Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy

1. Office of ScienceU.S. Department of Energy Nanoscale Science Research Centers: Status Update Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs report Dr. Altaf H. Carim Scientific User Facilities Division and Materials Sciences and Engineering Division Office of Basic Energy Sciences Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee meeting August 6, 2004 http://www.science.doe.gov/bes/

2. Outline • Status of the Nanoscale Science Research Centers • NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholders Discussion, August 2-4, 2004 • Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs:an interagency workshop identifying key research targets

3. Nanoscale Science Research Centers Center for Integrated Nanotech-nologies (Sandia & Los Alamos) Center for Functional Nanomaterials (Brookhaven) Center for Nanoscale Materials (Argonne) Center for NanophaseMaterials Sciences (Oak Ridge) Molecular Foundry (Berkeley)

4. Status of the Nanoscale Science Research Centers, 8/04

5. Nanoscale Science Research Centers: Web Sites • Center For Functional NanomaterialsBrookhaven National Laboratorywww.cfn.bnl.gov • Center For Integrated NanotechnologiesSandia National Laboratories/Los Alamos National Laboratorycint.sandia.gov or cint.lanl.gov • Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences (CNMS)Oak Ridge National Laboratorywww.cnms.ornl.gov • Center for Nanoscale Materials (CNM)Argonne National Laboratorynano.anl.gov • The Molecular FoundryLawrence Berkeley National Laboratorywww.foundry.lbl.gov

6. Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology brochure(updated; current version published March 2004) available, along with additional information, at:http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/NNI.htm (or in hard copy upon request)

7. Outline • Status of the Nanoscale Science Research Centers • NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholders Discussion, August 2-4, 2004 • Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs:an interagency workshop identifying key research targets

8. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion August 2-4, 2004 • Background • Several prior half- and full-day NSRC directors’ meetings have been held (sometimes in conjunction with BESAC meetings): • June 6-7, 2002 • November 4, 2002 • February 26, 2003 • July 24, 2003 • February 24, 2004 • These have been used to gather the Center directors (and some others) to discuss common issues and coordinate activities: • web site design, “jumpstart” user programs, user training, outreach, BES nanoscience brochure, workshops, ultrafine particles

9. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion August 2-4, 2004 • Background (continued) • In addition, there was an initial mini-review of operating plans (half day for each NSRC) on February 17-19, 2004. • A number of common issues were raised during this review and added to at the subsequent post-BESAC NSRC directors’ meeting. • These (primarily operational) issues were the primary basis for holding the extended Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion earlier this week. • Participants (about 75 total) included: • Directors and several staff from each NSRC • other scientific community stakeholders (members of NSRC scientific advisory committees, NSRC jumpstart users, etc.) • BES management and staff • representatives from other parts of DOE (EH, SC-EHS)

10. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion Agenda for August 2-4, 2004 Each NSRC was designated to lead a half-day session, organize it, and take responsibility for the products of that session. The overall agenda was as follows: • Monday am: Standardization among NSRCs – Internal Issues • Monday pm: Standardization among NSRCs – External Issues • Tuesday am: Ethical, Legal, Social, and Environmental/Health Issues • Tuesday pm: Metrics for Success of the NSRCs • Tuesday eve: Theory, Modeling, and Simulation • Wednesday am: Coordination among NSRCs In addition, there were two (largely parallel) satellite meetings of project personnel that were initiated by staff at the Centers: • Wednesday pm: Conventional Facilities • Wednesday pm: Environmental Safety and Health

11. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion Outcomes: Issue Papers Each half-day session of the main meeting contained discussion of several related areas. The outcomes of these were a series of concise issue papers produced by the NSRC Directors and staff, including the following components: • Title • Brief Description of Issue • Background • Sensitivities, if any • Findings • Suggestions/recommendations

12. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion Issue Paper Titles • Review Criteria for NSRCs • Review Process and Documentation • User Definitions and Policies • The User Experience • Intellectual Property • Coordinated User Activities • Coordinated Science Activities • Coordination with non-DOE Nanocenters • Theory, Modeling, and Simulation at the NSRCs • Staffing Policies • NSRC Advisory Committee Structures • Recapitalization • Environmental Safety and Health Roles and Responsibilities • Hazard Control, Worker Safety and Training • Public Perception and Education

13. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion Issue Paper Disposition • These documents serve as collective input on operational issues from the Nanoscale Science Research Centers.They will be the initial basis for development of DOE-BES issue papers.After consideration and revision by BES, the NSRCs will have another opportunity to comment before these are finalized and then made more widely available. • Several examples of information from the issue papers are included in the following visuals.

14. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion: some tidbits from submitted Issue Papers Review Criteria for NSRCs from Description of the Issue: “The two key criteria for evaluating the successful execution of this mission are • High scientific impact • A productive and satisfied user community, and quality of user support” Findings: • “NSRCs should use the same two criteria for success as the other BES facilities.” from Suggestions: • “Impact should be counted as the total output of both User science and NSRC scientific staff, but can be articulated separately for the purposes of BES review and annual NSRC self-evaluation.”

15. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion: some tidbits from submitted Issue Papers Review Process and Documentation from Recommendations: “We suggest that the documentation also include an Executive Summary written by the facility in the form of a narrative that covers the overall scientific impact, effectiveness of the user program, and future vision for the facility.” The list of recommended documentation included five categories, with considerable detail supplied for each: • Facility • Instruments and Laboratories • User Access • Impact • Future directions

16. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion: some tidbits from submitted Issue Papers Intellectual Property from Background: “…Full cost recovery is required for proprietary research, and efforts should be made to secure appropriate intellectual property control for proprietary users to permit them to exploit their experimental results. Standard practice is to have staff sign Non-Disclosure Agreements as needed. Also standard, co-inventions between a user and a staff member are jointly owned, using the rules and processes of the host laboratory…” from Findings: “Paul Gottlieb (DOE Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer & Intellectual Property) described the various options for working with users under currently existing DOE approved processes. While existing approaches have many of the characteristics that the NSRCs would like to see, it didn’t appear that any of these approaches have all of the characteristics required to satisfy the needs of the NSRCs. Paul encouraged us to define the characteristics that we would like and that he and others can help us develop an approach to secure the proper authorities to operate in the desired mode.…”

17. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion: some tidbits from submitted Issue Papers Coordinated User Activities Recommendations: • “Establish a working group to reach consensus about the uniformity of the NSRC User proposal. If it is agreed that a uniform format is desireable, this same group will design and iterate to a uniform proposal format. • To optimize inter-NSRC communication and minimize cost, it is recommended that each lab exploit the video conferencing access grid. The frequency of meetings should be between 1 and 4 months, or even more frequently as the need arises. • Form a committee to discuss coordination of User support, i.e., global access to all NSRCs and design/implementation of standard basic web-based training modules. • Design a grid (or grids) of all equipment available across the NSRC’s and arrange to have it as a standard item on each NSRC website. • Express to DOE and other governmental entities the utility and wide support for science-based events such as the NanoSummit. Important coordination meetings may be held attendant to the NanoSummit.”

18. NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholder Discussion: some tidbits from submitted Issue Papers Hazard Control, Worker Safety and Training(Environmental Safety and Health – Operational Issues) from Suggestions/Recommendations: • “Experiments synthesizing or using nanostructures should undergo pre-execution review and authorization for potential health, safety and environmental considerations. An industrial hygienist intimately familiar with laboratory operations should be part of this review team and should “sign off” on the protocol… • Nanomaterials should be handled using existing… practices for materials of unknown and presumed toxic properties… • Clear, workable and documented practices for handling nanomaterials should be adopted… • Where it is possible that operations involving nanostructures may cause airborne exposures, workers should wear personal protective equipment…” (Note that additional discussion on points of NSRC coordination in this area occurred at the satellite ES&H meeting.)

19. Outline • Status of the Nanoscale Science Research Centers • NSRC Directors’ Meeting and Stakeholders Discussion, August 2-4, 2004 • Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs:an interagency workshop identifying key research targets

20. Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs Report of a “grand challenge” workshop for the National Nanotechnology Initiative (March 16-18, 2004) Co-sponsored by DOE-BES and by other NNI participating agencies via the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office Co-chairs: Dr. Robert Q. Hwang, BNL Prof. Ellen D. Williams, U. Md.

21. Workshop background National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) reports and documents, as well as BESAC and BES studies, served as foundational background documents for the workshop Nanostructured materials were identified as a cross-cutting research theme in both the Energy Security and Hydrogen workshops Energy conversion and storage is one of nine “grand challenge areas” identified as part of the NNI since its inception in 2001

22. Workshop outcomes • An Executive Summary • A set of 9 Research Targets for Energy Needs • Single-page sidebars describing research targets and their energy impacts • A set of 6 Cross-cutting Themes that are foundational and underpin the identified research targets • Web address: http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/NREN_rpt.pdf

23. Workshop outcomes: Research Targets • Scalable methods to split water with sunlight for hydrogen production • Highly selective catalysts for clean and energy efficient manufacturing • Harvesting of solar energy with 20 percent power efficiency and 100 times lower cost • Solid-state lighting at 50 percent of the present power consumption • Super-strong light-weight materials to improve efficiency of cars, airplanes, etc. • Reversible hydrogen storage materials operating at ambient temperatures • Power transmission lines capable of 1 gigawatt transmission • Low-cost fuel cells, batteries, thermoelectrics, and ultra-capacitors built from nanostructured materials • Materials synthesis and energy harvesting based on the efficient and selective mechanisms of biology

24. Workshop outcomes: sample Research Target Nanostructured Photovoltaics • Improvements in control over nanoscale synthesis have the potential to result in cost, durability, and efficiency breakthroughs • Band gap tuning, nanoscale structuring, and combinations of tailored nanoscale components could facilitate broad spectral absorption

25. Workshop outcomes: sample Research Target Solid-State Lighting • Semiconductor nanocrystals (quantum dots) and other nanoscale advances could provide lighting with much reduced power consumption • A 50% reduction in the total electricity consumed for lighting would save4 x 1011 kW-h / year (equivalent to the annual production of 50 typical nuclear reactor units)

26. Workshop outcomes: Cross-cutting Themes • Catalysis by nanoscale materials • Using interfaces to manipulate energy carriers • Linking structure and function at the nanoscale • Assembly and architecture of nanoscale • Theory, modeling, and simulation for energy • Scalable synthesis methods

27. Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs: role in NNI planning • The Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs workshop was one of a series of “grand challenge area” workshops sponsored over the past two years or so by the NNI interagency group and/or individual agencies. • An overarching workshop to synthesize the outputs of these more narrowly focused meetings, identify gaps, and consider other aspects of the future of the initiative will be held next month. This is in some senses a successor to the 1999 interagency Nanotechnology Research Directions workshop, and is being titled “Research Directions II” (RD II). • The information from this meeting and other sources will provide input to development of the updated strategic plan for the NNI, which will be undertaken by the NSET subcommittee and other federal agency representatives immediately after RD II. • The Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs workshop report also serves to inform further research investments by BES.

28. Oversight of the NNI: Public Law 108-153, and the role of PCAST • Public Law 108-153, the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, was signed into law by the President on December 3, 2003. Among its provisions, the Act (an authorization bill) formalizes much of the structure that already existed for coordinating the National Nanotechnology Program. • The Act formally establishes the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, provides for regular external review of the program via the National Academy of Sciences, and indicates that “The President shall establish or designate a National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel” and lists its duties. • Prior to passage of the Act, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) had already begun to discuss the NNI program and its defining “grand challenges” in response to the National Research Council’s 2002 review of the NNI. Specifically, it had formed three Task Forces in the following areas: Materials/Electronics/Photonics; Energy/Environment; Biology/Medicine/Societal Issues • On July 23, 2004, the President signed an Executive Order formally designating PCAST to serve as the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel required by the Act.