From the moment the term 鈥渘anotechnology鈥� went public, it has had a dark side. In his seminal 1986 book Engines of Creation, Eric Drexler describes how self-replicating nano-robots 鈥� grey goo 鈥� could consume all living matter on Earth. Years later, health and environmental activists in Europe tried to use nanotech鈥檚 potential dangers to nip the nascent technology in the bud (New 杏吧原创, 21 June 2003, p 10).
This was a gross overreaction. After all, we encounter plenty of nanoscale objects 鈥� those between 1 and 100 nanometres across 鈥� in our environment without being harmed. Yet there are real concerns that the chemical and physical properties of some materials change dramatically when made into nanoscale objects, so it seems prudent to understand these materials and devise safety regulations before nanotechnology really takes off.
In the UK, this principle was proposed by the Royal Society in 2004 and agreed by government and industry, which were both keen to market nanotechnology as good for the nation鈥檚 health, wealth and environment. Yet things have not gone to plan. Earlier this year the government was taken to task by its own top-level advisory panel, the Council on Science and Technology, for .
Advertisement
This delay in drafting regulations is not only worrying in itself, UK companies complain that they are being held back. Nobody wants to create a new product only to find that it is later banned on health or environmental grounds. The UK is not alone in being ill prepared for nanotechnology. In the US, reports from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC show that both the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration .
What is most worrying is that government agencies do not yet have a framework for even thinking about how to regulate nanotechnology. So varied are its products that deciding what are potential threats and what to track is a mammoth task in itself (see 鈥淭he great nanotech gamble鈥�). To see why, consider nanotechnology鈥檚 larger-scale cousin 鈥渃entitechnology鈥�. This would include teacups, loaded guns, pencils, nuclear batteries, tubs of weedkiller and vials of nitroglycerine. Imagine working out a framework for identifying the dangers posed by such a diverse group of things, and then regulating them.
Despite this difficulty, industry and governments are hooked on nanotechnology and products are streaming onto the market. Governments must speed up their thinking on how to ensure the safety of these products. Nobody but a small group of extremists wants to see nanotechnology fail, but one serious health or environmental crisis is all it would take to stop the field in its tracks.
