To talk of Particle Technology in Latin America represents nowadays almost an eccentricity in both industrial and academic circles, although it makes really sense for most of the key industries within the region.
Latino America is still a continent of raw materials extraction and processing, coexisting with ancestral production systems for agricultural goods. Huge differences appear among the different Latin American countries depending on the amount of under-earth resources. The countries considered as riches ones are generally in such a position due to oil and mineral resources, Argentina being almost the only exception. Once the scope of this report is restricted to five of the more industrially active economies, some similarities and differences can be drawn.
In general, all these economies grew under the shadow of oil exploitation. In the first part of the 20th century, this exploitation was made by foreign oil companies, which extracted these resources producing buoyant economies in Europe and USA. The typical social structure based on a more dispersed population spread was then substituted by big people concentration around big cities and production sites: Mexico, Sao Paulo and Caracas are bigger than many European cities, but surrounded by “misery belts”. Similar situation but in another size scale is repeated near production sites, caused by people that left their traditional lifestyle attracted by the money river besides the extraction activities. In the middle of the last century, most governments (especially Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela), nationalized their oil industries and established import substitution policies and drove for the development of the manufacture, promoting the down-stream petrochemical activities. Like carbon-paper copies, the three countries grounded state owned companies with quite similar names: Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) and Petroleo Brasileiro (Petrobras). However, some important different exists, Venezuela was promoter and founder of the OPEC, while Mexico has remain excluded from it and Brazil was for many years a net oil importer, until the appearance of the Campos Basin. The three countries built a petrochemical subsidiary (Pemex-Petroquimica, Pequiven and Petroquisa) to promote the chemical industry. By the end of the century the three countries had liberalized the state control and private petrochemical companies that had already certain operations began to gain their own space and leadership. But again some differences appear: while Venezuela, that enter late into this policy had relatively low success, Mexico and Brazil petrochemical industries are well developed, with chemical industries very active and with most of the global chemical companies having subsidiaries and production sites for the whole region in both countries.
For the mineral sector each country has its own history, while Mexico cement, steel and cooper industries were the ones exhibiting better growth, Brazil has important development in almost all minerals (iron and steel, aluminium, but also niobium and tantalum) , Venezuela has also iron ore and aluminium, but Chile had formerly only inorganic salt mines and nowadays is world leader in cooper. While most European countries saw their mineral reserves to decline, it is far to be the Latin American case and it could be safely expected that 21st century remains signed by the mineral explotation. This situation conduct to a reality that already is present but will be increased: the world knowledge and experience in mineral processing will be in the southern hemisphere (Latin America, South Africa and Australia).
The already explained facts can maybe suggest why the “nanoparticles wave” has not that height in Latin America: there are still enough problems with the former called fine particles for looking additional ones with smaller particles. It does not mean in any case that global trends in chemicals are not valid in Latin America, but they are usually taken by the global chemical companies because of their global thinking way and not due to regional needs. The same arguments can be set for phama and biotechnology, the only exception being the importance of bio-leaching in ore treatment, which has been promoted by Latin American companies, like Codelco.
Food and beverage sector is also a potential consumer for particle technology, but two aspects make it a non-priority item: the inherent dispersionof the industry and the apparent inexistence of big challenges to be solved. Although, some giant companies exist, the small ones can survive with certains limits, this situation being impossible in oil & gas and in most minerals.
Having the oil companies so large influence into Latin American economies (even in other countries like Ecuador, Colombia and even Argentina and Chile), it seems to be addressed that a broader concept for particle technology must be used, letting bubbles and droplets and the interfacial phenomena involved in these multiphase systems to be also included. Oil and mining are activities occurring in huge tonnages, therefore the waste problems will remain as relevant ones for a while (tailing handling and slop oil treatment), being a predictable development the improvement of actual production patterns for “clean technologies”, i.e. not just treat the waste but minimize its production through new production processes.
Accepting that the global chemical companies are not a Latin American targets, because thea are attracted to Particle Technology from their headquarters, the companies to be monitored should be the different regional oil companies, that means not the global energy holdings, but especially PEMEX, PDVSA and Petrobras, with their associated petrochemical subsidiaries; the chemical divisions of Mexican groups like Alfa and Desc; the chemical Odebretch company, Braskem; the Brazilian CVRD, the Chilean Codelco, the Venezuelan CVG, the cement giant Cemex and Grupo Minero Mexicano, among others.
In the academic sector, the opportunity to permeate the Particle Technology concept is greater. However academic research centers are mostly “product oriented” instead of “technology oriented”. The interdisciplinary work in Particle technology has an outstanding example, the FIRP Laboratory in Merida, Venezuela, where people from five faculties deal with interfacial phenomena and product formulation for achieving desired (designed) properties of the dispersions, besides the several solid-liquid separations groups in Brazil, Chile and Venezuela. However, there is no doubt that the more successful example in a Particle Technology approach is already running since 30 years ago, the Brazilian Congress of Particulate Systems, known as ENEMP, which has put together different sectors of the Brazilean industry.
Almost all industrial research centers are tied to companies (Instituto Mexicano del Petroleo, PDVSA-Intevep, Cenpes-Petrobras, IM2-Codelco, CVRD-research center) but they normally has certain independence degree and could be also individually approached.
Most curricula are still separated in the traditional fashion but Particle Technology could represent an option for advanced in-company training, as well as in an eventual regional Master degree program.