Australian Academy of Technological
Sciences and Engineering
12 September 2008
Monash University City Campus
Melbourne, Victoria
[check against delivery]
In a survey conducted by the Australian Office of Nanotechnology last month, 88 per cent of respondents said they trusted scientists.
This is a remarkable result when you consider how much bad press the profession has had – from Dr Jekyll to Dr Strangelove – from Victor Frankenstein to the Nutty Professor.
While many Australians may be entertained by these stereotypes, few are swayed by them.
They recognise just how important science is to improving our quality of life, raising our standard of living, and solving the many problems that confront us.
So do I.
My own faith in the capacity of science to meet human needs and fulfil human aspirations is unshakeable.
When people ask me why I’m so optimistic about the future, this is the answer I give them.
Are climate change and energy insecurity serious problems?
Of course they are.
Are they problems we can’t solve?
No, they are not.
There are very few problems human beings can’t solve when they apply their creativity and intelligence.
Report
For proof of that, we need look no further than ATSE's report on Energy and Nanotechnologies.
It is a credit to the lead investigators, Professor Max Lu and Professor Greg Tegart.
It is a credit to the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, which has been promoting the creation and practical application of new knowledge for over thirty years.
It is great to see ATSE taking the initiative and joining the public debate on Australia’s energy future.
The more independent perspectives we get on these big questions, the more chance we have of finding answers.
Nanotechnology
Australia is exceptionally strong in nanotechnology, but as the report points out, we need more coordination and collaboration if we are to make the most of our limited research resources.
As we said before the election, the National Nanotechnology Strategy will wind up at the end of 2008-09.
Following an independent review by Deloittes, the National Biotechnology Strategy was wound up in June this year.
This clears the way for the development of a comprehensive strategy for enabling technologies – not just nanotech and biotech, but ICT and any others that may emerge in the future.
All of these technologies raise similar issues – of measurement, regulation, public awareness, community engagement and so on.
It makes sense to provide an integrated framework for dealing with these issues, rather than addressing them one technology at a time.
The Cutler Report I released on Wednesday urges the Government to establish strategies for enabling technologies that address the issues I’ve mentioned. (Recommendation 7.6)
This recommendation will certainly inform the policy response to be outlined in the Government’s Innovation White Paper.
In the meantime, the Government will continue to back nanotechnology through its research, innovation and industry programs.
My own portfolio spends around $170 million a year on nanotechnology research and industry support.
The Government is also pushing forward with the policy development process.
In July I released:
• the Monash report on what nanotechnology means for Australia’s existing regulatory framework; and
• a paper setting out the Government’s approach to managing nanotechnology responsibly.
Policy clarity is essential if we are to create favourable conditions for emerging technologies – as the Cutler Report recommends we should.
Industry
It is vital to the research sector and it is vital to industry.
It is vital to firms like Dyesol Limited, a nanotechnology and renewable energy company based at Queanbeyan in New South Wales.
Dyesol is commercialising dye solar cells that use nanotechnology to mimic photosynthesis.
The Australian Government has supported this work with:
• a $1 million grant from the Renewable Energy Commercialisation Program to Sustainable Technologies Australia, which first developed the cells
• a $2 million contract from the Defence Science and Technology Organisation enabling Dyesol to demonstrate how they can be used in military applications; and
• a $360,000 ARC Linkage Project grant from my own portfolio to support further research by Dyesol and Queensland University of Technology.
This is just one example of how the Commonwealth is nurturing nanotech-based industries in Australia.
We are particularly keen to support the use of nanotechnology to produce clean energy – not least through Climate Ready, the $75 million program I launched in July to help Australian firms develop and commercialise climate change solutions.
Internationalism
We also need to be looking beyond our own shores and thinking about what the rest of the world can teach us.
Energy and Nanotechnologies recommends that: 'Australia should actively seek to participate in international programs where nanotechnologies are being applied to energy systems.'
This is spot on.
In June I had the pleasure of visiting the University of California at Berkeley, where scientists have embarked on what they call the Helios Project.
Their aim is to store solar energy in a renewable transportation fuel.
They are investigating the generation of biofuels from biomass and algae.
They’re also looking at the use of solar energy to directly convert water and carbon dioxide into fuels.
This is an exciting project, and it mirrors work being done in this country.
Australian scientists are already great international collaborators, and we have everything to gain from strengthening and multiplying our overseas links.
That’s why I’ve made a priority of giving an international dimension to everything we do – whether through the Australian Research Council, the CSIRO, or my own Department.
The future
The Energy and Nanotechnologies report groups applications according to whether they present short-, medium- or long-term opportunities for Australia.
This strikes me as exactly the right approach to take.
Whatever the challenge, I think we have to give equal attention to what we can achieve immediately and what we can achieve over time.
The latest public attitude survey – conducted just last month – suggests that time is definitely on nanotechnology’s side.
A clear majority of people now believe the benefits of nanotechnology outweigh the risks, while only 3 per cent believe the risks outweigh the benefits.
People have high expectations of what nanotechnology can achieve, and they are increasingly comfortable with the idea of using it to achieve better environmental and health outcomes.
This report from the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering suggests that those expectations are well-founded.
It confirms to me that the trust the overwhelming majority of Australians place in our scientists is entirely justified.
It is a pleasure to launch it here today.
[Report is available at www.atse.org.au]