Tag Archives: National Institute of Nanotechnology

Canadian breakthrough with hybrid solar panels

Leave a reply

A team of scientists from the University of Alberta and the National Institute of Nanotechnology (located in Edmonton, Alberta) announced they’ve improved the performance of plastic solar cells (hybrid organic solar cells) by 30%.  The team worked together for two years on the project and they expect that mass production of improved plastic solar cells is five to seven years away. Earlier this week the principal investigator, Jillian Buriak was named Canada Research Chair in Nanomaterials (my Feb. 23, 2009 posting) so this must be quite a week for her. From the press release, here’s her description of a solar cell structure and the project’s improvement,

“Consider a clubhouse sandwich, with many different layers. One layer absorbs the light, another helps to generate the electricity, and others help to draw the electricity out of the device. Normally, the layers don’t stick well, and so the electricity ends up stuck and never gets out, leading to inefficient devices. We are working on the mayonnaise, the mustard, the butter and other ‘special sauces’ that bring the sandwich together, and make each of the layers work together. That makes a better sandwich, and makes a better solar cell, in our case.”

The news release is here on Eureka Alert (I’m not sure how long this remains available) and there’s a bit more information on NanoWerk, Nanotechnology researchers improve performance of plastic solar cells. I don’t understand the ‘hybrid organic solar cell’ decription and I haven’t found an explanation in materials I’ve seen. If you’re interested in the research paper (Thienylsilane-Modified Indium Tin Oxide as an Anodic Interface in Polymer/Fullerene Solar Cells), it’s here at the American Chemical Society (ACS) but it is behind a paywall.

On a completely other note, there was an article on the BBC News site about researchers who report ‘Oldest English words’ identified.

Canadian quantum dot at room temperature

Leave a reply

The researchers at the University of Alberta and the National Institute of Nanotechnology have cracked a problem. Quantum dots can be used to ‘herd’ or control electrons but up until now the dots could only be used effectively at ultra low temperatures consequently practical applications have lagged.

A research team headed by Robert A. Wolkow has created a single atom quantum dot that be used at room temperature. The smallest dot is one silicon atom and measures less than 1 nanometre in diameter. Generally quantum dots, sometimes called artificial atoms, have ranged from 2 – 10 nanometres in diameter.

The news release doesn’t go into much detail other than to note “[The] property enables numerous revolutionary schemes for electronic devices.”  For the news release go here and if you’re interested in both the press release and a video animation of a single quantum dot, go here.

Upstream engagement and nano plus some quick bits

1 Reply

Upstream engagement is a term used to describe a type of public engagement/consultation/understanding of science exercise. The idea is that if you inform people (the public mostly) about discoveries and innovations after the fact that they are more likely to reject them. So using the metaphor of a river, it’s easier to affect the flow of the river (public opinion) upstream than it is downstream where it has gotten bigger and more powerful.

The example that’s often used to illustrate the point is biotechnology and, as the thinking goes, the public engagement/consultation/understanding projects were started too late (too far downstream) to have an effect on the panic that occurred. To restate, if people had been better informed and more science literate they would not have panicked as they did.

Since I’ve just written a number of postings explaining my thinking about the use of public engagement/consultation/understanding projects as prophylactic treatments for public panics, I’ll move on to another goal for these projects: information gathering from the public with an intent to collaborate. But I’m doing that in a posting later this week.

It looks like Alberta is about to get $3.3M from the Canadian federal government to look into environmental issues posed by nanotechnology. They are planning to have a panel headquartered in Alberta at the National Institute of Nanotechnology in Edmonton. 13 scientists, five universities, three government departments,  and two national institutes of research will be cooperating on this panel. (I’m not sure what they mean by cooperation as it’s not explained but you can take a look at the article here.) It’s not a done deal yet.

If your dream is to have your nanotechnology writings appear in a nanotechnology encyclopedia, then SAGE Publications has a deal for you. They are looking for authors. For more detail, go to this article here or you can contact Susan Moskowitz, Managing Editor, Author Recruitment, Golson Books Ltd., her email is nano@golsonmedia.com.

Nano oscillation and music

Leave a reply

It’s one of those breakthroughs that sounds exciting but is a little hard to understand if you’re not working in that field … still … Scientists at the National Institute of Nanotechnology in Canada have solved a problem that was preventing more widespread application of nano-electro-mechanical systems (NEMS). They’ve developed a technique to control vibration/oscillation that could be compared to ‘unringing a bell’. The ability to stop the vibration of a nano cantilever in less than a nanosecond opens up new possibilities in information and communications technology (ICT) and other fields.  There’s a more detailed article about the work here at Nanotech Wire or here at Nanowerk. The research is described in the Nov. 2, 2008 online Nature Nanotechnology article, “Time-domain control of ultrahigh-frequency nanomechanical systems,” the abstract is here. The article itself is behind a paywall.

Chinese researchers are investigating ways to exploit the acoustic properties of carbon nanotubes which are usually lauded for their strength and their electrical properties. Shoushan Fan and colleagues from Tsinghua University in Beijing and Beijing Normal University created sheets of carbon nanotubes and sent audio frequency currents through them as if they were music speakers. However, unlike a standard speaker which creates sound by emitting a vibration, the scientists did not detect any vibrations from the ‘carbon nanotube’ speakers. The researchers believe that the carbon nanotube speakers work as thermoacoustic devices using temperature and pressure oscillation in the surrounding air to emit sound. For more including a video clip of the carbon nanotube speakers in action and a brief mention of 19th century thermoacoustic devices, go here.

One more reminder about Visible Verse, the video poetry event on November 6, 2008 at Pacific Cinematheque (1131 Howe St., Vancouver) at 7:30 pm. Tickets and more info. here.

Science Cafe in Alberta, more science policy thoughts, and the Netherlands publishes a nano intiative

Leave a reply

I wish I could be in Calgary (Alberta, Canada) next Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2008 from 6:30 to 8:30 pm at the Unicorn (pub?) on 304 8th Avenue SouthWest. They’re having an informal event called “Nanotoxicology; is the use of nanoparticles putting human and environmental health at risk?” Speakers include Lori Sheremeta from the National Institute of Nanotechnology and David Cramb, Nanoscience Program Director, University of Calgary. For more details, go here.

I read (skimmed) through Canada’s science policy document, “Mobilizing Science and Technology to Canada’s Advantage” and policy is really not my thing but a few things did strike me. First, basic science is given remarkably short shrift as the emphasis is strongly on scientific applications that can be brought to market in the foreseeable future. As I recall, none of the funding initiatives mentioned were focused on basic science. How are we going to keep a science alive if we don’t support theorists, thinkers. and dreamers?

If you think about it, a lot of the nanotechnology applications that will be coming to market in the near future are based in quantum theory much of which got its start about 100 years ago at the beginning of the 20th Century (Einstein and all that). It’s taken us 100 years or so to get from theory to developing every day applications.

Next,  nanotechnology is mentioned twice (p. 55 and p. 71) in the report but only briefly.  The primary focus for Canada’s scientific efforts will be in: (a) environmental science and technologies, (b) natural resources and energy, (c) health and related life sciences and technologies, and (d) information and communications technologies.

Finally, there are two paragraphs on intellectual property and copyright (intriguing in light of the government’s latest and very strange piece of proposed copyright legislation which, if enforced, would turn at least 80% [my estimate] of Canada’s population into criminals). Back to the report, they want to offer protection (presumable for the fruits of Canadian scientific labour)  through a modern system of patent and copyright laws while ensuring innovation.

I’m not sure what they mean by modern but RIM (Blackberry is their big product)) got caught by someone (viewed by many as a patent troll) in the US and had to pay big time when the US judge found in the alleged troll’s favour. (Patent trolls are people who file hundreds and thousands of patents for everything they can think of, do little to no original work of their own, and then look for opportunities to sue a successful company in an area where they claim their patent has been infringed. This is an international phenomenon and not confined to Canada and the US.) It seems to me that the modern system of copyright and patent protection is getting increasingly complex and in threatening to strangle innovation and creativity. I’ve certainly run into problems in my own work and in my Sept. 29, 2008 blog posting I gave a link to a report that suggests that Canada’s current intellectual property laws are stifling innovation and cutting off whole areas of scientific research. (Their focus was biotechnology but the ideas are applicable to many areas.)

Long posting today! Finally, the Netherlands Nano Initiative has been published and the strategists are advising that 1 billion Euros be invested over 10 years (between 2010 and 2020). (Note: that’s actually 11 years.) There’s more detail here and if you can read Dutch, there’s a lot more here.

Writer’s festival in Vancouver, a conference in Surrey, and a few nano odds and ends

Leave a reply

Vancouver’s annual writers and readers festival opens Oct. 21 and runs until Oct. 26, 2008.  I just bought a ticket for an Oct. 25 event, Femmes Fatales with Lisa Lutz, Leonie Swann, and Linda L. Richards talking about their murder mystery novels. I enjoyed both of Lutz’s books about the Spellman family, haven’t had a chance to read Richards’ book about a secretary (who’s the real brains of the operation) to a Depression era private investigator; and am not sure about Swann’s use of a herd of sheep as the detectives in her novel (still reading it). For more about about the festival and its events, go here.

There’s also a writer’s conference coming up in Surrey, BC, Oct. 24 – 26, 2008. This is for people who are serious about writing so a lot of it is shop talk. There are workshops, a trade show, book fair, editor/agent interviews (where you can sign up for a brief individual session), and more. For details, go here.

M. Fatih Yegul’s ( and co-authors M. Yavuz and P. Guild) paper analyzing the Canadian nanotechnology scene by examining the record of public scientific literature has been published. Publication details are avaialable at the IEEE Explore site. Information about the research is in my blog postings of June 17, 19, and 20, 2008. I recently heard from Martha Cook Piper’s assistant that Dr. Piper will be able to answer a few questions about her appointment (which occurred in April 2008) to the National Institute of Nanotechnology’s board  in early 2009.

Canada, India, and nanotechnology Part 2

Leave a reply

Darren Frew, Executive Director for the Nanotech BC, kindly answered some questions about the Aug. 10 – 11, 2008 meeting held between Indian scientists and Canadian scientists at the [Canada] National Institute of Nanotechnology in Edmonton. Here is the second half of the interview (first half was posted on Friday, Sept. 26, 2008).

You organized the Cascadia Nano Symposium in March this year and I’m wondering if you’re thinking of inviting some Indian scientists to the next one (assuming you are organizing another one).

The Indian scientists I met in August will be invited to the 2009 Cascadia Nanotechnology Symposium, which will be held in late April or early May, 2009

Are there any similarities in the nanotech funding situation between Canada and India? (I’ve seen reports that India spends between $7M and $10M per year on nanotechnology funding. I haven’t seen any information about Canadian spending other than the odd report about a specific grant.)

There are similarities between the funding situation for nanotech in India and Alberta in that both jurisdictions are making strategic investments of several million dollars

How does the research approach to nanotechnology differ between Canadian and Indian nanoscientists? Or are the approaches similar?

There is a much more of a nationally co-ordinated research effort in India.  For example, the Indian Institute of Technology co-ordinates the overall nanotech research effort at the several office it has throughout the country. There is no such national coordination in Canada.

What are the advantages to a collaboration between Canadian and Indian nanoscientists?

Many Canadian  researchers and business people are form India or have roots there, so collaborations with India are both desirable and easy for them.  Also, much of the research being undertaken in India is complimentary to R&D being conducted here in Canada.

Thanks Darren and It sounds like  the 2009 Cascadia Nanotechnology Symposium holds some exciting potential. It’s a bit surprising that the scientists didn’t have a stop in BC since (as Darren points out albeit in a different context) there are many connections between BC and India.

I still haven’t received any confirmation of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies webcast (Nanotechnology? Synthetic Biology? Hey, What’s That?) which is supposed to take place tomorrow. I’ll update the blog if I get a confirmation or cancellation notice. (update) They now list tomorrow’s webcast on the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies website.

Canada, India, and nanotechnology Part 1

Leave a reply

I mentioned a while back that there was a meeting with scientists from India and Canada at the National Institute of Nanotechnology in Edmonton, Alberta on Aug. 10 and 11, 2008. It was the one meeting they had in the west and Darren Frew, Nanotech BC‘s Executive Director, kindly answered questions about the meeting.

Did I get the following right?

Canada and India have a nanotech agreement to work together on some projects (recently announced)…there is funding available for this…based on this agreement, a group of Indian scientists came on a country-wide tour of Canada and met some of our nanoscientists…it was a 10 day trip with most of the stops in Eastern Canada…there was one meeting in Western Canada, held Aug. 10-11, 2008 in Edmonton at the [Canada] National Institute of Nanotechnology…

There is a working agreement on science & technology in general, not nanotech specifically

Here are the questions

Who was at the Edmonton meeting?

There were 10 visiting scientists from India, most of who are affiliated with the Indian Institute of Technology, approximately 20 people from NINT, The University of Alberta (U of A), The Alberta government and companies that have spun off from the U of A. Dr. Peyman Servati from UBC (University of British Columbia) and I were the only BC reps.

Was there some solid discussion about collaborating on future project or was it more a ‘getting to know you’ situation for everyone involved?

There was very sound discussion regarding collaboration, in fact, an agreement was signed between the National Physics Laboratory in New Delhi and one of the Edmonton-based ‘spinoff’ companies.

What kinds of projects will come out of the Aug. 10-11, 2008 meeting? or if there weren’t any specific commitments made, what areas do you see as having the most potential for future collaboration?

See above

Will there be future visits from Indian scientists?

Almost certainly

Is there a possibility they’ll come to BC on their next official Canada tour (if there is one)?

Absolutely

On Monday I’ll have the rest of the Q & A including some info. about the 2009 Cascadia Nanotech Symposium and the differences and similarities between nanotech funding in Canada and India.

Continue reading →

India’s investment in nanotechnology and Cientifica’s new report

1 Reply

Apparently, India’s annual expenditure on nanotechnology development is about $7M. (See this news report for more details.) Compared to government expenditure in the US ($1.5B) and in Europe (UK over $300M and France over $300M) it’s a small amount. (Note: The numbers change all the time so think of these ones as a rough guide.) According to the report, more money is being allocated, in the near future, to nanotechnology efforts in India. (The upcoming India-Canada nano meeting in Edmonton has sparked my interest in Indian nanotechnology.)

Cientifica’s new report called The Nantotechnology Opportunity Report (NOR) 2008 (executive summary available for free here) looks funding and various nanotechnology sectors globally. The full report is over 1000 pages. Interestingly, the authors single out India in their executive summery by offering an analysis of what happens to their government funding. Hint: it’s not good news. They admit that the problem exists in Europe too but here’s where they damn all government funding everywhere,

So, when we are looking at government funding, the fact that around a third of projects are managed by total incompetents with project officers in various funding bodies turning a blind eye to avoid having to justify their decisions has to be taken into consideration. Couple that with the fact that much curiosity driven research yields no results and our figure of 90% of academic research cash going down the plughole looks about right.

In the paragraph which directly follows (and the really good part),

Of course from our point of view we want to see an economic effect, but that is not to say the 90% of non-commercial research is wasted, it just adds to the ever swelling body of scientific knowledge which speeds up our future understanding.

Let’s start with the littlest thing,  the ‘sweliing’. Generally speaking and leaving aside any references to sex, this is not something you want to experience. Now, let’s add in the fact that they’ve were talking about money in the previous paragraph and that a “swollen” or “swelling” budget is bad. Intentionally or not, it cancels out what appears to be a faint attempt at fairness but that’s not my biggest problem with this.

Here’s my real problem. They say, 90% of government funded research is wasted (first para) but 90% of the non-commercial research is not wasted (2nd para).  Overall, the thinking here seems a little muzzy. and based on what I’ve seen in the executive summary I have doubts about the rest of their material.

India-Canada Confab in Edmonton

Leave a reply

Just got a notice from Nanotech BC that there’s going to be a Canada-India Nanotechnology Bionanotechnology workshop Aug. 10-11, 2008 in Edmonton at the National Institute of Nanotechnology. 10 scientists from India will be there and Nanotech BC is leading a delegation from BC attendees. If you want to collaborate with scientists in India, you can join the BC delegation by contacting:

  • Darren Frew, Executive Director, BC Nanotech Alliance at 604.602.5260 or darren.frew@nanotech.bc.ca

I can’t find this info. on the Nanotech BC website (which is here if you’re curious) or on the National Institute of Nanotechnoloy website here in their newsroom.

This comes in the wake of a new Canada-India Science and Technology agreement which launched 10 initiatives totalling $17M and was announced in June 2008.  Details here.