Category Archives: Current Events

Wake up chemists! The DHS is on the Case.

1 Reply

While American chemists have been busy going about their lives, making and analyzing molecules, the legislative and executive branches of the government have also been busy making things more complex for the chemical industry. Procedures, protocols, rules, guidelines, and consequences for inaction have been drawn up for our “safety” by the Department of Homeland Security, DHS. Even the American Chemistry Council (ACC) has bought into the changes.

I remember as an adolescent boy in the 70’s daydreaming with friends about how much trouble we could cause society.  We would scheme about how easy it would be to crash the power grid or interefere with traffic or a hundred other things that would amuse idle teenagers.  These were mischievious thought experiments that we would titter about, but would have never actually done.  Some fellows discovered marshal arts and others developed a fascination with weapons and personal protection. 

For a few of these fellows, the teenage obsession with weapons and security has grown into an adult paranoid lifestyle whose world view features a threat environment squirming with risks. To be sure, there are risks. But the 9/11 attack and chronic Islamic terrorism have stimulated the fight or flight bundle of neurons in the brainstem and they are firing alert signals everywhere.  It is worth noting that some of this threat is push-back stimulated by a century of unintelligent foreign policy by petroleum importing states.

Some of these righteous-yet-paranoid youth have grown up and gone into government.  The politics of fear mongering is everywhere. Security at all costs. Monitor telecommunications. Control everything. Worry about everything.  Restrictions on liberty are always justified because we are trying to protect liberty. We’re the good guys, right?

<<< Sigh >>>

One of the most intellectually challenging things for humans to do is to quantitate and plan for risk. Few people walking around on earth have a true grip on what probability really means, and only a few of those folks have an idea of how to devise plans based on it. Good data is scarce so planners have to make assumptions.  Most people, when faced with a perceived risk, will assume and plan for the worst. It seems defensible.  After all, isn’t the satisfaction of the complete excision of risk worth any price?

A more mature and nuanced view must balance risk with the cost to liberty and make choices about what kinds of failures are acceptable. But this is the choke point. It is difficult to come to agreement on acceptable risk in a democracy because votes have no logic test. For the chemical industry, it would appear that choices are being made for us by someone else.  Chemical incidents have a fair likelihood of exiting the perimeter of a plant, so the authorities naturally become involved. This is not unreasonable.

What is unreasonable in my view is the newly enacted statutory control of useful or even critical industrial substances.  The military considers chemical weapons to be largely ineffective owing to the point source nature of the release and unpredictable factors such as wind direction and speed. Somehow we’re worked ourselves into a lather over imagined improvised terrorist chemical calamities at US manufacturing facilities. 

US chemical industry should audit for weaknesses in security. But the path we’re on with the security state imposition of controls on materials is a bad trend and is likely to harm an industry that is already in a precarious competitive position.

[Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are solely those of this writer and do not represent opinions and policies of any organization the writer may be associated with.]

Russia Goes Deep

1 Reply

Our Russian friends have apparently “claimed” the seabed under the north pole by planting their specially crafted Deep Sea Flag.  (Is it still a flag when it is underwater or is it just a stick with a wet cloth on it?)  In the grand tradition of empirialist land grabbing, these folks believe that they have staked a claim to the vast untold, untapped mineral riches of the arctic floor. Of course, the Canucks were not impressed-

Peter Mackay, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, dismissed the voyage to the Arctic floor as “just a show.”

“Look, this isn’t the 15th century,” he said, according to the Web site of Canadian Television. “You can’t go around the world and just plant flags and say ‘We’re claiming this territory.'” 

According to Douglas Birch at Forbes magazine, the flag was planted in the sea floor 2 1/2 miles below the surface on what is called the Arctic Shelf.  [Th’ Gaussling didn’t realize that a shelf could be that deep. Sounds like an abyssal plain to me, but, hey… I’m not in real estate.]  The basis of the claim, Birch reports, is that the region is a part of the Eurasian continental shelf.  Russia’s public claim seems to be based on a kind of geographic tidiness.  But like all big issues today, it is really about resources.

In December 2001, Moscow claimed that the ridge was an extension of the Eurasian continent, and therefore part of Russia’s continental shelf under international law. The U.N. rejected Moscow’s claim, citing a lack of evidence, but Russia is set to resubmit it in 2009. 

The good news is that there won’t be any aboriginals to cruelly displace.  Seems to me that the Palestinians missed another big opportunity here- their sub must have been in the shop.  I would offer the suggestion that they give Putin an office on site there so he can keep an eye on the place.

National Treasure: H.R. 3043 and Scientific Publications

3 Replies

On page 14 of the July 30, 2007, issue of C&EN, an article entitled “Bill Mandates Public Access” by David Hanson describes a section of a bill recently passed from the House to the Senate. The relevent text from the bill is as follows-

SEC. 217. The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law. 

Hanson’s article states that the Professional and Scholarly Publishing (PSP) Division of the Association of American Publishers has asked members of Congress to reconsider this bill, or at least the mandatory submission to PubMed. Hanson reports that the PSP claims that-

“This language could serve to undermine the existing system of peer review and scholarly publication which disseminates high-quality research findings throughout the scientific community,” … 

Further down, Hanson gets to the real issue-

Brian D. Crawford, chair of the PSP committee and senior vice president of the Journals Publishing Group at the American Chemical Society (which publishes C&EN), says the House language violates fundamental copyright principles. The bill “would essentially force authors and publishers to, in essence, forfeit their copyrights” without compensation for their investments and would have many negative impacts on private-sector publishers, he says. [Italics by Gaussling]

What is telling is the quote by Brian D. Crawford, who suggests that the publishers stand to lose their copyright on the copy submitted by the NIH funded researchers.  If you are a publisher, should you be worried about this?  Probably.  The gravy train may be leaving the station.

Yes, the publishers have invested large sums in building publishing and distribution systems for the profitable dissemination of information.  But I would add that they have built these publishing engines on a system that hands voluminous copy to them for free.  Unlike other publishers who have to pay their authors for content, academic publishers do not pay contributors who, I might add, provide some incredibly valuable content. Academic publishers have built publishing businesses using content paid for by government granting agencies, and by extension, the public.

It’s easy to fault publishers for taking advantage of a system that hands them publishable content for free. But, on the other hand, circulation numbers for most publications is quite modest.  Even if advertising is used, the typical low circulation of any given specialized scientific journal is so low that only very modest advertising rates could be obtained. Many journals survive on subscription fees alone.  Examples of journals that have come to terms with advertising are J. Chem. Ed., Nature, and Science. 

The scientific publishing system is a sort of a deal with the Devil- the scientist gets the grant, does the work, and then what?  After dinner talks at the Elks Club? Of course not. A manuscript is prepared and in exchange for free printing and distribution, the publisher obtains the copyright. The copyright is the key.  It is a cash cow in the same way that the copyright to the Beatles songs are a cash cow, only with smaller numbers.

I think that Sec. 217 of H.R. 3043 is the right idea. The public has already paid for the research. Why should it be intercepted at no cost by printers who then have an everlasting copyright and control of what is rightly national treasure? The citizens have to pay taxes for the research and then turn around and pay commercial interests for the right to read it.  That is wrong.

If commercial interests want to make a profit on scientific publishing, then they need to find a better model.  The public shouldn’t be barred from access to what they have already paid for. Advertising may be the way to do it.  Perhaps the funding agency should have the copyright and publishers pay a fee to print and distribute it?  Comments?

An American Parliament?

7 Replies

There is an interesting post at the Daily Kos by Mentarch detailing the “Eight Principles of Incompetence“. Now, I’m not sure that this list constitutes a manifesto, guiding light, or even a footnote in a Polysci text of the future.  But the author has cogently reduced to writing some observations that I have struggling to put into words. I tip my hat. 

Much has been said about the growing problem with Cheney.  There is precious little to say about this fascist that is new. Cheney is doing a fine job of self destructing without my input. Mentarch has highlighted many of Cheney’s questionable actions over time with links to www references.  It is hard to escape the conclusion that the electorate is collectively incompetent sometimes.

But I would like to observe that the USA might have been well served by a parliamentary form of government, especially in this present troubled stretch of history. I think there are merits to a system that can vote out troublesome and destructive executives like Bush-Cheney without having to wait for the election timer to run out.  Impeachment is not the same as a vote to form a new government.  And if ever the USA needed to have a different executives in government, it is now.

In fact, one has to answer the question of why parliamentary systems proliferated during the 20th century while the American model as set forth by the US Constitution remains largely limited to the USA.  Why hasn’t our system been more closely copied? Could there be a better way?

The US needs a president that is less showhorse and more workhorse. We need administrators who can manage the executive branch more effectively. And we need executives who are not beholden to absolute doctrines and are willing to re-examine their fundamental assumptions on occasion.

The Bush-Cheney epoch has had a retrograde effect on American civil liberties, privacy, the freedom of assembly, and America’s credibility as a leading force for the advance of civilization. This damage will take many people a long time to make right. 

Obviously we will not change the structure of government in the next 25 years. We will not be able to yank bad executives out of office midterm for incompetence.  Bad executives will hold on to their office for the duration, enacting laws that benefit subscribers of their particular creed. They’ll have to commit a felony and be shamed into resignation like Nixon. 

The USA needs better checks and balances to protect the republic and its diverse constituency from Trojan Horse carriers of fringe doctrines and monotonic ideologies.  I’d rather have a president who cracks the books once in a while rather than one whose sole intellectual reflex is to whisper to iron-age deities.  I’d prefer to have a president who thinks analytically rather than devotionally.

Contrarian Views on Corn-Based Ethanol

2 Replies

If you travel through the American midwest, you cannot help but notice that corn-based ethanol is in the news. Over at the Oil Drum blog there is a good post on the merits of corn-derived ethanol (EtOH).  One of the important points that was made is that EtOH will be replacing MTBE as an oxygenating additive. This is an important point. For the near term, as MTBE is phased out EtOH is taking its place.  Therefore, the net effect on imported oil volumes may be nil. 

Then there is the matter of the energy balance for EtOH production.  There is no clear consensus on whether or not corn EtOH production is a net gain in BTU’s.  And then there is the matter of unintended consequences in shunting large mass flows of corn into energy production.

Modern agriculture has been characterized as the process of converting diesel fuel into food. High yield crop production also requires large machinery for efficient cultivation, soil amendments, advanced corn breeding, crop rotation, and specialized pesticides.  And this is just the farming part. Modern grain production requires substantial distribution infrastructure as well as financing for the upfront seed and fuel costs.

By unintended consequences the writer of the Oil Drum post means the possibility of ecological insult resulting from intensification of corn production.  Intensified corn production may result in reduced soybean production in the US, resulting in increased production in Brazil. US farmers may simply choose to grow fewer soybean acres. Increased soybean production in Brazil could result in accelerated deforestation to meet the demand uptick. 

What the writer did not mention is that reduced US soybean production could mean reduced crop rotation, placing increased demand on synthetic ammonia (NH3) production to make up the demand for fixed nitrogen.  Ammonia production uses natural gas (CH4) as the source of hydrogen, and the carbon is lost as CO2.  Increased nitrogen fertilizer use may result in greater run-off into the watershed, placing the aquatic ecosystem under increased stress and polluting drinking water supplies. 

Increased ammonia demand will stress the natural gas market to some extent and result in increased greenhouse gas emissions. 

In addition to ecological insult, there will be a shift of wealth associated with increased diversion of corn to fuels.  If corn yields and acreage cannot be increased to make up for increased fuels demand on corn supplies, the food product chain could be subject to greater scarcity with an increase cost to consumers for everything associated with corn- corn oil, high fructose corn syrup, starch, beer production (!!) with corn starch, cereal products, animal feeds and the associated price uptick that would cause for meat products. 

It is worth remembering that corn is one of the major inputs to our food manufacturing complex. It enters directly as whole corn or as separated corn germ and corn starch, and indirectly as food for hogs, cattle, and poultry.

Many of the choices we have in the supermarket are largely based on what you can do cheaply and on a continuous process basis with grain products.  Stress on this supply will be passed along to the consumer.

One fresh approach is from a start-up company called Zeachem who aims to produce cellulosic ethanol from biomass other than just the corn kernel.  In this process, all fermentable sugars as well as cellulosic hydrolyzates can be converted to acetic acid by fermentation and the lignin sidestream can be processed to yield hydrogen.  Esterification with process ethanol to afford ethyl acetate followed by hydrogenation yields EtOH.  This process is currently in scaleup and may prove to be a major improvement in the otherwise anemic economics of EtOH. 

Deutsche Bank’s Sankey: Simple Scarcity Driving up Fuel Prices

5 Replies

As everyone knows, the price of gasoline in the USA has been steadily marching up into the low US$3.00 per gallon range to achieve all-time high pricing.  Reliable sources state that the price run-up is due to simple shortage of supply. According to testimony from energy analyst Paul Sankey of Deutsche Bank, the US refines 17 million barrels of petroleum per day against a demand of 22 million barrels per day.  An interesting analysis can be found at the Oil Drum. 

We are in a very precarious position here. An oil shock caused by a catastrophic loss of refining capacity will result in a wild price spike (some estimate US$100/bbl) while gasoline is in the mid $3.00 range already and a major perturbation to the economy- or worse.  Unfortunately, we are bogged down in the ill-conceived GW-II, the second of the energy wars. 

Melamine in Pet Food

4 Replies

The issue of melamine in pet food has come up again as more lots of pet food are found to be contaminated with it.  At least a few news outlets have published a proposed reason for this contamination by a monomer from another industrial sector.  Melamine is very nitrogen rich- 6 equivalents per mole- so if you spike grain products with it you can cause the nitrogen analysis to read higher than it normally would.  Protein content is one of the factors in the pricing of animal feed, so an additive that would contribute to an uptick in nitrogen content would raise the price or even make a non-saleable lot of feed qualify for sale. 

The nitrogen test that most people think of is the Kjeldahl test.  It is a digestion-distillation-titration method that affords total nitrogen.  This test is still in wide use and is inexpensive to conduct.  A friend who has an Ag Lab still does the test on a bank of burners in his lab for total nitrogen in feed samples.

The practice of adulteration of foodstuffs not limited to China.  As an undergraduate I worked in a dairy processing plant lab and we had to screen for several kinds of mischief.  Dilution of milk with water is an old trick, given that pricing is on a per pound basis, so we had to test each raw milk tanker for total solids content.  We also tested for pH and temperature.

Neutralization of partially fermented raw milk with NaOH was also practiced at one time, so we taste tested each tanker as well since neutralization could not mask off-flavor.  Finally, we had to carefully screen raw milk for residual antibiotics.  Mastitis is an inflamation of the udder and has many causes. One aggravating factor is the common practice of milking ol’ Bessie three times a day.  A sick cow has to be taken off-line to recover. This reduces the productivity of the cow.

Farmers were often tempted to give sick cows a big jolt of antibiotic and get her milking again before the time needed to fully recover and clear the system of antibiotic. This could lead to antibiotic contamination in the tanker.  We performed two tests for penicillin at our plant. The microbiological test we performed was the Bacillus stearothermophilus disk assay. The other was a radiological assay called the Charm test utilizing C-14.  This test could be performed in 20 minutes, whereas the B. stearothermophilus test took 6 hours or so.  The newer Charm tests now take only a few minutes.

Residual antibiotics found in dairy products on the Grocers shelf could put a dairy out of business for repeated infractions. The state health authorities took (take) a dim view of penicillin in milk.

BLEVE- Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion

8 Replies

There is kind of fire behaviour called a BLEVE– Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion.  A BLEVE is what happens, for instance, when a closed container of flammable liquid is exposed to strong heating.  It can be caused by an external source, like a pool of burning liquid around the container, or it can result from a runaway reaction within a drum, cylinder, or tank.  The internal pressure builds up more rapidly than it can be vented and the containment fails, often explosively. It is interesting to note from the above link that boiling action of the liquid phase in the container absorbs energy and has a cooling effect, but there may come a point where the vapor pressure rise above the liquid exceeds the capacity of the relief discharge capacity and the vessel fails, discharging liquid and vapor across the burn zone.  At minimum, discharge and ignition will lead to a large flare, or if conditions are right, an actual detonation of the fuel/air mix could happen over a relatively large space.

These things often begin with some kind of tank or tanker accident (link updated 6/10/16) resulting in a discharge and ignition of flammable liquid.  As responders arrive they find a burning pool under or next to the tank(er).  Naturally, firemen and bystanders try to help those who may be hurt. As the minutes tick away and the fire becomes more aggressive and the tank gets hotter, the firefighters get their equipment in place and attempt to cool the tanker and suppress the fire.  Suddenly the tank fails and there is a prompt bulk discharge of liquid and vapor yielding a large fireball which may include an explosive shock, flying metal debris and a dangerous heat pulse.  It is at this point that the surviving bystanders and responders see the error of their ways.

Containers of flammable liquids rarely explode in a symmetric fashion so the container or its fragments are likely to be sent flying at high velocity, possibly spewing flammable material as it moves.  Even a relatively small volume of flammable liquid dispersed explosively can fill a large surrounding space with a fireball.

All chemical plants have their protocols for emergency response.  It is important for those in charge to recognize an incipient BLEVE and respond accordingly.  But even academic chemists should familiarize themselves with the phenomenon.  A fire in the lab engulfing closed containers of flammable solvents is extremely dangerous and very quickly firefighting may become your last earthly act, especially without personal protective equipment.  It is easy to under estimate the violence of these things.

Every lab person needs to look inward and decide what their personal limit is for dropping the fire extinguisher and running for the exit.  In my sophomore organic labs, the seed I planted in the students mind was this: The main purpose of a fire extinguisher was to fight your way to an exit.

Happy 100th Birthday Albert Hoffmann!!

2 Replies

Albert Hoffmann, the discoverer of LSD, turned 100 years old this year on Juanary 11th.  Happy Birthday, Albert!  Scienceblogs.com relates the story of Hoffmann’s first deliberate LSD trip on April 19th, 1943.  You might recall that Hoffmann was the Sandoz chemist who stumbled upon the psychotropic activity of lysergic acid diethylamide.  

Just this last week, the medical journal The Lancet called for an end to the “demonization” of psychedelic drugs, according to Guardian Unlimited.  The motivation behind the editorial in the Lancet was to urge a loosening of taboo’s connected with the use of psychedelic compounds.  The widespread criminalization of psychedelics has made research with these interesting molecules quite problematic. 

Perhaps the day will come when such materials are decriminalized and it will be possible to visit a psychedelic spa where one could go to have a safe dosage administered by qualified staff.  But it wouldn’t be all fun and games, though.  While the euphoric experience can be prolonged and profoundly vivid, there is a dark side.  An account of the experience of the psychiatrist Werner Stoll is described in Chapter 4 of Hoffmanns book “LSD. My Problem Child”.

Hoffmann and Sandoz would watch their discovery move from a psychiatric adjunct to a full fledged inebriant adopted by a counter culture movement.  In his book, Hoffmann laments-

    This joy at having fathered LSD was tarnished after more than ten years of uninterrupted scientific research and medicinal use when LSD was swept up in the huge wave of an inebriant mania that began to spread over the Western world, above all the United States, at the end of the 1950s. It was strange how rapidly LSD adopted its new role as inebriant and, for a time, became the number-one inebriating drug, at least as far as publicity was concerned. The more its use as an inebriant was disseminated, bringing an upsurge in the number of untoward incidents caused by careless, medically unsupervised use, the more LSD became a problem child for me and for the Sandoz firm.

    It was obvious that a substance with such fantastic effects on mental perception and on the experience of the outer and inner world would also arouse interest outside medical science, but I had not expected that LSD, with its unfathomably uncanny, profound effects, so unlike the character of a recreational drug, would ever find worldwide use as an inebriant. I had expected curiosity and interest on the part of artists outside of medicine-performers, painters, and writers-but not among people in general. After the scientific publications around the turn of the century on mescaline-which, as already mentioned, evokes psychic effects quite like those of LSD-the use of this compound remained confined to medicine and to experiments within artistic and literary circles. I had expected the same fate for LSD. And indeed, the first non-medicinal self-experiments with LSD were carried out by writers, painters, musicians, and other intellectuals.

Today, psychedelic substances are considered to be drugs of abuse and their use will lead to a long stay at the Gray Bar Hotel. Our Puritanical heritage seems everlasting. But rather than wallow in pity for my unenlightened brothers and sisters, I look forward to a brighter future where one could sit in a licensed psychotropic suite and explore the deepest recesses of consciousness brought out in full non-linear display, say, while listening to music. Everybody associates acid rock with LSD. That’s too easy. I’ve often wondered what it’d be like to listen to Leon Redbone in an altered state of consciousness.  Kinda curious about what a baritone sax does to a brain on acid.  Or David Bowie- Major Tom.  I’m showing my age. 

Yet another mass shooting in our USA

10 Replies

The news of the mass shooting at Virginia Tech just seems to get worse as the day wears on.  There aren’t words to describe it. 

After the grisly scene in Blacksburg is cleaned up and the bodies are buried, we’ll once again switch on the TV and watch programming glamorizing gun-toting tough guys and violence. Not a night goes by on television where some plot isn’t based on the menacing of women by crazed or angry men, most with guns.  Some people will solve problems with guns and others will cause problems with guns.  The message is that guns bring satisfaction and command respect. Just look at the very title of the series The Sopranos and listen to the lyrics.  “Woke up this mornin’ and got myself a gun …”

Maybe there is no causal connection between entertainment and what this shooter did.  But I cannot help but believe that the more or less constant exposure to violence in our entertainment doesn’t dull our sensibilities and lower our threshold for what constitutes acceptable behaviour.  Regardless, we have to start somewhere and cleaning up our tastes in entertainment is relatively painless.  We need to create less demand for this crude stuff.

Obviously, the shooter is responsible for the murders, not the inanimate steel mechanism.  But the common fascination we have with the gun and it’s stylized, even mythical, application means that this mechanical device has some kind of hold on us.  Its ease of use and its ability to deliver death from a great distance makes it possible for anyone to deem themselves a “warrier” for a few minutes.

We are horrified by such violence when it is real. But we entertain ourselves with painstakingly elaborate dramatizations of it.  We are gratified to watch fictional characters engage in gunplay with bad guys.  We cheer as fictional cops rough up suspects because, as we all know, bad guys really shouldn’t have rights. 

There is no mysterious or complex phenomenon to sort out here. Our American culture has a form of fragmented personality disorder with respect to gun violence.  I don’t know if it’ll do a damned bit of good, but we need to come down from the saturation level of violence in our entertainment and recreation. The first thing we must do is to remove a bit of the glamor of gunplay. 

We don’t have to give up our guns.  But we do need to develop a new viewpoint or an advanced ethos about them. We need new icons and archetypes.  It is time to retire CSI and The Sopranos as popular iconography.  We must find better ways to fulfill our self image and need for power besides being handy with a gun.  How do other societies do it?  Any suggestions??

Here is an interesting link to a rebuttal in the Daily Kos written by someone said to be from VT.