Cientifica reassures nanotech investors that commercial success will come

January 27, 2006

Brussels, 26 Jan 2006

In a report entitled 'Where has my money gone?', Cientifica, an international supplier of nanotechnology research and technology information, examines the lack of commercial impact of nanotechnologies, and reassures investors that they are about to see the results of previous investments in research.

The report states that nanotechnology research has received USD 18 billion (14.7 billion euro) in public funding since 1997. Adding that a further USD six billion (4.9 billion euro) investment is foreseen for 2006, this level of funding is the same in absolute terms as that received by the US' Apollo programme, but the results are far from comparable, according to the report.

'Eight years into Apollo, the program had already achieved the first manned flight around the moon, while the entire output of the nanotech program in the layman's view still consists of only stain-resistant pants [trousers]. No wonder critics of nanotech are beginning to ask whether it will ever be worth it,' states the report.

The delay in results is explained by a number of factors, brought up in interviews that Cientifica conducted with government representatives and researchers around the world. The length of time that it takes to establish a laboratory, along with a director, staff and appropriate equipment, is one of the reasons given for this delay, along with the time lag between the announcement of government funding and researchers receiving it, and the fact that a typical research to product cycle is seven years.

'The big spike in nanotech funding happened in 2001 in the US and Japan, and in 2003 in Europe. Given the two to three year lag between funding being granted and a laboratory starting work, plus an average of seven years to get from R&D [research and development] to a product, it is no surprise that nanotech has yet to deliver on its revolutionary promise,' states the report.

The report closes on a positive note, stating that venture capitalists and technology transfer officers dealing with nanotechnologies will find themselves increasingly busy in coming years.

Cientifica

CORDIS RTD-NEWS/© European Communities, 2005
Item source Previous Item Back to Titles Print Item

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns