For the full potential of nanotechnology to be properly realised, the public needs to be more informed and aware of its opportunities.

Size may not be everything, but in the developing era of nanotechnology, size is more important than we could have imagined. And if Ireland continues to plough forward in the science of the very small, we stand to reap huge rewards.

But experts warn that as nanotech grows, the public needs to be more informed and aware to ensure the technology's potential is properly realised.

Nanotech harnesses the power of tiny engineered "nanoparticles", manipulating at the scale of molecules mere billionths of metres across.

But there's nothing miniscule about the impact of the nano revolution, which experts hail as a new industrial age.

By 2010, the global market for nanotech products will hover around one trillion US dollars, according to estimates from the National Science Foundation in the US.

So what's the big deal with the very small? When particles of a substance fall below a certain size barrier, around 100 nanometres, their physical and chemical properties can change dramatically, opening up brand new avenues to explore.

This makes nanotech a ripe area for innovation and patenting, says Prof Jim McLaughlin, director of Nanotechnology and Intergrated Bioengineering Centre at the University of Ulster.

"It's a fundamental area for developing new sciences and concepts. And the beauty then is you are into new intellectual property (IP) and there's a clear route for ring-fencing IP and moving it on. And we have seen a lot of that," he says.

"It suddenly opens up a completely new market. You start being able to readily capture a whole marketplace that you couldn't capture with larger particles," he explains.

Nanotechnology provides good bang for your buck too. "You suddenly add dramatic value for very little change," says McLaughlin.

"The added advantage [of nanoparticles] and their value makes you a lot more competitive, which is a strong reason why we are seeing a lot more use of them," he says. "There's a feeling that things are going to come out of this area that are going to be very important to brand Ireland in the future," he says.

And the gods could be smiling on Ireland. We have invested heavily in basic biotechnology and information and communication technology (ICT) research, and nanotechnology is the incoming tide that could increase innovative advances in medical devices, drug delivery and data storage are expected over coming years.

But consumers don't have to wait that long. Products that contain engineered nanoparticles are already on the market, in transparent sunscreen with UV-blocking nano-titanium dioxide that leaves no white marks, in food storage boxes lined with a layer of nano-silver to kill off microbes and in face cream packed with nanosomes to deliver the moisturising payload deep into the skin.

Nanotechnology processes are also used to make a range of other products, such as computer chips. And nanomaterials are used to reinforce lightweight sports equipment like racquets and golf clubs.

The wow factor is there for consumers and this is just the start, according to physicist Dr Gordon Chambers, who researches and lectures in nanotechnology at Dublin Institute of Technology.

"If you go through Tesco you would probably be able to locate a handful of products with nanotechnology," he says. "In five years time, I'd be surprised if you couldn't find a whole trolley full."

And as engineered nanoparticles become more commonplace, experts agree that the public needs to be well informed, particularly about the safety of nanotech products and processes. The attributes of engineered nanoparticles that make them exciting to work with also raises questions about their impact on the human body and the environment.

While our bodies have been exposed to naturally occurring nanoparticles throughout our evolution, engineered nanoparticles are a new departure.

"Safety is the focus now," says Chambers, whose work looks at how lung cells respond to carbon nanotubes (tiny cylindrical structures) in the lab. "For years people were looking into developing applications for nanoparticles and nanotechnology, but now most people's attention has turned to the safety and biocompatibility of these materials," he says.

This is partly because many grant agencies insist on safety testing as a condition of funding, he explains, but it also reflects a maturation of the nanoscience research sector in Ireland.

The last year has seen increased collaboration between institutes and scientists from many disciplines working together, and the new Nanoteire initiative, funded by the Programme for Research in Third-Level Institutions (PRTLI), will further that by bringing together nanotech researchers in six Irish universities and two institutes of technology.

That collaboration and safety have become such an integral part of nanoscience and technology research here is welcome, and reflects reports from the UK and Europe calling for increased understanding of how particle size and shape can affect human health and the environment.

So far, the safety results look reassuring, but there's ongoing need for assessment, according to physical chemist Prof Kenneth Dawson, a principal investigator at University College Dublin's new nanobiology and nanomedicine centre.

"When you dig into it, no clear hazard has emerged," he says. "Nevertheless, it's early days and it's completely new technology, so people are clear they have to keep on looking at this until the end to be absolutely sure that there aren't any such implications." The scientists are also aware of the need to keep the public up to date on safety issues as well as the promise of better products.

No-one wants to repeat the saga of genetic modification, where a technology ended up on the popular scrapheap because adequate safety data wasn't to hand when the public started asked questions about a new and unknown process.

"If the GMO people had done all their homework first, it could have conferred immense benefits on people, but we will never know," he says.

An unfounded scare could undermine public confidence in nanotech, notes Chambers, who recently spoke at Ireland's first conference on nanotoxicology, organised by DIT, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and the Irish Society of Toxicologists.

"Open public dialogue is so important and the public need to know that we don't have all the answers, but we are as far along as we can be," he says.

"If the public don't have confidence, we will end up in a situation like with genetically modified foods, nuclear power or stem cell research - people will get frightened off and say 'I'm not going to use that'," he says. "That would be a shame because here the advantages definitely outweigh the risks."

But what does the public really think of nanotechnology? They appear to be positive about it in the main, according to Nora Shovelin, who researched the question for Forfás with Brian Trench of Dublin City University's School of Communications. Their work, last year, with groups of mainly 15-17 year olds showed that within those groups, concerns focused not on immediate safety issues over engineered nanoparticles, but on how nanotechnology might indirectly shape our society, for example through enhanced surveillance or massive data storage capacity.

However, the general level of nanotechnology awareness in the focus groups was "strikingly low", and, across the board, experts acknowledge the need for increased public dialogue about nanotech so that it takes no-one by surprise. "One of the problems is that the public is not that well informed," says Shovelin. "And it's hard for them to have the right discussion in a vacuum.

"Some of the public engagement that's going on in England between the experts and the public would be a good route - the discussions are lengthy and people get information, including the experts."