This blog post examines the benefits nanotechnology’s advancement will bring and the associated ethical risks, discussing how we can safely utilize it.
Most people easily think of ‘nano’ as ‘something very small’. Precisely, ‘nano’ is a prefix representing one billionth. One nanometer corresponds to the size of 3 to 4 atoms. To express this in a more everyday example, it would be easier to understand if we say it is one eighty-thousandth the thickness of a human hair. Or, it can be likened to a single soccer ball inside the Earth. The nanometer-scale world is governed by entirely different laws than the physical world we experience daily. For instance, the surface of a material we can feel with our hands appears completely different at the nanoscale, and the material’s properties change entirely as a result.
When materials shrink to the nanometer scale, they exhibit entirely new properties. The academic field studying these unique properties and phenomena of nanomaterials is called ‘nanoscience’. The technology that utilizes this nanoscience to create materials and components needed in our daily lives, making them more convenient, is called ‘nanotechnology’. The essence of nanoscience lies in understanding these novel phenomena emerging at such small scales and developing innovative technologies through this understanding. Before these technologies become commercially viable, they must undergo various processes, and new challenges inevitably arise at each stage. For instance, uncertainty remains regarding how nanotechnology, which only manifests under specific laboratory conditions, will behave in real-world environments.
While a centimeter (cm) is considered a small unit in everyday life, it is a very large unit from a nanoscale perspective. As mentioned earlier, when a material shrinks to the nanoscale, unique properties emerge that were absent at larger sizes. Specifically, it may become stronger, exhibit increased electrical conductivity, change color, or demonstrate catalytic effects. These property changes occur because interactions between atoms and molecules differ at the nanoscale. For example, gold nanoparticles change color depending on their size, while silver nanoparticles exhibit enhanced antibacterial effects. Leveraging these properties opens possibilities for developing innovative products across various industries.
Such nanotechnology is already widely used in daily life. It finds diverse applications in chemical materials, automotive machinery, electronic information and communications, environmental energy, and beyond. Familiar examples include fine dust masks utilizing nanofibers, sunscreens with nanoparticle UV filters, ultra-lightweight laptops, QLED displays, automotive exhaust purification systems, and water purifier filters. These products are already deeply embedded in our lives, demonstrating that many items we use are products of nanotechnology. Furthermore, nanotechnology is a core element in developing new materials, playing a crucial role in creating lighter and stronger materials by replacing or complementing existing ones.
Nanotechnology is hailed as a groundbreaking technology, earning the nickname ‘21st-century alchemy’ for its ability to alter the bonding structures of atoms or molecules, transforming them into new substances by harnessing these novel properties. Nanotechnology enables the artificial creation of properties unattainable in nature, paving the way for groundbreaking advancements across diverse industrial sectors. However, the potential risks accompanying these capabilities must be considered alongside the possibilities. Consequently, the development of nanotechnology extends beyond mere technological progress, potentially raising social and ethical issues.
However, at the 2008 House hearing on the revision of the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative, nanoscientist Andrew Meynard stated, “Moving forward with nanotechnology is like diving into water with your eyes closed.” This serves as a warning about the potential hazards of nanomaterials and the need for a clear understanding of them. Furthermore, The New York Times identified nanotechnology as one of the ‘10 Disasters That Could Destroy Humanity,’ alongside climate change and genetic modification, as a technology capable of leading the Earth to ruin. Consequently, we must deeply consider the risks and societal issues accompanying nanotechnology development. What negative problems might actually arise? These voices warning of such risks remind us that technological advancement does not always yield only positive outcomes. Technological progress must be directed towards benefiting humanity, and this requires more careful and thorough scrutiny.
First, I wish to discuss ‘new chemical reactions’. Currently, high-throughput screening technology enables approximately ten thousand toxicity tests per week. However, as mentioned earlier, properties change at the nanoscale, and characteristics vary significantly depending on the material. Consequently, it becomes clear that far more toxicity testing is required for nanomaterials than for conventional chemical substances. While nanotechnology is advancing at a rapid pace, the technology to verify its safety has not yet kept up with this speed. Particularly in this situation, there is no guarantee that new chemical reactions—such as the formation of toxic substances or explosive behavior—will not occur when unfiltered nanomaterials encounter specific substances in the environment. For instance, if toxicity manifests only after long-term accumulation within the body, as seen in the humidifier incident, consumers and workers exposed to such nano products could face risks, leading to compensation issues. These toxicity problems warrant particularly serious attention because predicting how nanomaterials will act within the body is often impossible.
Second is the issue of military inequality. Nanotechnology holds significant value for creating impact-resistant military security equipment or developing superior military communication technologies. However, we must also consider the dangers inherent in small objects. While larger sizes offer intimidation and power, smaller objects possess unique advantages and capabilities. In other words, small things can also be terrifying. If we increasingly covet smaller technologies and develop small, inconspicuous military weapons, this could determine hierarchical relationships between nations based on whether they possess sophisticated and successful nanotechnology, along with the capital and knowledge to sustain its development. This would mirror how the possession of nuclear weapons currently divides power relations between states. The development of such powerful military weapons could deepen the invisible power relations between current advanced nations and Third World countries, further exacerbating inequality between states. In such a situation, as an invisible fear begins to take hold, a world where trust between nations is completely shattered will emerge. This military imbalance is highly likely to ultimately act as a factor threatening world peace.
Third is the ‘surveillance labor society’. Let’s consider this specifically within the employer-employee relationship among various ‘power holder-power subject’ dynamics. If employers introduce nano CCTV in corporations, factories, companies, or department stores under the pretext of monitoring and supervising workers, the extent and scope of surveillance over workers’ every move could intensify.
