Are We Honoring or Exploiting Nature?

Environmentally friendly cars were worth the time/money, as was the entire recycling movement. It all depends if people stick to the new green trends or not and if people find ways to make the new products at least 90% as efficient as the old "bad" ones. Also, copying nature at least on a larger scale has shown enormous success - invention of the wheel, watching birds = airplanes, etc. Mimicking nature becomes especially useful in biology when you look at fields like tissue growth and artificial limbs. It's when people go overboard and try to replace every single type of technology that it becomes a financial disaster.

point to ponder if you will

when the green building being built is located on land that used to raise food

is that considered being "green"?

I've yet to see a green house that resembles a corn stalk, or feeds the people living in it

in the name of progress, thousands of acres of farm land are taken out of production every year

Personally I both honour and exploit nature everytime I cut a piece of wood to make a bow.
If we all hugged a few more trees the world would be a better place.
Here's Mrs Cat with an Oak which was there at the time of Agincourt (Jealous? Moi? hmmph)

"researchers are working to mimic or elaborate upon naturally-occurring substances and structures."

Of course they are. Because discovering the principles and methods used by the original designer is the easiest way to learn and apply these in a way that accomplishes a new goal or allows synthesis of the original. This honors both God and his creation.

"Biomimicry is not new, but it seems to especially lend itself to nanotechnology and the exploration of more environmentally friendly alternatives to existing products and processes."

Of course, because macro-scale mimicry was easier with eyes and hands, while now as we develop our understanding of smaller and deeper scales of observation and ability to manipulate substances on the nano scale, it allows us to be orders-of-magnitude more efficient with our mimicry and application to new uses. These replace less efficient attempts that required brute force synthesis of effect, and now we're getting to design function.

"Do you think turning to nature's methods will help us create greener, more sustainable technologies?"

That's what we've been on the road to all along, and it's what engineers do every day once the researchers provide a product that can be applied and is economical enough to be recognized by the market.

"Is the time and money spent unlocking these secrets worth the research that results?"

Yes. It's been worth it since byzantine days. And it's been worth every cent on the medical side as well, as we realize that "adult" stem-cell terminology is a misnomer...the only stem cells that have never yielded anything but death are the ones stolen from live embryos. On the mechanical side, life and lifestyle-affecting marketable applications are coming out daily - it's amazingly worth it.

"Is there any possible danger of exploitation of natural resources?"

There is no exploitation involved, so the premise of the question may be in question. This is discovery of the natural order of the universe, the original designs and methods, and applying them to solve new challenges in our environment. Pure scientific inquiry turned into useful information turned into technology and applied to life. Nothing could be less 'exploitative' than that...and in fact reduces our need for many of the resources that were taken en-masse to accomplish the same goals now with fewer resources. This kind of technology conserves natural resources even while using them in new ways.

But as for the 'spirit' of the question - the word "possible" leaves open a world of hurt in the hands of the baser instincts of "some" of mankind, depending on what specific area is being discussed - the above mentioned immoral embryonic research is one example. So I'll have to leave the final answer there in the hands of our children and grandchildren. We just have to teach them well to respect the sanctity of each human life and to restore any environment affected by resource gathering to a new condition capable of supporting the equivalent ecosystem of the area prior to harvesting whatever was used.

Yes to the first two, I don't see the connection between biomimicry and danger of exploitation.

Biomimetic approaches really push the envelope of technology, because our classic tools, machines, and models are utterly simplistic by comparison with the complexity that is inherent and necessary in nature.

A better understanding of the natural model is bound to lead to more sustainable (and more powerful) technologies, if we are capable of mastering that level of complexity.

In some cases, though, in my opinion, nature has simply done it best. There is no need for innovation in these cases, only more research to understand how to apply what nature so freely provides.

On the other hand, there are emerging technologies which have nothing to do with the natural model and which have just as much promise for more sustainable or "greener" technology if they are applied for that purpose: metamaterials is the best example, since it creates material properties specifically not found in nature. Application of these 'unnatural' principles to develop better products for sustainable living, and to advance our capacity to learn about the natural world on unprecedented small scales, is a beautiful and wonderful thing!