Big ambitions in a small world

28-May-2006 - Last updated on 14-Mar-2017 at 16:29 GMT

Related tags Food

Fears of a consumer backlash, similar to that against genetic modification, are making manufacturers cautious about divulging too much about their work into nanotechnology. But, reports John Dunn, there is a lot going on

After years of hype, promises and predictions, nanotechnology is at last beginning to find some real commercial applications. Yet despite the millions of pounds, dollars, euros, yen, renminbi and won that have been spent on chasing the nanotechnology dream, it is surprisingly hard to find out how many nanotechnology consumer products there are on the supermarket shelves. And it is even more difficult - nigh on impossible in fact - to find any food products that manufacturers are willing to own up to as having been touched by the magic wand of nanotechnology.

Despite heaps of government and private sector dosh, despite the explosion of nanotechnology academies, institutes, European Union (EU) projects, foundations, forums, clubs, newsletters and magazines, the US government estimates that there are just 80 or so consumer products on the shelves that use the fruits of nanotechnology research or that contain nano materials.

That figure is now having to be being revised upwards - a bit. The Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington DC has spent the past year producing the world's first inventory of nano-based consumer products. And it says that as of March 8 this year there were 212 nano consumer products being produced around the world.

Just 19 are classed as food and beverage items. These include canola (rapeseed) oil, chocolate chewing gum, calcium and magnesium supplements and vitamin sprays, as well as a slimmer's chocolate shake, a citrus mint shampoo and a tooth powder. The food and beverage list also includes two fridges that have benefited from nanotechnology.

The majority of the products on the inventory (125), however, fall into the health and fitness sector - from wrinkle-resistant clothing and sporting goods to cosmetics and sunscreens. And most of the items (126) emanate from the US, with a further 42 produced in east Asia and another 35 produced in Europe.

In the UK, the Institute of Nanotechnology (IoN) in Stirling has just produced its own report into the prospects for nanotechnology in the global agriculture and food industries. But after combing through the 15-page report, which was produced for the Nanoforum, the EU-funded information network hosted by the IoN, you won't find the names of any specific food products that have been influenced by nanotechnology.

Packaging fares better with several companies around the world claiming to have developed better barrier films for food and beverage products by incorporating nanoparticles that either prevent the entry of food spoilage gases such as oxygen, or prevent the loss of fizzy gases such as carbon dioxide.

Like the Woodrow Wilson Center, the IoN has had to rely mainly on trawling the web to find out what is happening. And the trouble with this approach, as the Woodrow Wilson Center admits, is that the data is taken from sources readily available on the web and therefore does not include nano products which manufacturers have not identified as such.

So why the hesitation from food manufacturers? Blame genetic modification (GM) say UK food experts. They agree the problem is that food manufacturers have grown increasingly wary of consumer reaction to technology in food following public reaction to GM foods. A few years ago the likes of Kraft Foods, Unilever and Nestlé, backed by DuPont and other chemical giants, were publicly promising all sorts of benefits from the coming together of physics, chemistry, biology and electronics to exploit the behaviour of materials at the nano scale.

Special properties

When particles and structures get down to a few billionths of a metre in size, they exhibit special properties. At the nano scale substances like clays become see-through, making them ideal gas barriers for food packaging. Oil droplets become see-through too, allowing them to carry nutrients and supplements into drinks. Sensitive compounds such as nutrients and drugs, or extremely bitter compounds such as peptides, can be encapsulated in nano particles so that they can be fed to humans and animals, passing by the taste buds until they reach their right destination where they can be triggered into action. Emulsions and colloids become more stable and predictable when their constituents are nano size. And by studying surfaces and foodstuffs at the nano scale, it should be possible to prevent the fouling of food processing equipment and develop self-cleaning surfaces.

But that was then. Today, those same food companies are keeping schtum and their heads down. Thanks to GM, they have become very sensitive to consumer concerns over food safety. And with the UK and US governments and the EU devoting cash and resources to ways of controlling the release of nano particles and nano materials into the food chain, it would take a brave food manufacturer indeed to laud its nanotechnology successes.

But fears over 'grey goo' are not the only barriers to incorporating nanotechnology in food products. The results of nano R&D come with a price tag; and is that price worth paying? Unless there are demonstrable benefits for the consumer, why will they fork out for it?

Nanotechnology will undoubtedly come to the food and drink industry, but the industry will never call it nanotechnology. Professor Peter Fryer, who heads food process engineering at Birmingham University, says that three or four years ago everyone was in the race to make nano emulsions. "Now everybody's got them. But can they identify something good enough to repay the cost of their development?" It will probably be easier and make more commercial sense, he suggests, to develop ingredient encapsulation processes and new packaging materials first.

"Nanotechnology is not as easy a hit for the food industry as it first thought. And companies are getting neurotic about it. We have ended the buzzword phase and people are now having to grit their teeth and ask: OK, just what can nanotechnology do for me?"

Fears of consumer backlash

Professor Vic Morris at the Institute of Food Research is co-author of a recent Institute of Food Science & Technology report into nanotechnology and its likely impact on the food and drinks industry (see Food Manufacture, p5, March 2006). He agrees with Fryer that there are very real fears among food companies about a consumer backlash against nanotechnology in foods.

"Until a few years ago food companies were quite open about what they were doing with nanotechnology, with companies like Nestlé selling the idea that they were going to [use it to] improve food. But now it is getting very difficult to get them to talk about what they are doing," says Morris. He believes companies will use nanotechnology in packaging, particularly in the development of 'smart' packing that can control the diffusion of gases and liquids.

"But in terms of direct food products, the most likely use for nanotechnology will be on the borderline between pharmaceuticals and functional foods, such as encapsulation for the better delivery of nutrients and supplements."

Pauline King, marketing manager of the Faraday Packaging research partnership says there is a tremendous amount of nanotechnology work under way in universities and research institutions. "A lot is beginning to come to fruition, especially in the US. But whether packaging companies and food packing companies in particular are willing to incorporate these technologies, and how quickly, is another matter.

"The nub of it is: what are the benefits to the consumer? Ultimately the consumer pays for these developments. So if they are seen to be of more value to the retailer - increased shelf-life for instance - then maybe the consumer won't see that as of any value to themselves. The limiting factor is cost and how much nanotechnology might add to the cost of packaging."

Dr Graham Clayton is commercial director of the Food Chain Centre of Industrial Collaboration (CIC) at Leeds University.

"The problem with nanotechnology and food and drink companies is getting the two together. Getting food and drink companies involved with any scientific development is an uphill struggle. So if you then add the word nano, people say: 'That's small machines isn't it? Nothing to do with food and drink'.

"So although nanotechnology does have something to offer the food and drink sector, it will need to be more obvious in other sectors first before the food and drink sector gets involved."

KEY CONTACTS