intentBlog:

Rospigliosi - Brave New World of NanoTechnology

Dear ATCA Colleagues; dear IntentBloggers

[Please note that the views presented by individual contributors are not necessarily representative of the views of ATCA, which is neutral. ATCA conducts collective Socratic dialogue on global opportunities and threats.]

We are grateful to Alessandro Rospigliosi, based in London, England, and Turin, Italy, for his response "The Brave New World of NanoTechnology and its Impact on Academia, Business and Governments" to Dr Brent Segal based in Boston, USA, for his ATCA submission, "Nanotechnology 2006: A Femto-Glimpse into Our Future or Nano-Hegemony Coming of Age?"

Alessandro Rospigliosi joined Ludgate Investments, a private equity group specializing in green technology companies, in June 2006 as Scientific Research Analyst. He graduated in Chemical (with Biochemical Engineering) from University College London (UCL) in 2001 and then obtained a Gates Scholarship for a PhD in molecular electronics at Cambridge University, England. This involved working on an interdisciplinary project that covered areas of synthetic chemistry, physics and material sciences. He has presented his scientific work at several conferences (in the US and Europe) and is in the process of publishing the results of his thesis.

He has participated at several Model United Nations conferences as delegate and head of delegation. During his time at Cambridge he co-founded and was the treasurer of the Cambridge University Technology and Enterprise Club (CUTEC) which in 2004 organized the first student-run, CMI (Cambridge MIT Institute)-sponsored Private Equity and Venture Capital conference in the London Guildhall. This conference has become an annual event which provides a platform for researchers, entrepreneurs and academics to meet investors and government officials. Partly due to this conference and personal contacts Alessandro entered the world of private equity. His other interests include skiing and sailing. He writes:

Dear DK and Colleagues

Re: The Brave New World of NanoTechnology and its Impact on Academia, Business and Governments

My attention was drawn to Dr Segal's ATCA comments on the current state of research in NanoTechnology (NT). Rather than a purely scientific comment on the current state of this field of research, my response aims at presenting an objective view from "within" the research world and gives some thought to a key point Dr Segal mentioned in his original ATCA submission: the necessity for a new, evolved class of interdisciplinary managerial-scientists and for support from legislative and executive powers if Western countries (and the US/EU in particular) want to remain at the forefront of scientific innovation in the future.

I certainly agree with Dr Segal that it is inevitable that NT will influence our world in numerous ways: from the development of novel nanoscopic computer chips to biosensors, from the advances made in material sciences to the creation of labs-on-a-chip. The possibility of designing molecules to give them a desired property or properties opens-up a real "Brave New World" for scientists and mankind.

Miniaturisation has been a Leitmotiv of human progress and in particular, with respect to integrated circuit elements, has followed the so-called Moore's law, which (back in the 60s) anticipated that the number of transistors on a chip would double approximately every 18 months. An alternative to the traditional technique of "top-down" miniaturisation, is to start with the study of single molecules in order to investigate how these can be used to create more complex circuit elements ("bottom-up"). This new approach to research has been made possible due to the widespread commercialization of instruments that allow the study of nanometre-sized samples: the Atomic Force and the Scanning Tunnelling Microscopes (AFM and STM), Scanning Electron Microscopes (SEM) and other scanning probe devices. Such instruments have made it possible for humankind to deepen our understanding in so many areas, such as biochemistry, solid state physics, supramolecular chemistry and protein science.

Having spent almost three years working on the synthetic modification of short DNA strands to prove that their electron conduction properties could be altered enough to turn this biopolymer into a "molecular wire" I have witnessed how difficult it is, not only to perform the modifications, but also to purify such DNA analogues. Human DNA intrinsically is not a good electron conductor - otherwise solar radiation would alter our genetic code at an alarming rate. During my PhD, I managed to show that a slight, but noticeable difference could be made by altering several bases on a double stranded oligonucleotide. However, the technical difficulty of making reliable and reproducible measurement of DNA filaments at the sub-100 nm (nanometre) level is still quite serious. Therefore, we should be careful not to over-estimate the immediate impact of NT. The main commercialised products that have come out in recent years have been linked to nanoparticles in paints and colouring agents.

Most of the excitement over NT relates to the discoveries and observations that many of the rules for materials in the bulk scale no longer apply when dealing with nanoparticles. At these dimensions, the effects we learn about in quantum mechanics cannot be neglected (as often done when modelling bulky large scale reactions and properties). For example, under certain conditions non-conducting materials can become conductive or ordinarily non-magnetic materials can become magnetic.

Also, in many NT projects it is no longer possible to perform experiments at room temperature, in air, at atmospheric pressure and under ambient conditions, because most materials are air-, light- and temperature-sensitive and need to be kept under an inert atmosphere or in high vacuum. To make progress, very specialised and expensive equipment and knowledge of the underlying physics and chemistry are needed.

That is why many governments, led by the USA, UK and Germany, but also Japan, India, China and Malaysia have announced they would increase funding (in some cases up to astronomical sums) for certain specific NT projects. However, funding alone is not going to create miracles. There is a need for an independent body that can ease the dialogue between academia, governments and research institutes in order to ensure that research money is used efficiently and that "good" conditions for research are created. A relatively new breed of human resources is needed to fulfil this task: a class of managerial-scientists capable of coordinating the efforts (and needs) of specialists in different subject areas across international borders. In some cases, for example, it is necessary to link experts from fields as diverse as quantum physics, theoretical and organic chemistry with specialists in biochemistry and proteomics. Although there are many institutions that have been created for this purpose it is not an easy task, because scientists that have worked life-long in one area typically find it difficult to interact and work efficiently with researchers in other disciplines. It is obvious that managing such a wide variety of experts requires a coordinator that has enough understanding of all subject areas to guide a fruitful project. At the same time these new "managers" must appreciate the commercial reality around a particular project if they are to exploit these for financial return.

There are a number of issues I would like to enumerate in relation to the challenges science and research institutions are faced with nowadays which impact future business and government policy:

· Although we can see that occasionally governments announce spending in very specific commercially-oriented research projects, the overall trend (particularly obvious in France and Italy over the past few years) is that less public money is given to academic institutions as a whole. This could have several detrimental consequences for those departments that do not work on potentially commercialisable and revenue-oriented research (ie humanities). Therefore universities and other publicly-funded institutions need to find their own source of revenue. The generation of cash flow could be created by successfully commercialised university spin-offs. If well-managed, a few such companies can produce enough revenue (through royalties and capital gain) for such institutions to compensate for declining government funding and eventually replace it altogether. This is a possible means of financing the increasing costs of research and of "unprofitable" departments (such as the arts, music, literature, languages, history and philosophy, etc...).

· Planning and timing is of the essence. Proper planning, timing and funding are fundamental points when running a company, a research institute or, even more so in recent years, a university. Huge amounts of money, effort and time are often wasted due to poor planning strategies because, particularly with novel, interdisciplinary research the accountability of research supervisors is not very strict - rightly to give them the necessary freedom to perform uncertain yet possibly ground-braking research. But this freedom needs to be guided by knowledgeable and integral managers if misuse is to be avoided.

· The requirements put on research supervisors have become unsustainable: Professors are facing ever increasing administrative tasks (such as knowing and complying with extremely detailed health and safety regulations, writing research proposals, general laboratory management requirements and organising conferences) which take-up so much of their time, that very little is left for their original duties (teaching and supervising). It therefore seems strange that even at the best research institutions tasks are not divided in order to alleviate the burden of non-research related duties.

· Indirectly linked to the above is a commonly accepted rule that researchers should be the ones presenting their work at conferences and, if their intellectual property (IP) can be commercialised, they should exploit it to found a start-up company. However, they may not necessarily be the most suited individuals to perform these tasks, because poor presentational, managerial, social and occasionally language skills often downgrade excellent pieces of work.

· Restructuring these institutions and the underlying mentality is not an easy task, but if countries that have benefited from leading research institutes do not want to lose their advantageous position they will have to re-formulate their strategy.

· Dependence: It is a matter of fact that today in the UK a vast proportion of research students and post-doctorate workers in many science departments (just as the great number of foreign business professionals working in the City of London) are non UK-citizens. This has created a serious dependence on foreign well-educated and qualified workers.

· Whilst during the past decades the US and the UK attracted bright and capable workforces on the one hand due to very good remuneration and on the other hand because they were being offered career opportunities they did not have in their home countries, as a former head of the EC directorate for science and research -- Prof Andreta -- recently stated at an Innovation and business conference: "Top scientists from developing nations are starting to move back to their countries of origin, even from prestigious institutions". He quoted a statistic that over the past two years approximately 8,000 researchers from Asian countries left (even Institutes like Caltech and MIT) to go back to their counties of origin, because for similar wages and working conditions they prefer to work in their home countries.

Given the role played by technological innovation in maintaining USA, Britain and France's role as world-class players and given that Britain and France have played a role in maintaining the "balance of power" since the 17th century, it is surprising that some of these points seems to have escaped the attention of the ruling elite in those countries as well.

I hope this will stimulate a controversial, yet positive, discussion on ATCA and wish you all the best.

Yours

Alessandro Rospigliosi

[ENDS]

We look forward to your further thoughts, observations and views. Thank you.

Best wishes

For and on behalf of DK Matai, Chairman, Asymmetric Threats Contingency Alliance (ATCA)

Please read the original article, ATCA: Nanotechnology 2006: A Femto-Glimpse into Our Future or Nano-Hegemony Coming of Age? by Dr Bent Segal.