| Phil Chamberlain |
freelance journalist n researcher n communications consultant
|
|
|
Small is beautiful
Published by Venue magazine Millions of pounds are being poured by the military into universities to research nanotechnologies with little debate about the outcome or the risks. A report from the pressure group Scientists for Global Responsibility, has highlighted contracts at several institutions including Oxford, Cambridge, Glasgow, Manchester and Bristol. The report says: "Many of military nanotechnology applications…might be solely for defensive purposes, whilst others would be more offensive or invasive, including miniature anti-satellite weapons, various robotic vehicles and body implants. "What is needed now is transparency and wide-ranging public debate on nanotechnology, neither of which is easy when funding involves military or commercial players." Nano research involves investigating objects at sizes hard to comprehend. They key range is from 100nm down to 0.2nm, the atomic level. A human hair is about 80nm in width. A strand of DNA is about 2nm wide – a billion times smaller than a football. Broadly the idea is either to build up micro-machines from atoms or mill down existing particles to desired objects. These can then perform jobs such as repairing cells or act as tiny computer processors. Many commentators see the impact of nanoresearch in the next 10 to 15 years as being among the most significant in a century. And the military has been quick to step in. In America there is defence funding to the tune of more than $300million. Among that is a $50million project at MIT to develop a battlesuit of the future. The UK itself is the world’s second largest funder of military science, engineering and technology with £2.7 billion spent in 2003/04. That’s twice what is spent on health research. In this country, the sums for nano research may be smaller, but competition just as intense. Among the MoD contracts is a £10m Interdisciplinary Research Centre involving Cambridge, Manchester and Bristol looking at a number of different aspects of nanoscience. Funding in universities from the MoD is often backed by funding from money from other government departments including the DTI as well as arms-length agencies such as QinetiQ. The SGR report says: "Potential problems with nanotechnology may arise from either current military or civilian applications – including impact on human health and the environment and the possibilities for weapon development. "This is especially so in areas such as nanotechnology-genetics based agents, autonomous fighting systems and microrobots." It’s not just SGR which has raised concerns about nano research, and military involvement in particular. A joint report from the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering on nanotechnologies said: "Manipulation of biological and chemical agents using nanotechnologies could result in entirely new threats that might be hard to detect and counter, "Some observers have suggested that refinements pf both existing and new weapons systems, through applications of nanotechnologies might lead to a new form of arms race." The Royal Society report also discussed the risks to people near laboratories saying any nano waste should be treated as hazardous as they could be a danger to humans and the environment. However only one per cent of research money goes into risk assessment. For more information see: www.sgr.org.uk |
| All articles on this website are copyright Phil Chamberlain and may not be reproduced without permission of the author. |