Tuesday, November 30, 2010

A Healthy Brain Needs a Healthy Heart


When the National Institutes of Health convened a panel of independent experts this past April on how to prevent Alzhei­mer’s disease, the conclusions were pretty grim. The panel determined that “no evidence of even moderate scientific quality” links anything--from herbal or nutritional supplements to prescription medications to social, economic or environmental conditions--with the slightest decrease in the risk of developing Alzheimer’s. Furthermore, the committee argued, there is little credible evidence that you can do anything to delay the kinds of memory problems that are often associated with aging. The researchers’ conclusions made headlines around the world and struck a blow at the many purveyors of “brain boosters,” “memory enhancers” and “cognitive-training software” that advertise their wares on the Web and on television. One of the panel experts later told reporters in a conference call that the group wanted to “dissuade folks from spending extraordinary amounts of money on stuff that doesn’t work.”
But did the panel overstate its case? Some memory and cognition researchers privately grumbled that the conclusions were too negative--particularly with respect to the potential benefits of not smoking, treating high blood pressure and engaging in physical activity. In late September the British Journal of Sports Medicine published a few of these criticisms. As a longtime science journalist, I suspected that this is the kind of instructive controversy--with top-level people taking opposing positions--that often occurs at the leading edge of research. As I spoke with various researchers, I realized that the disagreements signaled newly emerging views of how the brain ages. Investigators are exploring whether they need to look beyond the brain to the heart to understand what happens to nerve cells over the course of decades. In the process, they are uncovering new roles for the cardiovascular system, including ones that go beyond supplying the brain with plenty of oxygen-rich blood. The findings could suggest useful avenues for delaying dementia or less severe memory problems.
Dementia, of course, is a complex biological phenomenon. Although Alzheimer’s is the most common cause of dementia in older adults, it is not the only cause. Other conditions can contribute to dementia as well, says Eric B. Larson, executive director of the Group Health Research Institute in Seattle. For example, physicians have long known that suffering a stroke, in which blood flow to the brain has been interrupted by a clot or a hemorrhage, can lead to dementia. But research over the past few years has documented the importance of very tiny strokes—strokes so small they can be detected only under a microscope after death—as another possible cause for dementia. Studies at autopsy of people who had dementia have detected many of these so-called microvascular infarcts either by themselves or along with the plaques and tangles more typical of Alzheimer’s in the brains of people with dementia. These findings suggest that most dementias, even those caused by Alzheimer’s, are triggered by multiple pathological processes and will require more than one treatment.
Proving that cardiovascular treatment is one of those approaches will take some doing. Just because microinfarcts may make dementia worse does not mean that preventing them will delay the brain’s overall deterioration. Maybe severe dementia makes people more vulnerable to microinfarcts. And just because better control of high blood pressure and increased physical activity seem to decrease a person’s risk of stroke, that does not necessarily mean they are less likely to suffer microinfarcts. Correlation, after all, does not necessarily imply causation. That scientific truism was the problem that kept bothering the panel of outside experts put together by the NIH. Thus, the expert panel concluded, with one exception, that “all existing evidence suggests that antihypertensive treatment results in no cognitive benefit.” Data showing the benefits of boosting physical activity in folks with confirmed memory problems were “preliminary.”
The controversy boils down to semantics, says Martha L. Daviglus, chair of the consensus panel and a preventive cardiology researcher at Northwestern University’s School of Medicine. “Obviously, smoking and hypertension are risk factors for cardiovascular disease,” she says. “And they may turn out to be risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease as well,” she says. But after reviewing all the evidence, Daviglus and her fellow panelists concluded that it “failed to provide convincing evidence” of the link, whereas other researchers see “some evidence” of a link.
Getting better data may be a problem, however. One of the best ways scientists have to prove cause and effect in medicine is to conduct a randomized controlled trial, in which study subjects are randomly assigned to two groups. One group—the so-called control group—receives the usual standard of care. The other group—the so-called experimental group—gets whichever intervention is being tested. The simplest way to prove that treating high blood pressure helps to delay the onset of dementia would be to treat one group for hypertension and leave the other group deliberately untreated for the sake of the experiment. No ethical physician would participate in such a study.
One way out of this dilemma, Daviglus notes, is to design a study in which patients suffering from hypertension get treatment, and doctors analyze the results based on how well the patients’ blood pressure was controlled. If the amount by which blood pressure dropped closely paralleled the decrease in dementia risk, that would be powerful evidence of a beneficial link. Such a so-called dose-response study has not been done yet—it is a complex and expensive undertaking—but there is reason to believe it could be worth the investment.
Observational studies, which follow people as they get older without directly intervening in their treatment, have uncovered some suggestive trends. Larson and others have shown that people who have good control of their blood pressure from age 65 to 80 are less likely to develop dementia. After age 85, controlling blood pressure does not have much effect on dementia risk. That doesn’t mean anyone older than 85 should stop taking blood pressure medication. Lowering high blood pressure still prevents congestive heart failure and promotes kidney health. But these studies suggest that doctors do not have to take aggressive measures when treating patients older than 85 for hypertension.
As for physical activity, the best evidence in favor of its benefits for the brain comes from Australia. Two years ago researchers there published the results of a randomized controlled trial of physical activity in 170 older adults who had started showing greater memory problems than their peers and were thus at increased risk of developing dementia. Study participants averaged an extra 20 minutes a day of physical activity over six months. The study was so rigorously designed that individuals undertook the extra exercise by themselves at home to preclude the possibility that the true benefit had come from socializing with other people during group activities. The benefits of extra exercise were obvious and lasted—albeit at a diminishing level—­for 12 months after the exercise program ended. Not only did the experimental group score better on tests of their cognition compared with the control group, but the improvement was twice as great as the one that had previously been shown for the antidementia drug donepezil (brand name Aricept). This was the first time that anyone had proved in a randomized controlled trial that exercise could improve mental functioning in people with some cognitive problems.
No one understands on a biochemical level why physical activity might help the brain. The best explanation so far, says Henrietta van Praag, a neurobiologist at the National Institute on Aging, is that exercising the heart somehow stimulates growth factors to produce new nerve cells in the brain. In 1999 van Praag showed that more new nerves formed in the hippocampus—­one of the key centers in the brain for memory and learning—in physically active mice than in inactive ones. (She was working at the time as a postdoctoral researcher in Fred Gage’s laboratory at the Salk Institute.) She has since shown that the new cell growth is associated with a marked improvement in learning and memory. The new nerves also show qualitative differences from their older counterparts. The younger cells are better at establishing new connections with other cells. The effect is somewhat temporary. After a couple of months, the new cells start acting like the older cells, although they do not die off.
Maybe 10 or 15 years in the future, we will know for sure whether quitting smokingand exercising regularly help to delay dementia. That leaves the rest of us—who may have seen the devastating effects of dementia on older family and friends and cannot afford to wait for a definitive scientific answer on how we might avoid a similar fate—in an uncomfortable state of ignorance. Even if these steps never end up helping your brain, however, they will do your heart a world of good. 
Editor's note: This article was published in the print issue with the title, "The Heart-Brain Connection".

U.S. proved natural gas, crude oil reserves soar - EIA


By Selam Gebrekidan and Joshua Schneyer
NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. natural gas reserves increased by the most in history last year, and crude reserves also rose, as companies drilled frantically into shale rock formations with new technology, the Energy Information Administration said in an annual report on Tuesday.
U.S. net proved natural gas reserves rose 11 percent, or 28.8 trillion cubic feet (tcf), in 2009 to total 284 tcf, underscoring the dramatic impact that new gas pumped from shale rock formations is having on world energy supply.
Louisiana, whose statewide reserves grew quickest, saw its economically viable gas reserves surge by 77 percent, or 9.2 tcf, led by developments in its Haynesville Shale.
U.S. net proved crude oil reserves rose 9 percent, or 1.8 billion barrels, to 22.3 billion barrels in 2009. Texas saw its proved oil volumes rise most, by 529 million barrels, or 11 percent.
North Dakota, home of the oil-rich Bakken Shale formation, saw its reserves jump by a whopping 83 percent, or 481 million barrels.
"These increases demonstrate the possibility of an expanding role for domestic natural gas and crude oil in meeting both current and projected U.S. energy demands," EIA researchers said in their report.
Proved reserves -- which now stand at the equivalent of 12 years of gas consumption and 3.3 years of oil demand -- represent energy supplies that are extensively charted out and could be tapped under current market conditions. Total recoverable reserves, however, can be far higher.
The addition of 47.6 tcf in new proved gas reserves was the sharpest on record and caps seven straight years of increases, EIA said. It was led by gas from shale rock formations, such as Haynesville, where advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing have unlocked vast new energy potential.
As the cost of tapping gas fell, reserves were added even though prices of U.S. natural gas futures fell sharply last year, by an average of 32 percent, according to EIA's calculations. Burgeoning supplies of the fuel contributed to the price rout.
The expansion in crude and liquids reserves came largely as a function of a rise in U.S. oil prices over the course of 2009. Based on price levels at the beginning of each month, oil futures averaged $61.08 a barrel last year, up 37 percent from 2008, EIA said. That rise prompted oil companies to shift more oil reserves into the "proved" category, which is contingent on viable economics for their production, EIA said.
About 1,200 companies, including the largest domestic operators, were included in the EIA proved reserves survey.
The rise in proved crude reserves came after 2008 reserves dipped by 10.3 percent, their largest drop in 32 years. Natural gas proved reserves had risen 2.9 percent in 2008.
SHALE BOOM
Shale gas development in Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania supported the reserves increase. The Fayetville and Marcellus shale plays in Arkansas and Pennsylvania, respectively, nearly doubled their reserves in the reporting period.
Hydraulic fracturing technologies originally used to tap gas but now increasingly used to tap crude and liquids from shale plays helped boost crude oil reserves. All major oil production regions saw reserves rise, including California, Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore area, EIA said.
While the reserves boost is promising for U.S. energy supplies, it has also helped push natgas futures down further in 2010. They have fallen nearly 25 percent, by far the biggest loser of 2010 on the Reuters-Jefferies CRB Index of 19 commodities.
On Tuesday, January natgas futures slid 3 cents to settle at $4.18 per million British thermal units.
EIA's estimates of U.S. 2009 proved natural gas reserves were 16 percent higher than the 244.7 trillion cubic feet BP said are viably recoverable in the U.S. in the Statistical Review of World Energy report it published last June.
EIA's annual report also showed that British oil giant BP Plc remained the largest reserve holder and proprietary producer of both oil and gas in the United States last year.
The company, whose Macondo offshore prospect was the site of the biggest U.S. oil spill in history this year, owned 3.07 billion barrels of proved U.S. crude reserves and 15.2 trillion cubic feet of proved natural gas at the end of 2009.
Proved reserves are volumes of oil and natural gas that can be recovered in the near future from known reservoirs with a reasonable certainty using existing technology and under current economic conditions.
(Additional reporting by Eileen Moustakis; Editing by Marguerita Choy and David Gregorio)

Monday, November 29, 2010

Dark Jupiter May Haunt Edge of Solar System



A century of comet data suggests a dark, Jupiter-sized object is lurking at the solar system’s outer edge and hurling chunks of ice and dust toward Earth.

“We’ve accumulated 10 years’ more data, double the comets we viewed to test this hypothesis,” said planetary scientist John Matese of the University of Louisiana. “Only now should we be able to falsify or verify that you could have a Jupiter-mass object out there.”

In 1999, Matese and colleague Daniel Whitmire suggested the sun has a hidden companion that boots icy bodies from the Oort Cloud, a spherical haze of comets at the solar system’s fringes, into the inner solar system where we can see them.

In a new analysis of observations dating back to 1898, Matese and Whitmire confirm their original idea: About 20 percent of the comets visible from Earth were sent by a dark, distant planet.



This idea was a reaction to an earlier notion that a dim brown-dwarf or red-dwarf star, ominously dubbed Nemesis, has pummeled the Earth with deadly comet showers every 30 million years or so. Later research suggested that mass extinctions on Earth don’t line up with the Nemesis predictions, so many astronomers now think that object doesn’t exist.

“But we began to ask, what kind of an object could you hope to infer from the present data that we are seeing?” Matese said. “What could possibly tickle [comets'] orbits and make them come very close to the sun so we could see them?”

Rather than a malevolent death star, a smaller and more benign companion called Tyche (Nemesis’ good sister in Greek mythology) could send comets streaming from the Oort Cloud toward Earth.

The cosmic snowballs that form the hearts of comets generally hang out in the Oort Cloud until their orbits are nudged by some outside force. This push could come from one of three things, Matese said. The constant gravitational pull of the Milky Way’s disk can drag comets out of their icy homes and into the inner solar system. A passing star can shake comets loose from the Oort Cloud as it zips by. Or a large companion like Nemesis or Tyche can pull comets out of their comfort zones.

Computational models show that comets in each of these scenarios, when their apparent origins are mapped in space, make a characteristic pattern in the sky.

“We looked at the patterns and asked, ‘Is there additional evidence of a pattern that might be associated with a passing star or with a bound object?’” Matese said.

After examining the orbits of more than 100 comets in the Minor Planet Center database, the researchers concluded that 80 percent of comets born in the Oort Cloud were pushed out by the galaxy’s gravity. The remaining 20 percent, however, needed a nudge from a distant object about 1.4 times the mass of Jupiter.

“Something smaller than Jovian mass wouldn’t be strong enough to do the deed,” Matese said. “Something more massive, like a brown dwarf, would give a much stronger signal than the 20 percent we assert.”

There’s one problem, however. The pattern only works for comets that come from the spherical outer Oort Cloud, which extends from about 0.3 to 0.8 light-years from the sun. Comets from the flatter, more doughnut-shaped inner Oort Cloud don’t create the same distinctive pattern.

“That’s troubling,” Matese said. “It requires an entirely new dynamical explanation for how inner Oort Cloud comets are made observable.”

That the same weird pattern from 1999 is still there today “definitely makes it a stronger case than past papers,” said planetary scientist Nathan Kaib of the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, who was not involved in the new work. But he would still like to see more data.

“I think this whole issue will be resolved in the next five to 10 years, because there’s surveys coming on line … that will dwarf the comet sample we have today,” he said. “Whether these types of asymmetries in the directions that comets are coming from actually do exist or not will definitely be hammered out by those surveys.”

We may not have to wait that long, Matese said. An object like Tyche could be seen directly by WISE, NASA’s infrared space telescope.

“We anticipate that this WISE is going to falsify or verify our conjecture,” he said. “We just have to be patient.”



Images: 1) Comet Sliding Spring, a visitor from the Oort Cloud, was captured by WISE in January 2010. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/UCLA

2) The layout of the solar system, including the Oort Cloud, on a logarithmic scale. Credit: NASA



See Also:


Follow us on Twitter @astrolisa and @wiredscience, and on Facebook.
"

Blue Lighting Wakes Schoolkids Up


I tell you what, I could do with some of this “blue lighting” each morning when I start work at 7.30. Being tested in a British school, Philips’ blue-tinted light wakes kids up and makes them perform better.

In fact, previous tests have found that when the blue light is switched on, hyperactivity falls by 77 per cent; reading speed increases by 35 per cent and the number of errors actually fell by 45 per cent. The lighting system has four different light cycles for various times of the day (controlled by the teacher, naturally), with the blue setting reviving them when they’re drowsy; a normal setting for most of the time; a whiter light for helping them concentrate, and a warmer colour for relaxing the kiddywinks. [Daily Mail]

"

Who Put This 1000-Ton Boulder Here?

Who Put This 1000-Ton Boulder Here?: "


That’s not a tiny man. That boulder – shot by Icelandic photographer, volcano adventurer and overall awesome guy Ragnar Sigurdsson – stands 15m high, weighs about 1000 tons, and it wasn’t there a few days ago. Who put it there?

This guy:

I call him Mike, but you know him as Eyjafjallajokull. Its impact is still being felt in Iceland. This boulder came out of nowhere after the unpronounceable raging mountain melt the glacier that was trapping it. Glaciers are slow but irrepressible forces of nature that wrap and drag everything on their way. Unfortunately for the glaciers, volcano lava, win like scissors over paper. [Daily Mail]

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Telomerase reverses aging process


By Ewen Callaway
Premature aging can be reversed by reactivating an enzyme that protects the tips of chromosomes, a study in mice suggests.
Mice engineered to lack the enzyme, called telomerase, become prematurely decrepit. But they bounced back to health when the enzyme was replaced. The finding, published online November 28 in Nature, hints that some disorders characterized by early aging could be treated by boosting telomerase activity. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)
It also offers the possibility that normal human aging could be slowed by reawakening the enzyme in cells where it has stopped working, says Ronald DePinho, a cancer geneticist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, who led the new study. "This has implications for thinking about telomerase as a serious anti-aging intervention."
Other scientists, however, point out that mice lacking telomerase are a poor stand-in for the normal aging process. Moreover, ramping up telomerase in humans could potentially encourage the growth of tumors.
Eternal youth
After its discovery in the 1980s, telomerase gained a reputation as a fountain of youth. Chromosomes have caps of repetitive DNA called telomeres at their ends. Every time cells divide, their telomeres shorten, which eventually prompts them to stop dividing and die. Telomerase prevents this decline in some kinds of cells, including stem cells, by lengthening telomeres, and the hope was that activating the enzyme could slow cellular aging.
Two decades on, researchers are realizing that telomerase's role in aging is far more nuanced than first thought. Some studies have uncovered an association between short telomeres and early death, whereas others have failed to back up this link. People with rare diseases characterized by shortened telomeres or telomerase mutations seem to age prematurely, although some tissues are more affected than others.
When mice are engineered to lack telomerase completely, their telomeres progressively shorten over several generations. These animals age much faster than normal mice--they are barely fertile and suffer from age-related conditions such as osteoporosis, diabetes and neurodegeneration. They also die young. "If you look at all those data together, you walk away with the idea that the loss of telomerase could be a very important instigator of the aging process," says DePinho.
To find out if these dramatic effects are reversible, DePinho's team engineered mice such that the inactivated telomerase could be switched back on by feeding the mice a chemical called 4-OHT. The researchers allowed the mice to grow to adulthood without the enzyme, then reactivated it for a month. They assessed the health of the mice another month later.
"What really caught us by surprise was the dramatic reversal of the effects we saw in these animals," says DePinho. He describes the outcome as "a near 'Ponce de Leon' effect" -- a reference to the Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de Leon, who went in search of the mythical Fountain of Youth. Shriveled testes grew back to normal and the animals regained their fertility. Other organs, such as the spleen, liver and intestines, recuperated from their degenerated state.
The one-month pulse of telomerase also reversed effects of aging in the brain. Mice with restored telomerase activity had noticeably larger brains than animals still lacking the enzyme, and neural progenitor cells, which produce new neurons and supporting brain cells, started working again.
"It gives us a sense that there's a point of return for age-associated disorders," says DePinho. Drugs that ramp up telomerase activity are worth pursuing as a potential treatment for rare disorders characterized by premature aging, he says, and perhaps even for more common age-related conditions.
Cancer link
The downside is that telomerase is often mutated in human cancers, and seems to help existing tumors grow faster. But DePinho argues that telomerase should prevent healthy cells from becoming cancerous in the first place by preventing DNA damage.
David Sinclair, a molecular biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, agrees there is evidence that activating telomerase might prevent tumors. If the treatment can be made safe, he adds, "it could lead to breakthroughs in restoring organ function in the elderly and treating a variety of diseases of aging."
Other researchers are less confident that telomerase can be safely harnessed. "Telomere rejuvenation is potentially very dangerous unless you make sure that it does not stimulate cancer," says David Harrison, who researches aging at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine.
Harrison also questions whether mice lacking telomerase are a good model for human aging. "They are not studying normal aging, but aging in mice made grossly abnormal," he says. Tom Kirkwood, who directs the Institute for Ageing and Health at Newcastle University, UK, agrees, pointing out that telomere erosion "is surely not the only, or even dominant, cause" of aging in humans.
DePinho says he recognizes that there is more to aging than shortened telomeres, particularly late in life, but argues that telomerase therapy could one day be combined with other therapies that target the biochemical pathways of aging. "This may be one of several things you need to do in order to extend lifespan and extend healthy living," he says.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Puralytics CEO On Cleaning Water With Light, Winning The Cleantech Open








The Cleantech Open— a prestigious annual competition for U.S. tech startups that protect, restore, and reduce the negative impact of humans on the environment— announced its 2010 winners this week. Puralytics, a clean water startup from Beaverton, Oregon, took first prize.

The Puralytics team invented and sells a nanotechnology-based, photochemical water purification system that, in comparison to other available systems, can purify water more quickly, remove more impurities from it, and requires less electricity to do so. With 15 percent of the world’s total estimated 6.5 billion population lacking freshwater enough to live a healthy life today, companies with promising water technology are in demand, and could help abate a global water and humanitarian crisis.

The executive director of the Cleantech Open Rex Northen said, “Puralytics stood out because they have developed something that will have a tremendous environmental and social impact. Their technology lets you use LED light or sunlight as a mechanism to clean water, and it lacks the toxic output many others have. The team was also very strong.”

Puralytics’ chief executive and founder, Mark Owen, is a serial entrepreneur and inventor whose thirty-some successful patents (according to his own calculations) have generated over one billion dollars in revenue for companies he has worked for and founded.

Owen spoke with TechCrunch about winning the Cleantech Open 2010 National Business Competition, and how his latest innovation cleans water with light. An edited transcript of the conversation follows below.


TC: What environmental problem does your company solve?

MO: Purifying water has been a dirty process using filters, membranes, cleaning chemicals and mercurcy lamps. The systems in use today waste most of the water they’re trying to purify, and require a lot of electricity. With reverse osmosis systems, for example, about 80% of the water that could be purified goes out into the sewer.

We have a different way to purify drinking water or water for light-industrial and commercial use. Our system processes all the water, using half as much electricity, and doesn’t require you to produce anything toxic. It also removes things from the water that others cannot, like pesticides and pharmaceuticals.

The EPA just released a list of 169 endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) that they will track from now on in domestic drinking water. These are things that even in small quantities can cause health problems for some people [and animals] including caffeine. Our system removes them from the water.

TC: How does Puralytics’ technology work?

MO: If I was explaining Puralytics to a classroom full of kids, I’d say, “There are little things in your water that may not be good for you. We use a special light to make those go away.”

We use LEDs to illuminate a nanotechnology coating we’ve developed, that’s on a mesh where the water flows through a main system. This technology is not filtering at all. What it is doing instead, is creating a chemical reaction that causes molecules to break apart and break down in the water.

The right wavelengths of light and this nanotechnology coating cause five photochemical processes that work to pull contaminants out of the water onto the surface of the mesh, then dump the energy of what’s been absorbed into the molecules to break them apart.

Most organic molecules are lots of carbons, hydrogens, and oxygen and a few other things. Essentially we break a long molecule apart, all the way down, and reform it as CO2 and water and minerals. We actively destroy contaminants in the water, but leave the minerals that are good for you in it. Other treatments take out minerals that are good for you. But ours does not.



TC: Can you see the process?


MO: It isn’t really visible. You see a kind of purplish light. If you could, you might see something that looks like water turning into steam and dissipating in the air. Something is changing form in there.


TC: Where did you get the idea for this?

MO: My previous company was Phoseon Technology. I’m still a director. We actually make light emitting diode (LED) drying equipment that can dry inks, coatings and adhesives very quickly using little energy. If you have any Ikea furniture, they spray on the coatings to make it look good, and make it durable, and Phoseon lamps dry it in about three seconds.

I got to thinking about what else I could do with LEDs. The original idea was to replace mercury lamps that are used to kill germs in hospitals and in water with an LED array. It didn’t turn out to be efficient. There are other good solutions to killing germs, I learned. But there weren’t efficient solutions to take out chemicals and heavy metals and other things of concern from water.

Another thing that inspired me was a building I saw in Japan, within Tokyo’s Expo City. It had been sprayed with a coating that kept it from getting dirty. Sun activates the coating to break up dirt and chemicals on the surface, so it mostly stays clean. I asked myself if instead of making the building clean, you could make the water clean.

I brought together a team— experts in chemistry, optics and physics— and we started figuring out which wavelengths of light were optimum, what kind of nanotechnology we could use, what kind of coating was optimum, and all the other things that could commence this idea around 2007.




TC: Do you have customers already? Who are they?


MO: We began shipping to customers in 2009. The majority have been industrial process customers. They need water that’s ultra pure for use in the lab, or in processes they use to make their products. Tap water isn’t clean enough. We are useful to pharmaceuticals, biotech and semiconductor manufacturers, and coffee franchises alike. We have several Fortune 500 clients.



TC: What’s next for Puralytics?


MO: I told you about our primary product, the Puralytics Shield, which uses LEDs to purify water for light industrial and commercial use. We have another one called the Solar Bag. It uses the same technology but without the LEDs. So, you have a nanotech coated mesh inside of a bag. You fill the bag with water, stick it in the sun, and the nanotech purifies the water over the course of several hours instead of a few minutes. This is going to be important for getting clean drinking water to people without access in the developing world.

One of our partners, Hydration Technologies humanitarian water division, is helping us sell the Solar Bag to nonprofits that can distribute it. We also work with different aid organizations around the world— including one in Kenya, and another one in Bangladesh— to supply our technology in developing world applications. We’ll be figuring out how to do more of this.

We’ve been funded by four government grants, a seed round, and now some prize money. We’ll be using that develop a next generation product and expand our market presence. But we’ll also be looking to raise growth capital, soon.

[Editor's note: The national competition prize included $150,000 worth of business services, and $100,000 in the form of a seed investment from a consortium of investors: Wilson Sonsini Investment Company, Stiefel Family Foundation, and the Cleantech Open.]

Images courtesy Douglas Schwartz Photography

More information about the 2010 Cleantech Open National Business Competition winners is available via the competition’s winners site and competition’s Youtube Channel.





"

Where do ideas come from?



  1. Ideas don't come from watching television
  2. Ideas sometimes come from listening to a lecture
  3. Ideas often come while reading a book
  4. Good ideas come from bad ideas, but only if there are enough of them
  5. Ideas hate conference rooms, particularly conference rooms where there is a history of criticism, personal attacks or boredom
  6. Ideas occur when dissimilar universes collide
  7. Ideas often strive to meet expectations. If people expect them to appear, they do
  8. Ideas fear experts, but they adore beginner's mind. A little awareness is a good thing
  9. Ideas come in spurts, until you get frightened. Willie Nelson wrote three of his biggest hits in one week
  10. Ideas come from trouble
  11. Ideas come from our ego, and they do their best when they're generous and selfless
  12. Ideas come from nature
  13. Sometimes ideas come from fear (usually in movies) but often they come from confidence
  14. Useful ideas come from being awake, alert enough to actually notice
  15. Though sometimes ideas sneak in when we're asleep and too numb to be afraid
  16. Ideas come out of the corner of the eye, or in the shower, when we're not trying
  17. Mediocre ideas enjoy copying what happens to be working right this minute
  18. Bigger ideas leapfrog the mediocre ones
  19. Ideas don't need a passport, and often cross borders (of all kinds) with impunity
  20. An idea must come from somewhere, because if it merely stays where it is and doesn't join us here, it's hidden. And hidden ideas don't ship, have no influence, no intersection with the market. They die, alone.

"