[Let's get this right. If nanotechnology will be a _$1 trillion_ industry soon (and Bond thinks it might be far more), aren't there going to be some VCs who want a slice of this? If his statements of fact are correct, it seems like there are compelling reasons for the government *not* to be involved: Businesses aren't stupid, and they'll make the necessary investments to get a leg up on their competitors. Investors will do the same, in hopes of a wildly profitable return. More to the point, federal funding relies on the faulty assumption that Congress can make better choices about where to spend money than businesses can. Large areas of society are taxed at a relatively small rate to give relatively large handouts to favored groups, such as the nanotech folks, who are politically connected (recall they hired Newt Gingrich). That may be good politics, but it doesn't make for good science or good economics. --Declan] --- http://www.ta.doc.gov/Speeches/PJB_030404.htm Technology Administration KEYNOTE ADDRESS By Phillip J. Bond Undersecretary of Commerce for Technology United States Department of Commerce Delivered April 4, 2003 at the National Nanotechnology Initiative 2003 in Washington, DC Good morning. I am honored to be here with all of you -the intrepid men and women who are pushing back the frontiers of science and technology at the nano-level and working to deliver nano-enabled products and services to the market. I want to begin by thanking those responsible for putting this event together. This conference creates a venue where we can come together share ideas, learn from each others' successes and failures, identify current and future challenges, and build common visions that we can all work toward. In particular, I want to join the chorus of those expressing appreciation to conference chair Mike Roco of the National Science Foundation for his tireless efforts in bringing not only this conference, but the National Nanotech Initiative itself to fruition. It is my honor today to represent the U.S. Department of Commerce and its Technology Administration, where the NNI is an important priority. In fact, it is so important that Commerce has two unique roles to play in this historic initiative. First, as you know after hearing Dr. Shull's update yesterday, the Department plays a role through NIST in the development of the science and technology especially in the development of the tools and standards that enable researchers to work and accurately measure at the nanoscale. We are exceedingly proud of their extraordinary work being carried out by NIST researchers, including our Nobel Prize winners. This morning, I want to take the opportunity to talk about the Commerce Department's second role in the NNI: ensuring that the United States maximizes the extraordinary potential of this technology to the Nation's economy. The Commerce Department has an overarching theme for all of our activities that I would like to use as the framework for my remarks this morning: American Jobs, American Values. Please note the symbolism present in our thematic logo. "American Jobs" rests upon "American Values." Yes, we want to create high wage jobs-in fact, we must create high wage jobs to sustain our nation's standard of living-but we must build these jobs according to the values we hold dear-values such as respecting and protecting the health, safety, and fundamental dignity of human beings; respecting and protecting and respecting the economic principles that foster competition and innovation, such as intellectual property rights, and trade policies that ensure a level-playing field. As everyone hears knows, to say that nanotechnology holds promise for future economic growth and job creation is a gross understatement. We intend to capitalize on this potential. But with this promise comes the need to make sure its development and application are consistent with American values. My remarks this morning will address these opportunities as well as some of the public policy concerns. First, the opportunities...and there are many. As Richard Russell, Mike Roco and others no doubt have explained, the federal government will invest more than $700 million this year in the NNI, and President Bush has proposed a record $847 million for nanotechnology in FY 2004. Like any investor, we hope to reap substantial returns. We believe that investing in nanotechnology will enable us to maintain American leadership in technology and create those high value-added jobs I referred to earlier. And with those jobs and growth will come the revenues to do all those things we desire to do as Americans: * strengthen our national defense, * enhance homeland security, * finance improvements in our education system, * improve out health care system, * make us self-reliant in energy, * improve our food stocks, * pay down our debts, * protect our environment. and * and last and far from least bolster the commercial competitiveness of the United States. These are big dreams for small science. But, as you know better than I, these are realistic dreams. The broad range of developments we call nanotechnology have moved out of the genre of science fiction, into our academic and industrial laboratories, and increasingly, into the marketplace. More than ever before, those nations which are among the first to harness the potential of new technology will be the one's that reap their rewards. I'm here this morning in large part to assure you that the leaders of the Department of Commerce-Secretary Don Evans and Deputy Secretary Sam Bodman-understand this. They understand nanotechnology-especially its convergence with information technology, biotechnology and cognitive research at the nanoscale-represents the next revolution. A revolution that will impact nearly every industry and unleash heretofore unknown human potential. This is not hyperbole. When we talk about revolutionizing industry, we mean of course that companies embracing nano-based manufacturing -whether creating new products or making existing ones-will require different equipment and processes, different safety protocols and environmental control approaches, different suppliers, and workers with different knowledge and skills. New industries will arise, existing ones may be transformed, and yes some will disappear altogether as their products are supplanted by those of new nano-enabled industries, much the same as horse-and-buggy makers were largely replaced by automobile manufacturers. Of course as it already evident from the first commercial nano products-most of the first applications of nanotechnology will be more incremental than revolutionary. You know what I mean. * The most well known commercial application of nanotechnology is probably the use of nanowhiskers by Nano-Tex to produce the stain resistant fabric used in Lee Performance Khakis and other clothing products. * Also well known is Advanced Powder Technologies' ZinClear, a transparent sunscreen with UV protection superior to zinc oxide. * Nanocomposites in the running boards in SUVs * NanoBio, with products like NanoDefend which can be used to de-contaminate clothes and surfaces, and NanoGreen, which can be used on skin. Pretty timely watching the news from Iraq. * Finally, two nano products are making an impact on the sport of tennis. Nanotechnology is being applied to tennis balls to double their useful life, and to tennis rackets to reduce torsion. At first blush, these may not strike John Q. Public as revolutionary, but John Q. Public would be missing the deeper point. First, French manufacturer Babolat is using carbon nanotubes to rigidify its rackets, improving torsion resistance by 50 percent. To date, the company has introduced four rackets incorporating this technology. Of particular interest is how quickly Babolat has penetrated a mature market. While the company only began selling its line of rackets in the United States in 2000, they have already captured 5 to 10 percent of the U.S. market. Second, is the case of Inmat's Air D-Fense, the tennis balls with the nano-clay composite to slow the escape of air. This is what gives Wilson's Double Core tennis balls twice the life of standard tennis balls. Inmat believes its material can be used to coat the inside of automotive tires, a billion dollar market. Compared to current tire sealants, Inmat's nano-clay is much thinner and lighter. So in addition to the better sealant properties, it could potentially reduce material costs and reduce tire weight-which in turn would improve fuel economy. An added benefit claimed by Inmat would be easier and more environmentally-friendly recycling of tires. Today it is NanoDefend, tomorrow it's everything else in national security. "Nanotechnology is going to revolutionize everything we do" in the military, Gen. Les Lyles, Commander of Air Force Materiel Command, told the Armed Services Emerging Threat and Capabilities Subcommittee this past Monday. Rapid growth in market share...environment...energy efficiency...national security...government operations...sounds like the beginnings of a revolution. That is why the National Science Foundation, in consultation with a wide array of experts, has projected that the global market for nano products could reach $1 trillion by 2015. By comparison, total U.S. GDP is approximately $10.4 trillion. So we're talking about a market for nanotech products equal to about 10 percent of the entire U.S. economy today. And I for one would bet this is an underestimation. The accelerating rate of the accumulation of knowledge fueled by IT and the collaborative engine of the Internet lead me to conclude that models of the past cannot predict the rate of future advances. But set aside my irrational exuberance. Let's assume a $1 trillion dollar market within a dozen years, what would this mean in terms of jobs? If we look to IT-producing industries for guidance-and I think this is appropriate since IT-producing industries provide an average wage more than twice that of all private sector workers-and if the $1 trillion estimate holds true, we could estimate the number of jobs created by nanotech products to be approximately 7 million. To get there it would take a revolution that touches every industry and that stretches toward the most fantastic possibilities that are so amazing and alluring. * Nanocomputers smaller than a bacterium. * Data storage devices with memory densities sufficient to store the entire collection of the Library of Congress on a device the size of a sugar cube. * Wearable digital systems that serve as personal brokers- interacting with our surroundings, anticipating our information needs, seeking it out, and delivering it as needed. * Materials up to 100 times stronger than steel, at a fraction of the weight. * "Clean" manufacturing processes that build from the atom up, reducing or eliminating or re-cycling material waste, energy waste and other of today's by-products. * Advanced educational technologies that adapt to our learning styles, employ personal avatars, use immersive environments that tap all of our senses, and deliver knowledge on a just-in-time basis. * Medical technologies that provide early detection and characterization of diseases or illnesses and enable targeted delivery of pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, gene therapy, and sensors; and * Bioengineered tissues to replace damaged or diseased tissues. This audience knows these are no longer like the pie-in-the-sky fantasies of some wild-eyed science fiction writer. And maybe once they were. But, in fact there are scientists and engineers here in this room and elsewhere in the United States and around the world working to make each of these visions a reality. And some may be closer to realization than you might imagine. You are involved in the ultimate disruptive technology. Disruptive on a scale larger, I submit than mass production and digital technology...and that's saying something. Now we are committed to American leadership. As we know from history, disruptive technologies can rapidly shift the global balance of economic and military power-a fact recognized and appreciated by nations around the world...and they are investing accordingly. For example: * The government of Japan regards nano as a key to the "restoration of the Japanese economy" and anticipates nano spending to reach about $1 billion in 2003. * The People's Republic of China expects central government spending on nano to be approximately $240 million over the next five years, and that local governments in China will spend an addition $240 to $360 million. * Annual nanotech investments in Korea are expected to be about $145 million, in Taiwan about $112 million; and in Singapore about $37 million. * In Israel, there is a growing appreciation of the importance of nanotechnology to the country's future. Ben-Gurion University, Tel Aviv University, the Hebrew University and the Technion have announced major investments in the areas of nanoscience and nanotechnology totaling over $100 million. The Israeli NanoBusiness Alliance is developing a proposal for an Israel National Nanotechnology Initiative modeled on the U.S initiative. * And in Europe, the EU Research Commissioner estimates nanotech funding under the Sixth Framework to be about $750 million per year; other estimates range as high as $ 915 million. Counting both national and EU-level investments in nano research, some estimate that total European investments in 2003 could be twice that of the United States, or perhaps even more! The European NanoBusiness Association even asserts that leadership in nanotechnology belongs to the EU in its report "It's Ours to Lose." While I am quite confident of the United States' leadership position in nanotechnology, companies will establish R&D and manufacturing operations wherever the leading edge research is being conducted. The good news is the United States is uniquely positioned to reap the potential of nanotechnology. Not only has President Bush has proposed record levels of Federal support for nanotechnology through the NNI, but state governments are spending additional millions to create and support nanotechnology centers at universities around the country. Our institutions of higher education are unparalleled in their ability to educate students and to conduct cutting edge research. Nano business and professional associations are forming faster than self-replicating nanobots. And we have an entrepreneurial culture and business climate that is the envy of the world. We are just now beginning to see the fruits of the investments made in nanoscience and nanotools over the past few years. The potential is beginning to emerge: * We are seeing today the seriousness with which major corporations are exploring the potential of nanotechnology to improve their products and processes. I tend to see this first and foremost among the IT companies-such as IBM, HP, Intel-where there is strong potential for breakthroughs and commercial products in the mid-term. * We are seeing increased interest among a once-burned, twice-shy venture capital community looking for the next big thing- -or little thing. Much of the venture money is sitting on the sidelines right now-wary of being sold a bill of goods after the dot-com bubble burst-but it is ready to move rapidly into nano applications as the technical risks fall. * We are watching entrepreneurs take the science and technology out of academic environments and working to build commercial products and companies around them. * We are seeing the blossoming of a network of organizations-professional, business, academic-designed to share information, facilitate relationships, and advance the application of nanotechnology. * We are seeing America's leading universities embrace nanotechnology as a principal field of research, and gearing up to educate America's future nano-engineers, nano-scientists, and nano-technicians for the jobs of the future. * And recognizing the potential of nanotechnology to spur economic growth and create jobs, we are seeing state governments, cities, and regions around the country seeking to become a nanotechnology hub of the future-a Silicon Valley of the 21st century-by investing in their universities' research activities, business incubators, and other infrastructure. All of these developments from tennis balls to new nano-clusters...all add up to a promising future of American jobs. And, as I said before, those jobs always ultimately must rest on American Values. And one key public value today is that we don't rapidly commercialize something that is widely perceived as dangerous. The hard truth is, despite all these encouraging activities surrounding the development and commercialization of nanotechnology, many Americans' understanding of nanotechnology are being shaped by Michael Crichton's new book, Prey. In a theater soon near you. This creates a challenge for policy makers and nanotech industry leaders....If we are to successfully commercialize nanotechnology in the United States, we must proactively address legitimate societal and ethical concerns, and ensure that nanotechnology development and applications are undertaken in accordance with American values. All disruptive technologies face some level of social resistance. During the Industrial Revolution, workers in Holland fearful for their jobs threw their wooden shoes-sabots-into the machinery, delivering the term "sabotage" to our vocabulary. At the end of the 19th century, Thomas Edison attempted to demonstrate the dangers of alternating current by electrocuting animals. While his interest was economic-he had a strong financial interest in direct current-he attempted to manipulate the public's fear of the unknown that accompanies a new technology. In the past, some of these fears have been well-founded and rational, it seems to me that most of them have not been well-founded. As we have seen in the early days of biotechnology, the more revolutionary a technology is, the more likely it is to face public resistance in its development and application. Already there are groups advocating a preemptive ban on nanotechnology research until any potential downside can be assessed. I submit that we need not sacrifice jobs on the alter of values, nor values on the alter of jobs. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We know full well that the public at-large, and the body politic in particular, are highly susceptible to the virus of fear. So, we must act today to inoculate the public and the body politic against the virus of irrational fear, by studying and addressing legitimate concerns in this arena in advance. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Neither an ounce nor a pound is very nano, but you get my point...We cannot afford to wait until irrational fears take hold. When Prey hits your neighborhood theater, it would be best if it was seen by a public that understands that it is, in fact, science fiction and that serious people are thinking about how to address any reasonable concerns. Make no mistake, there is strong bipartisan support for nanotechnology now and we want to protect that. We can and we have to. Throughout history, we have successfully managed the downsides of technology-though often through great effort. Addressing these potential barriers has enabled America to remain at the vanguard of technological innovation-leading the Industrial Revolution, revolutionizing agriculture, building horseless carriages, inventing and commercializing powered-flight, generating and transmitting electric power, splitting the atom, creating global communications networks, rocketing to the moon and back, and unleashing the power of semiconductors to bring about the Information Age. As a result, we have reaped the extraordinary economic and social benefits that technology yields. Nanotechnology should be no exception to this record of technological achievement, though this will require an informed and dedicated approach by all of us here today-scientists and engineers, business leaders and policy makers. Each of us must reach beyond our own immediate sphere of knowledge and interest-our comfort zones-to identify and overcome challenges so that we can bring to the world all that nanotechnology has to offer. Now unlike many of you, I am not a scientist or engineer, so I don't bring great technical knowledge to my work in this arena. But I do bring three important tools: passion, position and politics. Passion-because I believe fervently in the economic potential and social advances that nanotechnology can bring to the citizens of the United States and the rest of the world; Position-as Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology I can guarantee that the opportunities and challenges of nanotechnology are brought to the attention of Commerce Secretary Don Evans and other senior Administration officials in the White House and other Federal agencies; and Politics-the necessary evil. Nanotechnology's future runs through the nation's capital. The federal government plays an important role in funding fundamental, high-risk research. To borrow a line from BASF ads: We don't make nanotechnology products, but we fund the science and technology that makes nanotechnology products and processes possible. In addition, many of the societal and ethical concerns about nanotechnology research and products will be debated and addressed here in Washington. Whether that's for the good or detriment of society depends on each of us. I promise to work with you to bring my knowledge of this town's culture, institutions, and processes to bear in advancing our common nanotechnology agenda. But I also need your help....for years many in the technology sector shunned Washington....that is not the right approach...you need to be involved, helping educate elected officials, opinion leaders...about the true benefits and promise of nanotechnology. This is more important than ever given that nanotechnology bills have been introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives that could shape the federal government's involvement in this field for years to come. In closing, I want to congratulate you on your successes to-date, to encourage your continued efforts in advancing nanoscale science and technology, and to urge you to engage in the societal, ethical and political discussions that will shape the future of nanotechnology. Thank you. Date created: April 8, 2003 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 13:07:46 PDT