Federal research plan to determine nanotech risks fails to deliver

Almost a year in the making, a federal plan to prioritize research on the potential environmental, health, and safety (EHS) impacts of nanoscale materials has so many failings that its begs the question as to whether the government’s 13-agency nanotechnology research effort is able to deliver an effective risk research strategy, according to David Rejeski, head of the Wilson Center’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.

“Currently, the federal nanotechnology risk research agenda is a bit like a ship without a captain, and it is unclear who has the responsibility to steer this ship in the right direction and make sure that it reaches its destination,” Rejeski said in comments on the new government report, Prioritization of Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for Engineered Nanoscale Materials.

Released for public review on August 16, the 8-page government report was prepared by a working group of the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee (NSET), part of the federal government’s National Science and Technology Council. In September 2006, the same working group issued a list of nearly 70 EHS research needs necessitated by advances in nanotechnology and subsequent commercialization efforts. The new report responds to some 40 public comments on the “prioritization criteria” described in last year’s document.

Although the new NSET report pares down the original listing to a shorter laundry list of 25 research activities, the end result is a “simplistic list of priorities,” says Rejeski. Furthermore, he states: “It falls far short of the carefully crafted, prioritized federal nanotechnology EHS research plan urgently called for over the past two years by leaders from both parties in Congress, industry, investment firms, scientists and consumer groups. Notably absent are important details like budget allocations, implementation time frames, and assigned responsibilities. The report reflects the government’s failure—after allotting over $8 billion for nanotechnology research since fiscal year 2001—to develop a coordinated, prioritized, and adequately funded program to characterize potential risks to human health and the environment associated with processes and products involving engineered nanomaterials.”

In comments submitted to the NSET, Dr. Maynard said, “It remains hard to see how this report or subsequent planned activities will help to provide the information that industry, regulators, and the public need to ensure the safe development and use of nanotechnology.”

In the project’s submission to the NSET subcommittee, Maynard and Rejeski both questioned whether following the priorities listed in the document would yield information that policymakers and regulators need to ensure that existing and future nanotechnology products are safe and environmentally sustainable.

Rejeski advised that funding for nanotechnology-related EHS research be directed toward agencies which have or support regulatory missions, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Agriculture, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. “If this document is truly meant to serve as a basis for a risk research strategy, there is a long way to go,” Rejeski said.

In 2006, nanotechnology was incorporated into more than an estimated $50 billion in manufactured goods. More than 500 manufacturer-identified nanotechnology consumer products are on the market from cosmetics to automobile parts to children’s toy stuffed animals (www.nanotechproject.org/consumerproducts). By 2014, an estimated $2.6 trillion in manufactured goods will use this technology.

“As the commercialization of increasingly sophisticated nanotechnologies gathers pace,” Maynard said, “industry, regulators and the public need sound information, now more than ever, on which to base their decisions. They also need the assurance that there is a strategy in place to fill knowledge gaps about risks as fast and efficiently as possible.”

Source: Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies

Related stories:

Use of nanomaterials in food packaging poses regulatory challenges
Report uses product scenarios to examine the oversight and regulatory pathways to commercialization
Engineered nanoscale materials (ENMs), which contain novel properties that offer potential benefits for use in food packaging, raise new safety evaluation challenges for regulators and industry, according to a report released today by the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) and the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA).
Slow federal action to oversee nanotechnology leaves 'room at the bottom'
State and local governments often have adopted trailblazing initiatives to address environmental, health and safety concerns in advance or in lieu of federal action. With nanotechnology, an emerging field of science with unknown risks, this practice is continuing, a landmark study has found.
Federal toxics disclosure law could help inform public of nanotechnology risks
The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) is releasing a first-time legal analysis that finds a key federal toxics reporting statute could be applied to production and commercialization of nanotechnology, providing the public with more information about these revolutionary -- yet still potentially risky -- technologies.
Nanotechnology's future depends on who the public trusts
When the public considers competing arguments about a new technology’s potential risks and benefits, people will tend to agree with the expert whose values are closest to their own, no matter what position the expert takes. The same will hold true for nanotechnology, a key study has found.
EPA takes first step in filling nanotech information gaps
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published today in the Federal Register its plan for the Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The plan takes a positive first step by offering industry, non-governmental organizations and other groups the opportunity to voluntarily submit safety data on engineered nanoscale materials.
Nanotechnology requires immediate changes in EPA
Regulatory oversight of nanotechnology is urgently needed and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should act now, reports a new study released today. In EPA and Nanotechnology: Oversight for the 21st Century, former EPA assistant administrator for policy, planning and evaluation, J. Clarence (Terry) Davies, provides a roadmap for a new EPA to better handle the challenges of nanotechnology. New nanomaterials and nanotechnology products are entering the market each week, and an adequate oversight system is necessary to identify and minimize any adverse effects of nano materials and products on health or the environment. Davies' report sets out an agenda for creating an effective oversight system as nanotechnology advances—the technology that some have hailed as "the next industrial revolution."
Nanotechnology provides 'green' path to environmentally sustainable economy
As products made with nanometer-scale materials and devices spread to more industries and markets, there is a growing opportunity and responsibility to leverage nanotechnology to reduce pollution, conserve resources and, ultimately, build a "clean" economy, advises a new report from the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.
Nanotechnology offers hope for treating spinal cord injuries, diabetes, and Parkinson's disease
Imagine a world where damaged organs in your body—kidneys, liver, heart—can be stimulated to heal themselves. Envision people tragically paralyzed whose injured spinal cords can be repaired. Think about individuals suffering from the debilitating effects of Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s relieved of their symptoms – completely and permanently.

News discussion:

Nanotechnology news