Discovery Tech Weekly Preview, Dec 29

December 29, 2008

Monday, December 29: Once railroads were the engineering marvels of the world. In France, they still are. Gene Charleton checks out trains on the Engineering Works podcast!

Tuesday, December 30: By arranging particles of different sizes, scientists are able to create aggregates that opalesce. Eventually, these so-called nanojewels could be used to fabricate nanosized laser, light-emitting diodes, circuits that use photons -- not electrons -- to move information and a host of other futuristic things. See the slide show featuring nanojewels. 

Wednesday, December 31: It’s not quite R2D2, but there may be a robot in your doctor’s future. And in yours. Gene Charleton introduces us to robotic surgeons on the Engineering Works podcast!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Photo: Ciccio Pizzettaro

Carbon Lightning

December 18, 2008

One of my favorite things about nanotechnology are the images that scientists create as part of their research. Those images are windows into a world too small for us to see and too distant to fully comprehend. But they awe nonetheless. This image is from the Materials Research Society, who also recognizes that importance of this imagery. And about every 6 months holds a contest, showcasing some of the most intriguing images made on the nanoscale.

This one is called Carbon Lightning and was done by Trevor Simmons of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York. In the image, bundles of single wall carbon nanotubes are randomly oriented along the bottom. But when pulled up, they align.

The Wide Angle: Should Plasma Gas Trash?

December 15, 2008

This week on Discovery Tech, we got all inspired by a news story running on the Discovery News site about plans to burn trash with plasma. We had so many questions:  What in the heck is plasma? How does it burn trash? Is that a good thing? A bad thing? What else can it do? Questions, questions. We figured you'd have the same. So this week, we're doing something a little special, taking a Wide Angle look at it.  Here are all of the related stories. Enjoy.

News:Plans to Burn Trash With Plasma Facing Hurdles
What's not to like about plasma gasification?

Slideshow: Plasma, Plasma Everywhere
From plastic kitchen wrap to satellite propulsion, plasma seemingly has 1,001 uses.

Tech Top 10: Facts About Zapping Trash with Plasma
What's not to like about plasma gasification?

Guest Spot Invitation blog: Physicians Oppose Plasma Plant
Hold that thought: There's plenty to be concerned about when it comes to zapping trash with plasma.

Video: Ze-Gen Creates Zero Emissions
The renewable energy company Ze-gen is converting construction waste into near zero-emissions energy. Discovery News finds out how they're doing it.

Quiz: Think You Know Plasma?
Now that you've read all there is to know about plasma, take the quiz and see how much you retained.

Blog: Tech That Loves Trash
Now that you're an expert on plasma gassification, check out other innovative ways to deal with waste.

HowStuffWorks: How Plasma Converters Work

Image: Steven Hunt
 

Public Nano-tudes: Context Matters

December 11, 2008

If you've been following along, then you know that Nature Nanotechnology is devoting three articles to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Tuesday, I summarized the article hailing from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School. Yesterday, I'm gave you an overview of Dietram Scheufele's study, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. And today, I'll be giving you the run down of Nick Pidgeon's (Cardiff) study, "Deliberating the Risks of Nanotechnologies for Energy and Health Applications in the United States  and United Kingdom."

Here are some interesting points about the study. First, Pidgeon and his team point out that, in general, whether a new technology gets accepted depends on people's perceptions of both its benefit and risk. So how do you know what people's perceptions are? Usually, you survey them. But here the researchers say, "surveys cannot easily uncover the ways that people will interpret and understand the complexities of nanotechnologies (or any other topic about which they know very little) when asked to deliberate about it in more depth, so new approaches...are needed."

So instead of a survey, they conducted four, half-day workshops. Here are some things that they found:

• Benefit, not risk, seems to frame nanotech risk perception
• A high regard for science and tech can be accompanied by the strong opinion that society will somehow fail to use the technology appropriately.
• The type of nanotechnology application matters.
• Workshop participants showed little distinction between present, near-term or long-term applications.
• Participants tended to want to talk more about the social implications of nanotechnology rather than the technology itself.

Because the workshop allowed the researchers to get at more specific reasons or opinions than a survey, they found qualitative differences in people's perceptions as well as subtle shades of cross-national differences. They say, "This implies that, as nanotechnology risk perceptions emerge, context matters. In particular, much will depend upon whether early risks are adequately managed to avoid major incidents, and whether appropriate systems of risk governance can be evolved in parallel."

 

Public Nano-tudes, 2 of 3

December 10, 2008

This week Nature Nanotechnology is devoting three articles to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Yesterday, I summarized the article hailing from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School. Today, I'm summarizing the study from Dietram Scheufele of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. And tomorrow, I'll be talking about research from Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University in the U.K.

Scheufele's study, "Religious Beliefs and Public Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology in Europe and the United States," examines the potential conflict between religiosity and science.

A few interesting notes:

• Historically, as Western countries have become more wealthy, they have become more secularized. With the exception of the United States, however, which hasn't changed in terms of its emphasis on religion since the 1950s.
• In the study, more than 70 percent of respondents did not think nanotechnology was morally acceptable. And those same people did not approve of nanotech under any circumstances.
• Of those that thought nanotech was morally acceptable, 90 percent approved of it "as long as the ususal levels of government regulation are in place."
• Support for nanotechnology strongly correlates with moral views toward it.

In short, the study found a healthy relationship between religion and support for nanotech. Why should we care? Because it could affect how nanotech gets regulated. Here's the deal: some people, even if they are highly knowledgeable about nanotech, may chose to discount information that could ultimately be critical to a policy.

Image: Walter Bibikow 

More on Public Attitudes About Nanotech 1 of 3

December 09, 2008

This week Nature Nanotechnology has three articles devoted to people's perception of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. The articles hail from Dan Kahan of Yale Law School, Dietram Scheufele of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Nick Pidgeon of Cardiff University in the U.K. I'm going to spend this blog and the next two summarizing the studies, which are quite insightful. I'll start with Kahan's research.

Kahan and his team designed a public opinion study, using 1,862 Americans. The participants were divided into two groups based on answers they gave to how much they knew about nanotechnology. The people who knew very little about it were put into a "no-information condition" group, and those who expressed knowing quite a bit where put into the "information-exposed condition" group.

Both groups were asked to read two paragraphs of equal length, one of which identified the benefits and the other of which identified the risks of nanotech. Then they were asked about their perceptions of the technology.

The interesting thing is that exposure to information, to facts and figures, seemed to have no effect on a person's perception of the risk or benefit of nanotechnology. It turns out that people's perceptions were based more on their cultural world view. For example, people who described themselves as individualistic and had pro-commerce values typically inferred that nanotechnology was safe. On the other hand, people who were more worried about economic inequality saw nanotechnology as holding more risk.

In short, providing people with information may not sway their opinions to your side. The authors say:

"Our study reinforces the conclusions of other researchers who have cautioned against assuming that enlightened public opinion will spontaneously emerge from accumulating science information on the risks and benefits of nanotechnology."

Image: Tamas Galambos

Weekly Preview -- Dec 8

December 08, 2008

Monday, Dec. 8
Magnet Meltdown
Why did the Large Hadron Collider break down and how do scientists and engineers plan to fix it? Clark Boyd sheds light on this and other technology with his weekly podcast. Listen in.

Video: The Skinny On Clean Rooms
Some people wear business suits to work, but scientists who build semiconductors wear "bunny suits.” Tracy Staedter and Kasey-Dee Gardner learn the ins and outs of clean room couture.

Tuesday, Dec. 9
Solve the Biomimetic Robot Puzzle

Guest Spot Invitation blog: Student researcher David Ellis talks about his area of research and what it's like to be a freshly designated PhD researchers who's still a little wet behind the ears.

Wednesday, Dec. 10
Engineering Works! podcast, courtesy Texas A&M University's Gene Charleton.

Thursday, Dec. 11
The Top 10 languages on the Internet. Can you guess what they are?

Friday, Dec. 12
Opalescent nano-sized particles are being developed for use in drug delivery, special coatings, sensors and more. See the slide show featuring different views of these beautiful nanojewels.

Public Ambivalent About Human Enhancing Nanotech

December 04, 2008

A team of researchers from North Carolina State University and Arizona State University recently released their "Public Awareness of Nanotechnology Study," the first national survey to examine public opinion on the use of nanotechnology for human enhancement. Enhancement meaning, among other things, artificial eyesight, human biomarkers that detect diseases early, implants  to improve performance of soldiers on the battlefield and brain implants to permit basic computer to brain functions.

The researchers say, "Overall, we find that attitudes are largely ambivalent and dependent on the information provided in the question wording, but also that interest declines as they learn more and that equity is fairly important concern regarding the long-term distribution of potential benefits."

Some interesting findings:

• Most people say they have not heard anything about nano for human enhancements (61%), while just 38% say they have heard nothing about nanotechnology in general.
• Of those who have heard something about nanotechnology, most people associate it with “machines and computers” (84%) rather than “consumer products” (47%), even though nano-based applications are mostly enhancements to consumer products.
• Interestingly, far fewer people believed that human enhancements were important at the end of the survey after they had been asked more questions about it (55%) than at the beginning before they heard much about it (81%).   

I think the last point is the most interesting and harkens back to a post I did in October about how people filter scientific information. An increase in knowledge about the benefits of a particular scientific approach isn't necessarily going to garner more support. 

Image: Flatliner

On Deck for the Week of Dec. 1

December 01, 2008

Monday, Dec. 1: We need to dramatically reduce CO2 in the atmosphere. So, how? Some think we should be burying it in the ground. Others say that's a risky endeavor. We'll have a Double Take, featuring both sides of the controversy.

We'll also have a video from producer Kasey-Dee Gardner about a new endoscope that creates 3-D images. The device provides doctors with a much better (and deeper) image of tissue than conventional endoscopes and that can improve diagnosis.

Tuesday, Dec. 2: Take a break from holiday shopping and do a puzzle. This month, our category is robots inspired by living things. Scientists call them "biomimetic."

Wednesday, Dec. 3: Gene Charleton has his weekly podcast from Engineering Works!

Thursday, Dec. 4: Some ancient buildings are lost and gone forever. But scientists are using virtual reality to rebuild architecture, allowing people to walk along corridors or through courtyards in ways that previously were not possible. Read the IM interview with Jose Kozan.

Friday, Dec. 5: Guest blog from David Alexander Ellis. Does Social Stimuli Expand Time? Recently graduated PhD student, David Ellis, tells us about his area of study and what it's like to be starting down the path of research. Read his guest blog.