Its a little odd when a serious newspaper attempts to mount a campaign against technology, but Geoffery Lean, environmental editor of the Independent obviously spends more time reading publications from ETC Group and the nuttier end of the MNT community than Nature. Even worse when the sub editor plasters a headline like Scientists support Prince on Nanotech over the article.
Of course scientists do no such thing. While the Prince of Wales has made something of a career of making ill-advised pronouncements on a vast array of subjects he has little understanding of, wed expect better of the UKs quality newspapers.
The forthcoming report from the Royal Society will cause something of a hoo-ha this Thursday, as it repeats the oft quoted message that scientists must be more open with the public and that more work needs to be performed in understanding the effects of nanotech on the environment. A number of leading British scientists are already packing their bags so as to be available for the inevitable media circus this week, and environmental groups are drooling into their organic muesli at the thought of putting the brakes on technology, at least in the UK.
The end result will be, on the whole, little change. A few ill informed politicians will bluster, a few scientists will bristle, but the work on health and environmental effects already being funded by governments and companies around the world will continue.
The major loser may wind up being Nanosys (it is worth a detour to see where nanosys.com takes you), depending on their IPO timing.
Bad news sells newspapers, so the hints of environmental cataclysms will be widely reported around the globe. Their IPO has been savaged in a number of sources, and for a company staking its future on being a pure play nanotechnology company they could get badly bitten as investors get cold feet about possible future liabilities.
(Anyone seriously concerned about this area should contact Científica’s consulting business where our legal and environmental experts have been performing a number of technology liability and environmental impact evaluations recently.)