R&D has a New York state of mind
The Empire State is one of many investing in basic research for electronics
Bill Roberts, illistration by Daniel Guidera -- EDN, October 1, 2004
The state of New York has seen the future, and it looks like nano- technology. The state government is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into R&D initiatives, across the nanotech spectrum, at several state universities. Nearly $400 million has so far been slated for nanoelectronics.
The jewel in the crown is Albany NanoTech, a university/industry-collaborative R&D center, at the University at Albany (part of the SUNY system) to which the state has committed $385 million—and counting. In addition, Albany NanoTech has attracted investments from several electronics companies, including Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM, for a total R&D war chest of $1.5 billion since 2002. Less than $20 million comes from federal grants.
"Never before has New York State committed funds of this magnitude to any R&D operation or any university," says Alain Kaloyeros, executive director of Albany NanoTech and a professor in the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering. "This nano-tech research effort transcends political lines. Governor George Pataki [a Republican] has broad bipartisan support." The investment comes despite a $15 billion state budget deficit.
New York is not the only state that sees the potential of nanotech to bring new industry, attract capital and create jobs in the decades ahead—provided they get in on the ground floor by attracting top-notch research talent. California, Texas, Florida, New Jersey, Oregon and others are investing modest to large sums in nanotech R&D, but none as extensively as New York.
California, for example, has committed $400 million over four years to four programs in different disciplines at various campuses of the University of California. One program, focused on electronics, is the California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), established jointly at UCLA and UC Santa Barbara.
"This is a departure for state government," says Roy Doumani, chief operating officer of the CNSI. "We're trying to have more influence on the type of economic environment being formed within the state's borders." The idea is to bring together researchers from universities and industry to collaborate on projects in both basic and applied research. The hope is that industry will eventually be able to develop the next generation of innovative products—and create the jobs to sustain them. Hewlett-Packard—which started when a Stanford professor suggested that two of his students found their company near the university—is a key corporate partner.
"State governments have spotted in nanotechnology a funnel through which to pour basic research dollars," says Stephan Herrera, a journalist whose book Closer to God: Nanotechnology's Fantastic Voyage (Random House) is coming out in early 2005. "It says a lot about nanotech that New York is willing to divert a lot of money into an unproven, fledgling bit of basic research."
From the electronics industry's perspective, the investments couldn't come at a better time. The federal government—the primary patron of basic research in the United States—has been steadily decreasing its investment in basic research for electronics as a percentage of gross domestic product (see "The End of Innovation?"). So every little bit helps these days, and it's no small amount that the states are investing. They've increased the funding of all types of basic research by more than 50 percent since 1993 (see "States Increase Their Basic Research Spending," below).
The most pressing need for electronics is to find a replacement for the CMOS transistor, which will reach its physical limits by 2020. The Semiconductor Industry Association estimates that that effort is underfunded by $1.5 billion a year. Everyone expects nanotech to replace CMOS. "I constantly hear how molecular electronics will be Moore's Law II," says Herrera.
If the industry does not find a CMOS replacement, it won't be for lack of effort at Albany NanoTech. The center, which sits on a 1,350-acre site next to the university, will have four fabs when construction is done. Three are completed, including a fab for 300-mm wafers. IBM contributed software and process systems for it.
Kaloyeros believes fervently that researchers can't push the boundaries of nanotech manufacturing without a production-class wafer fab. "Scaling to 300 millimeters is part of the basic science now," he says. "I don't subscribe to the theory that if you develop a wafer in the lab, industry can necessarily commercialize it." He says that the only other nanomicroelectronics R&D centers with comparable facilities are Europe's Interuniversity MicroElectronics Center (IMEC), in Belgium, and the Japanese industry consortium Semiconductor Leading Edge Technologies Inc. (SELETE).
He estimates that about 20 percent of Albany NanoTech's funding is for basic research, mostly by faculty and graduate students at the college, and 80 percent for applied research and development. But the distinctions often blur. "The colocation of research and development and the intermixing of how we set up offices and work together on programs cross-fertilizes ideas," Kaloyeros says. "I have a tough time distinguishing between the approach of an IBM staffer here and a faculty member doing basic research."
Besides IBM, which has nearly four dozen scientists at Albany NanoTech, the site also has financial commitments and staff from Tokyo Electron, a semiconductor equipment supplier; Infineon, a German semiconductor company; and several smaller companies. The total personnel from industry and the university at Albany NanoTech number more than 500, with plans to ramp up to more than 1,600 by 2006, Kaloyeros says.
IBM does basic and applied research at Albany NanoTech and then transfers work to its Fishkill, N.Y., lab for product development. "The confluence of academia, business and government has already been a powerful force," says Jim Ryan, director of IBM's R&D activities at Albany Nano-Tech. "All the entities have their own agenda, but they parallel each other and can be quite effective for developing a model with great potential. This is a fully cooperative activity."
