In this month’s interview, we talk to Josh Wolfe, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Lux Capital Management. Mr. Wolfe manages Lux’s investments in Nanosys, Cambrios, Siluria and serves on the Board of Directors of Kurion, Silicon Clocks, Crystal IS and Lux Research. Before forming Lux Capital, he worked in Salomon Smith Barney’s Investment Banking group, in capital markets at Merrill Lynch on its Financial Futures & Options/Government Strategy desk and at Prudential Securities in Municipal Finance.

Prior to venturing into the financial world, Mr. Wolfe published cutting-edge AIDS-immunopathology research in Cell Vision and The Journal of Leukocyte Biology, in leading medical-immunology journals. He serves as co-founder and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Coney Island Prep, the first charter school in his native Coney Island, Brooklyn, and has been actively involved with the East Harlem School at Exodus House for over a decade. The son of a public school teacher, Josh is passionate about science, inner-city education and kids having a deep desire to learn and the right heroes.

Josh is a columnist with Forbes, Editor for the Forbes/Wolfe Emerging Tech Report and host of a show on the Forbes Video Network. He has been an invited guest to the White House and Capitol Hill to advise on nanotechnology and emerging technologies, a lecturer at MIT, Harvard, Yale, Cornell, Columbia and NYU, and a frequent guest on CNBC and CNN. Mr. Wolfe graduated from Cornell University with a B.S. in Economics and Finance.

In this interview, we talk to Josh about Lux Capital’s approach to venture capital investing and discuss some of the firm’s investments in nano and other advanced technology. We hope you enjoy the interview. – Steve Waite

SW: It’s great to be speaking with you today, Josh. Thanks for spending some time with us. You mentioned investing in nuclear. Nuclear technology was derided by environmentalists decades ago, but several prominent and outspoken activists have changed their tune. How big is the opportunity in nuclear today?

JW: There’ve been two things holding back nuclear: fear and waste. On the former it’s a remarkable shift. Environmentalists, once vociferous opponents, have become voracious proponents. To favor carbon reduction is to favor nuclear production. It’s the only rational way to have zero-carbon, not just low carbon, but zero-carbon base-load electricity production. 20% of US electricity is from nuclear, 80% of France, 16% globally and rising.

Remarkably, many people don’t know this, but because of a program called Megatons to Megawatts, about half the uranium our domestic reactors consume comes from Russian nuclear warheads. So amazingly, roughly one in every ten electrons you are consuming right now comes from dismantling of Cold War weapons. Anyway, Lux spent a year scouting the entire fuel cycle, from uranium miners to modular reactors to fuel enrichment, and determined that for a variety of reasons, none of them were venture-backable. The single biggest unsolved problem, particularly in the US was nuclear waste.

SW: Dealing with nuclear waste is obviously a major issue. What kinds of solutions exist today to deal with nuclear waste that weren’t available in the past?

JW: The first thing to know is there are two kinds of nuclear waste: spent fuel, which are the rods inside our 104 domestic reactors and the 440 global reactors. What we call waste, France calls fuel because they reprocess the spent fuel rods; 95% of the fuel is still in them, but proliferation is a concern so since Jimmy Carter’s reign, we have a once-through fuel cycle that stores the rods in casks, basically giant caskets waiting for burial in a some geological repository like Yucca Mountain, in Nevada. But for political reasons that will be trapped in purgatory for years or decades. So there really isn’t a market to go after here.

But the other more important and widely unknown market which has an urgent pain is the defense clean up waste. Most people have never heard of a place called Hanford. It’s in the State of Washington, the size of the State of Delaware and has hundreds of millions of gallons of radioactive waste. Just think about that. That’s bigger than the BP oil spill and twice the cost. And what is most surprising: despite all the rhetoric and punditry on ‘cleantech’ and ‘greentech’ from our political leaders and the media, one out of every four dollars, 25% of the entire DOE (Department of Energy) budget is not spent on solar, batteries, or wind – but on nuclear waste cleanup. This is hands-down the single largest economic opportunity in energy and environment that almost nobody knows or talks about. So we recruited veteran all-stars from the nuclear industry, from government, even Patrick Moore, Greenpeace founder and huge nuclear convert and quietly started and funded a company called Kurion, named after Madame Curie who discovered radiation. They went on to lock-up the most important technical breakthroughs and can grab the worst radioactive elements and permanently capture and isolate waste from the environment. If the team is successful, this will be one of the most important things I do in my life and one of the most financially lucrative things I’ve done for our investors.

SW: While we are on the topic of investing in energy, what is your view of prospects for digital power over the next 3-5 years?

JW: This is another critical area and one where like nuclear, Lux had a variant perception, a differing view. Everyone believes in energy efficiency. But I think they’re crazy. Everyone believes if things were more energy efficient we’d use less energy but they have it exactly and completely backwards. I wish I’d discovered the reason why but credit goes back two centuries to Jevon’s Paradox which shows that while individual devices may get more efficient, without any debate, those devices become cheaper and more available. You can do more for the same cost or less. So demand for them goes up and with near certainty, the aggregate energy use goes up. Even Energy Secretary Steven Chu and I have debated this. He hails fridges as energy efficient devices, to which I say amen. But what he misses is that a fridge today while being 75% more efficient than fridges 30 years ago, also are 20% larger and cost 60% of what they did. And the aggregate number of fridges and the aggregate energy demand is way higher. Individual devices get more efficient, aggregate energy goes up. Think of it in Internet terms: if I gave you an efficient T-1 line you’d be doing video conferencing, streaming music, and sending large files. If I put you on a terribly inefficient 56k baud modem you’d pull your hair out!

The secret paradox is that if you want to reduce energy demand: you make things more INEFFICIENT, NOT more efficient. That’s if you believe we should be reducing energy demand, which I am in the minority opposition. Physics and the laws of thermodynamics tell us that life itself is a fight against entropy, disorder – and the only way to prevent entropy is to add energy to a system. The more energy, the more order and the more utility we have. The highly ordered photons in a laser are hugely valuable to society from eye surgery to photonics, whereas the highly entropic photons of a campfire give off heat and nobody will pay much for that. The trick is ordering the photons in a laser requires an enormous amount of energy and a huge amount of waste is chucked over the side.

We have recently announced an investment in Transphorm Inc. that we’re hugely excited about. Transphorm has developed the world’s most energy efficient power conversion technology – eliminating up to 90% of all electric conversion losses. The ability to convert electricity without loss may be to digital power what Intel was to digital logic.

SW: Are there any nano-enabled energy technologies that look attractive to Lux?

JW: The basis of our nuclear waste remediation company, Kurion was born in sophisticated chemistry and material science at the nanoscale. So too our soon to be announced power conversion digital power company coming out of stealth. All of these are based on ever increasing precision control over and ordering of matter at the nanoscale.

SW: I want to go back to your investment process. The second way Lux Capital invests is based on people. Can you give us a few examples of people-driven investments you have made and some insight into the thinking behind them?

JW: Yes, the first is thesis driven. We try to look where others are not looking, seeking out where capital and attention are scarce because that’s usually where valuations are low and future returns high. It’s intellectually gratifying to do these but very risky as we really part from the herd and we have to make sure we do our work and aren’t being contrarian for unfounded reasons. A second way we make our investments is special-situations, finding capital market dislocations where we can invest often times as the last dollars in but lowest average price per share – being a liquidity provider or helping companies when their other investors may be unable to continue financing them. And our third and favorite style is people-driven as you say. As Lux partner Larry Bock says, we bet on two-legged mammals. Darwin was misquoted. It isn’t survival of the fittest, but survival of the most adaptable. So we find the brilliant galvanizing scientist-entrepreneurs-operators, usually some combination of two of those three are embodied in one person. They are the ones that can adapt and turn on a dime, can passionately recruit, can paint a vision on a blank canvas that makes investors want to write checks and employees want to plunge in and take career risk. A phenomenal individual is just that a phenom – a spinning force that pulls people in. The most important thing we can do as a firm is have the good judgment in finding and picking these people and convincing them that Lux is their partner for the next 5 or 10 years. Our investors trust us to allocate their capital and we have to trust these entrepreneurs to do the same for us.

SW: We’ve seen a lot of activity in nanomedicine over the past decade. How does Lux view the potential of nanotech in medicine and health care overall?

JW: It’s as big as energy. The growing trend from big pharma is continued outsourcing to biotechs, academic institutions and embracing external R&D. And the pace of innovation is remarkable. We’ve spun out companies like Genocea in rapid vaccine discovery from Harvard and Berkeley. From MIT in the case of Cerulean and Visterra, focused respectively on nanotech in cancer and pandemic flu. And from Johns Hopkins in using nanotech to deliver drugs through mucus, with MIT legend Bob Langer and his star protégé Justin Hanes in a new company called Kala – which is Hawaiian for passageway.

SW: Returning to the other piece of Lux’s trilogy investment process, what kinds of special situations have you invested in that you are enthused about?

JW: The most interesting might be Everspin. We were founding investors who approached Freescale Semiconductor, which was previously Motorola Semi. They were struggling with a huge debt load from private equity investors after a buyout. And we made them an offer to spin-out their entire advanced memory division which developed non-volatile memory, instant-on memory and help free up their cash flow. It was a win-win for everyone and the company has been growing at triple-digit percentages.

SW: Nanotech is crucial to the future of semiconductors and electronics. How does Lux Capital go about evaluating technologies and companies in this space?

JW: The key particularly in a cyclical industry like semis is who actually is capturing the value. There’s also a secular component with the rise of Asia, contract manufacturing and fab-less models. The only intelligent thing we felt we could do was to avoid the capital intensive businesses and invest after all the capital was invested at the trough of the cycle. In three of our companies over $100 million was invested by either other investors or a corporate parent and we were able to invest at a valuation that was one-tenth, one-quarter or one-third capital invested – and at a time when product was shipping and tech risk was eliminated. These opportunities are rare but are almost surely to present themselves in energy and healthcare too.

SW: It’s been difficult in the venture capital space given the turmoil in financial markets over the past several years. Do you see the pendulum swinging back in favor of venture capital in the years ahead?

JW: I do. I have a self-serving bias here but VC has been the second worst performing asset class for the past decade, save for the S&P. There has been a flood of capital out of equity capital markets into debt markets, which has driven yields of bonds from governments to munis to corporate low and dividend yields of equities high. What I think you’re likely to see is a reversion of capital flows from debt markets into equities. People and institutions and investment advisors will tire of earning 0.5%, 2.5% or 3.5% respectively on 2,10 or 30 year Treasuries. Municipalities are likely to see serious headwinds and retirees who once thought these were tax advantaged vehicles to preserve capital will see them as capital confiscation and maybe even defaults. My speculation would be capital flows first into large-cap blue-chip high-quality dividend yielding US multi-nationals, almost like a Nifty Fifty of yesteryear. Until that gets overdone. Then investors are likely to seek high-growth unlevered equities and that is exactly what creates a new issue, IPO market. For ten years investors have shunned stakes in high-tech startups. The Facebook, Groupon, Twitter, Zynga phenomena are changing that, with blue-chip institutions clamoring to get allocations. It’s possible, if not probable, this trickles into broad demand for tech companies, which tend to be good inflation hedges as technology is broadly deflationary force with non-commoditized offerings and pricing power. So if Fed printing or debasing our dollars to get out of debt leads to inflation, one could see a resurgence of IPOs. Meanwhile, corporations have restructured balance sheets, refinanced debt, extending maturities and lowering coupons and have record amounts of cash on their balance sheets, ripe for M&A. There is always a five-year investment psychological bias, everyone wants to be invested today where they should’ve been five years ago and I think VC is ripe for five plus years of outperformance.

SW: We’ve seen IPO activity pick up over the past year. Should we expect to see some nanotech IPOs in the near future?

JW: Capital markets are setting themselves up for a reversion of capital flows out of bonds (low yielding sovereigns, munis, corporate in the presence of a non-zero inflationary risk) and into equities. First high-quality multi-national dividend yielding equities, then high-growth, unlevered small and mid-cap tech (also a natural deflationary force against inflation risk from central bank paper printing). It will be an IPO picker’s market: meaning, I’m skeptical we’ll see wholesale sectors see a rising tide of investor demand, but individual companies with either the fundamentals or overwhelming buzz (a la current social media phenomenon of Facebook, Groupon, Twitter, LinkedIn) will see strong demand.

SW: Looking ahead, what are the key investment areas that Lux Capital will be focused on?

JW: Two areas we’re in thesis construction mode are what we call “unmet needs for unmanned systems” and “distributed healthcare.” Both are about emerging technology shaking up both defense and demographic trends in the former and healthcare in the latter.

SW: One last question for you, Josh. What have been the three biggest investment lessons you’ve learned since co-founding Lux Capital.

JW: Not sure I can limit it to three, but I’d say that the only certainty is uncertainty – every company is a roller-coaster ride. That being early is the same thing as being wrong. That in tough investments, deal terms can matter more than the price you pay and in great ones, neither really matters. That good investment team processes are as or more important than outcomes. That people not technology are the single most important thing we invest in. That human nature is a constant and greed and fear and all sorts of well catalogued behavioral biases drive people who drive markets and while markets aren’t predictable, group behavior often is. That rational allocation and irrational misallocation of time and capital define all opportunities in investing.

SW: Terrific! Thanks again for your time, Josh. We wish you and your colleagues at Lux Capital all the best in the future.

I have been friends with Josh for 10 years and every time I speak with him I learn about a breakthrough in energy technology. Thank you Josh for your contributions to our Nanotechnology Community and we look forward to seeing you at one of our Conferences in 2011.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Commercialization Association
203-733-1949
vincent@nanobca.org
www.nanobca.org

Having successfully completed our first decade of servicing the nanotech community, I am writing you with some exciting news that I hope will provide a solid foundation upon which to serve you and other members in the decade ahead. As the researchers at the NSF and NNI note, nanotechnology is evolving into a second foundational phase that will see a ten-fold increase in the value of nano-enabled products and mass use of nanotechnology. Given the evolutionary path of nanotechnology in the decade ahead, the NanoBusiness Alliance (NbA) is changing its name and refocusing its efforts to be of maximum value to the nanotech community.

Our new name is the NanoBusiness Commercialization Association or NanoBCA, for short. We are in the process of launching a new website: www.nanobca.org. The website will be a comprehensive source of everything we do at the NanoBCA and we hope members find it to be an excellent resource in the future.

From the beginning, the NbA has always had business as its main focus. Our membership and community includes some of the finest business minds in the world. The addition of commercialization to our name reflects the new era into which we are moving whereby a decade of intense scientific research gives way to fundamentally new products that will likely change the way we live, work and play. As billions and trillions of dollars of new nano-enabled products enter the marketplace, there will be a growing interest and focus on nanotech innovation and commercialization. The NanoBCA will be positioned to be the voice of nanotech innovation and commercialization in the decade ahead.

One of the new of the new initiatives undertaking by the NanoBCA, through the support and involvement of its members, will involve monitoring and promoting nanotech innovations and commercialization in the private sector. Steve Waite steve@nanobca.org, our new Director of Strategy and Research, will be assisting me with this initiative. We believe it will be important for our members to stay on top of what is expected to be an acceleration and mass proliferation of nanotech innovations in the future. We hope to create a vibrant and interactive community whereby our members can share information with us and where we can help educate and promote their new products to policymakers, researchers, analysts, the financial community and other interested parties.

Our vision for the NanoBusiness Commercialization Association is clear and focused. The Association seeks to ensure that the United States – its companies, universities and people – are global leaders in the burgeoning nanotechnology field. And the Association ventures to ensure the safe, secure and beneficial use of nanotechnology and nanoscience for all people.

Our mission at the NanoBCA in the coming decade is three-fold:

1. Promote the Commercialization of products designed and developed through the Science of Nanotechnology.

2. Advocate continued U.S. spending through the National Nanotechnology Initiative. America must continue the funding of NNI from R&D to commercialization.

3. Inform membership with regard to EHS regulation from Federal (EPA and FDA) and State Governments. Monitor proposed legislation from Federal and State government.

We are proud of the accomplishments of the NbA over the past decade having successfully lobbied for the creation of The National Nanotechnology Initiative in January, 2000. Backed by our supportive members, our efforts have helped produce over $12 billion of funding, which has created a community of about 150,000 contributors in the U.S., along with a flexible R&D infrastructure consisting of about 100 large nanotechnology oriented R&D centers, networks, and user facilities, and an expanding industrial base of about 3,000 companies producing nanotech-enabled products. Despite all this fabulous growth in activity, we are still only in an early stage of development with nanotechnology. There is much work ahead and we know that we cannot do it without the support of our members.

We are very excited to be returning to NYC for our conference being held at the Marriott Marquis Times Square on April 6-7th. The conference begins with an opening reception on the evening of Wednesday, April 6th. We have an entire day of programming on April 7th (details to follow).

REGISTRATION $400
To register, please complete the attached form 2011 NanoBCA NYC Reg Form and fax to 480-275-3662

HOTEL INFORMATION
New York Marriott Marquis Times Square
212-398-1900
http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/nycmq-new-york-marriott-marquis/
$269 per night
Room block code: NYBA

We appreciate your continued support and look forward to working with and serving our members in what promises to be an exciting decade ahead for nanotechnology and the nanotech community. It has been a pleasure representing the collective voice of the nanotechnology community. I look forward to serving you in the next exciting decade.

Here’s to much success in the Nano Decade ahead!

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Commercialization Association
203-733-1949
vincent@nanobca.org
www.nanobca.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

Many of you in the nanotechnology community are familiar with our good friend Kristen Kulinowski, Ph.D. Kristen has been one of our leaders in providing information in regard to the safe handling of nanomaterials. Kristen and her team’s website http://goodnanoguide.org/tiki-index.php?page=HomePage is one of my favorites. Today I would like to share with you an opportunity for you to participate in a unique program called, “Introduction to Safe Handling of Nanomaterials in the Workplace” presented by the American Chemical Society (ACS) http://www.proed.acs.org/.

This course will cover aspects of occupational health and safety as they relate to handling nanomaterials. The emphasis is on controlling human exposure. The course begins with an introduction to nanomaterials and the physicochemical properties of the major classes. Major developments in the toxicology and environmental impacts literature will be summarized along with their implications for occupational practice. The next topic is strengths and weaknesses of existing tools for assessing and controlling exposure. Principles of risk management for nanomaterials will be introduced, including emerging topics such as control banding. Major activity in the regulatory and standards arenas will be summarized. The course will conclude with an introduction to essential resources that attendees can consult after the course is over.

MONDAY, MARCH 28, 2011
Check-in opens at 7:30am on the day of the course. Course runs from 8:30am to 5:00pm

REGISTER TODAY $695
The course fee includes a course binder and a continental breakfast each day.

Five for Four! Register five people for one course, one person for five courses, or any combination in between and your fifth registration is free. Note: This discount is only available if you register by fax or mail and mention this discount. May not be combined with any other offer.

Register online for this class in Anaheim, CA
Course Code: NANO
http://www.regonline.com/Register/Checkin.aspx?EventID=916169

Register with form via mail or fax
Course Code: NANO
http://www.proed.acs.org/courses/registration.pdf

KEY TOPICS
– Introduction to nanomaterials
– Toxicology of nanomaterials: research review
– Environmental impact of nanomaterials: research review
– Assessing and controlling exposure to nanomaterials: strengths/weaknesses of existing technologies
– Risk managements approaches: key elements, control banding
– Regulations and Standards: key regulatory agencies’ activities and standards on nanomaterials
– Information management in the nanotech workplace: essential resources for further education

COURSE INSTRUCTOR(S)
Kristen Kulinowski http://chemistry.rice.edu/FacultyDetail.aspx?RiceID=1200 is a Ph.D. Chemist and director of International Council on Nanotechnology as well as executive director of NSF Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology.

Bruce Lippy http://mysite.verizon.net/bruce.lippy/html/team.html is a certified industrial hygienist, a certified safety professional and holds a Ph.D. in policy from the University of Maryland.

EVENT LOCATION
Hilton Anaheim http://www.hiltonanaheimhotel.com/
777 Convention Way
Anaheim, CA 92802

HOTEL RESERVATIONS
Discount room reservations can be made through the ACS Housing Connection.
https://resweb.passkey.com/Resweb.do?mode=welcome_ei_new&eventID=3092081

Direct questions about the course to:
Phone: 202-872-4508, Email: shortcourses@acs.org

This is a subject that is vital to our nanotechnology community. Please continue to educate yourself on this topic.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

In this month’s interview, we talk to Mihail (“Mike”) Roco. Dr. Roco http://www.nsf.gov/eng/staff/mroco.jsp proposed the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) on March 11, 1999, at the White House, and is a key architect of the NNI. He is Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology to the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the founding chair of the U.S. National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (NSTC/NSET). Prior to joining National Science Foundation, he was Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Kentucky (1981-1995), and held visiting professorships at the California Institute of Technology (1988-89), Johns Hopkins University (1993-95), Tohoku University (1989), and Delft University of Technology (1997-98). His research was on multiphase systems, computer simulations, nanoparticles and nanosystems. Credited with thirteen patents, Dr. Roco contributed over two hundred archival articles and twenty books including “Particulate Two-phase Flow” (1993) and “Nanotechnology Research Directions” (1999), and more recently “Managing Nano-Bio-Info-Cognition Innovations” (2007), “Mapping Nanotechnology Knowledge and Innovation: Global and Longitudinal Patent and Literature Analysis” (2009) and “Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020” (2010).

Dr. Roco has been an international leader of nanotechnology development and of converging new technologies (NBIC: nano-bio-info-cognitive sciences). He initiated the first U.S. federal government program that focused on nanoscale science and engineering (on Synthesis and Processing of Nanoparticles) at NSF in 1991. He is editor-in-chief for the Journal of Nanoparticle Research, and has been a member of international research councils including the International Risk Governance Council in Geneva. Dr. Roco is a corresponding member of the Swiss Academy of Engineering Sciences, and a fellow of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, and the Institute of Physics. He was elected as the Engineer of the Year by the U.S. National Society of Professional Engineers and NSF in 1999 and again in 2004. Dr. Roco was awarded the National Materials Advancement Award from the Federation of Materials Societies in 2007 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, “as the individual most responsible for support and investment in nanotechnology by government, industry, and academia worldwide.”

In our interview, Mike notes that nanotechnology is recognized today along with information technology and biotechnology as a megatrend in science and engineering. He points out that nanotechnology has provided solutions for about half of the new projects on energy conversion, energy storage, and carbon encapsulation in the last decade. In the coming decade, Mike expects nanotech commercialization to become a powerful driver of innovation, job and wealth creation in the global economy. We hope you enjoy the interview with Mike Roco. – Steve Waite

SW: It’s great to be speaking with you, Mike. Thanks for spending some time with us. You and a group of 250 leading scientists, researchers and experts in nanotechnology recently published a terrific book titled “Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020: Retrospective and Outlook” (Nano 2020, for short). It’s clear from reading the book that nanotechnology has come a long way in the past decade, but still has a long way to go. What do you consider to be the major achievements of the past ten years?

MR: Nano 2020 report provides a twenty-year overview of the development of nanotechnology from a fragmented scientific field at the end of the 1990s to a general purpose technology by 2020. The first part of the report evaluates the progress and outcomes of nanotechnology in the last ten years and how the vision set up in 1999 by Nano 2010 has been realized. Nano 2010 stands for the report “Nanotechnology Research Directions: Vision for the Next Decade” (NSTC, 1999 and Springer, 2000, http://www.wtec.org/loyola/nano/IWGN.Research.Directions/) that inspired the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) and more than 60 other national programs. The first foundational phase of nanotechnology development “Nano 1” (2000-2010) was dominated by a science-centric ecosystem. The second foundational phase “Nano 2” (2011-2020) will be focused on nanoscale science and engineering integration. It is projected to be driven by socio-economic considerations.

In the last decade an interdisciplinary international community and a complex research and education infrastructure have been established. Nanotechnology has penetrated almost all industrial sectors and medicine, and the production of nanotechnology-enabled products has expanded with an annual rate of 25 percent to about $90 billion in the U.S. and $250 billion worldwide.

Scientific curiosity began to transform in 2000 with the help of two key parts of the Nano 2010 report. First, an integrative definition of nanotechnology was formulated based on distinctive behaviors of matter at the nanoscale and the ability to systematically control and engineer those behaviors. Second, a long-term vision and goals were articulated for the transformative potential of nanotechnology R&D to benefit society. Now, nanotechnology is recognized along with information technology and biotechnology as a megatrend in science and engineering.

One main outcome is a library of newly discovered nanoscale phenomena, processes and nanocomponents, as well as a versatile measurement and manufacturing tool-kit. These phenomena have become the foundation for new domains in science and engineering such as plasmonics, negative index of refraction in IR/visible wavelength radiation, spin torque transfer (spintronics), nanofluidics, programmable macromolecules, sub-cellular phenomena and synthetic biology, and teleportation of information between atoms. Other nanoscale phenomena are better understood such as quantum confinement, polyvalency, and shape anisotropy. New nanocomponents include one-dimensional nanowires and quantum dots of various compositions, polyvalent noble metal nanostructures, graphene, metamaterials, nanowire superlattices, and a wide variety of other particle compositions. New tools for nanotechnology have allowed femtosecond measurements with atomic precision in domains of engineering relevance. Single-phonon spectroscopy and sub-nanometer measurements of molecular electron densities have been performed. Single-atom and single-molecule characterization methods have emerged that allow researchers to probe the complex and dynamic nature of nanostructures in previously impossible ways. Together, these discoveries and tools have established a broad interdisciplinary foundation for new technologies.

Already, myriad R&D results include technological breakthroughs in such diverse fields as advanced materials, biomedicine, catalysis, electronics, and pharmaceuticals; expansion into new fields such as energy resources and water filtration, agriculture and forestry; and integration of nanotechnology with other emerging areas such as quantum information systems, neuromorphic engineering and synthetic and system nanobiology. “Nanomanufacturing” is already underway and is a growing economic focus.

Nanotechnology has provided solutions for about half of the new projects on energy conversion, energy storage, and carbon encapsulation in the last decade. Nanotechnology also has provided more than half of solutions for entirely new families of nanostructured and porous materials with very high surface areas, including metal organic frameworks, covalent organic frameworks, and zeolite imidazolate frameworks, for improved hydrogen storage and CO2 separations. Nanocomposite membranes, nanosorbents, and redox-active nanoparticles have been developed for water purification, oil spill cleanup, and environmental remediation.

There is greater recognition of the importance of nanotechnology-related environmental, health, and safety (EHS) issues for the first generation of nanotechnology products, and of ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) issues.

Nanotechnology has catalyzed overall efforts in and attracted talent to science and engineering in the last decade worldwide. A comprehensive list of outcomes arranged per areas of relevance is presented in the 600-page Nano 2020 report (Springer, 2010, available on www.wtec.org/nano2/ and www.nsf.gov/nano). The forecasts made in the Nano 2010 report generally have been realized, and some have been exceeded.

SW: The U.S. has invested some $12 billion in nanotech through the NNI over the past decade. Please give us a sense of how this investment has paid off to date and how it may payoff in coming years.

MR: Nanotechnology already has a major and lasting impact that promises to be more relevant for healthcare, environment and manufacturing here on Earth than the Space program. The cumulative U.S. nanotechnology commitment since 2000 places the NNI second only to the space program in terms of civilian science and technology investment (see Lok, C. 2010. Small Wonders. Nature 467:18-21, 2 September).

We are only at ten years of discovery and innovation enabled by investments in a field still in rapid formation, and only relatively simple nanostructures are in applications: nanolayers in multibillion dollar semiconductor industry, dispersions in multibillion dollar catalyst industry, and molecular recognition and targeting in multibillion dollar medical therapeutics, to name some of the most relevant. If one would consider an average tax of 20 percent and apply this to about $90 billion market incorporating nanotechnology in 2009, the result would be $18 billion that exceeds the total R&D investment of NNI in the last ten years. (Specific examples are presented in the Nano 2020 report.)

Nanotechnology has extensively penetrated several critical industries. Catalysis by engineered nanostructured materials impacts 30-40 percent of the U.S. oil and chemical industries (Chapter 10 in the Nano 2020 report); semiconductors with features under 100 nm constitute over 30 percent of that market worldwide and 60 percent of the U.S. market (Chapter on Long View in Nano 2020 report); molecular medicine is a growing field and only in 2010 about 15% of advanced diagnostics and therapeutics are nanoscience based. These and many other examples show nanotechnology is well on its way to reaching the goal set in 2000 for it to become a “general-purpose technology” with considerable economic impact.

Nanoscale science and engineering in the last ten years is a springboard for future nanotechnology applications and other emerging technologies. I estimate that introduction of nanotechnology in various economic sectors such as electronics and pharmaceutics will lead to at least 1 percent increase annually in productivity during 2010s in a similar manner as another general purpose technology – information technology – did in the 1990s.

SW: Nano 2020 report argues that we are moving into a new phase of nanotech evolution that you call “Nano 2.” What kinds of changes are we likely to see in the next phase of nanotechnology, and how will it differ from the first phase?

MR: The changes are significant as the field of nanotechnology reaches its “adolescence” in the next ten years (2010-2020). Since 2010, nanoscale science and engineering has changed focus in both R&D and outputs: we are transitioning from empirical synthesis of nanoscale components for improving existing products and services to science-based creation of new and complex nanosystems by design.

The transition from the Nano 1 foundational phase (2000-2010, focused on foundation interdisciplinary research at the nanoscale) to the Nano 2 integration phase (2010-2020, focused on NS&E integration for platform applications) includes achieving direct measurements at the nanoscale with time resolution of nanoscale processes and science-based design of nanomaterials and nanosystems. The focus of R&D and applications is expected to shift towards more complex nanosystems and new areas of relevance such as bio-nanomanufacturing, food systems and cognitive technologies, and fundamentally new products. This phase is expected to be dominated by an R&D ecosystem driven by socio-economic considerations. Nanotechnology development will be rapid and uneven, with global implications for the economy, balance of forces, environment, sustainability and public participation. Reversing the pyramid in education by earlier learning of general nanotechnology concepts in freshman and softmore years will become reality in undergraduate education.

SW: In Nano 2020, you talk about nanotechnology becoming a general purpose technology in the years ahead. Please explain what you mean by this and tell us why it is important.

MR: Nanotechnology will continue its widespread penetration of specific methods, tools and materials into the economy as a general-purpose technology, which – as with prior technologies such as electricity or computing – is likely to have widespread and far-reaching applications across many sectors. For example, nanoelectronics including nanomagnetics has a pathway to devices (including logic transistors and memory devices) with feature sizes below 10 nm and is opening doors to a whole host of innovations, including replacing electron charge as the sole information carrier. Many other vital industries will experience evolutionary, incremental nanotechnology-based improvements in combination with revolutionary, breakthrough solutions that drive new product innovations.

By 2020, there is potential to incorporate nanotechnology-enabled products and services into almost all industrial sectors and medical fields. Resulting benefits will include increased productivity and more sustainable development. New applications expected to emerge in the next decade range from low-cost photovoltaic devices (after about 2015), to affordable high-performance batteries enabling electric cars, to novel computing systems, cognitive technologies, and radical new approaches to diagnosis and treatment of diseases like cancer. As nanotechnology grows in a broader context, it will enable creation or advancements in new areas of research such as synthetic biology, cost-effective carbon capture, quantum information systems, neuromorphic engineering, geoengineering using nanoparticles, and other emerging and converging technologies.

Nanotechnology developments in the next decade will allow systematic design and manufacturing of nanotechnology products from basic principles, through a move towards simulation-based design strategies that use an increasing amount of fundamental science in applications-driven R&D, as defined in the Pasteur quadrant (Stokes 1997, Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Brookings Institution Press).

SW: You are projecting a 10-fold increase in the value of nano-enabled final product markets over the next ten years. What industries are likely to be among the most heavily impacted by nanotech during this time frame?

MR: The industries with largest applications will continue to be nanostructured chemicals (and especially catalysts), communication and information equipment, advanced structural nanomaterials, and pharmaceuticals. Other nano-enabled emerging areas of application with large rates of increase include biomedical equipment, energy and water resources, environmental improvement and safety, food and agricultural systems, forestry, hierarchical molecular manufacturing, and cognitive technologies. Current developments presage a burgeoning economic impact: trends suggest that the number of nanotechnology products and workers worldwide will double every three years, achieving a $1 trillion market and 2 million workers by 2015 and $3 trillion market and 6 million workers by 2020. This would correspond to a continuation of the annual growth rate of 25 percent and a 100-fold increase in 20 years (from 2000 to 2020). We have used here the NNI definition requiring a new property or function at the nanoscale. Nanotechnology R&D has become a socio-economic target in all developed countries and in many developing countries – an area of intense international collaboration and competition.

SW: Major semiconductor and electronics manufacturers would be having great difficulty innovating if it weren’t for nanotech capabilities. Yet, many people don’t consider companies like Intel, IBM, Apple and Micron nanotech companies. Do you see this perception changing in the future?

MR: Currently, all major companies producing semiconductors or memory components are in a race to introduce nanotechnology to remain competitive. Because nanotechnology components initially entered the semiconductor industry for improving CMOS, and those companies have other product lines, the perception has been divided. Once significantly improved performance of CMOS due to nanocomponents is proved and new paradigms for logic, memory and transmission of information are introduced using nanosystems – leading to products not available before – the perception will change definitively.

SW: Nanomanufacturing is coming of age. Do you think the U.S. can regain prominence in manufacturing through nanomanufacturing?

MR: Nanomanufacturing is an opportunity to add high added-value and high paying jobs to the economy. There are two main drivers that will be reinforced as we advance into nano’s second decade: creating products and services that were not possible before and more efficiently using materials, energy, environment and labor. The opportunities in the U.S. are particularly for the more sophisticated, new generations of nanotechnology products. The investment should focus on areas where there is capacity for assimilation in the U.S. economy, such as highly automated systems, distributed energy conversion and storage, nanobiotechnology, nanomedicine, integration with other emerging fields, and using specific infrastructure.

A condition for the U.S. achieving prominence in nanomanufacturing is focused R&D and support for continuing processes from discovery to innovation and commercialization at the national level. NSF has supported a funding program in nanomanufacturing since 2002 and the National Nanomanufacturing Network since 2006. Significantly larger efforts by industry, states and federal government are needed.

Another essential condition is the preparation of the workforce. Since 2001, NSF has supported a series of nanotechnology education activities including individual and group awards, the Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education (NUE) program and the Network for Computational Nanotechnology (NCN), the Nanotechnology Center for Learning and Teaching (NCLT) for multidisciplinary “horizontal” and K-Graduate “vertical” integration of formal education, Nanoscale Informal Science Education (NISE), the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) with education components, and Technological/Community College Nanotechnology education in NACK, among other awards. A main challenge now is to disseminate the results partly via Department of Education and Department of Labor to local school and job training systems. Another main challenge is to institutionalize the programs (like we did for IT) to ensure continuity and long-term impact.

Yet another challenge is to use the research results in U.S. industry, and here various national and international governance aspects need to be addressed. A main intellectual driver since 2000 has been the long view of nanotechnology development formulated in the Nano 2010 report that supported the Grand Challenge on Nanomanufacturing since 2002. The recent Nano 2020 report provides a continuation of that vision for nanomanufacturing development (see Chapters 3 and 13). The report encourages support of precompetitive R&D platforms, system application platforms, private-public consortia, and networks in areas such as health, energy, manufacturing tools, commercialization, sustainability, and nanotechnology EHS and ELSI. The platforms will ensure a “continuing” link between nanoscale fundamental research and applications, across disciplines and sectors.

Major industry involvement after 2002-2003 is an assurance for capturing the opportunities. For example, more than 5,400 U.S. companies had papers, patents, and/or products in 2008, and Moore’s law has continued for the past ten years, despite serious doubts raised in 2000 about the trend being able to continue into the nanoscale regime. The establishment of the NanoBusiness Alliance in 2001 was an earlier sign of industry interest.

SW: You note in the book that we are experiencing a qualitative change in nanotech due to direct measurement capabilities. Tell us why direct measurement is important and how it will alter the evolution of nanotech in the future?

MR: Instead of years of indirect measurements and deductive results (measurements based on time and volume averaging approaches mostly on surfaces) one can obtain immediately a realistic picture by a direct measurement. Direct measurements with atomic precision and time resolution of chemical/self-assembling reactions in the biological or engineering domains will open the opportunity to understand and optimize the nanoscale phenomena and processes, to help combinatorial methods and system design. Typical chemical reactions and atomic/molecular assembling processes need femtosecond resolution. The first such measurements for a collection of atoms were performed in 2009.

SW: Give us a sense of how you see nanotech EHS evolving in coming years as we move into the second foundational phase of nanotechnology (i.e., Nano 2).

MR: Nanotechnology EHS needs to be addressed on an accelerated path as an integral part of the general physico-chemical-biological research program and as a condition of application of the new technology. Knowledge is needed not only for the first generation, but also for the new generation of active nanostructures and nanosystems. As we discussed earlier, in about 2010, nanoscale science and engineering has begun a change of focus in both R&D and outputs. We are transitioning from empirical synthesis of nanoscale components to be incorporated into and improve existing products to science-based creation of new nanosystems for fundamentally new products. We need to emplace new principles and organizations for risk governance of new generations of nanotechnology products and processes with increased complexity, dynamics, biology contents, and uncertainty. There is a need for using nanoinformatics and computational science prediction tools to develop a cross-disciplinary, cross-sector information system for nanotechnology materials, devices, tools, and processes. A focus on nanotechnology EHS hazards and ELSI concerns must be routinely integrated into mainstream nanotechnology research and production activities to support safer and more equitable progress of existing and future nanotechnology generations.

The report Nano 2020 provides the outcomes in nanotechnology EHS and ELSI after the first 10 years of development, and research directions how to prepare for safe and ethical use of nanotechnology in the next ten years.

SW: We have seen a lot of growth in nanotech activities overseas in recent years, particularly in China and Korea. What do the numbers tell us today and what do you expect to see in the years ahead?

MR: The growth rate in investments and of number of publications is higher in several countries abroad, particularly after 2005, and the crisis of 2009 affected the U.S. more than the average of other countries. The U.S. maintains the lead in overall quality of papers and in patents as well as in the number of companies involved and the market. This position will be challenged in the future by the European Union, China, South Korea, Russia, as well as other countries for specific subfields of nanotechnology. The U.S. needs to continue to collaborate, compete, remain in the center of international exchanges, and develop mutually beneficial activities. All countries urgently need to better coordinate standards, regulations and sustainable development policies.

International development is rapid and uneven as described in detail in the Nano 2020 report. The report provides the international government investments per regions, as well as for companies and venture funding, between 2000 and 2009. The Science Citation Index paper and patent evolution over the past ten years also are provided. The average annual increases are between 23 percent and 35 percent.

While conceptually most countries generally follow the nanotechnology and converging technologies concepts initially advanced in the Nano 1 report, there are several differences. Other countries have dedicated more funds for applications, and information exchange has been more limited in those areas. Balanced exchange of information and collaborations based on mutual interest is essential for rapid nanotechnology development.

SW: One last question, Mike. In Nano 2, you state that nanotechnology is still in an early stage of development. What are the main challenges for nanotech and the nanotech community over the next decade?

MR: A lot of progress has been made in the last ten years. And yet, nanoscale science, engineering, and technology are still in a formative stage, with most of their growth potential ahead and in still-emerging directions. We cannot yet do direct measurement, build by computational design for a given function or even understand the special-temporal complexity of a general nanosystem.

There is a need for continued, focused investment in theory, direct measurement, and simulation at the nanoscale. We need to promote focused R&D programs, such as “signature initiatives,” “grand challenges,” and other kinds of dedicated funding programs, to support the development of measuring and production tools, manufacturing capabilities in critical R&D areas, and a nanotechnology-adapted innovation ecosystem.

Partnerships between industry, academia, NGOs, multiple agencies, and international organizations need increased attention. Priority should be given to support R&D platforms and creation of additional regional “nano-hubs” for R&D, system-oriented academic centers, earlier nanotechnology education, nanomanufacturing, nanotechnology EHS and ELSI. We need to promote global coordination to develop and maintain viable international standards, cross-sector nomenclatures and databases, and patents and other intellectual property protections. We should seek international coordination for nanotechnology EHS activities (such as safety testing and risk assessment and mitigation) and nanotechnology ELSI activities (such as broadening public participation and addressing the gaps between developing and developed countries). An international co-funding mechanism is envisioned for maintaining databases, nomenclature, standards, and patents. Another priority is the development of experimental and predictive methods for exposure and toxicity to multiple nanostructured compounds. A further challenge is support for horizontal, vertical, and system integration in nanotechnology education, to create or expand regional centers for learning and research, and to institutionalize nanoscience and nanoengineering educational concepts for K-16 students. Furthermore, we need to explore new strategies for mass dissemination, public awareness, and participation related to nanotechnology R&D, breaking through gender, income, and ethnicity barriers. This is a great challenge in the next ten years.

Ambitious scientific and technical goals remain over the next decade, including (a) Integration of knowledge at the nanoscale and of nanocomponents in nanosystems with deterministic and complex behavior, aiming toward creating fundamentally new products; (b) Better control of molecular self-assembly, quantum behavior, creation of new molecules, and interaction of nanostructures with external fields in order to build materials, devices, and systems by modeling and computational design; (c) Understanding of biological processes and of nano-bio interfaces with abiotic materials, and their biomedical and health/safety applications, and nanotechnology solutions for sustainable natural resources and nanomanufacturing; and (d) Governance to increase innovation and public-private partnerships; oversight of nanotechnology safety and equity building on nascent models for addressing EHS, ELSI, multi-stakeholder and public participation; and increasing international collaborations in the process of transitioning to new generations of nanotechnology products. Sustained support for education, workforce preparation, and infrastructure all remain pressing needs.

As nanotechnology applications are expected to satisfy essential societal needs in production, medicine, education, defense and overall economy, an overarching challenge is to institutionalize the nanotechnology in R&D, education, manufacturing, medicine, EHS and ELSI programs. The experience of leading experts from 35 countries is reflected in the comprehensive Nano 2 report. I encourage the readers to look on this material and get involved in solving the challenges ahead.

SW: Thanks again for your time, Mike. It’s been a pleasure speaking with you. We wish you all the best in the coming year and beyond.

The Nanotechnology Community sincerely thanks Dr. Roco for his efforts and vision in furthering the science of Nanotechnology during the last decade.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

Most of you in our Nanotechnology Community enjoy numbers, check this out:
This year we will experience 4 unusual dates: 1/1/11, 1/11/11, 11/1/11 and 11/11/11. NOW go figure this out. Take the last 2 digits of the year you were born plus the age you will be this year and it WILL EQUAL 111.

Who says math isn’t fun?

NANO NEWS

– Nanotechnology in the President’s State of the Union
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/science/26light.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimesscience

– Harris & Harris Group Notes Amgen to Acquire BioVex
http://www.tinytechvc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=545274

– Super Angels
A new breed of wealthy investors is daring to put their money where others won’t: untested start-ups that have little chance of landing venture capital
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2011/01/23/investing_where_others_wont/

– Livingston Securities www.livingstonsecurities.com – IPO Update
Neophotonics – Prospectus for Neophotonics http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1227025/000119312511008672/ds1a.htm

Endocyte – Prospectus for Endocyte http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1235007/000095012311002356/f56327a3sv1za.htm

The SEC urges you to read the prospectus before making an investment decision. Investment decisions should be based exclusively on the prospectus.

The Nano Community is very active in the IPO Market and M&A activity is heating up too. 2011 is shaping up to be a very good year for the Science of Nanotechnology.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusinenss Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

We in the Nanotechnology Community are very aware of the hundreds of products Americans use daily brought to us by the Science of Nanotechnology. I would like to share with you an article I received last fall from Green Manufacturer Magazine titled:

Sage Supplier: Lowering costs of lithium-ion batteries for EV power trains
http://www.greenmanufacturer.net/article/tc/sage-supplier-lowering-costs-of-lithium-ion-batteries-for-ev-power-trains

Launched in 2010, Green Manufacturer magazine is designed to deliver manufacturers the information and practical how-to application knowledge that decision makers need for converting their equipment, processes, facilities, operations and products to green and sustainable options. Published by the Fabricators and Manufacturers Association, International, a 40 year old trade association in Rockford, IL, Green Manufacturer delivers to the marketplace a full set of information tools that include the bi-monthly magazine, bi-monthly eNewsletter as well as delivers the latest business-critical content through its web site, www.greenmanufacturer.net. Please visit http://www.fma-communications.com/green/green-Subscription.cfm to sign up for a free subscription.

NANO NEWS

Arrowhead Sells Unidym for $5 Million
http://www.labusinessjournal.com/news/2011/jan/18/arrowhead-sells-unidym-5-million/

Not Just Bunnies, Nanotechnology: Oregon Lottery Touts Its Science Do-Goodism
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=143079

Building 3D Batteries from the Bottom Up with Coated Nanowires
http://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/semiconductors/nanotechnology/building-3d-batteries-from-the-bottom-up-with-coated-nanowires

Russia invests $700m in UK plastic electronics firm
http://www.themanufacturer.com/uk/content/11499/From_Russia_with_love

I continue to be very excited to see nano applications being utilized in the energy market.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

I have enjoyed lists since I was a young man. My mother would buy me the Farmer’s Almanac every year and I would go through all the lists for days.

Many times during the year people from our Nanotechnology Community would ask, “Do you know so and so?” We decided to start an interview series in January 2010 to give you insight into leaders of our Nanotechnology Community.

Today, we announce our Most Influential Nanotechnology Leaders List from 2010. I have enjoyed communicating with all these leaders in the Nanotechnology Community. The common thread amongst them is that they are all Nanotechnology Evangelists. Kudos to these leaders for their contributions to our Nanotechnology Community.

David J. Arthur, President & CEO, SouthWest NanoTechnologies, Inc.
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-david-j-arthur-president-ceo-southwest-nanotechnologies-inc

Lynn L. Bergeson, Managing Director, Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-lynn-l-bergeson-managing-director-bergeson-campbell-p-c

Larry Bock, Executive Director, USA Science & Engineering Festival
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-larry-bock-executive-director-usa-science-engineering-festival

Peter Hébert, Co-Founder/Managing Partner, Lux Capital
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusinessnyc-april-20th-nba-interview-peter-hebert-co-foundermanaging-partner-lux-capital

James M. Hussey, Chief Executive Officer, NanoInk, Inc
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-james-m-hussey-chief-executive-officer-nanoink-inc

Doug Jamison, CEO, Harris & Harris Group, Inc
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-doug-jamison-ceo-harris-harris-group-inc

Scott Livingston, Chairman & CEO, Livingston Securities, LLC
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-scott-livingston-chairman-ceo-livingston-securities-llc

Ajay P. Malshe, Co-founder & CTO, NanoMech, LLC
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-interview-ajay-p-malshe-co-founder-cto-nanomech-llc

Scott Rickert, CEO, Nanofilm
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-dc-event-nba-interview-scott-rickert-ceo-nanofilm

Dr. Mihail C. Roco, Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology, National Science Foundation
http://www.nsf.gov/eng/staff/mroco.jsp
Dr. Roco’s interview is scheduled for February.

Clayton Teague, Director, NNCO
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-interview-clayton-teague-director-nnco

Josh Wolfe, Founding & Managing General Partner, Lux Capital Management
http://www.luxcapital.com/team_wolfe.php
Josh Wolfe’s interview is scheduled for January.

Let’s have another round of applause for the contributions of these Nanotechnology leaders over the past decade.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nanobusiness2010.com
www.vincentcaprio.org

Our economy still has lagging institutional issues. Finally, the U.S. economy is on the right track after a tough 2009 and 2010. We foresee a prosperous 2011 for our Nanotechnology Community.

We would like to share with you an article from the NY Times on December 24, 2010.

Experts Citing Rising Hopes for Recovery in Coming Year
http://www.cnbc.com/id/40804465/

In 2011 we see a number of companies from the Nanotechnology Community with IPOs and increased M&A activity.

We would like to present to you the Best of 2010 NanoBusiness articles.

NanoBusiness DC Roundtable, Agency & EHS Day Summary, March 17, 2010
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-dc-roundtable-agency-ehs-day-summary-march-17th

NanoBusiness Alliance Issues Statement on Sustainable Development of Nanotechnology – July 1, 2010
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/nanobusiness-alliance-issues-statement-on-sustainable-development-of-nanotechnology

9th Annual NanoBusiness Alliance Conference, September 27-28, 2010
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/review-9th-annual-nanobusiness-alliance-conference-sept-27-28-chicago-il

NNI at Ten: Nanotechnology Innovation Summit, December 9-10, 2010
Summary – Part 1
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/summary-of-nni-at-ten-nanotechnology-innovation-summit-part-1

Summary – Part 2
http://www.vincentcaprio.org/summary-of-nni-at-ten-nanotechnology-innovation-summit-part-2

If you would like to read any of the other articles, then please visit www.vincentcaprio.org.

Happy New Year!

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org

We finish our 2010 interview series with one of the most influential people in our Nanotechnology Community, Clayton Teague. We would like to commend Clayton for the tremendous job he has done implementing the NNI during the past 10 years.

Clayton Teague http://www.nsti.org/outreach/NNCO/ is Director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO). Established in 2001, NNCO is the secretariat to the Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). As such, the NNCO provides day-to-day technical and administrative support to the NSET Subcommittee and assists in the preparation of multi-agency planning, budget, and assessment documents such as the annual National Nanotechnology Initiative supplements to the President’s Budgets.

NNCO is the point of contact on Federal nanotechnology activities for government organizations, academia, industry, professional societies, foreign organizations, and others, facilitating exchanges of technical and programmatic information. In addition, the NNCO develops and makes available printed and other materials as directed by the NSET Subcommittee and maintains the NNI Web site, www.nano.gov.

SW: Hello, Clayton! Thanks for taking time to speak with the NanoBusiness Alliance today. How are things going at the NNCO? We take it you’ve been very busy this year.

CT: Yes, it has been a busy and productive year for both the NNI and the NNCO. This year has presented challenges and opportunities that represent the culmination of nearly a decade of work. The NSET Subcommittee and its members have certainly risen to the challenge to close out the first ten years of the NNI with a new NNI Strategic Plan and an updated NNI strategy for nanotechnology-related environmental, health, and safety (EHS) research. In addition to these critical documents, the planning and convening of five workshops and the collaborative efforts required in drafting the subsequent workshop reports, 2010 has been a very busy year for the NNCO.

SW: Leading up to the 10-year anniversary of the NNI and the NNCO, what have been the major accomplishments of your office over the past decade?

CT: There have been many, and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to work with and to learn about the variety of roles, responsibilities, and cultures of the NNI member agencies. In terms of being privileged and learning, I am equally indebted to all the great staff I have worked with here at the NNCO. Among the major accomplishments, I would highlight the support the NNCO has provided for many NNI workshops and for developing the resulting workshop reports, the annual NNI supplements to the President’s Budget, and the development and maintenance of the NNI’s website, www.nano.gov. I am pleased that we have nearly completed a major redesign of the NNI’s website. This site, due to be released in early 2011, will feature enhancements in both appearance and functionality. This is one of the major interfaces between the NNCO, the NSET, academia, industry, and of course, the public. We feel that the updated and reorganized structure of this website will make it more user-friendly, and as such, an invaluable resource for anyone interested in not only the NNI, but in nanotechnology writ large.

As some degree of recognition of the NNCO contributions, the NSET Subcommittee has continued to increase annual funding support for the NNCO – which comes directly from the member agencies’ research funds! The result of that increasing level of support is that the NNCO staff in the last decade has grown from three people to a staff of 11. This increased staffing happened over time, in response to the growing needs of the Subcommittee, the formation of the four working groups by the Subcommittee, and the increased number of workshops and activities in the NNI. As the NNI and nanotechnology as a field have grown in terms of prominence and public awareness, we have seen an increased need for staff to liaise with the media, with industry, with states, and of course with Congress.

SW: What are the key U.S. nanotechnology initiatives underway today?

CT: Under the direction of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the NNI has launched three “Nanotechnology Signature Initiatives” in fiscal year (FY) 2011, covering the areas of Nanoelectronics, Sustainable Nanomanufacturing, and Solar Energy Collection and Conversion. These topics areas are not only prime targets to be at the forefront of a nanotechnology-driven industrial revolution, but they are well-suited for the increased interagency cooperation and collaboration and public/private partnerships that epitomize the NNI.

Additionally, a major effort has been underway under the direction of the NSET Subcommittee’s Nanotechnology Environmental and Health Implications (NEHI) Working Group to respond to the need to identify the potential risks of nanomaterials and the appropriate research strategies to address them. Thanks to the response of the NNI participating agencies, we have seen nearly a fourfold increase in the investment in EHS research, from $35 million in FY 2005 to $117 in the FY 2011 request. Nanomanufacturing has also seen a significant increase, from $34 million in FY 2006 to $101 million in the FY 2011 request. This nanomanufacturing increase is consistent with the recommendations we’ve heard from both the business community and from the President’s Council of Advisors for Science and Technology.

SW: What is your sense of how policymakers view the importance of nanotechnology with respect to U.S. economic performance and international competitiveness?

CT: Indications from the joint, annual R&D priorities memorandum to all agencies from the Office of Management and Budget and OSTP, as well as from the Administration’s white paper on innovation, send a strong, positive message about the future of nanotechnology. In both cases, nanotechnology was given a high priority and is viewed as being important in terms of both U.S. economic growth and international competitiveness. In general, I feel that it’s viewed as one of the more promising technologies, even among the other emerging technology fields like synthetic biology and biotechnology.

SW: Can you give us some insights into how the NNCO works with academic institutions doing nanotechnology research and the importance of this research?

CT:The NNCO’s main responsibilities in regard to academic institutions are to provide referrals to the appropriate NNI participating agencies and programs in response to direct inquiries, and to provide information on current solicitations and partnership opportunities on the nano.gov website. We believe the new website will serve as an excellent platform for users to ascertain information on funding opportunities throughout the NNI agencies. We also try to work with the NSF, DOE, NIST, and NIH centers that are housed at academic institutions and national laboratories across the country, to help increase public awareness of these centers and to highlight the research going on there.

SW: How does the NNCO view what’s going in on the private sector with respect to companies engaged in nanotechnology research and development?

CT: We view the private sector as an essential component in the R&D process, working with the government and academia to motivate and conduct forefront research and development, serving as the linchpin in successful technology transfer, and finally moving to commercialization. Private companies are invaluable to U.S. efforts in nanotechnology, because they are best suited for taking research results from the lab and integrating them into prototypes and marketable products. This translation of basic research resulting in applications is critical to realizing nanotechnology’s promise for enhancing our national security, public health, and economic competitiveness. Among the most important economic metrics for measuring the success of nanotechnology R&D are: the number of successful companies formed, the number of new jobs added, and the amount of new value added to the economy. We’ve had varying degrees of success in measuring progress in these areas. I believe the private sector has shown great progress and proven success in terms of forming companies and creating jobs, but the overall economic impact has yet to be assessed accurately. We are looking at a number of options to develop the appropriate metric to assess some of the economic impact numbers and to determine the best path forward to help launch nanotechnology into the forefront of the new economy. Getting the community to agree on what metrics are to be used in assessing economic impact is still in discussion as we work to achieve consensus.

SW: What are the biggest challenges facing the NNCO and the nanotech community today? From the NNCO’s perspective, how can the nanotech community do a better job of educating the public on nanotechnology?

CT: We at the NNCO – along with the rest of the nanotech community – are still trying to communicate with the general public about the benefits and the potential risks of nanotechnology in a positive way that the public can understand. A recent Scientific American article surveyed more than 21,000 adults worldwide that Scientific American described as “a supportive and science-literate crowd” and found that nanomaterials are viewed as the second most pressing safety concern we face today, after nuclear materials. For perspective, this number was skewed because Europeans saw nuclear power as much more dangerous than nanomaterials. But Americans overall thought nanotechnology was riskier. This result points to our need to more effectively communicate with and inform the public on nanotechnology opportunities and issues. Early reports from a study underway by Lux Research indicate that Europe has done a better job of communicating both the risks and benefits of nanotechnology, which may be why the European response to the survey was less negative toward nanotechnology than the American response. However, the door to more effective communications has not yet closed; the Scientific American study also revealed that scientists are viewed as the most trusted professionals. So we – the scientific and industrial communities – are still in the position to help correct any misperceptions about nanotechnology. As an example, members of the public don’t tend to see their iPods or their computers as nanotechnology-enabled products, but rather as just cool, new products. Raising awareness of how nanotechnology is playing a critical role in bringing products valued by the public is something all involved with the technology need to be doing. It is a role I think is particularly important for industry. Some companies have become wary of advertising or labeling their products as nanotechnology-enabled. While this is a justifiable reaction given the public’s concerns about nanotechnology, it has the potential to add fuel to the fire; what seems like good business sense in the beginning can be misconstrued as intentionally deceptive at a later date.

SW: How do you see the NNCO evolving in coming years?

CT: There is a growing interest in better serving both industry and the states and to take more steps toward public outreach and communications. The NNCO will also continue to work with the NSET Subcommittee as it forges a path forward to an increased level of collaboration among the member agencies. In order to better facilitate meaningful interactions with industry sectors focusing on nanotechnology and its applications and with state organizations, we are working with the NNI member agencies to reach out to both industry sectors and state organizations. Several of the NNI member agencies have had some initial meetings with the Environmental Council of States to enable better communication between the Federal and State efforts in nanotechnology-related EHS regulatory issues. We also plan to increase our efforts to work with regional, state, and local (RSL) initiatives, in part by making more information about RSL initiatives available through our website.

Our newly appointed Deputy Director, Sally Tinkle, is also tasked with serving as the EHS Coordinator. Through her leadership, we have already increased our efforts in interagency collaboration on EHS issues. Also, per the PCAST recommendations, we are increasing our coordination and collaboration on standards activities. This follows the formation of the NSTC Subcommittee on Standards, which is being led by NIST and chaired by the NIST Director, Pat Gallagher.

SW: What is the best way for NanoBusiness Alliance members to stay current with what the NNCO is doing and what can our members do to help the NNCO in the future?

CT: In part, by keeping abreast of our website and social media tools, such as our Twitter feed and our YouTube videos. We also encourage NbA members to attend our workshops and events and to participate in online activities like the Strategy Portal, strategy.nano.gov, established earlier this year to garner stakeholder input for the new NNI Strategic Plan and the updated NNI Strategy for Nanotechnology-Related EHS Research. Furthermore, we would be amenable to expanding regular meetings to discuss issues of mutual interest, perhaps by adding an agenda item to the annual NbA conference schedule for a meeting with, or presentations by, key NNCO staff. Toward NbA members helping the NNCO, we’d like to hear about the NbA’s current activities and plans. Please let me know of ways the NNCO could serve the NbA better; critiques of website content, suggestions for publication topics, mechanisms for working with industry sectors. With our new website and social media platforms, we would really like to highlight NbA accomplishments and new directions being taken by member companies, so don’t hesitate to contact our Communications and Outreach office (mepstein@nnco.nano.gov) to send us your latest news. When you succeed, we succeed!

Remember to follow us on Twitter @NNInanonews

SW: Thanks for your time today, Clayton. We wish you and the NNCO all the best in the future.

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to you and your family.

Regards,

Vincent Caprio “Serving the Nanotechnology Community for Over a Decade”
Executive Director
NanoBusiness Alliance
203-733-1949
vincentcaprio@nynanobusiness.org
www.nynanobusiness.org
www.vincentcaprio.org