Category Archives: Chemistry

Poorer Living from Better Things

I’m not an apologist for the chemical industry. Chemical industry has a checkered past in many ways. The pesticide, petrochemicals, and mining industries have left a deep and abiding foul taste in the mouths of many communities. In a previous era, heavy industry has fouled rivers, lakes, air, and ground water. It has lead to illness, death, and loss of livelihood to many people.

But in the modern era much of this wanton issuance of hazardous industrial material into the air and waters has been halted or greatly diminished. At least for the US, Canada, and the EU. And it is not because industry suddenly found religion. The “regulatory environment” became so compelling a liability cost factor that industry set its mind to engineering plants into compliance. 

I would make the observation that today, the major chemical health issues before us are not quite as much about bulk environmental pollution by waste products. Rather, I would offer that the most important matter may have to do with the chronic exposure of consumers to various levels of manufactured products. High energy density foods, particularly, high fructose corn sweeteners; veterinary antibiotic residues, endocrine disrupters, smoking, highly potent pharmaceuticals, and volatiles from polymers and adhesives to name just a few.

Modern life has come to require the consumption of many things.  A modern nation must have a thriving chemical industry to sustain its need for manufactured materials. It is quite difficult and isolating to live a life free of paint and plastics or diesel and drugs. Choosing paper over plastic at the supermarket requires a difficult calculation of comparative environmental insults. Pulp manufacture vs polymer manufacture- which is the least evil? I don’t know.

Our lives have transitioned from convenience to wretched excess. Our industry has given us an irresistable selection of facile ways to accomplish excess consumption. Individualized portions meter out aliquots of tasty morsels that our cortisol-stressed brains cry out for. These same portions are conveniently dispensed in petroleum- or natural gas-derived packages within packages within packages. These resource depleting disposable nested packages are delivered to our local market in diesel burning behemoths because some pencil-necked cube monkey decided that rotund Americans needed yet one more permutation of high fructose corn syrup saturated, palm oil softened, sodium salt crusted, azo dye pigmented, extruded grain product on Wal-Mart shelves.

Enough already.

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2008.

Synthetic Chicken- Regular or Extra Crispy?

While the rest of us were wasting our time sleeping or soaking in the spa, our ambitious food scientists have been steadily beavering away on the cultivation of chicken tissues. The goal is toward the mass production of chicken-like food.  Poulterer and Kentucky Colonel Harlan Sanders will be transformed into tissue farmer Dr. Sanders in a lab coat and goggles.

The mass production of tissue cultivated meats won’t happen anytime soon. However, it is something that is being investigated by serious workers in the field.

I have to admit that my unquestioning embrace of Progress is weakening. Nonetheless, interesting things are happening. Consider the work of Vladimir Mironov, Director of the MUSC Bioprinting Center at the Medical School, University of South Carolina in Charleston.  In an effort to get around the engineering problem relating to the construction of 3-D structured tissues, the idea of layering cells by ink-jet deposition was developed.

Who knows where this is going?  Mironov’s technology will be very expensive initially, so its application to the production of $4.59 pork tenderloin sandwiches at the local diner is some distance into the future. More likely than not, it will be used for the cultivation of designer transplant organs.

Eventually, some company with deep pockets will attempt to market engineered meats. I would venture to say that the marketing problem is nearly as big as the technology challenge. Wide acceptance into the marketplace will take a while. I wonder how the first ad campaign will take shape? PETA approved Beef-Like Steak Food. Marbling and tenderizing is already engineered into the “cut”. Marketing may eventually be its undoing.

Synthetic chicken fried steak with mashed potatoes and synthetic gravy. Genetically modified Roundup Ready corn on the cob boiled in reverse-osmosis purified water. HEPA filtered air in a kitchen cleaned with anti-microbial soaps. Mouths freshly gargled with hydrogen peroxide and bellies full of nutritional supplements. Lordy. Where are we going with this?

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2008.

On Company Lawyers

In the chemical technology world, it often happens that one company will engage another in the manufacture of some particular substance. Company A needs a particular material made according to certain specifications. Company A goes to Company B to ask for price and availability.  But first, Company A must disclose the identity and certain particulars of the material to Company B.

For Company A to disclose the identity of its material, it must work out a secrecy agreement with Company B. Company A’s business depends on the material and it does not want Company B to disclose the details of the material, the process, or any other aspect of the business. So, they execute a secrecy agreement.

What is interesting about such arrangements is the great diversity of “language” in the terms among companies. Some companies are very concerned about the faintest smidgeon of errant information and write detailed terms accordingly. Others are much more concerned about the broad strokes and are apparently willing to let the courts work out the details in a conflict.

Some companies are willing to yield on unreasonable terms and conditions while others will fight to the death on even the slightest change.  There is a strong correlation to the corporate culture and the extent to which a company is under a market pull influence (tolling operators) or is engaged in technology push (inventors).

In some companies, issues relating to intellectual property (IP) are strongly influenced by the lawyers.  In such an organization, it sometimes happens that management is completely immobilized by indecision in IP matters. Managers may not understand the IP, are unable to engage their own lawyers in detailed discussion about the issue, or may simply be terrified of making a mistake. Doing business with organizations that are highly rigid in deference to their lawyers tends to be a more difficult activity. The thinking is that if the lawyer makes the decision, then they can take the heat if it goes south. Of course, the lawyer won’t take the heat- they’ll just bill you to get you out of the mess.

In other companies, upper management will take legal advice, but will not leave the decisions to the lawyers. These managers understand that IP is company treasure that must be put to good use in order to bring in revenues. Lawyers get paid irrespective of the outcome in the advice dispensing trade. A good manager knowns how to ride a lawyer like a cutting horse, digging in the spurs now and then to show who’s boss.

A Fly in the Ointment. A Chemist Among the Astronomers.

This is a re-post of a 2008 seminar I attended by speaker Dr. Carolyn Porco.

28 April, 2008. University of Colorado at BoulderDr. Carolyn Porco of the Space Science Institute gave a public lecture at CU Boulder on the highlights of the Cassini Mission to Saturn. Porco gives a lively presentation and- dare I say it- is mildly charismatic. The website of the imaging group, ciclops.org, is quite well done and even includes downloads of many of the papers from the team. The paper on Enceladus is particularly interesting.

As a chemist sitting anonymously in a crowd of space science enthusiasts and professionals, I cannot help but compare the tenor of the experience to my own field of chemistry.

Space science people are funded in proportion to the general public enthusiasm for space.  The universe is big. Really, really big. And it is full of breathtaking scenery and wondrous objects. Space science almost always causes people to experience a deeply emotional sense of awe and wonder. This has not been lost on the space science community. The display of majestic photos with a bit of space music in the background goes a long way to rally public support.

Chemistry on the other hand, rarely induces this kind of raw response from the limbic system.  Whereas chemistry induces shock, astronomy induces awe.

The most common exhortation made on exposure to the chemical sciences is “How in the hell am I going to pass this course?”

Students take intro to astronomy classes as an enjoyable way to get their science credits. Students take chemistry because they have to. We all know this. Science aversion is even more extreme for the poor sots in physics.

The SI unit for humility is the “sagan”.  Public astronomy talks usually have a high sagan factor. I would estimate last nights talk was 8.5 out of 10 sagans.

Of particular interest to Porco was the Saturnian moon Enceladus. This moon has substantial water on it with evidence of “tectonic” activity on the uncratered surface. On closer inspection, it is apparent that this body is spewing water into space with fair vigor. Indeed, a vapor torus of water tracing the orbit can be seen on some of the images. The suggestion is that there may be liquid water under a water ice crust. IR images show hot spots that coincide with surface fissures on Enceladus.  This moon would be a good place to land some drilling equipment.

Porco spoke of the hope of eventually finding life on Enceladus or on Jupiter’s Europa. She suggested that this would finally “break the spell” and allow the assumption that life may be relatively common on worlds with liquid water.

What this kind of planetary exploration affords are insights into the evolution of planets and ultimately, what circumstances are likely and necessary for the ignition of life.  But the circumstances that promote life formation are chemical in nature. The origin of life is not an astronomical problem. It is a chemical network problem and for that we need the involvement of chemists.

Reality Check. Always Certain But Frequently Wrong.

One of the benefits of being a student is that there is always someone standing over your shoulder, watching the choices you make. In school you choices result in a score of some sort. Out in the world, your choices have bigger consequences than letter grades.

As in school, the Big Big World is always under time pressure. Better, Faster, Cheaper. There isn’t always time to deliberate on the global optimum solution. In industry, sometimes the choice you make is the first one that shows any promise. Experienced business people know that everything takes longer and costs more than you first realize. There is no substitute for an early start.

What results from this need to jumpstart a project is the failure to question your basic assumptions.  In chemistry, a person may slide into the seductive notion that you are an expert in a process and, of course, you know that your process will work on a particular analog. But, do you really?

Non-linear phenomena are particularly troublesome.  Or phenomena that are polynomial in description.  It is hard to intuit outcomes when terms that were previously small become dominant in the equation. There is no substitute for measurement. If you want to truly understand a thing, eventually you are going to have to make measurements and plot a curve.

Like a lot of people fresh from Grad School, I was sometimes an arrogant turd. Just ask around. Today I am much more cautious about my abilities and knowledge. Periodically I am reminded that intuition can fail. Like a 2×4 between the eyes.

While I can’t give details, I have had to drastically recalibrate my intuition about some things that I believed I had a handle on. It involved mass transport concepts. The separation of substances can be subject to constraints that aren’t so obvious to someone who has only been through the ACS-approved chemistry curriculum. An engineer might have looked at my circumstance and solved the problem in a New York minute.

But Th’ Gaussling had to learn the hard way. What else is new?

On Chemical Negotiation

I always amazes me how little negotiation goes on in chemical B2B transactions. Buyers ask for the price of an obscure chemical and that may be the last you hear from them. Only rarely do I see pushback. Either a purchase order arrives or it doesn’t.  I’m not referring to trainloads of soda ash or other mass quantities of commodity chemicals. I’m talking in the one to 100 of kg range. People naturally take prices as fixed in concrete.

This is especially unfortunate or even tragic for materials that are very unusual. Items that have a low volume or minimal competition are products whose price has not been made rational through the forces of the market place. Competition has not forced the price to an optimum level.

Price is determined by what the market will bear. If there is limited exposure of a product to the market, then a rational price probably has not been reached and someone is leaving money on the table. Prices are initially based on some reasonable multiple of costs. The demand picture and the sellers anxiety to move product determine the real price point.

Much has been written about negotiation. I have no new concepts to add except a reminder that the best deals can come from multiple iterations of offer/counter-offer. Only by going into cycles of offer/counter-offer can you find out exactly what is possible to get from the bargaining.

Some companies, like SAF for example, are notoriously rigid in their approach to sales. I have found that they do fix their prices in blast resistant concrete. SAF is uber-aggressive in the marketplace because they are after total global domination. But not all companies are like this. Many are pleased to make a deal to get some material out of inventory.

What is troublesome for manufacturers of new or obscure products is that the initial price may frighten off a buyer. If the buyer recoils in horror from a price without any attempt to negotiate, then they lose the benefit of that product and the seller loses the sale and perhaps the entire market future of the material. I have seen this happen many times.

What makes this a difficult issue for the seller is that you don’t want to seem too anxious to drop your price. That just telegraphs to the buyer that they should expect a better price. The seller should have a front price that they want and a fallback price that they can live with. It is better to have the fallback price than nothing.  The skill comes in the smooth application of salesmanship.

A good sales person watches the prospective buyer carefully for flight impulse and silently swoops in like a vampire for the seduction and the lusty bite. 

Sustainable Chemistry and YOU

A new chemical journal was distributed at the recent ACS meeting. It is called ChemSusChem and is a European effort published by Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. The theme is chemistry and sustainability. Librarians and Deans will surely groan when they hear a new chemical journal is available. I don’t know what an institutional subscription costs, but they all seem to be very expensive.

More than a few of us are convinced that we are presently watching a slow motion movie of the de-industrialization of the European Union. Many will scoff at the appearance of another greenish journal, especially from the EU. Indeed, the EU does seem hell-bent on outsourcing its basic industry to other parts of the planet with lower overhead costs. But cost doesn’t seem to be the only driver.

The EU has become a confederation of nanny states, all seemingly pre-occupied with the extermination of risk (and the US is on the way as well).  Some of it is legitimate, I believe, but to a significant extent some of the EU fussing with environmental issues is due to an inability to come to terms with ppm-level risk. Thus REACH.

The effect of REACH may be that this de-industrialization is accelerated. I am now involved in trying to understand REACH and how it affects exports to the EU.  For smaller companies who do not have the administrative structure to accomodate a new shelf of complex regulations, this is a genuine burden. Not just in terms of direct labor to manage it, but also the associated liability of non-compliance.

So, back to sustainable chemistry. The basic idea of sustainability provides for minimizing ecological insult and maximizing the long term availability of natural resources. It is hard to argue with the merits of this. But I would take it a step further.  Sustainable chemistry can easily accomodate advantageous economics if it is executed right.

Advantageous how?

Turns out that the principles of sustainability run in parallel with many good operating practices in process development.  High space yields, good atom efficiency, minimum energy inputs, solvent recycling, hazard abatement, etc. All of these ideals add up to maximum economic benefit.  It is just a form of frugality.

The people who can implement sustainable chemical processing are R&D and process chemists and engineers.  By adding more frugal methodologies to our toolkits, we can put sustainability into practice. The direct benefit would be better process economics. The larger benefit is a better competitive posture for industry that has chosen to remain in the EU or North America.

Sustainable principles applied to process chemistry can be a “next wave” of innovation that can lead to a re-think by business leaders in the eternal chess game of industry.  A tidy bit of “sustainable chemistry” has already been published. We chemists should filter through this to see what may be applicable.

Of course, if our academic friends have been busy beavering away writing patents on it, then it will be a much harder sell to management.  But that is another post.

 

Good Morning, NOLA. Pass Me Some Advil.

The math of Bourbon Street is painfully evident this morning. 1 Hurricane = 1 hangover. The sliders with the hot peppers didn’t help, either. I should probably start thinking about chemistry again. Bourbon Street is a very naughty place. The prospect of beads can cause ordinarily prudent people to expose their anatomy. A fellow can get into serious trouble here.

Speaking of pain, I’m reminded of a recent dinner conversation with an astrophysicist. This fellow is a senior player in the astrophysics circuit. He has been involved in the development and use of many “science packages” that are now hurtling through the vacuum of space.

Like physicists often do, he took delight in reminding me that chemistry is derived from physics. When asked why a chemist was interested in astronomy, I blurted out that I thought there was a goodly bit of chemistry happening in the universe and much for a chemist to try to understand. Between bites of beef medallions and the chomping of his bearded jowls, he shot a patronizing glance over his glasses at me and suggested that it was all ultimately physics. 

Ah, a reductionist! Not wanting to make a scene, I let this comment float into the ether where it belonged. But I would offer that if one had a headache and needed to wait for a physicist to invent and make some aspirin, you’d still be waiting.

NOLA ACS

Th’ Gaussling is heading for fabulous New Orleans, LA, to that gathering of eagles we call the National ACS Meeting. It’s an extravaganza. Chemistry overlords and underlings awkwardly walking about in their wrinkled dress-up clothes.  Undergrads on their first professional trip, lugging plastic bags loaded with trade show trinkets.  It’s an orgy of PowerPoint presentations disclosing all of the latest “firsts” and “remarkable” results. 

The National ACS meeting is a harmonic convergence of the illustrious grandees of the First Tier of universities together with those perched in lesser stations.  Th’ Gaussling, a 2nd rate molecule merchant, will be staying within hurling distance of Bourbon Street.  NOLA is a place where it is still cool to play the tuba.  Ya gotta love a place like that.