Archive for the ‘Nanotechnology’ Category

Suncreen nanoparticles ‘might be toxic’

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

Nanoparticles used to make some sunscreens transparent, making them popular with consumers, might also be toxic according to Australian research which adds to uncertainty about the safety of some sunscreens.

A study by Amanda Barnard, from the CSIRO’s materials science and engineering division, found the nanoparticles that provided the best transparency and sun protection also represented the highest for production of free radicals.

Using computer modelling, Dr Barnard analysed the properties of the man-made titanium dioxide nanoparticles found in some sunscreens, testing them in three areas: sun protection, transparency and potential for free radical production.

Studying various sizes of particles, she found it was a case of the smaller the nanoparticle the better the sun protection and transparency.

“Unfortunately the small ones also have a high surface-to-volume ratio and the surfaces are where the free radicals are produced through a photochemical, or light induced reaction,” she said.

Dr Barnard won the 2009 Malcolm McIntosh Prize for physical scientist of the year for her work on nanoparticles — tiny particles used in many products including sunscreens, cosmetics and paints.

Her latest research, published next month in the journal Nature Nanotechnology, found only particles less than 13 nanometres in size minimised free radical production while retaining other desirable properties.

The titanium dioxide nanoparticles in sunscreens range in size from three to 200 nanometres.

The results add to questions about the safety of such sunscreens. The main concern is whether the nanoparticles interact with sunlight to produce free radicals that damage tissues or DNA. “There’s a trade-off to be made here,” she said. “Currently it’s a situation of ‘is it better to protect yourself from UV rays or hold off and see what happens’. But in the future it may be ‘is it better to protect yourself from UV rays or protect ourself from something else’,” she said.

More… :arrow:

Posted in CrashBlogging, Nanotechnology, The Perfect Storm | No Comments »

Pentagon Looks to Breed Immortal ‘Synthetic Organisms,’ Molecular Kill-Switch Included

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

- Our hubris will be the ruin of us yet.   And we wonder why the SETI folks haven’t picked up any signals from other civilizations out among the stars.

- I think it is because in almost all cases, when animals evolve to the point where we are, with generalized intelligence, they  shoot themselves in the head by messing with stuff they shouldn’t have.  Stuff that then gets away from them and kills them.

- A year or two ago, I Blogged about Craig Venter’s attempts to create a bacteria from scratch.

- Then, more recently, I’ve posted several times about the risks of nanotechnology.  See these: :arrow: :arrow: :arrow: :arrow: :arrow: and :arrow:

- Now today, I see that the U.S.’s Pentagon is going to breed immortal lifeforms but that no one should worry – because they’re going to put a ‘kill switch’ in also.

- Has no one read Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle and his prescient story about Ice-9?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = *** = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Pentagon’s mad science arm may have come up with its most radical project yet. Darpa is looking to re-write the laws of evolution to the military’s advantage, creating “synthetic organisms” that can live forever — or can be killed with the flick of a molecular switch.

As part of its budget for the next year, Darpa is investing $6 million into a project called BioDesign, with the goal of eliminating “the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement.” The plan would assemble the latest bio-tech knowledge to come up with living, breathing creatures that are genetically engineered to “produce the intended biological effect.” Darpa wants the organisms to be fortified with molecules that bolster cell resistance to death, so that the lab-monsters can “ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely.”

Of course, Darpa’s got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work — so they’ll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create “tamper proof” cells. Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, “similar to a serial number on a handgun.” And if that doesn’t work, don’t worry. In case Darpa’s plan somehow goes horribly awry, they’re also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch:

Develop strategies to create a synthetic organism “self-destruct” option to be implemented upon nefarious removal of organism.

- More… :arrow:

- Hat tip to Cryptogon for this story.

Posted in CrashBlogging, Mental Irrationality, Nanotechnology, The Perfect Storm | No Comments »

Carbon Nanotubes: Innovative Technology Or Risk To Health Or Environment?

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

- I’ve written before about my concerns on the nanotechnology they are gleefully rolling out into our environment.   :arrow: , :arrow: , :arrow:

== == == == == == == == == == ==

Carbon nanotubes have made a meteoric career in the past 15 years, even if their applications are still limited. Recent research results show that – apart from their favorable mechanical and electrical properties – they also have disadvantageous characteristics.

One aspect which has rarely been considered so far is now addressed by researchers of the research center Forschungszentrum Dresden-Rossendorf. “If the application of products and commodities containing carbon nanotubes will increase in the future, then there will be a higher probability for the tubes to get into the environment during their production, usage or disposal, to be distributed there, and to bind pollutants such as heavy metals on their way trough the environment”, says Harald Zaenker, scientist at the FZD.

Via water into the environment

An important way for carbon nanotubes of getting into the environment is the way via the water. In their original state, the flimsy carbon fibers with a diameter of less than 50 nanometers (1 nanometer = 1 millionth of a millimeter) are hardly water-soluble. At first glance, they should therefore not be mobile in groundwater, lakes etc., i.e. they should rapidly settle or deposit. However, carbon nanotubes are able to form colloidal solutions if their surface structure is changed. Changes in the surface structure can be brought about deliberately during the production of the tubes or can be induced by natural processes if the tubes are released into the environment.

A colloidal solution, unlike a true solution of water-soluble substances, is a solution in which the apparently dissolved substance is finely dispersed in the solvent forming tiny particles. These particles are still much bigger than the molecules of a dissolved substance in a true solution. As colloids, carbon nanotubes might be transported anywhere in environmental waters. It is known meanwhile that the tubes can even penetrate cell walls and, thus, might theoretically be able to enter also animal or human cells. In addition, changes in the surface structure of carbon nanotubes cause another effect: their capability to bind heavy metals is increased.

More… :arrow:

Posted in CrashBlogging, Mental Irrationality, Nanotechnology, Pollution, Science, The Perfect Storm | No Comments »

Tiny Tech Can Leave a Big Mess

Sunday, April 19th, 2009

nanotechnology- I’ve been concerned about nanotechnology for sometime ( :arrow: , :arrow: , and :arrow: ).   It’s not that I don’t like the idea and don’t think it has a lot of future.  I read The Engines of Creation way back in 1988 and was deeply impressed by the promise of it all.

- My concerns are, rather, the way we’re going about it.   As always, humanity, in its impatience for maximum profit in the minimum time, is developing and dispersing these agents into our environment with no real idea of the possible consequences.   Just like all the industrial chemicals we’ve developed and employed in the past, we’re assuming these materials will not cause any problems – a least until we find out otherwise.

- I also read Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle many years ago and if you haven’t heard the story of ICE-9, you should.

* – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – *

Scientists try to clean up nanotechnology before it becomes a big business–and a big problem

Nanotechnology’s image is sleek, modern and clean. But that’s not its reality.

Turns out that designing and manufacturing materials so small that 100,000 of them can fit comfortably on the width of a hair strand absorbs tremendous amounts of energy and is anything but neat.

“You can make a very green product with a very messy process,” said Mark Greenwood, a Washington lawyer and former director of U.S. EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

That “very messy process” is a problem for nanotech researchers trying, among other things, to design more efficient batteries, higher-performing solar cells, more effective water purifiers and more sensitive pollution detectors.

Consider what it takes to purify a nanomaterial of unwanted chemicals. Traditionally, that has required the repeated use of solvents – a lot of them, said James Hutchison, a professor at the University of Oregon.

“If you’re washing with a solvent, you’re wasting a lot of solvent,” Hutchison said. “This is the biggest contribution to waste we’ve been able to see. If you think about a lifecycle analysis on this, you see what’s the hot spot, and think about other ways to purify that don’t require solvent.”

Hutchison and others are trying to come at the nanotech problem with “green chemistry” techniques that emphasize materials, products and processes that reduce or eliminate hazardous substances and conserve energy and resources. His solution for the solvent waste: a nanofiltration membrane that separates nanomaterials from the rest.

Hutchison’s work is part of a larger University of Oregon effort that researchers call green nanoscience. In 2005, Hutchison launched the Safer Nanomaterials and Nanomanufacturing Initiative, which is funded by the Air Force and aims to develop nanotechnology to ensure high performance without threatening human health or the environment.

Because nanotechnology is still an emerging field, scientists believe there are opportunities to make it environmentally safe. “Now’s the time to think about how to make this stuff clean and green,” said David Rejeski, director of the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.

But the technology is steaming ahead, and the opportunity is unlikely to last long.

More… :arrow:

Tags:
Posted in CrashBlogging, Nanotechnology, Pollution, The Perfect Storm | No Comments »

Government Fails to Assess Potential Dangers of Nanotechnology

Saturday, January 3rd, 2009

- You’d think that we’d learn from past mistakes but we don’t seem to. We’ve put hundreds, even thousands, of novel chemicals never before seen by nature out into the environment – often with minimal or no testing. And the results have not been good. DDT and Thalidomide were two high profile examples but there are many others. it is easy for the urban dwellers among us to ignore what’s going on with the disappearing frogs and bees of the world – but it all means something and it doesn’t bode well.

- Now, we’ve created nanotechnology chemistry and we’re moving straight into using these new chemicals and freely distributing them into the environment – again with little or no testing.

= = = = = = = = = = = =

The little beast

Scientists charge the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other government agencies are failing to assess the potential dangers of puny particles

Pesticide DDT, industrial lubricants PCBs and now plastic BPA (bisphenol A) are all widely used industrial chemical compounds that have been discovered to cause ills such as cancer and/or environmental damage. Worried that the latest chemical craze—nanoparticles (molecules and even atoms engineered at the scale of one billionth of a meter or smaller)—may follow suit, a panel of scientists is urging federal government agencies to assess the potential risks posed by such engineered chemicals and particles before they are used in any more substances.

The National Research Council, one of The National Academies in Washington, D.C., (scientific advisory bodies for the federal government) charges that the 18 government bodies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tasked with assessing chemical safety, have failed to prove that the diminutive particles are not dangerous. The group also charged in a new report that the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), the government body created to oversee such efforts, lacks a coherent plan for ensuring that current and future uses of nanotechnology do not pose a risk to human health or the environment.

Nanotechnology risk research “needs to be proactive—identifying possible risks and ways to mitigate risks before the technology has a widespread commercial presence,” the report says. Instead the NNI “does not have the essential elements of a research strategy—it does not present a vision, contain a clear set of goals [or] have a plan of action.”

More than 800 widely available products, including cosmetics, sporting goods and video displays, contain some form of nanotechnology, whether engineered particles or compounds, according to the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (a Washington, D.C. think tank created by Congress in 1968). That number is set to grow as nanotech comes to items such as food additives and medical treatments.

More… :arrow:

Tags:
Posted in Capitalism & Corporations, CrashBlogging, Nanotechnology, Pollution, The Perfect Storm | 1 Comment »

Nanotechnology Requires Immediate Changes In EPA, Experts Urge

Tuesday, May 29th, 2007

- I’ve written about this problem before. Nanotechnology holds huge promise but, I believe, it also holds huge risks.

- Anyone who’s read Engines of Creation by Drexler understands how incredibly powerful these new compounds will become as we master their creation. But anyone who’s read Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle and the story of Ice-9 will also realize how very badly things could go if we’re not careful.

- Scientists are and have been raising the alarm on this issue but thus far, not much has been done. In systems which are primarily profit driven, one can predict that not much will be done until a major problem manifests. Let’s hope it’s not a self-replicating, self-perpetuating something that we’ll be very unhappy we let out of the box.

– — — — —

Science Daily — As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently stated, nanotechnology has evolved from a futuristic idea to watch to a current issue to address. And for this new technology’s enormous potential to improve everyone’s life to be realized, nanotechnology must be subject to an adequate oversight system—a system designed to identify and minimize any adverse effects of nano materials and products on health or the environment.

Regulatory oversight of nanotechnology is urgently needed and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should act now, reports a new study released today. In EPA and Nanotechnology: Oversight for the 21st Century, former EPA assistant administrator for policy, planning and evaluation, J. Clarence (Terry) Davies, provides a roadmap for a new EPA to better handle the challenges of nanotechnology.

New nanomaterials and nanotechnology products are entering the market each week, and an adequate oversight system is necessary to identify and minimize any adverse effects of nano materials and products on health or the environment. Davies’ report sets out an agenda for creating an effective oversight system as nanotechnology advances–the technology that some have hailed as “the next industrial revolution.”

More… :arrow:

Books mentioned:

Posted in CrashBlogging, Nanotechnology, Science, The Perfect Storm | 1 Comment »

EXPERTS WANT TIGHTER CONTROLS ON NANOTECHOLOGY

Thursday, November 30th, 2006

- It is one of the signature attributes of mankind that as we’ve used our intelligence to bull our way to dominance of the planet and the biosphere, that we’ve repeatedly underestimated the effects of our actions on the world around us.

- Rachel Carson’s book, Silent Spring was, perhaps, our first major wakeup call in this regard. Today, the world’s soil, streams and oceans swarm with chemicals of all sorts that have no analogues in the natural world and are, in many cases, having unexpected and damaging effects on the planet’s biological forms – including us.

- Reviewing Kurt Vonnecgut’s 1963 book Cat’s Cradle in which in introduced us to the hypothetical Ice-Nine is instructive at this point as we embark on releasing larger and larger numbers of nanotechnlogical materials into the natural environment and, once agin, assuming that all will be alright. An amazing assumption that we seem to make over and over again so that caution will not get in the way of profits.

——————————–

WASHINGTON (AFP)—Nanotechnologies pose real threats to health and the environment and need prompt testing and oversight, but government and industry are moving slowly on the issue, scientists and environmentalists said.

Speaking after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency took its first step to regulate a nanomaterial–near atomic-sized particles of silver being used as pesticide in products from shoes to a washing machine–experts told AFP that nanotechnology is already producing materials that can harm the environment and human health.

“There are some very serious concerns about potential health consequences,” said Patrice Simms of the U.S. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

“We know next to nothing about their potential health effects,” said Simms.

Nanotechnology is the creation and use of materials barely larger than atomic in scale, measuring usually between one and 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter, and a human hair is roughly 80,000 nanometers in width.

At that size–small enough to pass through cell membranes in the body–many materials can take on physical and chemical properties not seen in their larger forms, giving them uses never imagined before.

A Washington-based group, The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, has catalogued 356 products already using nanotechnology, including “breathable” bedsheets, lighter, stiffer golf clubs, skin care creams, computer chips and antibacterial socks.

The technology also promises more substantial “miracle” uses, from health applications like cancer treatments, to drinking water filtration systems for poor countries, to longer-life batteries.

But materials at that size may also pose dangers when they are inhaled, ingested, absorbed through the skin, or spread through nature by wind and water, scientists warn.

“Something different happens when you begin to work at a very small scale,” said Andrew Maynard, chief science advisor at the Project on Emerging Technologies.

“We know that a lot of materials like asbestos and particles affect the health because of their shapes and sizes as well as their chemistry.

“It’s reasonable to assume that some of these new materials are going to do the same thing,” noting that there are a number of new nanomaterials in filament form, like asbestos which causes lung disease.

The problem is that both industry and the government have assumed the existing regulatory framework for chemicals and other materials is adequate, Simms pointed out.

More… :arrow:

Posted in CrashBlogging, Mental Irrationality, Nanotechnology, Science, The Perfect Storm | No Comments »