family members suffer from the disease. Its prevalence in Africa — the source of 90 percent of the world’s malaria infections annually — can also lead to harmful misdiagnoses. Ceesay recalls a family member who died after doctors treated her for malaria when she had a different sickness. “It’s so common back home; you can’t escape it,” Ceesay said.

“Seeing malaria’s effect on people in Kenya, it’s very important for me to apply fiber science to help this problem,” Ochanda added. “A long-term goal of science is to be able to come up with solutions to help protect human health and life, so this project is very fulfilling for me.”

There’s no mention of how close this textile is to becoming a product and being offered in the marketplace. So, for anyone who’s generally interested in nanotechnology-enable textiles and possible economic impacts and business outlooks, Cientifica released its report, Nanotechnologies for Textile Markets in April 2012 (available for purchase). From the April 16, 2 012 news release and report description webpage,

While the traditional markets of apparel and home textiles continue to be impacted by nanotechnologies, especially in adding value through finishing and coating, the major opportunities for both textile manufacturers and nanomaterial suppliers lie elsewhere.

“Nanotechnologies for the Textile Market” takes an in depth look at the major textile markets – apparel, home, military, medical, sports, technical and smart textiles – detailing the key applications of nanotechnologies and the major players. The 255 page report contains  full market analyses and predictions for each sector to 2022, outlines the key opportunities and is illustrated with 98 figures and 30 tables.

Cientifica predicts that the highest growth over the next decade will be seen in the areas of smart and technical textiles.  In both of these areas a significant part of the added value is due to the innovative use of nanotechnologies, whether in fiber production or as a coating or additive.

With over a billion Bluetooth enabled devices on the market, ranging from smartphones to set top boxes, and new technologies such as energy scavenging or piezoelectric energy generation being made possible by the use of nanotechnologies , there are opportunities for the textile industry in new markets ranging from consumer electronics to medical diagnostics.

‘It’s a perfect storm” added Tim Harper [Cientifica’s Chief Executive Office], “the availability of new materials such as graphene, the huge leaps being made in organic electronics, and the move towards the Internet of Things is blurring the divide between textiles and electronic devices. When two trillion dollar markets collide there will be lots of disruption and plenty of opportunities.”

Cientifica does offer a free download of the report’s Table of Contents (ToC). Here’s a sample from the ToC which gives you a preview  of the report’s contents,

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  11
INTRODUCTION  21
Objectives of the Report  21

World Textiles and Clothing  22
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the EU Textile Industry  24
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the US Textile Industry 25
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the Chinese Textile Industry  26
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the Indian Textile Industry  27
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the Japanese Textile Industry  27
Overview of Nanotechnology Applications in the Korean Textile Industry  29
Textiles in the Rest of the World 31
Macro and Micro Value Chain of Textiles Industry  32
Common Textiles Industry Classification  32
End Markets and Value Chain Actors 32
Why Textiles Go Nano 34
Nanotechnology in Textiles 34
Nanotechnology in Some Textile-related Categories 37
Technical & Smart Textiles 37
Multifunctional Textiles 39
High Performance Textiles 39
Smart/Intelligent Textiles 39
Nanotechnology Hype 41
CURRENT APPLICATIONS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY IN TEXTILE PRODUCTION  43
Nanotechnology in Fibers and Yarns 43

Nanotechnology in Fabrics 47

Nanotechnology in Textile Finishing, Dyeing and Coating 55

Nanotechnology In Textile Printing 66
Green Technology — Nanotechnology In Textile Production Energy Saving 67

Electronic Textiles 67

Concept  67
Markets and Impacts 68
Current E-Textile Solutions and Problems 69
Nanotechnology in Electronic Textiles 78
Future and Challenges of Electronic Textiles  87
NANOTECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS IN CLOTHING/APPAREL TEXTILES 89
Summary of Nanotechnology Applications in Clothing/Apparel Textiles 90
Current Applications of Nanotechnology in Clothing/Apparel Textiles 91
Hassle-free Clothing: Stain/Oil/Water Repellence, Anti-Static, Anti-Wrinkle 91

The Guardian newspaper in an October 4,  2011 article by Colin Stuart offers a brief , comprehensive but cautionary overview of nanotechnology-enabled textiles (thanks for the tip, Tim Harper),

The manipulation of textiles is an age-old practice, starting with the furs of the animals we hunted. As agriculture and farming grew, we began to weave natural fibres, providing us with fabrics such as cotton and wool – sartorial staples we’ve relied on for centuries.

Unsurprisingly, the most mainstream use of nanotextiles is in clothing. The chances are you have some nanotextiles hanging in your wardrobe; wrinkle-free or non-iron garments have been engineered against creasing by coating the fibres with nanoparticles. Nanotechnology is also responsible for the stain-resistant fabrics found in both clothing and carpets. Tiny, nano-sized hairs are added to the surface of the material which stop liquids from being absorbed. …

The nano clothing of the future, however, could add even more functionality to the latest fashions. Tomorrow’s must-wear materials could hide piezoelectrics – nanotechnology that harvests the energy created as you rub against the fabric. Imagine walking along as your every move helps charge an iPod strapped to your belt.

But nanotextiles are not just confined to clothing; they are also being used in Asia in the battle against malaria. In 2010 a group of Thai researchers announced they had created mosquito nets laced with nanoparticles of pyrethroid, an insecticide. Pyrethroid had been combined with nets before, but doing so on the nanoscale means the particles are small enough to cling to the fibres even when washed. These nano-nets can last up to five years – a five-fold improvement on conventional netting.

The article goes on to establish concerns over environmental, health, and safety regulations but I thought it best to end with the mosquito nets and malaria, which is where this posting started, more or less.

Nanotechnology policy primer for US Congress

I was hoping to get more information about that symposium I mentioned in my Jan. 27, 2012 posting (in addition to the news about one of the presentations which I mentioned in my March 29, 2012 posting about assessing lifecycles and economic impacts),

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and the US National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) are hosting an  International Symposium on Assessing the Economic Impact of Nanotechnology, March 27 – 28, 2012 in Washington, D.C.

As it turns out, an April 13, 2102 brief (Nanotechnology: A Policy Primer) prepared by John Sargent for the US Congress relies on some data that was provided to the symposium. Unfortunately, there’s not much and it’s about funding, not nanotechnology’s economic impacts. From Sargent’s policy primer, page 12,

The United States has led, and continues to lead, all nations in known public investments in nanotechnology R&D, though the estimated U.S. share of global public investments has fallen as other nations have established similar programs and increased funding. In 2011, Lux Research, an emerging technologies consulting firm, estimated total (public and private) global nanotechnology funding for 2010 to be approximately $17.8 billion with corporate R&D accounting for a majority of funding for the first time.[14] Cientifica, a privately held nanotechnology business analysis and consulting firm, estimated global public investments in nanotechnology in 2010 to be approximately $10 billion per year, with cumulative global public investments through 2011 reaching approximately $67.5 billion. Cientifica also concluded that the United States had fallen behind both Russia and China in nanotechnology R&D funding on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis (which takes into account the price of goods and services in each nation), but still leads the world in real dollar terms (adjusted on a currency exchange rate basis).[15]

Private investments in nanotechnology R&D come from two primary sources, corporations and venture capital investors. Lux Research estimated that total global private sector nanotechnology funding had risen from $9.2 billion in 2009 to $9.6 billion in 2010, while the venture capital component of the investment had fallen from $822 million in 2009 to $646 million in 2010. According to the firm, U.S. private sector funding of approximately $3.5 billion led all other nations, followed by Japan (almost $3 billion), and Germany (about $1 billion). Lux Research also reported that the amount of venture capital funding in Europe was one-fifth that of the North American level.[16]

14 OECD /NNI International Symposium on Assessing the Economic Impact of Nanotechnology, Background Paper 2: Finance and Investor Models in Nanotechnology, Working Party on Nanotechnology, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, March 16, 2012, p. 4.

15 Global Funding of Nanotechnologies and Its Impact, Cientifica, July 2011, available at http://cientifica.eu/blog/wpcontent/ uploads/downloads/2011/07/Global-Nanotechnology-Funding-Report-2011.pdf.

16 OECD /NNI International Symposium on Assessing the Economic Impact of Nanotechnology, Background Paper 2: Finance and Investor Models in Nanotechnology, Working Party on Nanotechnology, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, March 16, 2012, p. 4.

This primer provides a good brief (17 pp.) introduction for anyone who’s not familiar with the field of nanotechnology.

Nanodiagnostics: a roundtable at Kavli and new report from Cientifica

The Kavli Foundation, based in California, held a roundtable discussion on ‘Fighting Cancer with Nanotechnology‘ which focused largely on diagnostics and drug delivery. According to a March 14, 2012 news item on Nanowerk, the four participants were:

  • Anna Barker – Former Deputy Director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and current Director of Arizona State University’s Transformative Healthcare Networks;
  • Mark E. Davis – Professor of Chemical Engineering at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), and a member of the Experimental Therapeutics Program of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at the City of Hope;
  • James Heath – Professor of Chemistry at Caltech and a founding Board member of Caltech’s Kavli Nanoscience Institute;
  • Michael Phelps – Norton Simon Professor, and Chair of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology at the University of California Los Angeles.

The researchers discussed how nanotechnology holds the promise of revolutionizing the way medicine wages war against cancer, from providing new ways to combine drugs to delivering gene-silencing therapeutics for cancer cells. [emphasis mine]

Yet again, war has been used as a metaphor for healing. I particularly appreciate the way ‘revolution’, which resonates with US audiences in a very particular way, has been introduced.

The discussion features diagnostics,

JAMES HEATH: That is certainly an important application. A typical diagnostic test measures only a single protein. But the nature of cancer—even a single cancer type—is that it can vary significantly from patient to patient. The implication is that there is probably not a single protein biomarker that can distinguish between such patient variations. Even to confidently address a single diagnostic question may take measuring several protein biomarkers. Discovering the right biomarkers is extremely challenging—you might have 300 candidate biomarkers from which you want to choose just six, but you will likely have to test all 300 on a very large patient pool to determine the best six. That’s tough to do with existing technologies because each protein measurement requires a large sample of blood or tumor tissue, and each measurement is time-consuming, labor intensive and expensive. With some of the emerging nanotechnologies, a large panel of candidate protein biomarkers can be rapidly measured from just a pinprick of blood, or a tissue sample as small as a single cell. This allows one to accelerate the development of conventional diagnostic tests, but it also opens up the possibilities for fundamentally new diagnostic approaches. These are opportunities that nanotech is bringing into play that simply weren’t there before.

Here’s one of my favourite comments,

MICHAEL PHELPS: Yes. All of us developing therapeutics want to have a transparent patient—to see where the drug goes throughout all tissues of the body, whether it hits the disease target in a sufficient dose to induce the desired therapeutic effect on the target, and where else the drug goes in the body regarding side effects. [emphasis mine] PET [positron emission tomography ‘scan’] can reveal all this. For this reason almost all drug companies now use PET in their discovery and development processes.

I suspect Phelps was a bit over enthused and spoke without thinking. I’m sure most doctors and researchers would agree that what they want is to heal without harm and not transparent patients. That’s why they’re so excited about nanotechnology and therapeutics, they’re trying to eliminate or, at least, lessen harm in the healing process. It would be nice though if they get past the ‘war’ metaphors and dreams of transparent patients.

I found the comments about the US FDA (Food and Drug Administration), pharmaceutical companies and biotech startups quite interesting,

ANNA BARKER: These challenges are mostly related to perception and having the tools to demonstrate that the agent does what you say it does. It’s more difficult for nanotherapeutics than for other drugs because they employ a new set of technologies that the FDA is more guarded about approving. The FDA is responsible for the health of the American public, so they are very careful about putting anything new into the population. So the challenges have to do with showing you can deliver what you said you were going to deliver to the target, and that the toxicity and distribution of the agent in the body is what you predicted. You have to have different measures than what is included in the classic toxicology testing packages we use for potential drugs.

MARK DAVIS: There’s so much cool science that people want to do, but you’re limited in what you can do in patients for a number of reasons. One is financial. This area is not being pushed forward by big Pharma, but by biotech companies, and they have limited resources. Secondly, the FDA is still learning about these innovations, they can limit what you are allowed to do in a clinical trial. For example, when we did the first clinical trial with a nanoparticle that had a targeting agent enabling it to latch onto a specific receptor on cancer cells and a gene silencing payload, we realized it would be important to know if patients have this receptor and the gene target of the payload to begin with. Prebiopsies from patients before testing the nanotherapeutic on them to see if the tumor cells had this receptor and gene target in abundance would have been helpful. However, in this first-in-man trial, the FDA did not allow required biopsies, and they were performed on a volunteer-basis only.

It is a fascinating discussion as it provides insight into the field of nanotherapeutics and into the some of the researchers.

On the topic of nanodiagnostics but this time focusing on the business end of things, a new report has been released by Cientifica. From the March 13, 2012 press release,

Nanodiagnostics will be a $50-billion market by 2021; Cientifica’s “Nanotechnology for Medical Diagnostics” looks at emerging nanoscale technologies

Following on from Cientifica’s Nanotechnology for Drug Delivery report series, “Nanotechnology for Medical Diagnostics,” a 237-page report, takes a comprehensive look at current and emerging nanoscale technologies used for medical diagnostics.

Areas examined include quantum dots, gold nanoparticles, exosomes, nanoporous silica, nanowires, micro- and nanocantilever arrays, carbon nanotubes, ion channel switch nanobiosensors, and many more.

Cientifica estimates medical imaging is the sector showing the highest growth and impact of nanomaterials. Already a $1.7-billion market, with gold nanoparticle applications accounting for $959 million, imaging will continue to be the largest nanodiagnostics sector, with gold nanoparticles, quantum dots and nanobiosensors all easily exceeding $10 billion.

“Getting onboard with the right technology at the right time is crucial,” said Harper [Tim Harper, Cientifica’s Chief Executive Officer]. “The use of exosomes in diagnosis, for instance, a relatively new technique and a tiny market, is set to reach close to half a billion dollars by 2021.”

You can find out more and/or purchase the report here.

I have written about Cientifica’s  Nanotechnology for Drug Delivery (NDD) white paper here and have published an interview with Tim Harper about global nanotechnology funding and economic impacts here.