A REPORT on nanotechnology issued today by Greenpeace UK and seen in advance by 快猫短视频 could put the brakes on a full-scale campaign against the science of small things.
While other campaigning groups have condemned nanotech outright, Greenpeace鈥檚 68-page survey acknowledges that the technology may not be all bad. And without the support of Greenpeace 鈥� renowned for high-profile tactics 鈥� the growing offensive against nanotech may falter.
The battle began last year when the Canadian environmental organisation ETC called for a moratorium on nanotechnology until it could be proved safe. ETC pressed its case at a meeting in the European Parliament last month, encouraging other campaigners to follow its lead (快猫短视频, 21 June, p 10).
Advertisement
But Greenpeace UK commissioned scientists at Imperial College London to provide independent advice. The resulting report shares one worry with ETC: the lack of regulation of nanoparticles. These tiny grains, just thousandths of a millimetre across, are already used in cosmetics, even though there is little data on their possible side effects. 鈥淚t would be crazy for us to say that nanotechnology should be banned because of that,鈥� says Douglas Parr, chief scientist for Greenpeace UK. Nanotechnology could be used anywhere from medicine to electronics and concerns about one use should not rule out others, says Parr (see 鈥淪mall stuff, big questions鈥�).
While the equivocal response by Greenpeace seems to suggest that nanotechnology will not be targeted as strongly as GM foods, ETC remains vociferous in its opposition to the technology. Other groups are also concerned. Friends of the Earth, for example, has submitted a list of combative questions to a nanotech investigation led by two British institutions, the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering. The organisation will wait for their report to be published next year before deciding its policy.