Peter H. Bell: “the traditional approach on environmental and health concerns for new technologies is to simply wait until there is a…”

“the traditional approach on environmental and health concerns for new technologies is to simply wait until there is a problem. Instead of reacting down the line in response to environmental or health problems that may arise in the development of nanotechnology, we have the opportunity through this amendment to understand the risk involved as we move forward in our research now. One common, often fair, criticism of government is that we are slow and reactive. Here is a chance for all of us to be proactive. This amendment will ensure that the environmental and toxicological impacts of nanotech applications are studied during the developmental process so that problems can be spotted early on and fixed before any damage is done. Prevention is better and cheaper than cleanup. I think everybody would agree with that. History has many examples of promising technologies whose hidden costs and risks were only determined after widespread adoption. These include nuclear power, which continues to generate an enormous amount of toxic waste; DDT, which wiped out malarial mosquitoes in the U.S. but was harmful to animal life; semiconductor manufacturing, which ushered in the computer revolution but resulted in environmental contamination. There are other examples of science moving forward but then looking at the implications after the fact.”