Posted on 06/23/2005 1:01:35 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Buckyballs, described by some scientists as "the perfect molecule" and a hallmark of Rice University research, may cause more havoc in the environment than researchers originally thought.
A team of researchers at Rice and Georgia Tech universities has found that the ultra-tiny, soccer-ball-shaped buckyballs, contrary to what they had thought, do in fact dissolve in water, a finding that suggests they could pose a risk for wildlife and water supplies.
The new results compound concerns raised by earlier studies that found buckyballs can cause brain damage in bass and harm human cells. Discovered nearly two decades ago at Rice, buckyballs are among a handful of new materials, far smaller than human cells or even DNA, driving the nanotechnology revolution.
"This doesn't mean that we should put a halt on nanotechnology," said Joseph Hughes, an environmental engineer at Georgia Tech and the study's lead author. "Quite the opposite."
No scientists or government regulators have called for stopping the research and commercialization of nanotechnology, a rapidly expanding field of specialized materials that encompasses everything from novel medical approaches to bulletproof vests. Nor are many likely to call for a ban now.
What the new findings should do, researchers say, is increase pressure on the federal government to further regulate the production and handling of buckyballs and potentially other nanotechnology materials, such as carbon nanotubes.
"I don't view this new research as something that's very scary," said Kristen Kulinowski, executive director of Rice's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology. "But it may highlight the need for caution."
Japan a big producer
The call to consider tighter regulations comes as nanotechnology is moving, with increasing rapidity, from academic labs to industry. A Mitsubishi Corp. subsidiary in Japan already can make 40 tons of buckyballs a year and has plans to expand its capacity to 1,500 tons annually within a few years.
Moreover, 40 countries, including the United States, have state-sponsored nanotechnology research and development programs to accelerate these transition efforts.
Meanwhile, some institutions have concluded that the environmental effects of nanotechnology must be better studied before its materials are too widely distributed in products.
In a nanotechnology report for the United Kingdom's government last year, The Royal Society concluded: "Until more is known about the environmental impacts of nanoparticles and nanotubes, we recommend that the release of manufactured nanoparticles and nanotubes into the environment be avoided as far as possible."
And the world's second-largest insurer, Swiss Reinsurance Co., recently issued a report saying there were many unknowns with nanotechnology and that the insurance industry should carefully consider how much they cover products that include nanomaterials.
The new findings could also stoke environmental groups to include nanotechnology as one of the chemical pollutants they seek to restrict.
In Europe, some environmentalists have been vocal about their concerns, but in the United States criticism has been limited to a handful of smaller groups.
That's not to say their criticism hasn't been provocative. Last month, in front of a Chicago Eddie Bauer store, which markets paints that include nanomaterials to prevent staining, a group called THONG protested the company's use of nanofibers.
The group wears only its namesake during protests.
"We're out here naked so people can see the problem," said Kiki Walters, a member of the group, in a news release. "Nanotech is such a radical and unpredictable new technology, like biotech, that it takes something highly visible, like a naked body, to get people to focus on the need to stop corporations from using humans as guinea pigs for new, untested and unstable new technologies."
The new study results were reported in this month's issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology.
The research team found that buckyballs dissolve in water after they clump together, and persisted up to 15 weeks in fresh water.
The scientists also exposed buckyballs to two common types of soil bacteria, and found the particles inhibited both the growth and respiration of the bacteria at quite low concentrations of as little as 0.5 parts per million.
Concern over 'free radicals'
Researchers believe buckyballs can cause harm because their unique configuration acts as an efficient vacuum for sucking the electrons off nearby molecules. Once stripped of an electron, some of these molecules become so-called "free radicals," which can damage cell membranes or harm bacteria.
The National Science Foundation gave Rice a five-year, $12.4 million grant in 2001 to establish a center, in part, to research the safety of nanomaterials in the environment. Unlike the model for most new technologies, which are rolled out and environmental impacts determined after the fact, the government sought to take a proactive stance on the safety of nanotechnology, Kulinowski said.
Rice scientists have also developed a method for neutralizing the toxic effects of buckyballs, and they believe it will be possible to safely work with buckyballs and other nanomaterials in all manner of applications.
"It's much better, obviously, to investigate these questions in advance of commercialization," Kulinowski said. "Then we can devise strategies to deal with any problems so there's no surprises down the road."
Bump!
The actual name of these compounds is "Buckminsterfullerenes" or "fullerenes" for short. Named after the inventor of the geodesic domes that have the same shape as the molecule.
***Scientists have calculated the theoretical strength of carbon nanotubes to be as large as 300 gigapascals, nearly 100 times greater than steel and 15 times greater than graphite whiskers.***
See LINK at Post #4.
bump for later read
Build buildings of Carbon fiber? It does burn...............
If you put a buckey ball in a nanotube do you have a nanogun?........
It looks like government is literally researching new ways they can regulate us.
Government sucks.
I love the smell of buckyballs in the morning. Technology rocks!
"A Mitsubishi Corp. subsidiary in Japan already can make 40 tons of buckyballs a year and has plans to expand its capacity to 1,500 tons annually within a few years."
So what could we do with 40 tons of buckyballs if we had them? It still doesn't sound like they are ready to do anything with them.
Thank goodness they didn't DANTHE! ;-P
Nanotechnology broadly refers to engineering at microscopic scales. By manipulating materials at the molecular level, scientists can enhance them with new properties that go beyond those available in ordinary substances.
Examples of nanomaterials already on the market include nanoscale titanium dioxide used in some cosmetics and sunscreens, nanoscale silica being used as dental fillers, and nanowhiskers used in stain-resistant fabrics like Eddie Bauer's nanopants. Plus, nanoclays and coatings are being used in a range of products from tennis balls to bikes to cars to improve bounce, strengthen high-impact parts or render material scratch-proof. Nanotechnology could one day give rise to microscopic machines, some theorize. ...***
Buildings and bridges are intricate structures, and engineering selection of appropriate construction materials is too complex to make such a generalized, mutually exclusive statement. I certainly think that the advanced properties of carbon fiber will have some application in building and bridge construction. However, there will be myriad situations where carbon fiber's properties will be undesirable compared to steel.
It is not a situation where steel is inherently "good" or carbon fiber is "bad" (or vice-versa). It's just that properties of materials can't be summarized by a meaningless adjective like "strength". The first thing an engineer is going to ask is "what kind of strength?" Tensile? Shear? Compression? Torsion? Impact resistance? etc. etc. etc.
Aluminum was more expensive than gold early on.
I thought that buckyballs occurred in nature.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.