Profile cover photo
Profile photo
BREC Solutions Limited
BREC Solutions Limited's posts

Nanotechnology newsletter has just been published by BREC Solutions (@BREC_Solutions)(August Issue 035)

July and August are usually very quiet in the nano-world, yet we managed to see a number of very interesting news from the industry and regulators. A great deal of activity has been detected in Graphene area with some of the new applications being posted in press. We have also heard from the regulators in US (US FDA and EPA), Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, EU Commission. The most striking was the third report by the EU Commission where they proposed a number of steps to characterise and qualify a material as not-a-nanomaterial. This was not proposed before and will surely be the centre of some debate. CODATA has completed their work on nanomaterial descriptors and published their report.

Post has attachment
Combined microflotation of fine quartz using microbubbles ( < 50 μm)
It is already well established that the flotation efficiency of fine minerals can be significantly improved by adding a relatively small amount of microbubbles ( < 50 μm) to conventional coarse bubbles (>1 mm) normally used in flotation cells. To establish quantitative characteristics of this effect, the dependence of the flotation rate constant and recovery on microbubbles dosage was studied using fine quartz ( < 25 μm) samples in laboratory pneumomechanical and column flotation cells. It was found that, for pulp concentration in the range of 20–30 g L− 1, the flotation rate constant of the pneumomechanical flotation process is directly proportional to the microbubbles dosage. It was also found that the introduction of 0.25 L kg− 1 of microbubbles into the pulp before it is fed into the column flotation cell resulted in the recovery increasing from 77 to 89% for quartz concentration of 34 g L− 1 and from 66 to 87% for the quartz concentration of 68 g L− 1.
#nanobubble   #finebubble

Post has attachment
FDA Issues Final Guidance on Use of Nanomaterials in Food for Animals Contains Nonbinding Recommendations #NanoNews 

#220 Guidance for Industry Use of Nanomaterials in Food for Animals
In this document, the term animal food means food for animals. This guidance is applicable to food ingredients that are intended for use in animal food and that (1) consist entirely of nanomaterials, (2) contain nanomaterials as a component, or (3) otherwise involve the application of nanotechnology.

leon-nanodrugs GmbH Raises EUR 18.5 Million In Series A Financing 
TVM Capital Life Science leads international syndicate of investors - an additional EUR 3 million investment is expected later in 2015  
Munich, Germany, July 27, 2015 / B3C newswire / -- leon nanodrugs GmbH today announced that it completed the first closing of its Series A preferred stock offering at EUR 18.5 million. The financing was led by TVM Capital Life Science, based in Munich and Montreal, with participation from Signet Healthcare Partners (USA), LifeCare Partners (Switzerland), CD-Venture (Germany), Albany Private Equity Holding (Australia), and a non-disclosed Family Office from Germany. Dr. Hubert Birner, Managing Partner, and Stefan Fischer, General Partner & CFO, TVM Capital Life Science, James Gale, Managing Director, Signet Healthcare Partners, Dr. Gerhard Ries, Managing Partner, LifeCare Partners, Dr. Frank Mathias, CEO, Medigene AG, and Dr. Bernd Baumstümmler, CEO, Instillo Group, will be joining the Board of Directors.

Post has attachment
Banking on future demand for graphite and graphene, Australian companies search the globe for new deposits

Australian companies are searching high and low for new graphite deposits, and their hunt is seeing old mines reopen from Port Lincoln to northern Sweden.

Post has attachment
EC JRC publishes the latest report on the Definition of a nanomaterial … #nano #definition
The JRC has published science-based options to improve the clarity and the practical application of the EC recommendation on the definition of a nanomaterial. This is the last JRC report in a series of three, providing the scientific support to  the Commission in its review of the definition used to identify materials for which special provisions might apply (e.g. for ingredient labelling or safety assessment).  The Commission's review process continues, assessing the options against policy issues.
As the definition should be broadly applicable in different regulatory sectors, the report suggests that the scope of the definition regarding the origin of nanomaterials should remain unchanged, addressing natural, incidental and manufactured nanomaterials. Furthermore, size as the sole defining property of a nanoparticle, as well as the range of 1 nm to 100 nm as definition of the nanoscale should be maintained.
On the other hand, several issues seem to deserve attention in terms of clarification of the definition and/or provision of additional implementation guidance. These include:
The terms "particle", "particles size", "external dimension" and "constituent particles".
Consequences of the possibility of varying the current 50% threshold for the particle number fraction (if more than half of the particles have one or more external dimensions between 1 nm and 100 nm the material is a nanomaterial): variable thresholds may allow regulators to address specific concerns in certain application areas, but may also confuse customers and lead to an inconsistent classification of the same material based on the field of application.
Ambiguity on the role of the volume-specific surface area (VSSA): The potential use of VSSA should be clarified and ambiguities arising from the current wording should be eliminated.
The methods to prove that a material is not a nanomaterial: The definition makes it very difficult to prove that a material is not a nanomaterial. This issue could be resolved by adding an additional criterion.
The list of explicitly included materials (fullerenes, graphene flakes and single wall carbon nanotubes even with one or more external dimensions below 1 nm): This list does not include non-carbon based materials with a structure similar to carbon nanotubes. A modification (or removal) of the current list could avoid inconsistencies.
A clearer wording in the definition could prevent the misunderstanding that products containing nanoparticles become nanomaterials themselves.
Many of the issues addressed in the report can be clarified by developing new or improved guidance. Also the need for specific guidance beyond clarification of the definition itself is identified. However, relying only on guidance documents for essential parts of the definition may lead to unintended differences in the implementation and decision making. Therefore, also possibilities to introduce more clarity in the definition itself are listed above and discussed in the report.
JRC will continue to support the review process of the definition and its implementation in EU legislation.
Background information
The EU Recommendation on the definition of a nanomaterial (2011/696/EU) was adopted in 2011. Its provisions include a requirement for review "in the light of experience and of scientific and technological developments. The review should particularly focus on whether the number size distribution threshold of 50 % should be increased or decreased". The Commission is expected to conclude the review in 2016, following the consultation of its draft findings with the stakeholders towards the end of 2015.
The EC nanomaterial definition is currently used in the regulations on biocides and medical devices. It serves also as a reference in the amendment of the older nanomaterial definitions in the cosmetics and food information regulations. Moreover the European Commission is looking at ways to use the definition in the context of potential nanomaterial specific provisions related to the Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH). In addition, the definition was recommended for use by EU agencies such as the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that have already started to apply it in their work.

Post has attachment
What will be the impact on innovation and nanotechnology in particular with Greece crushing out of Euro? #grexit #GreeceCrisis ?
From the first glance, the negotiations on the Greek bailout seem extremely damaging for the whole of the financial sector. What is the impact on the innovation, research and sciences in Greece? Whatever comes out of the talks in Brussels, it is clear that funding will be cut even further for government programmes. Greece has already been under a very limited research funding. If the agreement is not reached and the new drachma is introduced then its devaluation will mean that local research and development may be very cheap. At the same time, if the EU (FP7 or H2020) projects are still running they will pay in Euros, thus becoming a life line for some of the institutions.
Greek nanotechnology industry is very limited and has already suffered from strong Euro. Unless they are in debt in Euros, their costs will reduce significantly in case of Greek Euro exit. They will not be able to rely on stable banking sector but at least their profitability will be balanced. Most of known Greek nanotechnology firms are in services and materials synthesis sectors. The impact will not therefore be as significant on their operations while their costs will reduce with Grexit.
So, not the end of the world realy 

Post has attachment
Nanotechnologies for pesticides and veterinary medicines: regulatory considerations Final report by Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority

The interest in nanopesticides appears to focus predominantly on three formulation types: polymer-based nanoformulations, inorganic nanoparticles such as silica and titanium dioxide, and nanoemulsions. The benefits of these formulations compared to existing formulations include the release of active ingredients in a slow and targeted manner, protecting active ingredients against degradation and increasing the apparent solubility of active ingredients that are poorly water soluble. Other benefits such as a network of wireless sensors able to detect and locate pest-infested portions of a crop and communicate the information via satellite to a laptop computer, and nanoclay devices installed in drip irrigation lines that release agrochemicals on demand, are also envisioned. Deploying such technologies will reduce the environmental footprint and off-site impacts of chemicals through the use of smaller quantities and more targeted application.

Post has attachment
Graphene To Be New Star Of Defense Manufacturing      

Post has attachment
Graphene booms in factories but lacks a killer app @NatureNews #graphene #business #market 
by Mark Peplow
17 June 2015
The city of Manchester, UK, is gearing up for a graphene jamboree. Graphene Week 2015, which kicks off on 22 June, is sure to delight its more than 600 attendees with a conference and celebrations of the ‘wonder material’. Graphene’s commercial future, however, is much less certain.
The atom-thin flakes of carbon are being produced in record volume and have found their way into a handful of eye-catching gizmos. But experts fret that graphene production far exceeds requirements, and that the material offers only marginal benefits over incumbent technologies in many of its target applications. 
Wait while more posts are being loaded