Thinking Small

THERE'S SMALL, and then there’s nano-small. The New York minute has been replaced by the nanosecond. Britney Spears’ short-lived Las Vegas Strip wedding: “nano-nuptials.” And while the Apple Nano iPod may be the smallest iPod with a viewing screen, it’s nowhere near as small as the real-world applications of nanotechnology.
 

The science of nanotechnology involves materials as tiny as a billionth of a meter, or thousands of times smaller than the width of a strand of hair. Nanotechnology is already at work making tennis balls bounce higher and televisions brighter and flatter, protecting clothing from spills and cleaning cruise ships.

Scientists also have their eyes on more significant uses, from nano-sensors that sniff out terrorist plots, to targeted drug-delivery systems. In addition to serving as invisible scouts and messengers, nanotechnology is being used to create materials that promise to be lighter and stronger. That’s because matter behaves differently at the nano-level.

“Suppose you take a ball and throw it against the wall. It will always bounce back,” says Ivan Schuller, professor of physics at the University of California, San Diego. “That’s not the case when things are small. At nano-scale, there’s a tunneling effect, so if you throw something at the wall, it goes through it.”

With this kind of potential to bend the laws of physics, small wonder nanotechnology has been touted as “the next big thing.” But therein lies a problem. Nanotech could be the answer to so many questions that scientists, venture investors, businesses and regulators are having a hard time figuring out how to harness and use its potential.

So far, research has focused on uses in biotechnology and defense, so it’s no surprise San Diego has been at the forefront of nanotechnology innovation. At UCSD, Michael Sailor, a professor of chemistry, is working on developing robots the size of a grain of sand, dubbed “smart dust.” These robots would move through their environment to specific targets, detect and locate chemical or biological compounds and report back to the outside world. Nano-robots could be used to monitor the safety of drinking water, detect chemical or biological agents in the air or locate and destroy tumor cells in the body.

Nano-assemblies can be used not only as sensors but may actually become involved in threat evaluation and response. “Suppose you want to sense something coming at you. You look for an infrared signature first,” says Schuller. “Then you look for radioactivity, and look at biological and chemical signs. All of this must work cooperatively, because you don’t want to evacuate the city every time a meteor is coming down.

“So the primary sensor looks around, wakes up another sensor, and they talk to each other and decide whether the data is interesting or not. You must be able to manipulate the data locally to tell what’s going on, so you need sensors and electronics that work together, and there has to be power—either solar or small batteries—and you want to pack it all on a [silicon] chip.” A medical application would be a nano-scout that could take the place of a biopsy in determining whether tissue is cancerous.

BIOTECHNOLOGISTS WITH A STAKE in developing nanotech have banded together to form NanoBioNexus, an industry organization based in San Diego. “We came into being two years ago to fill an unmet need,” explains Adriana Vela, NanoBioNexus founder and chairwoman. “While we in San Diego are a mecca for biotech and nanotechnology innovation, what was not here was a community” that brought together the scientific and business perspectives.

A frequent topic at NanoBioNexus meetings is how to bridge the gap between scientific research and the development of products that can be sold in the marketplace. Nano startups in particular must cross what is known as the “valley of death” between research and commercialization. Traditionally, venture capital is the mother’s milk that nourishes early-stage tech firms until they can walk on their own. Venture capitalists have modified the “Show me the money” mantra in the movie Jerry Maguire to “Show us the products.”

“Venture capitalists don’t see nanotechnology as a business,” Vela says. “The venture community invests in products that generate revenue; nobody buys technology—and while that is true, it doesn’t mean there isn’t a huge market for nanotechnology.”

The market for nanotech venture capital has also been dampened by the Internet bust of 2001. “The market is still skittish from the dot-com hangover,” comments Joel Martin, a partner at San Diego–based Forward Ventures.

With initial public offerings in short supply, some nano-flavored biotechs have opted for an acquisition exit. In 2004, San Diego’s Egea Biosciences was bought by Johnson & Johnson; Applied Molecular Evolution was purchased by pharma giant Eli Lilly in 2003.

San Diego companies can also be buyers: Invitrogen bought Hayward, California–based nano-pioneer Quantum Dot in 2005.

“There are very few companies that can take an idea from technology to the end product,” says Vela. “The rules of the game for IPOs have changed, so in some instances the best thing is to get bought by Big Pharma.”

Spurred by competitiveness concerns, Washington is getting involved in trying to give nanotech a push on Capitol Hill. In This past May, the U.S. Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Trade, Tourism and Economic Development held a hearing to promote nanotechnology development. Senator George Allen (Republican, Virginia) said that the United States must be the leader in nanotechnology, which he called “the next great economic revolution.”

Sean Murdock, executive director of the NanoBusiness Alliance, told senators the United States faces stiff competition from abroad in the race to commercialize. The NanoBusiness Alliance estimates more than 50 percent of firms involved with nanotechnology worldwide are based in the United States, which the alliance says claims 613 such businesses, but announcements made at the ChinaNano2005 trade exposition place the number of Chinese companies involved at 800. A recent European Union report estimated 500 European firms are active in the field.

In response, Senator Max Baucus (Democrat, Montana), the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Finance Committee, has introduced the Research Competitiveness Act of 2006, designed to provide U.S. firms with tax credits and incentives for nanotech research.

FUNDING IS NOT the only barrier to commercialization. Environmentalists have sounded the alarm that nanotechnology development left unchecked could introduce a new kind of environmental hazard.

In 2002, science fiction thriller writer Michael Crichton, author of Jurassic Park, published Prey, a futuristic novel in which a swarm of self-replicating nano machines escapes its research facility. The film rights were sold to 20th Century Fox.

In March, a German cleaning product called Magic Nano is believed to have been responsible for more than 100 cases of respiratory illness. Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment is investigating the incident to determine what caused the problem and whether it had anything to do with nanotechnology.

Assuming no Prey-type scenarios occur, however, the future of nanotechnology will be determined in the marketplace.

“There are wonderful examples of nanotechnology, such as the liquid crystals in flat-screen TV displays,” Martin remarks. “But if someone comes to me and says, ‘I’m a nanotech company,’ it’s tough for me to put my finger on it, unless you tell me the application or product.”

Developing new technology such as nanotech is like surfing, says Martin. “If you’re going to ride the wave, you’d better be in the right spot, because if you’re too far in or too far out, you’re going to miss it.”

Do you like what you read? Subscribe to San Diego Magazine »