At the risk of belaboring the point (which, by the way, is one of my favorite activities) there are market numbers and then there are market numbers for nanotechnology.
This latest comment of mine comes on the heels of a report entitled “Nanotechnology: A Realistic Market Assessment" that estimates that the global sales revenues for nanotechnology will reach $26 billion in 2015—a far cry from the $1 trillion figures that are widely circulated.
Once again Nanowerk rises in indignation at the preposterousness of $1 trillion market figures and breathes a sigh of relief that finally somebody is telling the truth, or at least as Nanowerk seems to understand it.
Nanowerk even provided a link to its previous explanation of how these numbers are derived to which I responded to as well last year.I will provide one thing that Nanowerk needs to know about market numbers: sine qua non.
As I have explained previously:
"While the argument that just because some nanoparticles are in the paint coating of a Mercedes Benz doesn’t mean you can attach the entire value of that car to nanotech is appealing, it doesn’t quite hold up when a few pennies of a nanoparticle are used in a drug formulation.
I have tried to explain this seemingly simple economic concept before, but it apparently bears repeating. If the drug cannot be formulated so it possesses a new and improved delivery system and efficacy without the nanoparticle, then the new drug does not come into being. Therefore there is no value without the nanoparticle but with it there is. Sine qua non. Maybe a little Latin will clear that up."
While I am growing somewhat weary with this polemic, I suppose I will feel compelled to raise it at least every time that Nanowerk characterizes attempts to actually estimate the impact of nanotechnology on various markets as something less than honest.
Dexter Johnson is a contributing editor at IEEE Spectrum, with a focus on nanotechnology.