Kristin: The very last session at COMS2009 is on the theme of education. There are some common global issues. Firstly there will be an anticipated shortage of scientists and engineers. Second, there are conflicting views on how to develop nanotechnologists.

1. Nanotechnology should be taught at all levels

Assoc Prof Aldrin Sweeney from the University of Central Florida and Editor of the Journal of Nano Education discussed some of the issues in nanoscale science and engineering education. One of the issues emerging is whether nantechnology can be taught at all levels. In 2003, Mihail Rocco said there was a need for education and training in nanoscience concepts to be introduced at all levels of education. And in Technology Foresight on Danish Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, The Steering Group recommended that nanotechnology should be taught in both primary school and secondary schools:

‘Compared with technical and scientific subjects in general, nanotechnology appeals strongly to young people. Early teaching of nanotechnology may thereby have the beneficial side effect of increasing the general interest in – and applications to study for – technical and scientific qualifications.’

2. Therefore, what fundamental concepts and competencies are needed within a nanotechnology curriculum?

There seems to be three cores areas required, at least at the tertiary level. First is the need to have a good understanding of physics, biology and chemistry, and to be able to understand the interdisciplinary nature of these sciences in nanotechnology. Second, studetns should learn some basic skills around instrumentation, microscopy and nanofabrication. Third, students should be aware of the political and cutural contexts of nanotechnology and associated research. Here, perhaps it is also important to impart skills in and what about the role of commercialisation – especially if you belive that researchers have an obligation to extedn there research into the marketplace.

3. Specialisation or generalisation?

Yes, that old chestnut. Do you teach basic courses in physics, chemistry and/or biology and then introduce interdisciplinarity (the T-model), or do you teach the inverted T – which introduces nanoscience as an interdisciplinary knowledge base and then focus on specialisations within this?

• Larrs Montelius from Oresund University (a collaborative association of Universities in Sweden and Denmark) presented on Nano Connect Scandinavia. Here there is acknowledgment that both a broad understanding and in-depth knowledge. He showed a range of approaches within Scandinavian universities.
• Nadine Hoser from Bamberg University and a Fulbright Scholar in California is looking at how people transition from education to the labour market. Interestingly, she showed that most employers would be prefer a science degree in a specific discipline followed by nanotechnology specialisation , rather than a first degree in nanotechnology. Her project will be looking at how nanoscientists and nanotechnologists define themselves (and the effect of the market and professional associations), as well as how nano breakthroughs have been diffusing into the labour market.

4. What are some ways that nanotechnology can be presented in education?

Finally, how can the needs at the tertiary level be translated for secondary schools?

• Gabriel Ramirez presented Class on a Chip, a MEMS Education chip (6.2 mm by 2.8 mm) containing 20-30 devices per chip. Helping to identify what these micro-electric systems components do and how they work. The chip can be connected through a driver board to a PC with a haptic controller which allows the students to play and touch and feel. Laboratory manuals currently in development with high school and college teachers to allow ensure students can get the most out of the device (Clive wants one).
• Francesca Calati from La Trobe University presented on AccessNano as a way of introducing nanotechnology in Australian schools. Francesca showed simple (and cost-effective) ways that this resource allows teachers to show how properties change at the nanoscale. And how provocative ideas can engage students in science.

Kristin: VCs are in chaos. They are not making new investments, they are downsizing personnel, and when it comes to making a deal, they don’t want to go it alone. Additionally, limited partner investors are upset with the poor performance of VCs, they have concerns about high fee structures and want liquidity.

So how might you fund a start-up in an economic crisis? Robert Mehalso provided some advice in a plenary session at COMS2009.

Bob’s advice on dealing with VCs? Well, VCs consume an incredible amount of time in due diligence – they ask thousands of question to find reasons not to invest. Working with VCs is expensive – they require IP reviews, legal/contractual documents, due diligence payments, and annual fees for attending board meetings. And your company pays. VCs want control even for a minority position. And the due diligence process can create apprehension with customers and suppliers. They tend to stick to your original forecasts and often bring little in terms of relationships, customers or future round funding. Additionally, the VC business model is broken – more than half the VC funds will disappear over the next two years. Use VC as a last resort!

So how to prepare for funding?

• Obtain advice from a commercialisation expert on the maturity of the technology
• Focus research to address commercialisation challenges
• Obtain government funding
• Develop industrial interest and funding
• Engage a corporate partner
• Use personal, family and friends’ funds
• Focus on specific markets
• Minimise funds usage by conducting research at university as long as possible, using the research institutions’ facilities and equipment, and engage subject-matter experts to get things done faster.

To maximum opportunities for funding, it’s important to remove technical and market risk and be able to demonstrate manufacturing (eg through pilot). Companies should try to engage government funds for prototyping and pilot plans and engage corporate partners. Wherever possible show he company has revenue. Bob suggests that external funding is possible, but it’s difficult, time consuming and the conditions are onerous.

Is there any upside?

Kristin: The recurring theme of the conference is the challenges and solutions for making things work – essentially how do you get micro and nano technologies to market through effective applications serving a market need.

Dirk Ortloff from Process Relations (edit: Note the company is Process Relations) presented on the process development challenges in difficult economic times. Everything is complex – new processes, often many changes to specifications, lots of data, plus time to market is shortened and budgets are tight. Plus there are more regulatory requirements. And importantly, how can you move away from the grind and onto creative work? Dirk suggests four steps to improved development efficiency that can be enabled through specific software tools: to fully utilise knowledge, to learn in different ways (eg virtual prototyping), to gain more information and knowledge through experimentation and to effectively transfer knowledge into production at volume. Don’t just gather information – free your time to be thoughtful and creative to get a better process and/or product.

JB Tuttle is doing his MBA at the University of New Mexico. As part of the entrepreneurial program, JB developed a business plan which expanded and won some business awards. The product he’s working on is the ‘MicroHound’ – a handheld vapour trace detection system for cargo screening, ports fo entry and border security applications. Out of the market research, they found that the Science & Technology Directorate has an gate of entry type role for security devices, but the market need is there. The MicroHound is enabled through 12 patents developed by Sandia National Laboratories. So he’s got a product at the right level of technology development, but how to you get it to market? And how do you get across the ‘valley of death’. One solution is be flexible enough to alter products for targeted market research – not just asking people what they want, but also testing it with them (even if it means taking your technology development back one stage). JB is now working n the next stage of the commercialisation process.

Some good insights here for the way approach the technology transfer process with CleanFutures.

Kristin: This morning the conference was opened by the Danish Minister for Science, technology and Innovation, Helge Sander. Minister Sander talked about why nanotechnology was potentially imporant and spoke about how Denmark is working for the future. Initiatives included industrial PhDs, regional collaboration arrangements within Scandinavia and public private partnerships.

One unexpected initiative was the foreshadowing of new Danish-Chinese research centres in China and Denmark that will be opened in a week. These centres provide exciting collaboration opportunities and open up knowledge based relations between Denmark & China. The centres are an outcome of Denmark’s China Policy which includes a focus on research and innovation.

Kristin: The final session I attended today was on business models, road-mapping and entrepreneurship. I arrived late as I was presenting at the same time, but I caught the end of Christian Vogerer presenting the results of the 2009 nano-manufacturing survey in Austria.

A similar presentation was then given by Markus Dickerhof from MINAN (the European Technology Platform for Micro- and NanoManufacturing), who revealed the outcomes of the 2008/2009 Roadmapping survey for micro and nano production in Europe. In this study, they asked for input on both ‘Application Pull’ and ‘Technology Push’ approaches, aiming to link applications with technological capabilities. They were successful in attracting 232 respondents from 28 countries. The full report will be available from the MINAN website in October. One question looked at the various technology categories including assembly processes, microtechnologies and nanotechnologies. In nanotechnology, nano-surfaces were the most commonly mentioned technology seen as important for the future.

This is interesting as it matches the findings of Manufacturing: the Advanced Manufacturing R&D Capability study we submitted for South Australia earlier this year. The outcome from that report was seeding industry activities around two capabilities – coatings and composite materials.

Prof Erol Harvey from Minifab gave a beautifully titled talk called ‘Frogs and Princesses: Courtship between industry and academia’. I would love to tell you more about it, but Erol’s talk was so entertaining, that I could not take notes. Nevertheless, it was all about the fairytale (ie the myth) of commercialisation – the magic interface of ‘innovation’ that creates rivers of gold. But he did provide a good dose of reality and showed how MiniFab helps companies through the product development phase and into market adoption – Thanks Erol!!

Kristin: A range of sensor technologies are enabled through micro and nanotechnologies. It is interesting that sensors can take so many forms: mechanical, chemical, biological – and that of course, they employ combinations of these as well.

• Anja Boisen from DTU spoke about the potential of cantilver sensors. At DTU, they are looking at making new types of mechanical sensors and applying this to the detection of explosives, detection of gas (eg nerve gas), water quality (eg pesticides) and food quality (eg colour change detection on release of gases or vapours). Instead of optical methods they are refining a piezoresitive readout which allows for work with non-transparent liquids. The challenge is the sensitivity, but Anja suggested that doping of the resistor can help with this.
• Christophe Vannahme from the University of Karlsruhe spoke about microfluidic lab-on-chip sensors using PMMA (a transparent, thermoplastic polymer which is often used an alternative to glass) and integrated organic lasers that supply high efficiency. The sensing schemes are based on transmission change and fluorescence.
• Luis Moreno-Hagelsieb from DICE at UCL, is developing an electrical biosensor able to measure changes in humidity – at levels sensitive to human breathing. The device therefore has useful health monitoring applications in both conditions like sleep apnea, but also in sports (eg measuring breathing rhythm against speed in running).

The talks so far have demonstrated the challenges in obtaining highly sensitive and reproducible measurement. And they’ve also demonstrated the useful outputs of such sensors for making decisions around health, environmental and other applications.

Kristin: Karin Markides from Chalmers University in Gothenburg outlined a number of different roles and models of universities – past and present, and in different regions.

1. An educational model where the university is a host to industry.
2. A license model where the university has a strategic approach to industry and IP.
3. An entrepreneurial university which incorporates the role of host and holding incubator with ownership stakes.
4. A knowledge platform university which is more complex and requires the joining of stakeholders through throughout the whole innovation system including industry clusters, research consortia and open source platforms plus the university. This model provides a knowledge triangle between education, research and innovation.

Karin explains that open innovation is about creating and profiting from technology, using external and internal ideas, and internal and external paths to market. Boundaries become permeable, and innovations transfers across boundaries. But how do you make this work?

Karin talked further through examples of open innovation at Chalmers and MC2 (the Microtechnology and NanoScience Department), including the GHz Centre.

Kristin: The first plenary speaker for COMS2009 is Prof Frank Caruso from the University of Melbourne. While is seems excessive to travel all the way to Copenhagen to hear Frank speak, he also has ties to Europe through his PhD studies in Sweden and in co-founding the German-based company Capsulution .

One of Frank’s specialty areas is drug delivery. Particle systems can be effective delivery vehicles and there are a wide range of nano-based carriers for cancer detection and therapy. Some current particle systems include:

• Dendrimers – VivaGel® from Starpharma for the prevention of sexually-transmitted diseases
• Liposomes -Doxil® for the treatment of recurring ovarian cancer
• Inorganic particles
• Polymeric vehicles
• Virus-like particles – including the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil®

But these are all highly specialised applications. Is there such a thing as an ideal drug delivery system that can transport a number of drugs? The work that Prof Frank Caruso and his team are doing is aimed at developing such a carrier particle. They have been producing nano-engineered capsules through a layer by layer deposition of polymers over an initial seed particle. They then remove the particle to produce a controlled hollow carrier. This work has resulted in the formation of the company Capsulution based in Germany which is looking at nanoparticles to cross blood brain barriers, sustained release of drugs to treat chronic and inflammatory eye disease, and drug-eluting stents.

A further research interest is peptide & oligo nucleoride delivery. What they then do with the hollow carrier particles is to load the capsules with peptides (more complicated than it sounds!). It might then be possible to use these encpsulated peptide systems to trigger immune responses through the activation of T-cells.

Frank makes a number of observations about his work:

1. Major advances in treating disease will come from smarter delivery systems and not just the development of new small drugs.
2. Multidisciplinary approaches are required to address challenges in nanomedicine.
3. Engineering structures of materials at the nanoscale affords new therapeutic and diagnostic systems.

This is still research phase work but it is interesting to consider what else might stem from the ability to create a hollow carrier that can be used across a range of medical applications.

Kristin: I’m on my way to COMS2009. the annual commercialisation of micro and nano systems conference presented by MANCEF. Last year I attended the conference in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico and blogged and twittered some of the things that attracted my interest. This year I intend to do the same from the conference venue in Copenhagen Denmark.I also have two presentations: on CleanFutures in the clean technologies section and one with Francesca Calati of La Trobe University in the education section on AccessNano. Many thanks to the Perth Convention Bureau for providing some sponsorship towards my attendance at the conference.

This visit to Europe will also see me visit contacts in The Netherlands and The United Kingdom to look at European approaches to public engagement around emerging technologies, specifically nanotechnologies. The outcome of these visits, plus some desk-based research will be a report for the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science & Research and will hopefully contribute to Australia’s enabling technologies strategies around public engagement.

And in my spare time, I’m looking forward to connecting with futurists in Copenhagen, Paris and London, as well as meeting up with friends.

Kristin: For those of you interested in how the micro and nano communities can and are connecting through social media, you may have read my post from Clive Davenport’s presentation at COMS08, or downloaded the podcast. But if you’re in Adelaide on Thursday 2nd October between 5 – 7:30pm, you can hear it in person. Clive and I will be adapting this preentation for the ANBF Networking Seminar and anyone interested in micro and nanotechnologies is welcome to attend. Contact us for venue details and to RSVP.

Kristin: All this talk about COMS08 has cast my mind back to last year’s conference held in Melbourne. Here’s a post from the archives:

Science is dead, or at least that’s what I told the group of scientists, science teachers and engineers at the Education Day for the COMS07 conference in Melbourne last week. My first point was that science enrolment numbers at school and university are declining. My second point was that the reason St Helena Secondary College has been successful in reversing the decline in their VCE Chemistry enrolments was by introducing nanotechnology. Is nanotechnology science then? Yes and no. Certainly the curriculum draws on the basics required in chemistry, physics and biology, but I think the reason the SHINE nanotechnology program has been so attractive is because they have also integrated social impacts, art, applications, tools, and the latest cutting-edge research; things that provide context around the science. Dr Andrew Maynard called science in context ’smart science’. So is science dead? Perhaps only if it refuses to become ’smart’.

One of the opportunities presented by attending the COMS08 conference, was to extend the trip to see some nano education related activities. With some referrals and planning, I was able to arrange a visit to the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Sandia was established in 1949 and has a history of developing science-based technologies that support national security.

I got an introduction to part of Sandia when Gil Herrara presented at COMS08. Gil spoke about the MESA facility and some of the work they are doing in microsystems development. Listen here to a podcast of Gil’s talk About MESA at Sandia. Gil has assured me that the content is not classified (!).

The first part of my visit was spent at the Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies (CINT). The centre does a mixture of characterisation, synthesis and integration work and is set up with space to allow users to work at the centre. I also heard about the mechanisms and benefits of Sandia’s university alliances, the National Institute for Nano-Engineering (NINE) and managed to catch-up again with Harold Stalford.

NINE is a national innovation hub that aims to enhance student education by engaging them in team research activities for leading-edge technologies. The program includes a range of summer projects for university students. I was also shown a lab-on-chip device that CINT is hoping to send out to clients for experiments. One such test might include adding a ball to the end of a cantilever to act as an atomic force microscope. But the best thing about the technology was comparing the microscopic image of the chip showing its circuits and cantilevers with the physical chip itself – it was about 3mm by 1mm. Now that’s powerful for getting ideas about scale across!

The afternoon was spent at the Advanced Materials Laboratory (AML). AML is located alongside the University of New Mexico. There are about 110 people on site, but only 15 of these are ‘Sandians’ – the rest are students from the high school (Albuquerque institute for Math & Science – AIMS ), Central New Mexico Community College and University of New Mexico participating in research projects.

As well as looking over the facilities we were shown some examples of student outreach activities. Bernadette Hernandez-Sanchez has developed an excursion for elementary students called ‘CSI: Dognapping’. Students are brought to the centre to see a magic show, but find out the star dog has been kidnapped! They then work though a series of clues, some involving nanotechnologies, to discover the culprit. The program has had exciting results in the way students think about science after the program. AML also has a 5D rapid prototyper called ‘Cookie’ which is called into duty to demonstrate the technology by writing chocolate text on graham crackers. Delicious!

Overall the visit was a good insight in the research facility and I gained a better understanding of micro and nanotechnologies as well as setting up opportunities to share ideas regarding eduction. Thanks to everyone who took the time to talk with me. A special thank-you goes to Dominique Wilson for organising my visit, and to Pete Oelschlaeger, my host for the day, for showing me around Sandia and Albuquerque.

Kristin: 1. First a quick poll….. Is science relevant to everyday life? According to findings presented by Harold Stalford, 70% of students and 50% of parents in the USA think that K-12 math/science is irrelevant to everyday life.

2. Another poll….. Is an understanding of science important? According to Robert Giasolli, 76% of Americans say that Presidential candidates need to focus on science as a priority, but only 26% think that they themselves have a good understanding of science.

Science education is important to train the scientists and engineers for the future and to give people the power to make informed decisions. But how do we cross this gap in understanding and how do we engage the bored? The COMS2008 conference featured presentations (including one from me) covering education, public awareness and workforce development:

• Educational tools luring interest with advanced technology – Robert Giasolli
• Commercialization & Community – Kristin Alford –
• Public Outreach that Works: Spreading the word about nanotechnology – Sue Neuen
• Nanofun K-20 Education – Harold Stalford
• Hands on Micro/Nano Learning Modules Using Programmable Lego Robotic van der Graff Generators & their Commercialization- Dean Aslam
• Microfluidic Platform for Education & Research – Proyag Datta

This is a long post (reflecting my interest area I suppose), but stick with me. I would very much like to hear your feedback and about other initiatives in this area.

*

Making Nano Accessible and Fun

In a striking call to action, Sue Neuen got the audience singing ‘It’s a Small World (COMS2008 – Small World)’, based on a session they had run for younger children. In doing so, Sue demonstrated the first strategy for nano education – make it fun. And as Robert Giasolli said, don’t forget Clarke’s Third Law – you can also make it ‘magic’.

Sue said they’d asked children to count to 100 and explained that to get a billion you’d be counting for 95 years! They’ve also used the Dr Seuss book ‘Horton hears a Who’ as a resource.

Other resources mentioned were the hands-on exhibits in the NanoZone at UC Berkeley’s Lawrence Hall of Science and Bugscope where students can send in bugs and then access the SEM images over the internet. Robert Giasolli also described the poster and virtual world that was being created called 21st Century World. The video for 21st Century world will be a great resource when it is released.

By the end of Sue’s talk, she was blowing ‘nanospheres’ (that’s bubbles to everyone else), but a good reminder of how nanotechnology and scale can be communicated with levity.

Harold Stalford is also using the principles of ‘fun’ in designing K-12 education programs. In this case, ‘fun’ evokes both understanding the simple FUNdamentals of science that explain nanotechnologies, but also looking for fun applications to hook students into enjoying science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM).
*

Using Nano as Hook for STEM

As noted in my introduction, Harold discovered that most students were bored or couldn’t see the relevance of maths and science. Therefore, they set some guiding principles for producing resources:
1. Make it relevant to student life
2. Use internet-based software so students can ‘virtually take apart’ nanotechnologies like they might have taken apart machines; and
3. Concentrate on the fundamentals.

I later met Harold at Sandia National Laboratories where he is on secondment. He explained that they are seeking funding to deliver modules on electronics (like iPhones for example). Each module is based on the fundamentals but include on-line interactive activities and self-assessment tests to show ‘cool’ nanotechnologies in the students’ own language.

Robert Giasolli also launched the MANCEF educational kit at COMS2008. Their process was to identify the micro and nanotechnology needs of government, universities and corporates and then to generate a roadmap and seek out creative ways of conveying the value of micro and nanotechnologies. Their first unit is on Scale and contains 5 lessons including handouts, teacher guides, animations, videos and commercial products. The unit links back to teacher knowledge and ability but it strategically linked to approaches in the field. Elements include comparing nano to normal, measuring the microworld, asking whether nano size is a macro challenge and whether an atom really just space, and finally looking at a nano peace prize. The kit contains a DVD and teacher CD sells for $350. They will be expanding the kit and are currently looking for corporate sponsorship to supply kit materials or to provide teacher professional development for groups of schools.

I also talked about the education initiatives in Australia. The NanoBits kit is gaining interest in Australia and export markets (and several people I met were eager to place orders!). SHINE was discussed at COMS2007, but we updated everyone on its impact in Victoria and on Francesca Calati winning the Prime Minister’s Prize for Secondary School Teaching, in a large part due to this initiative. I also gave a preview of the new AccessNano national nanotechnology school resource we are launching in November. It is clear that AccessNano is a very comprehensive resource and people are very interested in our approach and materials.
*

Tools

In addition to educational resources, there were a couple of exciting tools that could be used in the classroom.

The first was a system of programmable Lego robotics presented by Dean Aslam. Dean explained how Lego could be used to explain some micro and nanotechnology concepts. He explained that to understand nanotechnology (or even pico-technology) we also need an understanding of time, mechanisms, electrodynamics, and chemical bonds. Nano-sized robotics has potential for drug delivery and diagnostics, using brain computer interfaces to control robotics and prostheses. The fundamental building block of all of these systems is the transistor switch. Dean has a system of Lego pieces that show how micro transistors can be manufactured. He recently gave a workshop to 80 teachers using a van der Graff generator made out of Lego with a bubble generator. These systems will be commercialised with the support of Wireless Integrated Microsystems in Michigan and will include static charge sensors, robotic wall climbers and van der Graff generators.

Another tool was the microfluidic platform presented by Proyag Datta at the Univeristy of Louisiana. This platform could be used to demonstrate microfluidic principles using dyes and other materials at a reasonable cost.
*

Industry Outreach for Education

The other important aspect to education that was raised is how industry and research institutions can support science and math eduction.

Sue mentioned Siemens USA – Generation 21 and recommended one of their publications – Siemens Pictures of the Future .

The other way scientists and engineers can play a role is to present at local or national science teachers associations. Sue has speaking at these events in the USA, much like a group of us in Australia have been doing. Sarah and I presented at STAVCON last year and Peter Binks from NanoVic, Matthew Dipnall from NanoBits, Brent Banham at Flinders University (plus a myriad of others I’m sure) have all presented at these conferences recently. And certainly in Australia, this has been backed up by specific nanotechnology presentations on SHINE from Amanda Clarke and Francesca Calati. And not just at conferences – classroom incursions or organisation excursions are also effective. One teacher said to Sue that ‘if the US needs 10,000 new technicians in the next 10-15 years, then we need a lot more of these seminars!’
*

Public Engagement

The final aspect of these presentations was public outreach. Sue mentioned some forums at the California Science Center and I later found out about forums at the Exploratorium too (includng one next Thursday 18th September).

I showcased a range of activities in Australia from arts/science collaborations, forums, dialogue, and Web2.0 media like blogging and podcasting. My slides show the range of activities being undertaken in Australia. It is clear from this conference that we are undertaking a wide range of activities appealing to a broad public audience. And not just information to make informed decisions, but also activities that provide emotional engagement.

So what’s going on in your neighbourhood? Let us know!

Kristin: So what does Ferran Adria and his restaurant E Bulli have to do with nanotech? Several presentations at COMS08 highlighted innovative applications and approaches for nanotechnology. This blog looks at the following:

• A Bio Micro Convergence Technology: A Laboratory on a Foil to Reduce Real State Cost- Jesus M Ruano-Lopez
• Continuous monitoring of Biomarkers fro Environmental Applications – Charles Call
• Micro and Nano Innovation and Education in Scandinavia – Mogens Poulsen

A Bio Micro Convergence Technology: A Laboratory on a Foil to Reduce Real State Cost- Jesus M Ruano-Lopez

According to Jesus M Ruano-Lopez, Adria’s creations at E Bulli demonstrate the innovation that happens when we mix cooking and science. He asked whether the same principles might be applied to mixing nanotechnology with the life sciences and suggested that one outcome would be the development of ‘lab-on-a-chip’ applications. He explained how the ‘LabonFoil’ technology works to address four key commercialisation requirements:

1. Disposable – Silicon wafers are too expensive to be disposables, but the “LabonFoil’ approach uses a MEMS base with dry film lamination to produce a low-cost chip.
2. Prepares Samples – Real samples are 1.5ml compared with micro channels in the test system. Jesus Lopez asked ‘how can you fit the Eiffel tower into a car?’ The solution is to mix the sample with magnetic beads to trap the relevant sample in the testing device.
3. Easy to Handle – These films are so thin that they can be embedded into a card (like a credit card) or into skin patches.
4. Market Driven – The approach has been to increase added value through added functionalities, but also with an eye on the price and how to produce at quantity.

Continuous monitoring of Biomarkers fro Environmental Applications – Charles (Chuck) Call

Chuck showed how serum protein concentration could fluctuate wildly in the first 24 hours after an injury. Currently point samples are taken to estimate the path, but the reality is more complicated. Getting real-time measurements would allow for more targeted treatments and may save lives. Chuck spoke about how a nanobiosensor called Vista comprises multiple probes of nanowires suspended in electrical circuit to provide large functional arrays. These could provide for real-time monitoring in such circumstances.

The nanowire technology can also be used for security systems monitoring eg for smoke, aerosols and bio-threats. The commercialisation timeframe is within the next five years for clinical applications, but some applications may be available within the next year. Chuck also mentioned that the development tracks back to a meeting at COMS2001, which provide connections to make these initiatives work.

Micro and Nano Innovation and Education in Scandinavia – Mogens Poulsen

Mogens spoke about the innovation system in Scandinavia. Traditionally, research, education and innovation have been organised nationally, but more recent facilitating initiatives have embraced regional and bilateral networks. For example, Nano Øresund is a region encompassing Denmark and southern Sweden. The region has a cluster of internationally competitive competencies around medical and ICT technologies.

The other interesting aspect of Scandinavian innovation was their industrial PhD stream. The student is employed by the company, with time split 50/50 between the company and university. The project has company specific content, and all IP belongs to the company. The company ensures the applicability of the work and the university ensures scientific and educational merits. The Danish government reimburses up to 50% of the salary.

So three different presentations that highlight how creativity, connection and innovation are working in nanotechnology.

Kristin: I’m back in my room reflecting on another day of talks here at COMS2008. My brain’s a bit full, but it’s worth noting the plenary session this morning. The presentations again nicely covered the main theme of COMS – models for innovation, specific applications of nanotechnology and regional development. They were:

1. The MESA Concept: A model for fostering multidisciplinary innovation – Gil Herrara
2. Nanocomposites: Thin film devices from photovoltaics to nanoelectronics – Seamus Curran
3. Alberta & Canada – Your partners in micro and nanotechnology – Rick Brommeland

The MESA Concept: A model for fostering multidisciplinary innovation – Gil Herrara

Gil spoke about projects at Sandia National Laboratories, where the primary objective of the MESA facility is to do focus on key critical components that cannot or should not be obtained commercially. The facility focosed on technologies falling into Tech Readiness levels 1 to 6. Gil spoke about three main things.

Firstly, he spoke about the ‘tight coupling’ of manufacturing to basic science and computational simulation that brings thier success in developing microsystems. Sandia has experts in synthesis, characterization and theory for for atom-level chem & physics, advacned computation and high performance supercomputing, test and validation methods and engineering complex systems.

Secondly, they have in-house expertise to support multiple enabling technologies, such as flexible fabrication, photonics, compound semiconductors, advanced packing, piezoelectrics and micro-machining. They use a borad definition of microsystems – any function that helps sense, think, act or talk.

Finally he profiled thier deep competency in electronics packaging and explained that the packaging is just as important as the MEMS device it protects and enables. Key things to address include the thinness of device, management of power, allowance for different environments (including space!).

*

Nanocomposites: Thin film devices from photovoltaics to nanoelectronics – Seamus Curran

Seamus looked at the differences and potential combinations of the top-down, inorganic world and the bottom-up, organic world of polymers. He spoke about how these two types of matter could be combined to provide novel behaviours and potential new applications (a scientific mash-up!)

Seamus diagreed with Tim Harper about the bubble market and anticipated a market of more than $1-2 trillion dollars for 2015 as nanotechnology evolved into different sectors such as biotechnology and energy.

*

Alberta & Canada – Your partners in micro and nanotechnology – Rick Brommeland

After hearing about Mexico yesterday, it was interesting to turn to Canada, specifically Alberta. Canada makes a similar investment in nanotechnology funding to Australia and is keen to sttract more private investment. The major Canadian university precincts in nanotechnology are Britih Columbia, Ontoario, Quebec and Alberta. Alberta is centred on the Univeristy of Alberta and the University of Calagary, and public sector investment in nano is $13.50 per person per year. In addition, there is also the National Institute for Nanotechnology and the Alberta Ingenuity Nano Accelarator. Investment to 2007 has been $250 m with a further $220 M expected by 2012. They are particularly focused on applcxiations in agriculture, plus health and materials and have a rnage of international research and industry relationships. If you’re interested in Alberta – just call!

Kristin: Tuesday’s Plenary session featured three different speakers talking about applications, markets and innovation:

1. A new class of nanomaterials brings power to the people – Roberto Mehalso. Bob talked about using nanoporous materials for super efficient batteries;
2. Ten years along: is nanotech finally profitable? – Tim Harper. Tim talked about the expectations for nanotechnology markets; and
3. Nanotechnology in Mexico: Current overview and perspective – Dr Francisco Medina. Francisco provided an overview and perspective of nanotechnology development in Mexico, specifically Jalisco.

A new class of nanomaterials brings power to the people – Roberto Mehalso

Bob demonstrated the microbattery in his phone by taking fast, flash photos of the audience again and again and again. He explained how the nanoprorous materials can be made from liquid crystal templates to produce highly effective and safe batteries for electronic equipment like cell phones. I’ve blogged Bob’s talk in more detail here.

The battery is made from a new class of nanoporous materials, produced by self-assembly of liquid crystal templates (basically soap) developed by Nanotecture. Mixing this surfactant with water gives rise to different chemical structures including micella, hexagonal, lamellar and cubic phases. This can be done using electrodeposition or chemical deposition and both methods can control pore size and structure…..

*

Ten years along: is nanotech finally profitable? – Tim Harper

Tim Harper from Cientifica reviewed the market success of nanotechnologies after 10 years. He stressed the importance of understanding the underlying technologies for investors and showed how many the share prices of many ‘nanotech’ companies declined through 2007 compared with a pretty flat sharemarket overall. Tim made the point that many of these ‘failures’ were based on the technology, rather than on an understanding of market needs (again we come to the issues of supply vs demand, technology push vs market pull). Companies who are making use of nanotechnologies as part of a broader customer solution eg BASF are more successful and he doesn’t think the VC model works well for emerging technologies. And he doesn’t think that public acccpetance is relevant. Tim also showed Gartner’s Hype Cycle (applied for nano) and suggested that the biggest issue for nano now is bridging the chasm between people who want technology and people who want solutions. Future expectations for nano? Tim says 80% of opportunities are in chemicals and pharmaceuticals by 2012.

*

Nanotechnology in Mexico: Current overview and perspective – Francisco Medina

Francisco Medina (from our host organisation) said that nano is alive and well in Mexico in theory, but in practice, the nano industry is not yet a major player.

• • • • • Stats on the supply side – 56 institutions, 449 researchers, 101 technicians, 87 postgraduate programs, 157 labs and 91 current projects.
        • Stats on the demand side – 84 companies from Expansion (Mexican Fortune 500) recently responded to a survey. 50% of respondents ignore the subject (of nano), 76% have no or little lab infrastructure, 42% have no nano projects. He surmised that very few companies are actually involved in nanotechnology in Mexico.

Francisco also said that there is very little controversy over nano in Mexico and that most Mexicans are unaware – they don’t realise the size of the market or potential impact on their daily lives. Finally, Francsico said that Mexico does not need roadmaps or lots of money to laucnh its nano program. It needs imagination and political will! Nicely said!

Another podcast from COMS2008 – this one a recording of Clive Davenport talking about connecting the micro and nano worlds globally through social media. I apologise that the sound quality is not good – we had interference from the talks next door and it is quite echo-y. However, I hope you are inspired to contribute your thoughts and you feel like you’re here.

Kristin

Kristin: In one of the first sessions at COMS2008, Clive Davenport presented on ‘Connecting the Micro and Nano Worlds’. Clive introduced a number of social networking options to stay connected and I talked about blogging, microblogging and feed aggregaters and explained how I was presenting the COMS2008 conference through the NanoVic & ScienceGeekSpeak blogs (and this one), Flickr photos, FriendFeed rooms and the Yahoo pipes site (Thanks@dnwallace). I also recorded the session and you can listen to the podcast (Thanks for the hints @fang). The sound quality is not great due to interference from the session next to us, but it’s one more way we can make it feel like you’re here with us. Like a margarita?

Kristin: At Coms2008 this morning, Alan Smith gave a number of examples of nanotechnology in health, energy and transport. Intriguingly, he also had some show & tell and passed around this Easton Stealth baseball bat. The bat was interesting, not only because it’s made of material containing carbon nanotubes, but also because this is stated prominently on its side. Marketed as ‘CNT’ technology. Cool!

Originally published on Blog@NanoVic for Nanotechnology Victoria.

Kristin: What a busy day! I’m sitting in the last parallel session for the first day of COMS2008. At the break, Prof Erol Harvey from MiniFab asked me what I’d discovered so far. The key things that have come out of the day are:

1. noting that the same global issues keep coming up;
2. the importance of market pull and ‘translators’ in innovation; and
3. understanding applications of nanotechnology that are new for me.

Note that these are my perspectives on what I’ve heard today and apologies for any misinterpretations! I welcome your comments and feedback. Now let’s take those items one at a time….

Global Issues

Pedro Adalberto Gonzalez Hernandez and our host Francisco Medina Gomez mentioned the range of global issues that Mexico is facing, and these were again echoed by Jane Niall from the State Government of Victoria. They were also addressed in a global context by Steve Walsh. These issues include health care, water, climate change and energy. In some ways, pursuing micro and nanotechnologies (MNT) can be justified if they suggest possible solutions to these problems. On the other hand, positioning MNT as the solution is problematic. Another global consideration was the potential of MNT as a driver of economic development and how growing global connections may assist.

*

Market Pull and ‘Babel Fish’ Translators for Innovation

I’ve been involved in a project for the South Australia government mapping R&D capability. Two snippets from talks resonated with me in light of this work.

Firstly, Dag Winkler from Chalmers University (Sweden) spoke about the 20+ spin-out companies from the mu-fab network, but then mentioned the booking system for the laboratories. I wondered why the focus on a booking system until he mentioned that the software they had developed to take the bookings across three laboratories with 500 instruments has received attention form other users and they were now looking at commercialising that as well. A good example of market pull and being prepared to deliver different sources of innovation.

Miriam Luzinik from MESA+ (Netherlands) was speaking about how ideas are commercialised. As well as spin-out companies, she made reference to the role of ‘Technology Accelerator’ – someone who talks to the research groups, finds interesting projects with market potential and then works out ways to protect IP and proceed with development. This is a great example of someone working as a ‘babel fish’ translator for innovation, something that we have identified in our projects in South Australia as being necessary to assist industry R&D and research commercialisation.

*

Applications of Nanotechnology

Finally I managed to canvass a few new applications of nanotechnology I hadn’t previously understood very well. Both Franz Kampers and Kathy Groves gave more details about the application of nano in food technology, opening up considerable questions for me. I find myself torn here – if the answer to good health is eating a fresh and balanced diet, then as Franz says, we don’t need nano. So it seems almost sad that there is this market opportunity. On the other hand, if, as they both explained, we can use MNT to perhaps reduce artificial colours, supply nutrients and lower the fat content of baked goods with lowering the eating quality (still tastes good), then perhaps consumers will buy foods which are better for their health and which may protect them from diet-related disease.

I also spoke with Jim Mason from the Oklahoma Nanotechnology Initiative about improvements to prosthetics and Greg Raupp from the Flexible Display Centre at Arizona State University about display technologies (some thing I will chase up further!).

You can listen to ‘Welcome to COMS2008′…..

After watching the the Science Blogging: London Conference unfold online on Saturday, I was inspired to try something similar with the MANCEF – COMS2008 I am attending in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico.

It started with a relatively simple post on the Bridge8 website, but then I got more ambitious. Included is the podcast of the opening session (thanks Mike) and photos uploaded from my phone to Flickr. And since I’ve been twittering with the tag #mancef-coms or #coms, we realised we’d started to amass some good info. I opened a FriendFeed room and @dnwallace has very generously set up a Yahoo Pipe especially for the event.

You can also visit the offical site to see the program.

I’ll be presenting Wednesday afternoon, so feel free to twitter me questions or participate.

Kristin

Kristin: The first session introduced delegates to Puerto Vallarta in the state of Jalisco, Mexico. Jalisco is known as Mexico’s Silicon Valley or the high tech capital. It has the largest budget for science, technology and innovation (and is also responsible for tequila and mariachi bands!). Microtechnology and MEMS are examples of expert areas for the research centres, universities and the local and international companies here. Other areas include IT, microelectronics, photonics, sensors and diagnostics.

This session also include three technical presentations:

1. Economic environment for the development of high tech in Mexico – Pedro Adalberto Gonzalez Hernandez
2. Micro & Nano technologies for food – Franz Kampers
3. The wonderful world of MEMS & Nanotechnology – Steve Walsh for Marlene Bourne

Economic environment for the development of high tech in Mexico – Pedro Adalberto Gonzalez Hernandez

For me, it seemed that the programs in Mexico have some clear parallels to the issues we’ve been discussing for South Australia and Australia. It was interesting to note that programs in Mexico are dedicated mostly to SMEs and that there is not really an overall vision for this sector that takes into account the difference among market sectors. Pedro also made the comment that ‘Program-centred research, development & innovation often meet the ‘valley of death’ and need support to cross this obstacle and deliver productive and successful commercial applications.

A case study on the Mexican automotive industry showed 8 times as many 2nd and 3rd tier suppliers than the final assemblers. Are there other global opportunities for these firms? Can these firms develop further capabilities in manufacturing design and development? To do so, they require support for human resources & training, design, networking, marketing and business opportunities.

Micro & nano technologies for food – Franz Kampers

Franz framed his presentation with a disclaimer: if people eat the right diet they do not need nanotechnology. But he added that most people do not eat the recommend 2 fruit and 5 veges which leads to the question – could we add functionality to a processed Western diet to address some of these issues?

He showed an example of how microtechnology could be used to reduce the fat content of mayonnaise – membrane emulsion can add small droplets of oil in controlled process to deliver controlled droplet sizes. this would be more stable and contain less fat than a traditional mayonnaise. Another example is creating particles with a nanostructured shell that could release vitamins and minerals in a specific part of the gastrointestinal tract.

Franz also spoke about food quality and stressed that nanotechnologists need to show that risks for nano in food are different from nanoparticulate risks. Communicating these benefits is very difficult – media are generally more interested in the risks and companies are reluctant to use their products as examples.

The wonderful world of MEMS & Nanotechnology – Steve Walsh for Marlene Bourne

Again, the disruptive nature of micro and nano technologies (MNT) was stressed in relation to traditional technologies such as semiconductors. For MNT, the technology roadmap is complex – there are lots of different technological substitutes and no one platform or technology to address a problem.

The idea the MNT might be a fifth wave of development (after Schumpeter) was raised as a way to help educate people about the possible economic impacts on wealth and job creation. Roadmaps are being developed through MANCEF for global opportunities and challenges in biotechnology, workforce development, energy, water and health.

And Steve stressed the need to still educate – and the importance of understanding issues and risks for good governance.

Kristin: Steve Walsh told a nice story at COMS2008 about the importance of really understanding the issues in order to have good governance. Apparently, the city of Cambridge MA, USA regulated against anyone holding more than 5 gallons of flammable liquids within the city boundary after a serious industrial accident. Steve was asked to give a talk in the city and gave all attendees tickets for breaching the law. They all drove.