A Brief Overview of

Potential Environmental Pollution and Health Hazards

Resulting from Possible Military Uses of Nanotechnology with

Implications for Research Priorities Helpful to Prevent and/or Reduce
Such Pollution and Hazards

![](media/image1.jpeg){width="1.5604166666666666in"
height="1.5909722222222222in"}
![](media/image2.png){width="1.5520833333333333in" height="1.625in"}
![](media/image3.jpeg){width="1.4368055555555554in"
height="1.5833333333333333in"}

A nanomachine concept A buckyball Buckytube

Results from a Two-Round Expert Delphi

Conducted by the

Millennium Project of the

American Council for the United Nations University

February 2005

# Table of Contents

# 

# [Executive Summary..........................................................................1](#_Executive_Summary_1)

# [Introduction.....................................................................................3](#_Introduction_1)

# 

# [1. Potential Use and Potential Impacts between 2005 and 2010..............4](#potential-use-and-potential-impacts-between-2005-and-2010)

# 

# [2. Potential Use and Potential Impacts between 2010 and 2025..............6](#potential-use-and-potential-impacts-between-2010-and-2025)

# 

# [3. Research priorities.....................................................................\...8](#research-priorities)

[for addressing health
hazards.........................................................\...8](#research-priorities-for-addressing-health-hazards)

[for addressing environmental
pollution...............................................10](#research-priorities-for-addressing-environmental-pollutionsorted-by-knowledge-gain-potential)

[for general questions to obtain further insight into nanotech
impacts............11](#priorities-of-general-questions-to-gain-further-insight-into-nanotech-impactssorted-by-knowledge-gain-potential)

# [4. Additional Comments from the Panelists........................................13](#additional-comments-from-the-panelists)

# 

# [5. References for related research....................................................17](#references-for-related-research)

# 

# [Appendices.................................................................................\...22](#appendices)

> [Appendix A: Delphi Panel
> Participants...............................................22](#_Appendix_A:_The)
>
> [Appendix B: Definitions of
> Nanotechnology........................................24](#_Appendix_B:_Definitions)

The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the views the
Millennium Project's sponsors.

# Executive Summary

An expert panel of 29 participants identified potential military uses of
nanotechnology that might occur between 2005--2010 and 2010--2025 with
their potential for causing health hazards or environmental pollution.

**Some examples between 2005 and 2010 are:**

-   Nanosensors to detect trace concentrations of biochemicals could
    lead to absorption of nanoparticles through the skin into the body
    and environment, concentrating in water and soil, and eventually
    linking with natural organisms, causing unknown environmental
    changes

-   Nanomaterials (e.g., nanotubes) in uniforms and equipment to make
    them stronger and lighter could lead to nanofiber-like materials
    that break off from uniforms and equipment and enter the body and
    environment

-   Nanoparticles as surface coverings to make it harder, smoother,
    and/or more stealthy could erode and be inhaled by military staff
    and the general population

-   Nanomaterials used as filters to remove selected impurities from
    fluids could become very low in cost and hence ubiquitous, and
    result in many small but discrete concentrations of possibly toxic
    impurities.

**Some examples between 2010 and 2025 are:**

-   Artificial blood cells (respirocytes) that dramatically enhance
    human performance could cause overheating of the body,
    bio-breakdowns, and their excretion could add to the environmental
    load.

-   Large quantities of smart weapons --- especially miniaturized,
    robotic weapons and intelligent, target-seeking ammunition without
    reliable remote off-switches could lead to unexpected injury to
    combatants and civilians, destruction to infrastructure, and
    environmental pollution.

-   Small receptor-enhancers designed to increase alertness and reduce
    the reaction times of humans could cause addiction and/or subsequent
    Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, leading to weakness, neural damage, and
    death.

**[Research Priorities]{.underline}**: The expert panel also identified
and rated research questions whose answers might produce knowledge to
help prevent or reduce the health hazards and environmental pollution
from potential military uses of nanotechnology. Those research questions
or directions that would produce the most new knowledge to prevent or
reduce **[health hazards]{.underline}** (rated 4 or higher on a 5‑point
scale) are:

-   How are nanoparticles absorbed into the body through the skin,
    lungs, eyes, ears, and alimentary canal?

-   Once in the body, can nanoparticles evade natural defenses of humans
    and other animals? What is the likelihood of immune system
    recognition of nanomaterials?

-   What are the sizes, aspect ratios, and surface activity determinants
    of nanoparticle impacts on living organisms (research must be
    conducted for specific nanoparticles)?

-   What are potential exposure routes of nanomaterials - both airborne
    and waterborne?

-   Are the current toxicity tests used for chemicals appropriate and/or
    useful for nanomaterials?

The research directions that would produce the most new knowledge to
prevent or reduce **[environmental pollution]{.underline}** from future
military use of nanotechnology (rated 4 or higher on a 5‑point scale)
are:

-   How biodegradable are nanotube-based structures?

-   Could nanoparticles enter the food chain by getting into bacteria
    and protozoa and accumulate there?

-   How will nanomaterials enter the environment and will they change
    when moving from one medium (e.g. air) to another (e.g. water)?

-   How to identify and dispose of nanomaterial litter?

-   How might nanoparticles get into plants and other organisms?

-   Regardless of the question, the research should be interdisciplinary
    and international.

-   Do nanoparticles act like bioaccumulants in Nature?

-   How can nanotechnology be used for post-battlefield cleanup
    (including biological, chemical, and nuclear wastes) so that they do
    not pollute soil and water?

-   What technologies can be used to minimize exposure to nanomaterials?

# Introduction

A nanometer is one billionth of a meter (10^-9^ meter). Nanotechnology
manipulates matter at this nanoscale. It is more of an approach to
engineering than a science, although it draws from the scientific
knowledge of biology, physics, chemistry, and materials science and is
expected to dramatically change these sciences. See Appendix B for a
list of other definitions. Eric Drexler introduced the term
"nanotechnology" in *Engines of Creation* (1986) to describe the
"manipulation of individual atoms and molecules to build structures to
complex, atomic specifications," and said that "Perhaps the 'arrival' of
the concept of nanotechnology came about in physicist Richard Feynman\'s
landmark 1959 lecture called [There\'s Plenty of Room at the
Bottom]{.underline}: *The principles of physics ... do not speak against
the possibility of maneuvering things atom by atom ... it has not been
done because we are too big*."

Today many other kinds of nanotechnology have attracted much attention.
Global nanotech investments in 2004 were estimated at \$8.6 billion, and
revenues from nanotech products should equal that of information
technology in ten years.[^1] President Bush signed into law the [21st
Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act]{.underline}[^2],
providing \$3.7 billion beginning in 2005 and spread over four years, as
the largest governmental funding of scientific projects since the space
program.

The applications of nanotechnology range from next generation flat panel
TVs, advanced solar panels, and chemical and biosensors, to nanomedicine
and energy transmission efficiencies. Richard Smalley, who discovered
the first fullerenes, called "buckyballs (C~60~), and is developing the
use of "buckytubes," expects nanotech to help improve energy
transmission efficiencies.[^3] (*Buckyballs* are the hollow C~60~
spheres; a *fullerene* is any pure carbon molecule with 60 or more
atoms, e.g. carbon nanotubes.)

Nanotechnology approaches range from "top down" (large machines that
make very small things today like nanomaterials in tennis rackets,
clothing, and sunscreens) to "bottom up" approaches (molecular
assemblers that one day may make molecular machines that make larger
things). This study invited input on the full range of approaches to
nanotechnology from an expert panel via a two-round Delphi.[^4] The
invitation letters and Delphi questionnaires are available at:
<http://www.acunu.org/millennium/nanotech-rd1.html> and
<http://www.acunu.org/millennium/nanotech-rd2.html>.

The 29 expert Delphi panel respondents had backgrounds in nanotechnology
R&D with potential military applications, medicine, and/or environmental
research related to nanotechnology. This study was conducted between
September 2004 and January 2005 as a small addition to a contract with
the Army Environmental Policy Institute to produce monthly scanning
reports about international environmental security issues.

# 1. Potential Use and Potential Impacts between 2005 and 2010

The Delphi panel was asked to suggest potential environmental pollution
and health hazards that might result from military uses of
nanotechnology in the time periods 2005--2010 and 2010--2025.

The following is an **[unranked list]{.underline}** of the panel's
suggestions (edited and condensed for clarity) that might occur
**[between now and 2010]{.underline}**:

1.  Nanomaterials in sunscreens, camouflage creams, and/or bioweapons
    skin shields might be absorbed through the skin and/or flushed into
    the environment and enter the food chain.

2.  Nanomaterials in uniforms and equipment to make them stronger,
    harder, smoother and/or lighter could be damaged and/or through
    normal usage and aging, break off and enter the body and environment
    including plants, other animals, water and fish.

3.  Nanoparticles in fuel as additives might be inhaled by military
    staff and the public.

4.  Nanoparticles as surface coverings to make it harder, smoother,
    and/or more stealthy could erode and be inhaled by military staff
    and the general population

5.  Nanosensors to detect trace concentrations of biochemicals could
    lead to absorption of nanoparticles through the skin into the body
    and environment, concentrating in water and soil, and eventually
    linking with natural organisms, causing unknown environmental
    changes.

6.  Very low cost filters/membranes using nanomaterials to remove
    selected impurities from fluids (liquids and gases) could become
    ubiquitous and result in many small but discrete concentrations of
    possibly toxic impurities that could become more toxic than the
    initial materials.

7.  Nanoparticles in weapons such as depleted uranium could be inhaled
    by military in the battlefield and civilians if dispersed via wind
    or other means.

8.  Similarly, nanoparticles created by the blast of high technology
    weapons and/or high temperature combustion processes could lead to
    diseases like cancer, lymphoma, or leukemia in humans and other
    animals induced by inhalation of nanopollution or ingestion of
    contaminated food; e.g., inhaled nano-sized pollution in the Twin
    Towers Collapse Phenomenon.

9.  Nanoparticle accelerants and explosives could be accidentally
    dispersed into the environment.

10. If implanted into the body, radio frequency identification device
    (RFID) tags to track soldiers and equipment could result in
    materials \"leaching\" into the body; those in equipment could enter
    the environment.

11. More effective prophylactics and therapeutics---e.g. time-released
    polymers that would replace multiple vaccinations---would give
    better control over contracting and spread of illness and disease;
    however, those polymers would end up in the environment.

12. The biocompatibility of improved prosthetic devices (non-friction
    microscopic coatings) and implanted medical devices has yet to be
    established.

13. Disposal of highly efficient batteries using nanomaterials could
    impact ecosystem and human health.

# 2. Potential Use and Potential Impacts between 2010 and 2025

The following is an **[unranked list]{.underline}** of the panel's
suggestions (edited and condensed for clarity) that might occur
**[between 2010 and 2025]{.underline}**:

14. Artificial blood cells (respirocytes) that dramatically enhance
    human performance could cause overheating of the body,
    bio-breakdowns, and their excretion could add to the environmental
    load.

15. Large quantities of smart weapons---especially miniaturized, robotic
    weapons and intelligent, target-seeking ammunition without reliable
    remote off-switches could lead to unexpected injury to combatants
    and civilians, destruction to infrastructure, and environmental
    pollution.

16. Small receptor-enhancers that increase alertness and reduce the
    reaction times of humans could cause addiction and/or subsequent
    Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, leading to weakness, neural damage and
    death.

17. Inorganic, non-biodegradable nanoparticles (and perhaps also
    non-biocompatible) nanoparticles for drug release or cancer
    treatment, or \"permanent\" nanosensors, might induce a foreign body
    reaction.

18. Proteomic targeting, genetically selective \"designer quasi-viral
    components\", engineered to select specific human targets based on
    definable genetic markers, might mutate, creating a biological
    pandemic.

19. Nanoparticles to \"clean-up\" contaminated areas might create new
    compounds that could have unknown impacts on the environment,
    including long-term leaching into ground water reserves.

20. Ubiquitous surveillance systems deployed without strong controls on
    the use of information could lead to psychological stress from the
    sense of being watched by strangers.

21. Numerous centimeter-scale buoyant platforms deployed in the
    atmosphere might interfere with birds and aircraft, and damaged
    devices might fall as precipitation at uncontrolled locations over
    Earth\'s surface.

22. Nanoscale time-released bioweapons for inhalation might have
    long-term effects on those handling the bodies of victims and on the
    environment in general.

23. The deliberate high-volume production and use of nano-built weapons
    and ammunition might occur without sufficient disposal methods after
    the need for use has passed.

24. Nanaoscale biomolecule-driven motors that enhance the efficiency of
    ATP (adenosine triphosphate) usage, the frequency of generation of
    ATP and the life of ATP molecules in endurance athletes and/or
    long-haul soldiers could cause overheating of the body,
    bio­breakdowns, and possibly lead to Rapid-Onset Muscle Soreness
    after a stipulated duration, and if allowed to function beyond this
    duration, may kill the organism thus modified.

25. Ubiquitous sensing in the oceans via large numbers of small drifting
    devices linked by acoustically based data-packet networks, and
    countermeasures to disable them, could affect sea life from these
    materials, as well as from acoustic pollution.

Other interesting suggestions for the period 2010 to 2025 that are not
conventionally thought of as health or environmental impacts included:

-   Nanocomputers could remove humans from the battlefield making
    warfighting less costly for the side with the nanotechnology and
    therefore make warfighting more likely. The reduction in lethality
    of wars aided by nanotechnology could reduce the moral sanctions
    against wars of aggression. Better sensors, effectors, and
    computational systems, with lower cost production enables deployment
    of teleoperated \"soldiers\" able to occupy territory without risk
    to human soldiers, could destabilize military balances, prompting
    preemptive wars or wars of aggression, enabling inexpensive conquest
    and subsequent suppression of insurgencies, and even a reduction in
    moral sanctions against wars of aggression. Rapidly deployed
    high-volume production of superior weapons and ammunition might have
    similar impacts.

-   Automated or remote-controlled weapons, rather than removing humans
    from the field of battle, instead may make it easier to take the
    battlefield to the humans. Although these new weapons may shift the
    focus of conflict away from conventional battlefields, new
    battlefields will have to be developed, and many of them will
    overlay civilian populations.

-   Inexpensive, high performance military systems make nonlethal
    weapons economical as a means of projecting force, despite their
    lower effectiveness per unit cost.

-   Antisatellite systems based on inexpensive, high performance launch
    and orbital systems could lead to dense clouds of hazardous objects
    in near-Earth space, posing collision threats, strategic
    destabilization, and precipitating war.

-   Special operations nanorobots designed to shoot from the inside,
    after being ingested, might miss their targets and lead to random
    killings.

# 3. Research priorities

## 3.1 Research priorities for addressing [health hazards]{.underline}

The Delphi Panel was also asked to identify and rate research questions,
that if pursued might help prevent or reduce environmental and health
impacts. The following scale was used to rate the questions:

***[Potential]{.underline} for gaining new knowledge from the
research***

> 5 = Will lead to critical knowledge for preventing and/or reducing
> problems
>
> 4 = Very likely to lead to critical knowledge for preventing and/or
> reducing problems
>
> 3 = May lead to critical knowledge for preventing and/or reducing
> problems
>
> 2 = Not likely to lead to critical knowledge for preventing and/or
> reducing problems
>
> 1 = A complete waste of time

The tables below present the averages of the ratings by the Delphi panel
listed in order of their potential for gaining new knowledge important
to reducing or preventing potential health impacts noted previously.

**[Health hazard]{.underline}** research questions----sorted by
Knowledge Gain Potential

  ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------
  How are nanoparticles absorbed into the body through the skin,     4.46
  lungs, eyes, ears, and alimentary canal?                           

  Once in the body, can nanoparticles evade natural defenses of      4.38
  humans and other animals? What is the likelihood of immune system  
  recognition of nanomaterials?                                      

  What are the sizes, aspect ratios, and surface activity            4.14
  determinants of nanoparticle impacts on living organisms (research 
  must be conducted for specific nanoparticles)?                     

  What are potential exposure routes of nanomaterials - both         4.00
  airborne and waterborne?                                           

  Are the current toxicity tests used for chemicals appropriate      4.00
  and/or useful for nanomaterials?                                   

  What are the surface properties of nanoparticles that alter        3.87
  toxicity? What are the distinct properties of nanoparticles that   
  may alter toxicity?                                                

  Do nanoparticles concentrate at critical sites like synapses and   3.80
  tumors?                                                            

  Effect of exposure to nanoparticles on all lifestages, from fetus  3.79
  to old age, and on all major systems, including neural and immune  
  systems.                                                           

  How are nanomaterials metabolized and eliminated by the body?      3.73

  What are the important unknowns about nanomaterials crossing the   3.64
  brain/blood barriers and traversing neural pathways?               

  What is unique about the health hazards of manufactured            3.60
  nanomaterials vs. health hazards of particles of a similar size?   

  Can nanomaterials concentrate inside humans? If so, in which       3.53
  organs are they most likely to accumulate?                         

  Can nanoparticles enter egg and sperm cells, altering DNA?         3.53

  How are namomaterials distributed throughout the body?             3.50

  What is the nature and quantitative effectiveness of the mechanism 3.50
  for removing nanoparticles from the lungs?                         

  Compared to existing weaponry, how much more deadly will           3.42
  nano-built smart weapons be‑‑especially miniaturized, robotic      
  weapons and intelligent, target-seeking ammunition?                

  Develop uniform nomenclature for research and presentation of      3.36
  results.                                                           

  How are nanomaterials biotransformed within different species?     3.36

  Organize data on impacts based on group or class of nanoparticles  3.23
  with respect to chemical composition, size, aspect ratio, and      
  surface activity.                                                  

  What are the regulatory options to investigate?                    3.20

  Is there built-in auto destruction within the nanoparticles? If    2.92
  so, what happens to the waste materials?                           

  What psychological aspects should be considered?                   2.85
  ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------

## 3.2 Research priorities for addressing [environmental pollution]{.underline}----sorted by Knowledge Gain Potential

  ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------
  How biodegradable are nanotube-based structures?                  4.36

  Could nanoparticles enter the food chain by getting into bacteria 4.21
  and protozoa and accumulate there?                                

  How will nanomaterials enter the environment and will they change 4.20
  when moving from one medium (e.g. air) to another (e.g. water)?   

  How to identify and dispose of nanomaterial litter?               4.14

  How might nanoparticles get into plants and other organisms?      4.14

  How can research in these fields be made more interdisciplinary   4.08
  and international?                                                

  Do nanoparticles act like bioaccumulants in Nature?               4.07

  How can nanotechnology be used for post-battlefield cleanup       4.00
  (including biological, chemical, and nuclear wastes) so that they 
  do not pollute soil and water?                                    

  What technologies can be used to minimize exposure to             4.00
  nanomaterials?                                                    

  What are the potential environmental impacts of nanotech water    3.93
  purification systems? \[Reformulation suggestion: How to          
  determine whether there are environmental impacts of using        
  functionalized nanomaterials or nanostructured membranes or       
  filters for water purification?\]                                 

  Real inhalation studies (vs. simulation).                         3.83

  Are nanoparticles changed in composition (as they go through the  3.79
  body or environment), or do they accumulate as pollutants in the  
  environment?                                                      

  How do engineered or manufactured nanomaterials behave as         3.71
  compared with natural nanomaterials, or those resulting from      
  combustion processes?                                             

  Study nanotech impacts on ecological systems, and not just on     3.54
  single organisms.                                                 

  What climate change impacts are possible from extremely           3.54
  large-scale operations to provide energy (especially solar) or    
  from mass-produced nano-built weaponry and/or military            
  infrastructure?                                                   

  Compared with existing weaponry, how much more damage could       3.50
  nano-built weapons do to buildings, roads, and infrastructure,    
  and how much of a pollution hazard will these create?             

  How might nanomaterials leach into water tables?                  3.42

  Study current nanoparticle contaminations in post-war fields by   3.09
  high-technology weapons, including smoked cigarette tobacco       
  polluted with depleted uranium.                                   

  What strategies could prevent uncontrollable growth (or the "gray 2.79
  goo" problem)?                                                    
  ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------

## 3.3 Priorities of [general questions]{.underline} to gain further insight into nanotech impacts----sorted by Knowledge Gain Potential

  ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------
  Toxicologists and pharmaceutical scientists cannot solve or       4.43
  understand all these nanotech problems acting just within their   
  disciplines. Biomaterialists, immunologists, and embryologists    
  have a better cultural background to understand the               
  physical-chemical and biological interactions of nanoparticles    
  with human life and environment. A multidisciplinary team is      
  necessary.                                                        

  What training will be necessary to provide the capacity for       4.17
  oversight for safe development and application of nanotechnology? 

  What are the most useful methodologies and protocols for          4.07
  environmental pollution and health hazard studies for the range   
  of nanotechnologies?                                              

  What is a useful classification system to provide a framework to  4.00
  make research judgments and keep track of the state of knowledge  
  about nanotech's potential pollutions?                            

  How can toxicologists and pharmaceutical scientists investigating 4.00
  nanoparticles\' ability to evade cell defenses to target disease  
  best be brought together?                                         

  How can energy consumption be minimized and waste/pollution be    4.00
  prevented in the manufacturing of nano/military materials and     
  products? This research would address green manufacturing of      
  nanomaterials -- applying green chemistry and green engineering   
  principles.                                                       

  How can standard metrics for nanotech pollution/hazards be        3.86
  developed?                                                        

  Are there ways to use novel testing methods, protocols and        3.86
  technologies (e.g. toxicogenomics) to increase the efficiency     
  with which we can generate important risk data for new            
  nanomaterials?                                                    

  How can specific research into nano-related environmental         3.71
  pollution and health hazards effectively take into account the    
  fundamental ways that all systems (ecological, economic,          
  political, and social) may be disrupted and transformed by        
  molecular manufacturing on local, national, and global scales?    

  What will be the development timeline for nano-built nanomachines 3.69
  (exponential manufacturing) with military potential? How soon do  
  we have to prepare?                                               

  What are the commonalities between anthropogenic and manufactured 3.69
  particles?                                                        

  At what stage in the lifecycle of nano/military materials and     3.67
  products do the major environmental impacts occur (e.g., resource 
  extraction, manufacture, use, end of life)? This research would   
  address life cycle assessment of nanomaterials used in military   
  activities.                                                       

  What are the \"representative\" nanomaterials that should be used 3.46
  for testing in terms of which nanomaterials may cause high        
  exposures?                                                        

  How can stand-off off-switches be created to deactivate nanotech  3.18
  weapons?                                                          

  Can nanoparticles be made preferentially symbiotic with human     3.14
  hosts, creating a new breed of terrorists?                        

  How can nano-built nanoproducts intensify earlier problems of     3.00
  nanomaterials and create important new ones?                      

  How can arms-control measures prevent the deployment of powerful  3.00
  nanomanufacturing systems able to produce unprecedented           
  quantities of advanced weapons?                                   

  Establish Nanotech-Environmental summits.                         3.00
  ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------

# 4. Additional Comments from the Panelists

**Applied nanobiology being utilized for the engineering of \"next
generation\" bio-weapons, including the development of hybrid genetic
marker targeting quasi-viral components and potentially hypervirulent
\"designer prions\":** I am greatly concerned that this work is already
well under way, perhaps not in the U.S., but without question in other
parts of the world. Certainly the \"tools of the trade\" for this type
of endeavor already exist. Unlike nuclear devices, even those that have
been purchased ready-made (such as the infamous Russian \"suitcase
nukes\"), which require substantial complex maintenance, and can be
detected, designer bio-entities, especially viruses and viral hybrids,
can remain dormant for very long periods of time, with very little or no
maintenance, and are essentially undetectable until eventually released.

Even once released, if the proteomic/genetic signature of the newly
created hybrid organism is of an unknown origin (and therefore not in
the current genetic library of known bio-pathogens), it can slip through
even comprehensive biological scans until it is eventually isolated and
analyzed. By that time, it has already been well established in the
targeted population, and its desired effects have become manifest.

Indeed, the artform of inventing this new generation of bio-weapons is
not just in creating extremely virulent and deadly quasi-viral entities
that are proteomically selective for keyable genetic markers, but also
are designed to have \"stealth\" proteomic signatures that mimic
relatively harmless or benign organisms.

Furthermore, prions, which are responsible for pathologies such as the
so-called \"mad cow disease\" (and similar pathologies which have
occurred in other species, including humans), are still relatively new
and somewhat unexplored as a potential military asset. No doubt,
however, this is also being considered, and this is truly in the arena
of nanobiology, in that prions are much smaller than even viruses
(roughly speaking, prions are somewhat like a proteomic fragment of a
virus).

The interesting and relevant point here about prions is that they are
extremely hard to detect, can be hypervirulent, can remain dormant and
\"hidden\", even within the targeted host victim until they become
activated via a biological trigger, and most importantly, are virtually
indestructible. Extreme temperatures, most chemicals that would usually
kill viruses and even extremely high dosages of radiation have no affect
on these entities. They can \"lie in wait\" anywhere, in soil, water, in
living tissue, waiting for their cue to become active.

Once activated, they can create horrendous neurological pathologies, and
death.

**Worst case scenario:** Hypervirulent \"designer prions\" get released
into a general human population, as part of a scheme hatched not by a
military organization, but as the outcome of an ideological agenda where
simply death and mayhem on a mass scale is the intended goal. The end
result is just that, death and mayhem on a scale almost unimaginable,
leaving in its wake a new class of \"sub-organism\" entity which is
essentially indestructible, ubiquitous, and even after the initial
pandemic may be resolved by some form of treatment or antidote, it will
lie in wait for centuries to come, like the ultimate bio-timebomb
quietly waiting to be recatalyzed into action on an unsuspecting future
population.

This scenario could in fact come to pass well within our lifetime. As a
last note on this topic, once again making the comparison to
\"traditional\" nuclear weapons: creating designer bio-entities does not
require nearly the scale of enormous overhead, exotic resources and
facilities as nuclear device development. Essentially, the right
collection of molecular biologists and other specialists in certain
areas of expertise could be quietly ensconced in an ordinary office
building setting, anywhere, and obtain the required equipment off the
shelf as standard biological research purchases directly from the
suppliers of such technology without ever even the raising the
suspicions of the vendors.

Hence, the prevention of this scenario should be a priority for military
research.

Another area where nanotechnology could become truly terrible, as a
weapon platform, beyond the more obvious applications such as smart or
autonomous AI (artificial intelligence) enhanced vehicles, robots,
swarms of \"intelligent nanobugs\", distributed intelligence \"smart
dust\", and so on, and even the much more terrifying advent of
proteomically selective nanobiological agents (mentioned above), would
be in the theoretical realm of \"selective disassembly\"

The deployment of selective disassembly would be somewhat like a
\"controlled\" version of the infamous "gray goo" concept, in that
specific domains of material/chemistry regimes would be targeted for
\"molecular chaos\" to ensue when the invading nanomaterial was
triggered or catalyzed into action.

That this type of research would even be considered should be enough to
cause very legitimate concern and regulatory action. There is no
\"global authority\" that can actually regulate and prevent such a
concept from being secretly explored and potentially deployed.

Who might do this is an area for debate, but if a country or group did
so, then an entirely different potential future for nanotech could
unfold, instead of its promising solution to so many of the world\'s
current problems.

Although there is much thought given to carbon nanofibers, there are
many different forms of nanostructured materials already in development
(and deployment) which have nothing at all to do with carbon fullerene
chemistry. For example, various forms of \"smart\" sensory garments
without carbon fullerene chemistry of any type are being patented now.
Carbon nanofibers are probably not particularly threatening, as per the
same logic that applies to asbestos fibers, although there is yet no
specific data to support or deny this position.

Also, in the arena of nanoparticulates utilized for filtration purposes
(such as in water treatment, for instance), perhaps in the long term,
there could be cause for concern, but again, there is no data to my
knowledge that supports this. Furthermore, if nanofiltration techniques
provide a ready solution for many water problems, then a balance between
the perceived potential threat of these materials and the real (and
immediate) benefits of fresh / water access has to be assessed.

Another nanomaterial is "qauntum dots." Cadmium sulfide is the common
material of choice for creating quantum dots, spectrally
selective/resonant nanoparticles whose resonant frequencies are
determined by the physical size of the particle. The applications are
many and highly interesting, but cadmium is also highly toxic (carbon,
for instance, is not). However, it should also be pointed out that there
are already various alternative (and less toxic) material variants being
investigated for potential quantum dot manufacture, particularly in
potential medical applications.

I think that language that makes the following points would help to
clarify the reported results: Current nanofabrication uses large things
to make nanoscale things, often crudely, messily, and expensively.
Future productive nanosystems will use small things to make both large
and nanoscale things, and can be precise, clean, and inexpensive.
Expertise in nanoscale products is often associated with confused
assessments of productive nanosystems, which are long-term goals of a
different field. Accordingly, mixing discussions of productive
nanosystems with discussions of current nanoscale products can lead to
mixed results.

There seems to be three general categories of questions about the
effects of nanomaterials on the body: 1) are they physically large
enough (individually or with massive accumulation) to obstruct a bodily
function at the tissue (capillary, bronchiole, neural synapse), cellular
or subcellular levels; 2) does the body interact with or metabolize
them; and 3) what is the function of the particular "nanobot" in
question?

Our skin, GI tract, and lungs are constantly exposed to particles of all
size without much effect unless the particle is large enough or the
exposure is large enough\...as in smoke inhalation, asbestosis, etc.

But we do interact with and metabolize many things regardless of size or
amount that our body uses. These are either chemical reactions (e.g.,
carbohydrate, protein, fat metabolism, Na pump, K pump, etc.) or
allergens. Much work has been done to study chemistry and allergy in the
human body and it is likely that the chemical makeup of most
nanomaterials is not new to the study of the human body. Therefore I
think the real question of harm to the body is about the function for
which the "nanobot" is created. What job is it supposed to do? Because
the creator of the "nanobot" knows its function (s)he would probably
already know how to stop that function or should create along with it an
"off- switch" mechanism, antidote, or decay mechanism (or vaccine?) that
would arrest any harmful or pollutant effect. I believe this principle
should apply to any scientific creation of any scale that could be
harmful to humanity.

An additional research question should be: What will be the potential
environmental and human health impact of the convergence of
nanotechnology with biotechnology, cognitive technology and information
technology?

I do not follow how the development of nanosensors leads to
environmental damage. Is the concern the eventual environmental ubiquity
of nanosensors, which themselves would be absorbed through the skin and
then excreted from the human body, to later build up concentrations of
nanosensors in the environment, which would somehow alter natural
organisms? This seems like a tortured series of assumptions to me.
Military development of nanosensors to detect trace biologics? Yes.
Military use of nanoparticulate "stuff" (drugs, nutrients, etc.) as skin
creams for transdermal delivery? Yes. Concentrations of nanowaste in the
environment? Plausibly. Unforseen nanowaste manipulations of natural
organisms? Possibly. But all of these strung together? Doubtful.

Nanoparticulates and nanofibers have two different dimensional
challenges to entry into the body. Nanofibers have a reasonable length
to them, which boosts them dimensionally into the micro range, which the
human body deals with differently -- so trapping and excreting them is
more likely and thus less of a health threat (this addresses the
physical threat, but obviously not any chemical threat that they might
pose, in any size). There has already been a study which showed
cytotoxicity, but NORA (National Occupational Research Agenda created by
the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) is still
looking into the nanofiber toxicity issue.

Since filtration systems are designed to capture, not release the
filtrants, nanotech should not be an issue. If anything, the
concentration of toxics in a filtration system is a good thing, not a
negative environmental impact. You would be removing them from the
environment.

Nutritional and vaccination applications of using nanotech are not
mentioned. Both of these are possible within five years. Drug delivery
is mentioned once, but the health-related applications go beyond that.
From a nutritional (human systems performance) perspective, the greater
solubility, greater ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, greater
dosing efficiency, better time-release functions, etc. of
nanotech-enhanced nutraceuticals provides high value on the battlefield.
Research on several vaccination applications for nanotech are in
process, the objective of which is to leverage nanotech's delivery
advantage over conventional vaccination technologies.

Consider the possible consequences of hostile agents breaking into
communications and control of nanosystems, either in their intended
activity or (worse) replication activities----particularly if the
intended activity is as a weapon. (Nanoterminator III?)

Nanorobots for the elimination of the nanoparticles inside the blood can
have a positive impact on human health. Nanomotors for moving
nanoparticles outside of the human body can also have a positive impact
on human health. Low-cost, disposable nanostructured platforms for
diagnostics of diseases and biocontamination can be very effective and
provide rapid response in biowarfare and control of disease outbreaks in
adverse environments. Nanostructured energy scavenging devices could
provide low-cost power generation for micro-devices that would allow
better, real-time, and pervasive monitoring of environmental conditions.

# 5. References for related research

The following are references for research related to potential
environmental and health impacts of military use of nanotechnology. An
initial list was provided by the research staff. The panel added to the
list during both rounds of the Delphi. (Note that long Web addresses may
have to be copy/pasted into the browser address window.)

Jürgen Altmann and Mark Gubrud, *Risks from Military Uses of
Nanotechnology. 2002* "Military Uses of Nanotechnology: Perspectives and
Concerns", Security Dialogue (SAGE Publications) 35(1):61-79 (2002)
<http://www.ep3.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/bvp/RiskMilNT_Lecce.pdf> ;
[www.sagepublications.com](http://www.sagepublications.com/) DOI:
10.1177/0967010604042536)

P.J.A. Borm and W.G. Kreyling, *Toxicological Hazards of Inhaled
Nanoparticles---Potential Implications for Drug Delivery*, J. of
Nanoscience and Nanotechnology 4(5):521-531 (2004). This paper gives a
brief review on the toxicology of inhaled nanoparticles, including
general principles and current paradigms to explain the special case of
nanoparticles in pulmonary toxicology.

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, *The Effects of Molecular
Manufacturing on Military and Government Capability and Planning. --*
<http://www.crnano.org/study20.htm>

Vicki L. Colvin, *The Potential Impact of Engineered Nanomaterials*,
Nature Biotechnology, Nature Publishing Group 10:1166-70 (October 2003)

K. Donaldson, V. Stone, L. Tran, W.G. Kreyling, and P. Borm,
*Nanotoxicology: a new frontier in toxicology*, Occup Environ Med
61:727--728 (2004)

Kevin L. Dreher, *Health and Environmental Impact of Nanotechnology:
Toxicological Assessment of Manufactured Nanoparticles,* Toxicological
Sciences 77:3-5 (2004)

R. Duncan, *The Dawning Era of Polymer Therapeutics*, Nature Reviews
2:347-359 (May 2003) <http://www.nature.com/reviews/drugdisc>. Research
at the interface of polymer chemistry and the biomedical sciences has
given rise to the first nano-sized (5--100 nm) polymer-based
pharmaceuticals, the 'polymer therapeutics'. Polymer therapeutics
includes rationally designed macromolecular drugs, polymer--drug and
polymer--protein conjugates, polymeric micelles containing covalently
bound drugs, and polyplexes for DNA delivery. The successful clinical
application of polymer--protein conjugates, and promising clinical
results arising from trials with polymer--anticancer-drug conjugates,
bode well for the future design and development of the ever more
sophisticated bio-nanotechnologies that are needed to realize the full
potential of the post-genomics age.

*Nanotechnology:* *Looking As We Leap*, Environmental Health
Perspectives, 112:A741-749. (Sept 2004) Main Section of EHP Online --
[[http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-13/focus.html]{.underline}](http://stanley.niehs.nih.gov/ehp/cs.html?charset=iso-8859-1&url=http%3A//ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-13/focus.html&qt=url%3Ahttp%3A//ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/+url%3Ahttp%3A//ehp.niehs.nih.gov/+url%3Ahttp%3A//ehis.niehs.nih.gov/+url%3Ahttp%3A//ehpnet2.niehs.nih.gov/+||+Nanotechnology&col=ehp&n=3&la=en)

*From Genomes to Atoms: The Big Down: Atomtech: Technologies Converging
at the Nano Scale*, The ETC Group, January 2003. --
<http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/TheBigDown.pdf>

Robert A. Freitas Jr., *Exploratory Design in Medical Nanotechnology: A
Mechanical Artificial Red Cell*, Artificial Cells, Blood Substitutes,
and Immobil. Biotech 26:411-430. (1998)
[http://www.foresight.org/Nanomedicine/Respirocytes.html](http://www.foresight.org/Nanomedicine/Respirocytes.html )
(The original \"respirocytes\" technical paper; first paper on medical
nanorobotics ever published in peer-reviewed mainstream medical journal)

Robert A. Freitas Jr., *Nanomedicine, Volume I: Basic Capabilities*,
Georgetown TX: Landes Bioscience, 1999.
[http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMI.htm](http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMI.htm )
(First textbook ever published on nanomedicine and medical nanorobotics;
includes over 3700 literature references)

Robert A. Freitas Jr., *Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous
Nanoreplicators, with Public Policy Recommendations*, Richardson TX:
Zyvex LLC (preprint), April 2000.
[http://www.foresight.org/NanoRev/Ecophagy.html](http://www.foresight.org/NanoRev/Ecophagy.html )
(First technical discussion of ecophagy risk or \"gray goo.\")

Robert A. Freitas Jr., *Nanomedicine, Volume IIA: Biocompatibility*,
Georgetown TX: Landes Bioscience, 2003.
[http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMIIA.htm](http://www.nanomedicine.com/NMIIA.htm )
(First comprehensive textbook ever published on the biocompatibility of
nanomaterials, nanoparticles, and nanorobots in the human body,
especially diamondoid and carbon-based materials; includes over 6200
literature references)

Robert A. Freitas Jr. and Ralph C. Merkle, *Kinematic Self-Replicating
Machines*, Georgetown TX: Landes Bioscience, 2004.
[http://www.MolecularAssembler.com/KSRM.htm](http://www.MolecularAssembler.com/KSRM.htm )
(First comprehensive technical review of replicative machines ever
published, including molecular assemblers and nanofactories; includes
over 3200 literature references)

A.M. Gatti and F. Rivasi, *Biocompatibility of micro- and nanoparticles
Part I in liver and kidney*, Biomaterials, 23(11):2381-2387 (June 2002)

A.M. Gatti and S. Montanari, *The so-called Balkan Syndrome: a
bioengineering approach (English version)* (February 13, 2004)
<http://www.idust.net/Docs/Nanoparticles01.htm>

A.M. Gatti, *Biocompatibility of micro- and nano-particles in the colon
(part II),* Biomaterials 25(3):385-392 (Feb 2004)

A.M. Gatti, M. Balestri, and A. Bagni, *Granulomatosis associated to
porcelain wear debris*, Amer. J. of Dentistry 15(6):369-372 (2002)

A.M. Gatti, *Risk assessment of micro and nanoparticles and the human
health*, Chapter of Handbook of Nanostructured Biomaterials and their
Applications, American Scientific Publisher USA‑‑in press Dec 2004.

A.M. Gatti, *Symposium Keynote Presentation: "Risk Assessment of
Nano-Particles and Nano-Technologies for Human Health\",* 7th World
Biomaterials Congress--2004, 748-749

A.M. Gatti, S. Montanari, E. Monari, A. Gambarelli, F. Capitani, and B.
Parisini *Detection of micro and nanosized biocompatible particles in
blood*, J. of Mat. Sci. Mat in Med. 15(4):469-472 (April 2004)

Chiu-Wing Lam, John T. James, Richard McCluskey, and Robert L. Hunter,
*Pulmonary Toxicity of Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes in Mice 7 and 90
Days after Intratracheal Instillation*, Toxicological Sciences
77:126-134 (2004)

M. Lucarelli, AM. Gatti, G. Savarinoo, P. Quattroni, L. Martinelli,
E.Monari, and D.Boraschi, *Innate defence functions of macrophages can
be biased by nano-sized ceramic and metallic particles*. Cytokine Netw.
15(4):1-8 (December 2004).

M. Lucarelli, E. Monari, A.M. Gatti, and D. Boraschi, *Modulation of
defence cell functions by nanoparticles in vitro*. Bioceramics 16
(Porto). Ed. M.Barbosa , Trans Tech Publ, (ISBN 0-87849-932-6), 907-910
(2004)

Wolfgang Luther (ed.)*, Industrial Application of Nanomaterials -
Chances and Risks, Technological Analysis* (with support of the European
Commission), Düsseldorf: Future Technologies Division (2004)
<http://www.zukuenftigetechnologien.de/11.pdf>

*The Nanotech Report 2004,* New York: Lux Research, 2004

<http://www.luxresearchinc.com/reference.html>

Tom McCarthy, *War in the Age of Invisible Machines*, World Systems
<http://www.mccarthy.cx/WorldSystem/war.htm>

Sonia E. Miller, Esq., *The Convergence of N: on Nanotechnology,
Nanobiotechnology, and Nanomedicine,* New York Law Journal (December 2,
2003) <http://www.ctba.us/articles.asp>

NSF Workshop Report, *Emerging Issues in Nanoparticle Aerosol Science
and Technology (June 2003)*,
<http://nano.gov:/html/res/NSFAerosolParteport.pdf>

Joe Pappalardo, *Military Ponders Future of Nanotech*, National Defense
(October 2004)
<http://nationaldefense.ndia.org/issues/2004/oct/Military_Ponders.htm>

K. Peters, R.E. Unger, A.M.Gatti, E. Monari, and C.J.Kirkpatrick,
*Effects of nano-scaled particles on endothelial cell function in vitro:
Studies on viability, proliferation and inflammation*, J. of Material
Science: Mat. in Medicine 15(4):321-325 (2004)

Chris Phoenix and Eric Drexler, *Safe exponential manufacturing*,
Nanotechnology 15:869-872
<http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0957-4484/15/8/001/> --- This paper
explains that the so-called 'gray goo problem' is now less of a concern
than are the implications of other forms of molecular manufacturing. The
authors say "Nanotechnology-based fabrication can be thoroughly
non-biological and inherently safe: such systems need have no ability to
move about, use natural resources, or undergo incremental mutation.
Moreover, self-replication is unnecessary: the development and use of
highly productive systems of nanomachinery (nanofactories) need not
involve the construction of autonomous self-replicating nanomachines.
\[However,\] other concerns present greater problems. Since weapon
systems will be both easier to build and more likely to draw investment,
the potential for dangerous systems is best considered in the context of
military competition and arms control."

Mihail C. Roco and WIlliam Sims (ed.), *Societal Implications of
Nanoscience and Nanotechnology,* Bainbridge, Kluwer Academic Publishers
(2001)

*Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties*,
London: Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, July 2004
<http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm> The report illustrates the
fact that nanotechnologies offer many benefits both now and in the
future but that public debate is needed about their development. It also
highlights the immediate need for research to address uncertainties
about the health and environmental effects of nanoparticles----one small
area of nanotechnologies. In particular Chapter 5 addresses issues of
health effects and nanotoxicology.

*Nanotechnology: Small Matter, Many Unknowns,* Zurich: Swiss Reinsurance
Company, 2004.
<http://www.swissre.com/INTERNET/pwswpspr.nsf/fmBookMarkFrameSet?ReadForm&BM=../vwAllbyIDKeyLu/ULUR-5YAFFS?OpenDocment>
(If this fails, go to [www.swissre.com](http://www.swissre.com/) and
search for \"nanotechnology\")

*Overview of Completed and Ongoing Activities in the Field: Safety and
Risks of Nanotechnology, Version 2.2*, Technologie Management,
Switzerland, November 18, 2004.
<http://www.temas.ch/WWWTEMAS/TEMAS_Homepage.nsf/vwRes/Safety/$FILE/NANOSafety_Version2_2.pdf>

D. B. Warheit, B. R. Laurence, K. L. Reed, D. H. Roach, G. A. M.
Reynolds, and T. R. Webb, *Comparative Pulmonary Toxicity Assessment of
Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes in Rats*, Toxicological Sciences
77:117‑‑125 (2004)

The Wise-Nano project, a collaborative website to study the facts and
implications of advanced nanotechnology. It is a site for researchers
worldwide to work together, helping to build an understanding of the
technologies, their effects, and what to do about them.
[http://wise-nano.org](http://wise-nano.org/)

**The following Websites should also prove useful:**

<http://www.aist.go.jp/NIRE/eco_tec_e/hyouka_e.htm>---National Institute
for Resources and Environment (Japan) -- Evaluation Technologies for
Environmental Effects and Ecotechnology. Excellent technical discussion,
with many graphics.

[http://www.AZoNano.com](http://www.AZoNano.com/)---\"The World\'s
Premier Online Nanotechnology Information Site\"---A commercially
sponsored portal and news site with an extensive collection of
information.

<http://www.eurekalert.org/nanotalk/20041207/talk.php> --- A useful
portal and news site sponsored by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science.

<http://www.euronanoforum2005.org/>---Web site of the conference,
\"EuroNanoForum 2005\"---\"Nanotechnology and the Health of the EU
Citizen in 2020\"----6-9 September 2005

[http://www.luxresearchinc.com](http://www.luxresearchinc.com/)---Site
of Lux Research Inc., a \"leading nanotechnology research and advisory
firm\". Links to corporate-related events, and white papers.

<http://www.nano.gov/>---The home page for the U.S. government\'s
National Nanotechnology Initiative. Offers current news and a variety of
links.

[http://www.nanoforum.org](http://www.nanoforum.org/)---\"European
Nanotechnology Gateway\". Sponsored by the EU. News and a small number
of links.

[http://www.nano.org.uk](http://www.nano.org.uk/)---Site of the (UK)
Institute of Nanotechnology. Links to events and various other types of
resources.

# Appendices

## Appendix A: The Delphi Panel

Michael Brody

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington D.C.

Vicki L. Colvin

Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN)

and Associate Professor of Chemistry, Rice University

Houston, Texas

Anna Laura Comunian

International Council of Psychologists

Padova, Italy

K. Eric Drexler, Chairman

Foresight Institute

Independent Consultant

Los Altos CA

Sujoy Dutta

Evalueserve (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Gurgaon, India

Robert A. Freitas Jr.

Institute for Molecular Manufacturing

Independent Consultant

Pilot Hill, CA

Antonietta M. Gatti

EC Task Force of the JRC-ISPRA

Laboratory of Biomaterials

Department of Neurosciences

Modena, Italy

Theodore J. Gordon

Senior Fellow

ACUNU, Millennium Project

Old Lyme CT

Barbara Karn

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, D.C.

Wolfgang G. Kreyling

GSF - National Research Center for Environment and Health

Neuherberg/Munich, Germany

Linda MacDonald Glenn

University of Vermont

Independent Consultant

Burlington, VT

Norbert Malanowski

Future Technologies Division of VDI TZ GmbH and Independent Consultant

Duesseldorf, Germany

John McGuinness

Army Environmental Policy Institute

Arlington, VA

Kara Morgan

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Rockville, MD

Tom Murphy

Radiologist and Independent Consultant

Des Moines, IA

Charles Ostman, Senior Fellow

Institute for Global Futures

Chair, Nano Electronics & Photonics Forum, Senior Consultant, Silicon
Valley Nano Ventures

Berkeley, CA

Chris Phoenix

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology

Brooklyn NY

Peter Rzeszotarski

Center for Disease, Control, and Prevention

Atlanta, GA

Jennifer Sass

Natural Resources Defense Council

Washington, D.C.

Nora Savage

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, D.C.

Rich Silberglitt

Senior Physical Scientist

RAND Corporation

Santa Monica CA,

Anita Street

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington D.C.

Päivi Törmä

Jyväskylä University

Jyväskylä, Finland

Mike Treder and Chris Phoenix

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology

Brooklyn NY

Terry Turney

CSIRO Nanotechnology Centre

Victoria, Australia

Jorma Virtanen

Jyväskylä University

Jyväskylä, Finland

Matti Vuento

Jyväskylä University

Jyväskylä, Finland

Scott Walsh

Environmental Defense

Washington D.C.

Paul Werbos

National Science Foundation

Arlington, VA

**Staff Assistance**

Elizabeth Florescu

Director of research

AC/UNU Millennium Project

Calgary, AB, Canada

John Young

Research Consultant

AC/UNU Millennium project

Union Bridge, MD

Hayato Kobayashi

Research Assistant

AC/UNU Millennium Project

Washington D.C.

**Principal Author**

Jerome C. Glenn, director

AC/UNU Millennium Project

Washington, D.C.

## Appendix B: Definitions of nanotechnology

In recent general usage, any technology related to features of nanometer
scale: thin films, fine particles, chemical synthesis, advanced
microlithography, and so forth. As introduced by the author, a
technology based on the ability to build structures to complex, atomic
specifications by means of mechanosynthesis; this can be termed
molecular nanotechnology.

[www.foresight.org/Nanosystems/glossary/glossary_n.html](http://www.foresight.org/Nanosystems/glossary/glossary_n.html)

The science and art of making devices that are smaller in scale than
MEMS, often at a molecular size, generally fabricated by chemical
processes that result in the growth or formation of certain useful
structures.
[www.isye.gatech.edu/\~tg/publications/ecology/eolss/node2.html](http://www.isye.gatech.edu/~tg/publications/ecology/eolss/node2.html)

Nanotechnology is a new technology for creating MEMS structures in the
"Nano" range which is three orders of magnitude, or 1000 times smaller
than the current generation of MEMS devices. Refers to devices ranging
in size from a nanometer to a micron.
[www.allaboutmems.com/glossary.html](http://www.allaboutmems.com/glossary.html)

The manufacture of systems of molecular size that emulate the behavior
of larger systems. Any life system is potentially creatable in these
dimensions, using standard biological or even inorganic components.
[www.calresco.org/glossary.htm](http://www.calresco.org/glossary.htm)

A manufacturing technology able to inexpensively fabricate most
structures consistent with natural law, and to do so with molecular
precision.

[www.nanotech-now.com/nanotechnology-glossary-M-O.htm](http://www.nanotech-now.com/nanotechnology-glossary-M-O.htm)

The application of science to developing new materials and processes by
manipulating molecular and atomic particles.
[www.nanoelectronicsplanet.com/glossary/article](http://www.nanoelectronicsplanet.com/glossary/article)

The science of creating highly miniaturized machines that work on the
molecular level.

[www.morphonix.com/software/education/science/brain/game/brainarium/brainarium_glossary.html](http://www.morphonix.com/software/education/science/brain/game/brainarium/brainarium_glossary.html)

Atomic engineering‑‑the ability to devise self-replicating machines,
robots, and computers that are molecular sized.
[www.levity.com/mavericks/glossary.htm](http://www.levity.com/mavericks/glossary.htm)

A precise molecule by molecule control of products and byproducts in the
development of functional structures.
[www.biotech.ca/EN/what_glossary.html](http://www.biotech.ca/EN/what_glossary.html)

...is the science of building devices at the molecular and atomic level.
For example, a single data bit might be represented by only one atom
some time in the future. Beyond being used in computers and
communications devices, nanotechnology could be used to build devices,
change the properties of materials, and extensively in biotechnology.
[www.beta-rubicon.com/Definitions.htm](http://www.beta-rubicon.com/Definitions.htm)

Constructing things one atom or molecule at a time or using programmed
molecular sized robots called \'nanobots\', for example treatment of
disease from within the human body using nanobots.

[www.iib.qld.gov.au/itcareers/talk.asp](http://www.iib.qld.gov.au/itcareers/talk.asp)

The development and use of devices that have a size of only less than
200 nanometres.

[www.eppic-faraday.com/glossary.html](http://www.eppic-faraday.com/glossary.html)

...the creation of nanoscale devices (up to 100 nanometers)
[www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020912S0030](http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20020912S0030)

Research and technology development at the atomic, molecular or
macromolecular levels in the length scale of approximately one to
several hundred nanometers.

[www.solexa.co.uk/Glossary/g.htm](http://www.solexa.co.uk/Glossary/g.htm)

--- technology that changes atoms to create something new

[www.nasaexplores.com/lessons/02-057/5-8_glossary.html](http://www.nasaexplores.com/lessons/02-057/5-8_glossary.html)

\"an experimental technology which uses individual atoms or molecules as
the components of minute machines, measured by the nanometer, or a
millionth of a millimeter.\"\*

[www.hale.nrsd.net/HaleLibraryHome/LibraryWeb_folder/SciWebPages/Topic_Define.html](http://www.hale.nrsd.net/HaleLibraryHome/LibraryWeb_folder/SciWebPages/Topic_Define.html)

(n.) is synonymous with molecular systems engineering. An
interdisciplinary field where devices are constructed at the molecular
scale and function at this scale. This technology is expected to allow
the construction of very compact and high performance computing devices.

[www.new-npac.org/projects/html/projects/cdroms/cewes-1999-06-vol1/nhse/roadmap/applgloss/applgloss.html](http://www.new-npac.org/projects/html/projects/cdroms/cewes-1999-06-vol1/nhse/roadmap/applgloss/applgloss.html)

This refers to the construction and use of structures and devices that
range in size from one to 100 nanometers.
[www.midlandstech.com/jlh/ast/glossary/n.htm](http://www.midlandstech.com/jlh/ast/glossary/n.htm)

...the branch of engineering that deals with things smaller than 100
nanometers (especially with the manipulation of individual molecules)
[www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn](http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn)

Nanotechnology is the projected ability to make things from the bottom
up, using techniques and tools that are being developed today to place
every atom and molecule in a desired place. If this form of molecular
engineering is achieved, which seems probable, it will result in a
manufacturing revolution.<http://www.crnano.org/whatis.htm>

[^1]: <http://www.nanalyze.com/articles/foresight_oct_04/page3.aspx>

[^2]: <http://www.smalltimes.com/smallstage/images/nanobills189.pdf>

[^3]: <http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/19812/>

[^4]: For background on the Delphi method, see Theodore J. Gordon, "The
    Delphi Method," [Futures Research Methodology version
    2.0]{.underline}, American Council for the UNU. Washington, D.C.
    (2003)