BYTE.com > Editorial and Opinion > 2004
No Big Deal
By Shannon Cochran
August 16, 2004
(No Big Deal
: Page 1 of 1 )
Lux Research, which has been issuing annual reports on nanotechnology since 2001, has just released its predictions for 2004: Government and industry will spend more than $8.6 billion worldwide on nanotech research this year. In the U.S. alone, more than $3.16 billion has already been spent by the government to fund nanotechnology R&D, and $982 million in additional funding is proposed for next year—at which point the government's investment in the National Nanotechnology Initiative will outstrip its investment in the Human Genome Project. 1500 companies worldwide—including most of the companies that comprise the Dow Jones Industrial Average—have declared plans to research nanotechnology. And as far as the media goes, the word "nanotechnology" appeared in the non-scientific press 190 times in 1995, 7,316 times in 2003, and will most likely surpass a count of 12,000 in 2004.
At the risk of merely jumping on a bandwagon—we're one in 12,000, baby!—there's a real story here. And with all due respect to Bill Joy, Prince Charles, and the "gray goo" brigade, it's not the story of how mad scientists are bringing us all to the brink of destruction with their reckless research. No, the startling thing is that nanotechnology is already all around us: and it's kind of boring.
When you think of nanotechnology, do you imagine clouds of tiny robots building whole cities out of thin air, a la science fiction books such as Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age? Try thinking of toilets instead. The German company Nanogate Technologies has built a business around providing a coating for ceramics that exploits the unique properties of nanoscale materials in order to protect sinks and toilets from grease deposits.
And, while you're thinking of bathrooms, perhaps you'd like to powder your nose? "Estee Lauder, for example, is one of the leading consumers of nanoparticles," says Anantha Sethuraman, a VP at the nanotech firm BYTE.com > Editorial and Opinion > 2004
|