Opening Remarks

• The Honorable Ron Wyden

  United States Senator

  Oregon

Testimony

• Dr. Stan Williams
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Dr. Stan Williams

  Chairman Wyden, Senator Allen, members of the subcommittee, I thank you for providing me – on behalf of Hewlett-Packard Company – the opportunity to testify before you on the topic of nanotechnology. To appreciate the smallness of a nanometer, consider shrinking yourself down in all three dimensions by a factor of 1000 – you would become the size of an ant. Now shrink that ant by a factor of 1000 – it would be about the size of a single red blood cell. Finally, shrink that cell by a factor of 1000 – that is the size of a nanometer, essentially the width of a few atoms. Nanoscience, the study of structures that are a few atoms in size, is the scientific field where hundreds of years of advances in physics, chemistry and biology have recently come together. Now that all three disciplines have arrived at this same goal, each has realized that it can learn much from the others, which is causing traditional academic boundaries to blur. The unifying theme is that the intrinsic properties of matter, such as color, chemical reactivity, and electrical resistivity, depend on size and shape only at the nanoscale. Nano-engineered systems have the broadest possible range of properties that can be designed, which in turn means that building anything with control down to the nanometer scale will enable them to be produced in the most efficient possible manner. Thus, nanotechnology is a collection of new tools available to a broad range of scientists and engineers – it is not a complete solution to any problem. We will increasingly find that the crucial or enabling component of a system is engineered at the nanometer scale. Indeed, Deutsche Bank in Berlin has estimated that the total value of nanotechnology-enabled products and services will be US$116 billion this year. Thus, as we consider creating a National Nanotechnology Program, we must not neglect other scientific and engineering areas that provide the other components to complete solutions. I will give three examples that illustrate the breadth and scope of what is possible in the present, the near future, and the longer term with nanotechnology. By mixing hard and tough materials at the nanoscale, new composites have been made with levels of both properties never seen before in a single material. In the past year, General Motors has introduced a polymer-clay nanocomposite that is used for running boards on their pickup trucks, and they plan to utilize it in an increasing number of components of their vehicles in the future. In this one example, we see that a nanotechnology can help the fuel economy, the safety, the repair cost, and the ecological impact of our transportation system. One of the most significant nanoscience discovories of the past couple of years is that carbon nanotubes and semiconductor nanowires, can be used as extraordinarily sensitive sensors of chemical compounds. They should be ideal in home defense applications for the detection of explosives, poisons and biological agents. Given an appropriate level of support, it should be possible to begin deploying such sensors in susceptible areas within two to three years. On the five to ten year time frame it should be possible to cheaply manufacture such sensors in the hundreds of millions to billions of units per year to provide continuous monitoring of our public buildings, post offices, transportation networks and other institutions vulnerable to terrorist attack. On a longer time frame, recent discoveries and announcements in the area of nanoelectronic memory and logic circuits promise to extend the dramatic improvements in performance of computers that we have seen over the past 40 years. These advances promise to extend the economic benefits of the electronics industry that the US has enjoyed for many more decades into the future. From these examples, we can see that nanotechnology has the potential to greatly improve the properties of nearly everything that humans currently make, and will lead to the creation of new medicines, materials and devices that will substantially improve the health, wealth and security of American and global citizens. However, current experience in the US shows that the number of excellent proposals submitted for nanotechnology-related research far outstrips the available funds. The ramp-up in funding must be steep, approximately 30% per year, and sustained for at least the next five years. A National Nanotechnology Program will allow for continuous monitoring and feedback to make sure that the best ideas are funded. Also, increases in nanotechnology support must be consistent with an overall increase in the total physical science and engineering base in agencies such as the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense. My primary concern for US nanotechnology is that we will not train and retain enough of the best researchers to be the leaders in this crucial area. Currently, the US is supplying only 25% of the global funding for nanotechnology research by national governments. Other countries are determined to keep pace and even surpass our efforts by investing heavily and by recruiting the best and brightest researchers away from the US. We will need to leverage our academic, government and corporate research capabilities to compete globally. However, relations between large corporations and American Universities have never been worse. Severe disagreements have arisen because of conflicting interpretations of the Bayh-Dole Act. Many large US based corporations now work with the elite institutions in France, Russia and China, which are willing to offer extremely favorable intellectual property terms for their support. The US government has several roles to play to insure that America leads the world in nanotechnology. The first is to invest sufficiently in the basic research enterprise, which produces the scientists and engineers who will invent the future. The second is to act as an early adopter of new technologies, especially in the areas where technological advantage enhances our security. Finally, government should consider a new role, that of mediator to bring together academic, corporate and national research labs so they can work together and the nation can share in the benefits of their discoveries.

• The Honorable Richard M. Russell

  Associate Director and Deputy Director for Technology

  Executive Office of the President
  Read statement

  Testimony

  The Honorable Richard M. Russell

  Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to speak about the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). Nanotechnology is research and development at the nanoscale - a scale on the order of 10-9 meters, or a thousandth of a millionth of a meter. To provide some perspective, this is approximately 1/100,000 the diameter of the average human hair. Research in nanotechnology is contributing to a fundamentally new understanding of the unique properties that occur on the nanoscale. The properties and governing physics of materials and artifacts at the nanoscale can differ significantly from those at more conventional scales. As a result, nanotechnology represents more than simply another step in the progression of technology miniaturization. Looking to the future, commercialization of nanotechnology is expected to lead to new products, and in some cases the creation of new markets, in applications as diverse as materials and manufacturing, electronics, medicine and healthcare, environment, energy, chemicals, biotechnology, agriculture, information technology, transportation, national security, and others. Nanotechnology will likely have a broad and fundamental impact on many sectors of the economy. Some have even suggested that this impact will surpass the combined impact of both biotech and information technology. New discoveries are being made on a regular basis. Just last week (9/10/02), researchers at Hewlett Packard announced a nanotechnology breakthrough in molecular electronics. Through a joint federal/industry funded project at the University of California at Los Angeles, the team pioneered a method to fabricate nanoscale wires separated by a thousand molecules. This novel device represents a major breakthrough in memory storage density that heralds a new era in microelectronic miniaturization. It serves as a prime example of the promise - and the challenge - posed by nanotechnology. This includes the promise of new materials, new devices, and new processes that will enable continued growth in our high tech industries. But it also highlights the challenge of understanding nanoscale phenomena, reliably producing nanoscale structures and systems, and converting this new knowledge into new technologies that contribute to our economic prosperity. Another example of great promise is the federally funded BioCOM chip under development at the University of California at Berkeley. This device combines elements of both the nano- and the micro-scale into a lab-on-a-chip package that provides a new tool for real-time sampling of blood for Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) screening. Though still in the prototype stage, this device, and others like it, promise to revolutionize medicine. These developments are leading to new sensors that will be utilized in medicine as well as homeland security, broadly contributing to healthcare, economic strength, and national security. Nanotechnology is still at a very early stage of development. The role of federal R&D funding in this area is to provide the fundamental research underpinnings upon which future commercial nanoscale technologies will be based. Numerous challenges must be addressed before the envisioned promise of these technologies can be reached. These challenges include fundamental research to improve our basic understanding in several fields of science and engineering, as well as novel approaches toward synthesis, analysis and manufacturing of nanotechnology-based products. Because of the complexity, cost, and high risk associated with these issues, the private sector is often unable to assure itself of short-to-medium term returns on R&D investments. Consequently, industry is not likely to undertake the basic research investments necessary to overcome the technical barriers that currently face the nanotechnology field. The NNI program is structured to overcome these barriers so that America’s industries will prosper from our investment in nanotechnology. The President’s FY 2003 budget represents a record request for federally funded R&D ($112 billion), an increase of eight percent over the previous investment. Because of its significant potential impact on the physical sciences, life sciences, and engineering—and more broadly on the U.S. economy and society—nanotechnology is viewed by the Bush Administration as an important component of the federal research and development (R&D) portfolio. Funding for nanotechnology was increased seventeen percent in the FY 2003 request ($679 million). In the previous fiscal year, President Bush signed into law a thirty seven percent increase in the NNI budget (from $464 million to $579 million). The Administration’s ongoing support for nanotechnology was articulated through a joint guidance memorandum issued to heads of Federal science and technology agencies from John H. Marburger III, Director of OSTP, and Mitchell Daniels, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, which specifically identified nanotechnology as one of six interagency R&D priorities for FY 2004. Federal funding for Nanotechnology is focused through the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The NNI is an interagency program that encompasses relevant nanotechnology R&D among the participating Federal agencies. The research agenda for the nine agencies currently participating in the NNI is coordinated by the Nanoscale Science and Engineering Technology (NSET) Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). The NSET is staffed by representatives of the participating agencies, OSTP, OMB, as well as other Federal agencies that lack relevant R&D programs but which have an interest in these technologies. NSET members meet on a monthly basis to measure progress, set priorities, organize workshops, and plan for the coming year. The National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) assists NSET-participating agencies in coordinating their nanotechnology funding. It also serves as the secretariat for the NNI. The NNCO carries out the objectives established by the NSET members, coordinates and publishes information from workshops sponsored by the NNI, and prepares annual reports on the activities of the NNI. The NNCO also contracts for program reviews to provide feedback on the NNI. The federal agencies currently performing nanotechnology research coordinated through the NNI are: Department of Defense; Department of Energy; Department of Justice; Department of Transportation; Environmental Protection Agency; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Institutes of Health; National Institute of Standards and Technology; National Science Foundation; and Department of Agriculture. This funding provides support for a range of activities, which include: basic research, focused efforts directed at answering specific sets of questions of high significance – so-called “grand challenges,” research infrastructure (instrumentation, equipment, facilities), and centers and networks of excellence, which are larger centralized facilities intended to provide sites for cooperative and collaborative efforts among distributed networks and groups of researchers at multiple affiliated institutions. Depending on the agency, funding is being used to support mission-oriented research within agencies, research at national laboratories, or to support research at academic institutions. A small portion of the funding is also dedicated to addressing non-technical research problems in a broader context, including societal implications, and workforce and training issues that will likely emerge in relation to nanotechnology. The National Research Council (NRC) conducted an evaluation study of the NNI from mid-2001 to mid-2002. Earlier this summer, the NRC released the results of this study in a report entitled Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers: A Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative. The report highlighted the strong leadership of the NNI, praised the degree of interagency collaboration, and lauded the early successes of the research programs. The report also provided a number of recommendations to further strengthen the NNI. OSTP is working closely with the NNCO, as well as through its representation on the NSTC’s Nanoscale Science and Engineering Technology Subcommittee, to improve the structure of the NNI, and to create a stronger framework for implementing the NNI’s technical objectives. One recommendation of the NRC was to create an independent Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Advisory Board (NNAB) to provide input to the NSET members. OSTP believes that this function can be met through the President’s Council of Advisors and Science and Technology (PCAST). As you know, PCAST members represent a distinguished cross section of industry and academia and have always functioned as an external advisory board on science and technology issues of relevance to the nation. They are clearly qualified to carry out such functions for nanotechnology. The NNI was initiated in FY 2000. The early program successes and positive independent review by the NRC provide a sound justification for continued support in this important research field. With a history of only two years, the ultimate impact of the NNI lies in the future and will only be realized through continued Federal R&D funding. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I hope that this overview has conveyed this Administration’s commitment to nanotechnology and the NNI program. OSTP is actively working with the NNCO to implement many of the NRC recommendations. We believe that our efforts will improve the program substantially and will enhance our investment in nanotechnology.

• Dr. Nathan Swami
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Dr. Nathan Swami

  Click here for Dr. Swami's tesitmony

• Mr. F. Mark Modzelewski
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Mr. F. Mark Modzelewski

  Introduction: Mr. Chairman, Senator Allen, members of the subcommittee, I thank you for allowing me -- on behalf of the NanoBusiness Alliance and our member organizations -- the opportunity to testify before you on the topic on nanotechnology and its transition from a science into a business. Nanotechnology has really been here since the dawn of creation. The difference now is that man is beginning to tap into it. Nanotechnology is the ability to do things - measure, see, predict and manufacture - on the scale of atoms and molecules. Traditionally, the nanotechnology realm is defined as being between 0.1 and 100 nanometers, a nanometer being one thousandth of a micron (micrometer), which is, in turn, one thousandth of a millimeter. Working at the scale of atoms and molecules is not merely about miniaturizing items. Working at this scale allows for the actual opening of nature’s toolbox. Working at this scale allows man to act as nature does in creating things. Currently, nanotechnology is transitioning from a science into a business. It is rapidly becoming the Industrial Revolution of the 21st century. The importance of nanotechnology cannot be overstated. It will affect almost every aspect of our lives, from the way we do computing, to the medicines we use, the energy supplies we require, the foods we eat, the cars we drive, and the clothes we wear. More importantly, for every area where we can fathom an impact from nanotechnology, there will be others no one has thought of -- new capabilities, new products, and new markets. We are at the earliest stage of this “nano-revolution.” The nanotech industry might be compared to the computer industry of the 1960s, before the development of the integrated circuit, or the biotech industry of the 1970s. But while many nanotechnology sectors are in their nascent stages, others are already delivering products to the market. Forward-thinking corporations and entrepreneurs are reaping revenues and profits from a variety of nanomaterials, including enhanced polymers, coatings, and fillers. And advanced nanotech medical applications, such as disease detection and drug delivery, are in human trials and will be greatly impacting lives within a few years. As production of nano-products becomes easier, faster and cheaper, every market sector will begin to feel their impact. We at the NanoBusiness Alliance estimate that the global market for nanotechnology-related products and services could reach more than $225 billion in 2005. The U.S. National Science Foundation conservatively predicts a $1 trillion global market for nanotechnology in little over a decade. (It should be noted that the Microtechnology Innovation Team at Deutsche Bank AG. announced last week the results of a comprehensive market analysis on nanotechnology (full study available Q3/Q4 2002). They estimate that the current market size of nanotechnology products is greater than $116 billion, excluding electronics, and $300 billion total. According to the report, the nanomaterials market size is expected to reach $29.4B per year by 2006. While these significant numbers are appreciated, they do not align with other research in the field and will need to be explored upon the full release of the report.) Nanotechnology Development: Nanotechnology is an enabling technology. It allows us to do new things. Like other enabling technologies, such as the internal combustion engine, the transistor or the Internet, its impact on society will be broad and often unanticipated. And nanotech is indeed changing many fields of business in truly revolutionary ways. Life Sciences and Medicine: In life sciences and medicine, nanotechnology means we are beginning to be able to measure and make things on the level at which organisms in the living world, from bacteria to plants to ourselves, do most of their work. Being able to work at this scale doesn't just empower us in our control of the biological world, but also allows us to start borrowing from that world, leveraging the extraordinary inventions that nature has produced through billions of years of evolution. Nanotechnology will ultimately help to extend the life span, improve its quality, and enhance human physical capabilities. In the near future, about half of all production of pharmaceuticals will be dependent on nanotechnology - affecting over $180 billion in revenues per year in 10 to15 years. Disciplines in LifeSciences and Medicine that are seeing nanotechnology’s impact are: Nanoparticle Tagging: Nanoparticles small enough to behave as quantum dots can be made to emit light at varying frequencies. If you can get particles that emit at different frequencies to attach to different molecules you can literally put a sign of identification on them. This development will allow for the tagging of disease, infection and bacteria, allowing for detection at the earliest moment of a disorder’s onset. Nanostructured Materials: Nanostructured materials, coupled with liquid crystals and chemical receptors, offer the possibility of cheap, portable biodetectors that might, for instance, be worn as a badge. Such a badge could change color in the presence of a variety of chemicals and would have applications in hazardous environments. The US armed forces are already in advanced research stage for this discovery to be part of the military uniform of the future. Drug Delivery: Drug delivery is one of the areas that is anticipated to have applications hitting the market very soon; clinical trials have already begun. Almost all current medications are delivered to the body as a whole, which is fine as long as they only become active in the areas you want them to. But this is not usually the case. When the treatment is designed to kill cells, as in the case of cancer, the side effects are enormous. Nanotech also promises to allow for substance “extraction” potentially removing poisons or toxins from the body or allowing for organic coatings of these substances so they pass harmlessly through the body. Cellular Manipulation: Cells are extraordinarily complex systems about which we are still quite ignorant. For this reason, it will be a long time before we see nanorobots doing complex work in our bodies. However, as we learn more we are likely to find ways to manipulate and coerce cellular systems and will achieve a lot that way - persuading lost nerve tissue to regrow. Agriculture: Nanotechnology will ultimately provide the ultimate solutions for many hurdles presented by biotechnology and agri-sciences. The most likely area in which nanotechnology will initially enter the agricultural industry is the world of analysis and detection, such as bio-sensors to detect the quality of and the health of agricultural products and livestock. Also, innovative waste treatment options and composite materials, as part of the manufacturing and processing of agricultural products, are already entering the market. Food Safety: Advanced nano-sensors that can detect surface and airborne pathogens are already leaving the lab, yet work to develop these products for the agriculture sector remain limited. Should pricing continue to fall and enhanced development be undertaken, the extent of nano-sensor usage can go right to the consumer level with the packaging of agriculture products such as meat actually examining and denoting quality and safety. Animal Health: Work on unique drug delivery, protease inhibitors, cell tagging and treatment are already hitting the trail phases. Targeted drug delivery for instance is one of the areas that are anticipated to have applications hitting the market very soon. With protease inhibitors, viruses, prions and diseases such as BSE (Mad Cow Disease) and Brucellosis. GMO Enhancements: Nanoparticles small enough to behave as quantum dots can be made to emit light at varying frequencies. If you can get particles that emit at different frequencies to attach to different molecules you can literally put a sign of identification on them. This development will allow for the tagging of molecules in the GMO development process. This development can also be used to tag disease, infection and bacteria, allowing for detection at the earliest moment of a disorder’s onset. Also the tagging can be a part of the treatment as cells that are tagged can be engineered or attacked separately from non-tagged cells –allowing for pinpoint eradication. Nano-filtration: NF uses partially permeable membranes to preferentially separate different fluids or ions, and will remove particles from approximately 0.0005 to 0.005 microns in size. NF membranes are usually used to reject high percentages of multivalent ions and divalent cations. while allowing monovalent ions to pass. Removal includes sugars, dyes, surfactants, minerals, divalent salts, bacteria, proteins, particles, dyes, and other constituents that have a molecular weight greater than 1000 daltons. Waste treatment efforts are in development already in BioComposities: Nano-bio composites are in development that can serve as composite material for manufacturing that is lighter, stronger, yet completely bio-degradable. Uses include body panels, parts, organic fibers and many other areas. Materials Science: In materials, things start to behave differently at the nanoscale. The bulk materials that we have traditionally dealt with are uncontrolled and disordered at small scales. The strongest alloys are still made of crystals the size and shape of which we control only crudely. By comparison, a tiny, hollow tube of carbon atoms, called a carbon nanotube, can be perfectly formed, is remarkably strong, and has some interesting and useful electrical and thermal properties. When particles get small enough (and qualify as nanoparticles), their mechanical properties change, and the way light and other electromagnetic radiation is affected by them changes (visible light wavelengths are on the order of a few hundred nanometers). Using nanoparticles in composite materials can enhance their strength and/or reduce weight, increase chemical and heat resistance and change the interaction with light and other radiation. While some such composites have been made for decades, the ability to make nanoparticles out of a wider variety of materials is opening up a world of new composites. For example, in 10-15 years, projections indicate that such nanotechnology-based lighting advances (utilizing nano-phosphorus among other materials) have the potential to reduce worldwide consumption of energy by more than 10%, reflecting a savings of $100 billion dollars per year and a corresponding reduction of 200 million tons of carbon emissions. It has been estimated that nanostructured materials and processes can be expected to have a market impact of over $340 billion within a decade (Hitachi Research Institute, 2001). Like so many aspects of nanotechnology, this is a difficult thing to estimate because of potential new applications - if you can make a material ten times as strong and durable as steel for a lesser mass, what new products will people dream up? The nanometer scale is expected to become a highly efficient length scale for manufacturing. Materials with high performance, unique properties and functions will be produced that traditional chemistry could not create. Disciplines in Material Sciences that are seeing nanotechnology’s impact are: Nanoparticulate Fillers: Alternatively, composite materials can use nanoparticulate fillers. Composite materials already enjoy an enormous market, but making the filling material nanophase (i.e. consisting of nanoscale particles) changes its properties. As particles get smaller, the material's properties change – metals get harder, ceramics get softer, and some mixtures, such as alloys, may get harder up to a point, then softer again. Nanoparticles for Many Applications: Recently, clay nanoparticles have made their way into composites in cars and packaging materials. (Widespread use of nanocomposites in cars could lead to an enormous decrease in fuel consumption: savings of over 1.5 billion liters of gasoline over the lifespan of one year’s vehicle production, thereby reducing carbon dioxide emissions by more than 5 billion kilograms). You've probably heard of sunscreens using nanoparticulate zinc oxide. Nanoparticles are also being used as abrasives, and in paints, in new coatings for eyeglasses (making them scratchproof and unbreakable), for tiles, and in electrochromic coatings for windscreens, or windows. Anti-graffiti coatings for walls have been made, as have improved ski waxes and ceramic coatings for solar cells to add strength. Glues containing nanoparticles have optical properties that give rise to uses in optoelectronics. Casings for electronic devices, such as computers, containing nanoparticles, offer improved shielding against electromagnetic interference. That famous spin-off of the space age, Teflon, looks soon to be trumped for slipperiness thanks to nanoparticle composites. Textiles: Another huge industry that will be impacted by nanotechnology is the textiles industry. Companies are working on “smart” fabrics that can change their physical properties according to surrounding conditions, or even monitor vital signs. The incorporation of nanoparticles and capsules in clothing offers some promise and nanotubes would make extremely light and durable materials. Fabrics infused with nanoparticles are already being marketed that are highly resistant to water and stains and wrinkling. Nanoparticle Catalysts: Many industrial processes will be affected by nanotechnology. One major early impact will come from our improved capabilities in making nanoparticles, the reason being that nanoparticles make better catalysts. A catalyst (a substance that initiates or enhances a reaction without being consumed itself) does its work at the point where it contacts the reactants, i.e. its surface. Since volume changes as the cube of the linear dimension, but surface area changes only as the square, when you make a particle smaller in diameter (the linear dimension), the volume, and thus mass, decreases faster than the surface area. Thus a given mass of catalyst presents more surface area if it consists of smaller particles. Equally, a given catalytic surface area can be fitted into a smaller space. The use of catalysts in industry is widespread so there should be a large market here for nanoparticle manufacturers. It should be noted, though, that nanostructured catalysts have already been used in industry for decades - zeolites, catalytic minerals that occur naturally or are synthesized, have a porous structure that is often characterized on the nanoscale. Catalysts are also of major importance in cleaning up the environment, allowing us to break down harmful substances into less harmful ones. Improved catalysts will make such processes more economical. Petroleum and chemical processing companies are using nanostructured catalysts to remove pollutants, creating a $30 billion industry in 1999 with the potential of $100 billion per year by 2015. Improved catalysts offer a nice example of how taking an existing technology and making it better can open up whole new markets. Nanostructured catalysts look likely to be a critical component in finally making fuel cells a reality, which could transform our power generation and distribution industry (for example, our laptops and cell phones would run for days on a single charge). Disciplines in Catalysts sector that are seeing nanotechnology’s impact are: Fuel Cells: The development of fuel cells will probably be impacted by nanotechnology in other ways too, certainly by structuring components in them on a nanoscale but also in terms of storing the fuel, where the nanotube, yet again, shows promise for storing hydrogen for use in fuel cells. A relative of the nanotube, the nanohorn, has been touted as ready to hit the market in two to four years in a methane-based fuel cell. Solar Cells: Nanotechnology has been cited as a way to improve the efficiency of solar cells. However, typical commercial cells have efficiencies of about 15%, with over 30% having been achieved, which is already much better than photosynthesis, at about 1%. The cost of solar cells is currently the biggest barrier to commercialization. Light Sources: In the world of light transmission, organic LEDs are looking like a promising way of making cheaper and longer-lasting light sources, reducing power consumption in the process. By contrast, at least one group of researchers has created a bulb driven by nanotubes. Tiny electron emitters, called field emission devices, including ones based on nanotubes, hold promise for use in flat panel displays. Pharmaceutical Processes: The pharmaceuticals industry will probably experience a benefit not only from advances in catalysis, but also from the new, cheaper and smaller bioanalysis tools. One estimate claims that nearly half of all pharmaceutical production will be dependent on nanotechnology within 15 years -- a market of some $180 billion per year (E. Cooper, Elan/Nanosystems, 2001). Waste Treatment: Photocatalysis will play in this field in the future. There are efforts underway to sensitize TiO2 to visible light; this could open the door for this technology in large-scale waste treatment, because visible light is free and plentiful, especially as compared to UV-light. Electronics and Information Technology: The impact of the Information Technology (IT) Revolution on our world has far from run its course and will surely outstrip the impact of the Industrial Revolution. Some might claim it has done so already. Key to this is decades of increasing computer power in a smaller space at a lower cost. In electronics, the benefit of working on the nanoscale stems largely from being able to make things smaller. The value comes from the fact that the semiconductor industry, which we have come to expect to provide ever smaller circuits and ever more powerful computers, relies on a technology that is fundamentally limited by the wavelength of light (or other forms of electromagnetic radiation, such as X-rays). The semiconductor industry sees itself plunging towards a fundamental size barrier using existing technologies. The ability to work at levels below these wavelengths, with nanotubes or other molecular configurations, offers us a sledgehammer to break through this barrier. Ultimately, circuit elements could consist of single molecules. MEMS are generally constructed using the same photolithographic techniques as silicon chips and have been made with elements that perform the functions of most fundamental macroscale device elements - levers, sensors, pumps, rotors, etc. Nanoscale structures such as quantum dots also offer a path to making a revolutionary new type of computer, the quantum computer, with its promise of mind-boggling computing power, if it can be converted from theory to practice. Lasers constitute an area that is likely to be commercially affected by nanotechnology in the near future. Quantum dots and nanoporous silicon both offer the potential of producing tunable lasers - ones where we can choose the wavelength of the emitted light. You may have heard of Moore's law, which dictates that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles every 12 to 24 months. This has held true for about 40 years now, but the current lithographic technology has physical limits when it comes to making things smaller, and the semiconductor industry, which often refers to the collection of these as the "red brick wall", thinks that the wall will be hit in around fifteen years. At that point a new technology will have to take over, and nanotechnology offers a variety of potentially viable options. Disciplines in Electronics and Information Technology that are seeing nanotechnology’s impact are: Carbon Nanotubes in Nanoelectronics: Carbon nanotubes hold promise as basic components for nanoelectronics - they can be conductors, semiconductors and insulators. IBM recently made the most basic logic element, a NOT gate, out of a single nanotube, and researchers in Holland are boasting a variety of more complex structures out of collections of tubes, including memory elements. There are two big hurdles to overcome for nanotube-based electronics. One is connectibility - it's one thing making a nanotube transistor, it's another to connect millions of them together. The other is the ability to ramp up to mass production. Traditional lithographic techniques are based on very expensive masks that can then be used to print vast numbers of circuits, bringing the cost per transistor down to one five-hundredth of a US cent. Current approaches to nanotube electronics are typically one-component-at-a-time, which cannot prove economical. Molecular electronics (which, strictly speaking, includes nanotubes) faces similar scaling hurdles. There are some possible solutions, however. Organic Nanoelectronics: Organic molecules have also been shown to have the necessary properties to be used in electronics. However, unlike nanotubes, the speed of reaction, for instance in switching a memory element, and hardiness in face of environmental conditions, will likely limit uses. Devices made of molecular components would be much smaller than those made by existing silicon technologies. But the issue of mass production remains. Soft Lithography: There is an approach to making nanoscale structures that potentially offers great promise for nanoelectronics in the near term, owing to its simplicity. This is soft lithography, which is a collection of techniques based around soft rubber nanostructured forms or molds. You can use these to stamp a pattern on a surface, in the form of indentations, or using some form of "ink". No special technology is required, and nor are the fantastically clean environments required for existing silicon chip production. Additionally, a wide variety of materials can be used. The approach is reminiscent of one of the most famous examples of mass-production - the printing press. Soft lithography is already used to make microfluidic systems, such as those in lab-on-a-chip systems, and it scales readily down to the nanoscale (depending on the variant of the technology used, resolution can get below 10 nanometers). The techniques also promise potential in the creation of optical devices, which may in turn ultimately be used in optical computing. As a replacement for traditional lithography for creating electronic devices, however, there is currently a major obstacle – the technique is not well suited to making the precisely-aligned, multi-layered structures currently used in microelectronics, although researchers are working to overcome this limitation. Memory and Storage: When it comes to the technology behind the vast IT market, there is much more than just shrinking microprocessors to consider. Storing information is vitally important and can be done in many ways. Magnetic disks in computers have been increasing their capacity in line with Moore's law, and have a market at the moment of around $40 billion. The other type of information storage common to all computers is DRAM (dynamic random access memory). DRAM provides very quick access but is comparatively expensive per bit. Magnetic disks can hold much more information but it takes much longer to access the data. Also, DRAM is volatile - the information disappears when the power is switched off. The trade-offs between access speed, cost, and storage density dictate the architecture of computers with respect to information storage. New technologies may change this dynamic. MRAM: Some memory technologies that are currently being researched are single-electron tunneling devices, rapid single flux quantum devices, resonant tunneling diodes, and various types of magnetic RAM (MRAM). MRAM offers the promise of non-volatile RAM, enabling devices such as a PC or mobile phone to boot up in little or no time. This puts the technology somewhere betweenexisting DRAM and magnetic disk technologies. Nanotubes also hold promise for non-volatile memory and recent news suggests nanotube-based RAM may hit the market very soon (commercial prototype in 1 to 2 years). Quantum Computing: In the much longer term, there’s quantum computing, which offers staggering potential by virtue of the ability to perform simultaneous calculations on all the numbers that can be represented by an array of quantum bits (qubits). The atomic scale, the scale at which quantum effects come into play, argues for a requirement for nanoscale structures and quantum dots to come up regularly in discussions of quantum computing. Primary applications would be in cryptography, simulation and modeling. The realization of a quantum computer is generally believed to be a long way off, despite some very active research. Funding in the area is thus still largely that provided for pure research, though some defense department money has been made available. The total potential for nanotechnology in semiconductors has been estimated to be about $300 billion per year within 10 years, and another $300 billion per year for global integrated circuit sales (R. Doering, “Societal Implications of Scaling to Nanoelectronics,” 2001). But it's actually much harder to predict the commercially successful technologies in the world of electronics than in the world of materials. The assumption that continually increasing processing power will automatically slot into a computer hardware market that continues to grow at the rate it has done historically, is not necessarily sound. Most of the growth over the last decade has been driven by personal computers and some argue that this market is nearing saturation. The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Since its inception, the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has proven to be an incredible instance of government outpacing the vision of the private sector. And already we are the better for it. The NanoBusiness Alliance indeed fully endorses the work of the NNI and offers our deep appreciation to the fine work of Dr. Mike Roco, Dr. James Murday and the other individuals who created the NNI and continue to advance its efforts everyday. The NNI has been an exceedingly successful program. From our industry vantage point the NNI has made an incredible impact in the following areas: 1. Funding: The NNI has provided much needed funding for basic research at America’s universities and government labs. By fueling innovation, this investment is -- and will continue to -- find its way to the public marketplace promoting industry development. 2. Awareness: Before the NNI. the overwhelming majority of Americans thought that nanotechnology was science fiction -- or they never even heard of it. A survey just a couple years back showed that less than 5% of CEOs knew what nanotechnology was, never mind what it meant to their businesses. This is changing rapidly. In fact, we now hear claims that people talk about nanotechnology too much. 3. Collaboration: The NNI has been extraordinarily successful at fueling collaborations between corporations, universities, start-ups and government labs – in the US and abroad. Also, the NNI has helped to break down internal research silos. Nanotechnology is an incredibly cross-disciplinary field. To succeed in developing applications you need chemists to work with engineers; and engineers to work with physics and so on. Due to the educational efforts of the NNI, and the structure of their grants programs, this collaborative movement is beginning to ferment. Universities, such as University of Washington, are already giving out PhDs in NanoScience which trains students across many needed disciplines, and other schools are following at the undergrad and graduate level. 4. Competition: For better and for worst, the announcement of NNI set forth a global contest for dominance in the nanoscience and nanotech industry. Ultimately this will make the consumer the winner. This global competition will push even more rapid developments. That is why the NanoBusiness Alliance and its members would like to enthusiastically endorse the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act that is being introduced by this Senator Wyden.. By all accounts it will be a vital and timely bill that will assist America’s scientific and economic competitiveness as well as play a key role in developing nanotechnology efforts for Homeland Defense. State of NanoBusiness Few realize that the age of nanotechnology as a business – NanoBusiness -- is already here. Though we are admittedly at the earliest stages, substantial change is already taking place. Some of the most recent predictions for the development of nanotechnology and time to market are being rapidly eradicated. For instance, in January 2000 at the NNI kick-off announcement at Cal Tech, President Clinton noted: “Just imagine, materials with 10 times the strength of steel and only a fraction of the weight; shrinking all the information at the Library of Congress into a device the size of a sugar cube; detecting cancerous tumors that are only a few cells in size. Some of these research goals will take 20 or more years to achieve.” When President Clinton said those words it seemed like a highly reasonable timeframe. Yet here we are a couple of years later and just last week Hewlett-Packard said they had created a 64 bit computer memory chip using new molecular technology that takes miniaturization further than ever before. Some thousands of these memory units could fit on the end of a single strand of hair. In addition, incredibly strong nanocomposites are already available and being used by aircraft manufacturers and automakers among others. Researchers at Rice University are in early trials using quantum dots to detect cancer in the lab. Have we completely erased the 20 year prediction? No, but we are getting close. Very close. Corporations Just five years ago only a few corporate visionaries – IBM, HP, Texas Instruments among them – were undertaking any research and development in the nanosciences. Today you’d be hard pressed to find a single member of the Fortune 500 that is involved in manufacturing that does not have some nanotechnology effort underway – GM, GE, Ford, Siemens, Intel, Motorola, Lucent, Toyota, Hitachi, Corning, Dow Chemical, NEC, Dupont, 3M, etc. have launched significant nanotech initiatives. Some of the biggest spenders on R&D are allocating up to a third of theirresearch budgets to nanotech. As an example of current market applications in corporate America for one small area of nanotech – carbon nanotubes – already some 60% of the cars on our highways utilize nanotubes or other nanoparticulate fillers in their fuel lines, airbags, and body panels. And 50% of lithium batteries on the market utilize nanotubes to enhance their energy storage capabilities. These are compelling cases of American corporations already tapping into the potential of nanobusiness. Some examples: General Electric: At a time when many corporations are scaling back research and development operations, General Electric, the world's largest company, reaffirmed its commitment to R&D this year with a $100 million+ pledge to modernize its global research center. The Center will focus its greatest emphasis on nanotechnology. GE views nanotechnology as a key component to its future. IBM: Few would question that IBM is the world’s leading nanotechnology company with bleeding edge efforts in nano-electronics, life sciences and nano-materials. IBM has major nanotechnology operations underway in New York, Zurich and in Silicon Valley. They are patenting literally hundreds of new nanotechnology discoveries a year. Mitsubishi Corp: Mitsubishi Corp. created a joint venture with two Arizona-based start-ups, MER and Research Corporation Technologies, to form Fullerene International Corp. (FIC). FIC has established a fullerene manufacturing facility in Osaka, Japan, with MER providing the reactor. Start-Ups Unlike the Dot-com era, nanotech start-ups are built on science. They have real technology. Real assets. And more often than not, they are founded by researchers from universities, government and corporate laboratories. These young companies are already pushing the growth of the field through their innovation. And these start-ups will most assuredly be part of the next NASDAQ boom. More than half the world nanotech start-ups are in the US. And while it is difficult to pin an exact number on how many there are, it is safe to say that around a 1,000 are currently in operation up from maybe 100 three years ago. Some examples: C Sixty Inc., A pioneering biotech company that is modifying fullerenes for medical applications, -- drug delivery, protease inhibitors, and disease prevention. C-Sixty has begun clinical trials on an AIDS drug already. The Houston-based company also reported progress on another fullerene-based approach – this one for Lou Gehrig’s disease, a degenerative disorder that affects nerve cells. Luna Innovations: A diverse research company based in Blacksburg, Va., recently received a $2 million federal grant to develop buckyballs that can be used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems and for possible diagnosis and treatment of cancer. They also have a cutting edge sensor in final development for the oil and gas industry. NanoBio: A start-up company spun off from the University of Michigan has created an emulsion that protects civilians and troops from biological terror attacks. It actually kills anthrax and was approved several years ago, far in advance of the horrible events of last fall. This antimicrobial substance called NanoProtect, can be applied either before or after an attack to all kinds of surfaces, including skin, clothing and vehicles. NanoProtect is the result of a five-year, $11.8 million grant by the U.S. Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency (DARPA) to researcher Dr. James Baker Jr. Evident Technologies: Evident is a nanotechnology manufacturing and application company that draws upon semiconductor nanocrystal expertise to develop sophisticated, cost effective, innovative devices and products. Their products have applicability in biotechnology, optical switching, and computing, telecommunications, energy and other fields. Evident’s quantum dot technology can be used to “tag” cancerous cells, create new lighting source, or serve as part of developing electronics. This self funded company has been creating profits by supplying testing materials to the semiconductor and biotech industries. Funding: Venture capitalists, institutional investors and wealthy angels have also begun to see the potential in nanotech, and, though chastened by the lessons of the “dot-com disaster,” are nevertheless aggressively seeking investment opportunities. Over 60 US venture capital firms invested in nanotech-related companies in 2000. Investment in nanotechnology start-ups will rise from $100 million in 1999 to more than $1.2 billion by 2003. Recent investments include NanoPhontonic, a semiconductor company that received over $25mm this spring in venture investment. Surface Logic, a nanoelectronics firm obtained almost $22 mm in new funding as well. All signs demonstrate that this growth curve will continue to increase rapidly over the next 3-5 years for nanotechnology regardless of the current economic slow down. So-called angel investors and corporate venturing operations are expected to outpace traditional venture capital firm’s investments for the foreseeable future due to the business models and return times. Regional Development: Ultimately, regional development efforts --the creation of technology clusters (Nanotech Valleys if you will) -- will fuel the explosive growth of the nanotechnology industry. The bringing together of universities, government officials, corporations, investors, non- profits, start-ups and service firms to coordinate, plan, and develop an environment condusive for collaboration and attracting talent is the key to developing the industry. Region specific approaches. Region specific planning. National –even international -- collaboration and impact. Localized development efforts are already underway from Virginia to Texas to California. The NanoBusiness Alliance launched a “Nanotech Hubs Initiative” a few months back with the hope of jump starting regional technology cluster development. We have been overwhelmed. Though we have launched efforts in Colorado, New York, San Francisco, San Diego, Michigan and Washington DC metro - as well as affiliate organizations in the EU and Canada - we have been inundated with calls from 35 states and 11 countries to help develop this capacity. They are looking for best practices, partners and funding. They are looking for roadmaps and shared databases. These states and regions are already looking to nanotechnology to develop local economies and fuel overall state economic development. Some examples: New York State: Albany NanoTech is a fully-integrated research, development, prototyping, pilot manufacturing and education resource managing a strategic portfolio of state-of-the-art laboratories, supercomputer and shared-user facilities and an array of research centers located at the University at Albany - SUNY. Its first research center, the NYS Center for Advanced Thin Film Technology, was established to provide its company partners with a unique environment to pioneer, develop, and test new ideas within a technically aggressive, yet economically competitive, research environment. Governor Pataki has been instrumental in expanding this center, as has IBM. It has served to be a magnet for corporate development and start ups. It was recently announced that the SEMATECH - the largest semiconductor industry developers - would locate its next generation R&D facility at the Center. When the last SEMATECH located in Austin it turned the city from a quiet college town into one of Americas 5 great technology centers. Chicago: Chicago is looking to seize leadership in the emerging field of nanotechnology by providing tax subsidies to foster a high-tech corridor. The area has also created a Chicagoland nanotech initiative of sorts, with large corporate players like Boeing and Motorola; nanotech companies like NanoPhase and NanoInk; investors; consultants like McKinsey: Northwestern’s Nanotechnology Center; U Chicago; and Argonne National Laboratory all collaborating. Foreign Competition Nanotechnology is emerging as a truly global technology. Unlike the many waves of technological development over the past seventy-five years, nanotechnology is not dominated by the United States. The US is being outpaced by foreign competition in several areas of nanotechnology. Japan, Italy, Israel, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, UK, Germany, Russia, South Korea, China, France, Canada, and Australia are all significant players in the field of nanotechnology. A recent report from the Journal of Japanese Trade & Industry notes that the Japanese government views the successful development of nanotechnology as the key to "restoration of the Japanese economy." They are not alone. Funding has grown at unprecedented rates in the last three years fueled by the awareness of the US National Nanotechnology efforts. Problems in the NanoBusiness World Not everything is rosy for the future of nanobusiness. Though much development has occurred, many obstacles remain. While the NNI and overall government nanotech efforts have been a great source of .coordination and basic research funding for many, these nanotech grants remain among the most competitive in the government. In addition, many nanotech companies have emerged from the basic research cycle and are addressing issues such as scaling and integration. Few government programs address this timeframe. Add to that a venture capital sector that is battered, not knowledgeable on nanotech and now working in a shortened cycle of investment return and you have many nanotech companies falling into what investors term “Death Valley.” Another area of concern for nanotech start ups is the current state of US intellectual property and the USPTO. The Patent Office is in desperate need of training programs to ensure its examiners understand nanotechnology. At USPTO, nanotech patent applications –understandably due to the wide breadth of application areas the technology covers – go down many different review silos at USPTO. Also, several early nanotech patents are given such broad coverage, the industry is potentially in real danger of experiencing unnecessary legal slowdowns. Another grave fear that is often expressed by CEOs, particularly at large corporations that are undertaking nanotech R&D, is uneasiness over the lack of research on nanotech health and safety issues. More than one CEO has raised the specter of “are we sitting on the next asbestos working with all these tiny things.” Lastly, education, as well workforce training and development are beginning to become issues among the nanotech community. Close In closing, nanotechnology the science is indeed now rapidly becoming nanotechnology the business. As a nation we have been very fortunate to have the visionary support --from both sides of the aisle -- in developing and maintaining the National Nanotechnology Initiative. However, we are now at a cross roads where we must expand the reach of this national initiative from the laboratory to the board room. While maintaining the development of basic research as a priority, we must expand our sights to cultivate the nanotechnology industry and usher in a new Industrial Revolution. Again, that is why the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act is so important. We see the Act’s ability to strengthen the structure of the National Nanotechnology Initiative as being of vital importance -- increasing the long term stability and growth of our Nation’s nanotechnology efforts. The Act makes the development of the nanotechnology sector a major government focus. Increasing understanding and awareness of nanotechnology throughout the government’s political and civil service ranks by providing mechanisms for program management and coordination across government agencies and White House. We especially support Act’s call for the development of a government advisory board made up of nanotechnology leaders to regularly discuss the state of the industry and recommend solutions to the President and Congress. Due to real challenges to our Nation’s efforts to obtain a secure leadership position in nanotechnology and nanobusiness, we also strongly support the Act’s call for further examination and tracking of international funding, development and competition in nanoscience and nanobusiness. And, we strongly support the Act’s efforts to encourage nanoscience through additional grants, and the establishment of interdisciplinary nanotechnology research centers, as this will lead to more innovation and further development of the nanotech economy. Long term, the Alliance would like to see Congress continue its focus on nanotechnology as it becomes nanobusiness and develop programs - and expand existing programs - for commercializing nanotechnology development. Create programs that offer opportunities to entrepreneurial start-ups and innovative corporations alike. Programs that offer incentives, loans, and funding to take nanotechnology innovations into the marketplace. Ensure that the USPTO is properly educated and equipped to evaluate and approve nanotechnology patents Organize an extensive global effort with industry, academia and government to study the health and environmental effects – good and bad – on nanotechnology now before potential problems or even negative intimations arise. The effort should include social and scientific studies building on much of the fine work of the National Nanotechnology Initiative staff. Ensure that publicly accessible materials, events and websites are developed to disseminate such information to a broad audience. Develop programs, possibly though the Office of Technology Policy in the Department of Commerce, economic development organizations, universities and industry groups to promote and nurture regional nanotechnology cluster development. Create best practices reports, guides, and extensive national nanobusiness database. Again, I would like to thank the Chairman, Senator Allen and the Committee for this opportunity to address them.

• Dr. Samuel I. Stupp
  Read statement

  Testimony

  Dr. Samuel I. Stupp

  Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Samuel Stupp. I am Board of Trustees Professor of Materials Science, Chemistry and Medicine at Northwestern University, and chaired the Committee for the Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative of the National Research Council. The Research Council is the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine, chartered by Congress in 1863 to advise the government on matters of science and technology. I am here representing a committee that was composed of a mix of individuals from academe and industry, and drawn from a variety of scientific and engineering disciplines relevant to the topic of nanoscience and nanotechnology. The committee spent nine months reviewing the National Nanotechnology Initiative or NNI, and writing the report that is the basis of my testimony to you today. During those nine months, we heard from all of the agencies currently being funded under the NNI, and most of the agencies that are planning on joining in the NNI in the near future. In addition to the information gathered from these agencies, we also relied on the knowledge committee members have about activities on-going in our universities, in the private sector, in state and local regions, and internationally. The committee was asked to review the NNI with particular attention to Whether the balance of the overall research portfolio is appropriate, Whether the correct “seed” investments were being made now to assure US leadership in nanoscale work in the future, Whether partnerships were being used effectively to leverage the federal investment in this area, and Whether the coordination and management of the program is effective, such that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” In writing its report, the committee was very concerned with communicating to the reader the importance of nanotechnology and its future potential. There have been a lot of promises made for the wonders which nanotechnology will provide for society, and while there has been hype, the committee can say definitively that nanoscience and nanotechnology are not dreams but are here today in products and technologies we currently use. You already use nanotechnology everyday in applications as mundane as the sunscreen and lipstick you may be wearing, to those as sophisticated as the high-density hard disk that runs your pc or laptop. Current research results point to even more applications in the near future, such as improved medical diagnostics and new therapies for disease and injury. The committee found that the agencies participating in the NNI have made a good start in organizing and managing such a large interagency program. The committee was impressed with the leadership and level of multi-agency involvement in the NNI, particularly the leadership role played by the National Science Foundation. Programs funded to date that were presented to the committee were all of an appropriately high technical merit, and the participating agencies have sponsored a number of influential symposia in nanoscale science and technology, including one on the potential ethical, legal, and social issues involved in these technical advances. The committee formulated ten major recommendations to help the NNI-participating agencies build on the foundation of their efforts to date to further strengthen the implementation of the initiative. Concerning the balance of the research portfolio, the committee recommended that More emphasis be given to long-term funding of new concepts in nanoscale science and technology. Truly revolutionary ideas will need sustained funding to achieve results and produce important breakthroughs. There are not currently enough funding mechanism to give longer-term support to higher risk but potentially groundbreaking ideas. The committee recommends increasing the multiagency investments in research at the intersection of nanoscale technology and biology. We can already see applications of nanoscale science and technology that will have significant impacts in biotechnology and medicine. “Bio-nano” is not currently as well represented in the NNI portfolio as it should be. Since many of the advances foreseen in this area involve the marriage of physical sciences and engineering with biology, these investments should focus on collaborations between NIH and the other NNI agencies. The committee recommends investment in the development of new instruments for measurement and characterization of nanoscale systems. Historically, many important advances in science happened only after the appropriate investigative instruments became available. Since one must be able to measure and quantify a phenomenon in order to understand and use it, it is critical that we develop tools that allow for more quantitative investigations of nanoscale phenomena. The committee recommends that NSET develop a new funding strategy to ensure that the societal implications become an integral and vital component of the NNI. The current level and diversity of efforts concerning societal implications of nanotechnology is disappointing. Federal agencies have not given sufficient consideration to societal implications of nanoscale science and technology. To ensure that work in this area is funded, the participating agencies should develop a funding strategy that treats societal implications as a supplement or set-aside to agency core budget requests, which is then awarded to agencies willing and capable to engage in this type of work. On whether the correct “seed” investments are being made now for the future of US leadership in nanoscale science and technology, the committee recommends That NNI agencies provide strong support for the development of an interdisciplinary culture for nanoscale science and technology. Nanoscale research is leading us into areas involving the convergence of many disciplines—biology, chemistry, physics, materials science, mechanical engineering, and others. However, the overall value system used by the scientific community to judge its members continues to discourage interdisciplinary research. Although the number of interdisciplinary research groups will grow as it becomes evident that this approach is necessary to make the most exciting advances in nanoscale research, federal agencies should accelerate this process by developing creative programs that encourage interdisciplinary research groups in academia. Looking at the question of whether partnerships are being used effectively in the NNI, the committee found that Industrial partnerships need further stimulation and nurturing to accelerate the commercialization of NNI developments. The US is most likely to realize economic benefits from nanoscale science and technology when this technology and its underlying intellectual property come from US-based laboratories, institutions, and corporations. Interagency partnerships also require further attention. While the NNI Implementation Plan lists major interagency collaborations, the committee had no sense that there is any common strategic planning occurring in those areas, any significant interagency communication between researchers working in those areas, or any significant sharing of results before publication in the open literature. All NNI funds are currently directed by each agency to the projects and programs of that agency’s choice. To stimulate meaningful interagency collaborations, the committee recommends the creation of a special fund within NNI, perhaps under the oversight of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), for grants to exclusively support interagency research programs. On the topic of program management and evaluation, the committee recommends That NSET, the Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council, develop a crisp, compelling, overarching strategic plan for the NNI. This plan should articulate short, medium, and long-term goals, and emphasize those long-range goals that move results out of the laboratory and into society. In particular, the strategic plan should include a consistent set of anticipated outcomes for each funding theme and each Grand Challenge in the NNI implementation plan. The committee recommends that NSET develop performance metrics to assess the effectiveness of the NNI in meeting its objectives and goals. Currently the programs have only been evaluated as part of the GPRA procedures of individual agencies. Finally, the committee recommends that OSTP establish an independent standing Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Advisory Board (NNAB). The existence of such a board would help give the NSET agencies vision beyond their own individual missions. It could identify and champion research opportunities that don’t fit conveniently into any one agency’s mission to ensure that nanoscale science and engineering continue to progress toward their ultimate potential. Such a board should be composed of leaders from industry and academia with scientific, technical, social science, or research management credentials. With this, I will be happy to take your questions on the report and its findings.