May
9
9
Chemistry Newsbytes
Posted by Bethany Halford and Lisa Jarvis on May 9, 2008 in Chemistry is Everywhere, Uncategorized
Platypus peculiarity is genome-deep. NY Times
Trickle-down pollution: Melting glaciers are exposing penguins to DDT. New Scientist
Nanoholes let more light spill out of LEDs. Guardian
Funeral options: burial, cremation, or alkaline hydrolysis. LA Times
First they went for the catalytic converters. Then they were after bronze statues. Now what’s the hot ticket with enterprising theives? Restaurant grease. NPR
Canadian researchers hope algae can suck up the carbon dioxide generated in oil extraction. CNet
World science: Which countries are publishing the most scientific papers? In the Pipeline
Games for geeks: predicting protein folding for sport. Foldit via Slashdot
1.4 Cents For Your Thoughts
May
7
7
Posted by Carmen Drahl on May 7, 2008 in Uncategorized
My stash is rolled up in paper packets. My friend’s is in the back of a drawer in his dresser. Interest groups have been tussling for years about whether to rid the U.S. of it completely.
Before you jump to conclusions, you should know that I’m talking about pocket change–the penny and nickel specifically.
Yesterday, the House debated a bill that could lead to a cheaper reformulation of the penny and the nickel.Why would they want to do that? Well, the metals that make up these coins cost more than they used to, and it now costs more than a penny to make a penny (around 1.4 cents, depending on fluctuating metal values). Same goes for the nickel (one nickel costs about 7 cents to make).
The idea under consideration is whether to make pennies, and maybe nickels, out of steel, an iron alloy. Currently, pennies are made mostly from zinc, with a touch of copper plating. Today’s nickels contain more copper than nickel. (So technically, my graphic pitting elements against each other isn’t accurate, but I can never resist an opportunity to use Microsoft Paint.)
Slainte! To The Science Of Scotch!
May
7
7
Posted by Lisa Jarvis on May 7, 2008 in Chemistry and Food
Scotch isn’t really my thing, but I was excited nonetheless to learn a bit about the science of the drink last night at the New York Academy of Sciences. Simon Brooking, master ambassador for Laphroaig and Ardmore, two of Scotland’s premier single malt whiskeys, gave a rollicking talk that covered everything from the history of the drink to how it’s distilled to a primer on tasting and enjoying the drink (a hint: let it hit the middle of your tongue, not the tip). There were bagpipes and kilts and several kinds of Scotch to sample. Brooking even sang a few songs.
Our own Beth Halford did a thorough job explaining the process of distilling whiskey, so I won’t go into the gritty details. But I did come away with a few interesting facts worth sharing:
*The Scots use copper stills when making their magic elixir, and Brooking says the style and the flavor of Scotch is linked to the shape of the still and the angle of the line neck. Smaller, squat stills tend to produce a heavier, oilier-flavored drink, whereas taller stills impart a sweeter flavor. When I asked Brooking to clarify why the shape of the still mattered so much, he said “we’re not sure exactly what is happening,” chalking up the process to the magic and mystery of Scotch. Hmm. Not exactly the scientific breakdown I was hoping for. He did explain that different parts of the still wear thin sooner than others because of the heat generated while the whiskey is refluxing, which could influence the final product. I did a little digging, and it seems the copper reacts with sulfur compounds that would otherwise give the whiskey an unpleasant taste. I’m sure there’s more to it, chemically speaking, and would guess surface area also plays a role. Perhaps one of our readers could provide some more clarity?
Drip, Drip, Drip
May
6
6
Posted by Jyllian Kemsley on May 6, 2008 in Uncategorized
The “leaky pipeline” describes the declining proportion of women in science as they progress up through the career ranks. The latest results from ACS’s Committee on Professional Training show that in 2006, women received 51.9% of bachelor degrees in chemistry, 48.6% of masters degrees, and 35.8% of Ph.D.s (C&EN, Sept. 17, 2007, p. 43). Meanwhile, women made up just 14% of the tenured or tenure-track chemistry faculty at the top 50 schools in 2006–07 (C&EN, Dec. 18, 2006, p. 58). In industry, 12.0% of people serving on boards of directors in 2007 were women, as were 9.2% of executive officers (C&EN, July 30, 2007, p. 38).
Reasons given for the drop-off are varied. A trio of blog posts from the past week highlight some of the issues that women in the physical sciences face when trying to advance their careers:
[My colleague] sits in hiring committees and hears young male faculty question whether female applicants are capable of having their own ideas and working independently, but these issues are not raised for male applicants. He has been fighting this attitude for so long, he was discouraged that it wasn’t something that went away as younger faculty were hired.
Letter from Europe: Here’s Looking at You
[After returning from giving a preinterview seminar, Female Science Professor 1] said to me that she felt very good about her visit because there is an excellent academic fit between her field of expertise and where the institution wants to go. Something worried her though. She was told that [Female Science Professor 2], who is also an excellent young scientist, had the preference of a fraction of the (male) faculty because of her looks.
# The [female post docs] in the study were more productive (as measured by internal publications), on average, than the males. Half of the males produced fewer internal papers per year than the least productive female in the sample. There was a much broader distribution for the male post docs: “nearly all the females are highly productive, whereas 1/2 the males produce almost nothing, somewhat half are moderately productive, and a select few are extremely productive.” Note that internal publications were used to measure productivity because peer-reviewed journal publications always list all of the project’s participants in alphabetical order as authors.
# Males were much more likely to be alloted conference presentations. The ratio of physics conference presentations to internal physics papers produced for males was double that of females (triple if all presentations and papers were considered).
It would appear that gender discrimination still abounds, despite the best efforts of some. C&ENtral Science readers: What have you experienced or observed?
Chemistry Newsbytes
May
6
6
Posted by Bethany Halford and Lisa Jarvis on May 6, 2008 in Chemistry is Everywhere
Ionic liquids tidy up sticky chewing gum mess. Guardian
Leave the light on: 107-year-old bulb is still burning. LA Times
A brief history of LSD. NY Times
Just how spicy is that hot sauce? Get out the nanotubes! Nanowerk
Fungi to the rescue: a method to sequester depleted uranium. New Scientist
Who has greener intentions in the uranium rush? Environmentalists or mining companies? LA Times
Build your own MPLC. The Chem Blog
One Hundred Years Ago …
May
5
5
Posted by Lisa Jarvis on May 5, 2008 in The Editor's Blog
This week, Rudy’s editorial digs into the causes of a major transition that occurred at ACS in 1908. It turns out, the ACS Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Division, the Organic, Physical, and Agricultural & Food Chemistry Divisions, and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers are all celebrating their 100th anniversaries this year. Rudy decided to investigate what exactly happened a century ago. He writes:
“So what was special about 1908? It turns out that there was a lot of ferment in the chemistry enterprise in the first decade of the 20th century, and it was reflected in the activities and structure of ACS. What I find interesting are the parallels between then and now.”
Tension between ACS members who were industrial chemists and those working in academe and government labs, worry that new journals would dilute the content of JACS, and a debate over the merits of creating more-specialized subdivisions within the organization topped members’ concerns. Sound familiar? Do these issues remain at the forefront 100 years later? Sound off in the comments!
Who’s Making All That Racket In The Parking Lot?
May
2
2
Posted by Alex Tullo on May 2, 2008 in Chemistry is Everywhere
Motorists have learned to take down the window mounts of their GPS systems when they leave their cars unattended. Now comes a crime spree they can do little to prevent. Catalytic converters are being stolen in increasing numbers. Thieves crawl under parked cars and saw—or if they’re bolted on, unscrew–the catalytic converter canisters right off the exhaust. The crime wave has become a nuisance noticed in
What the thieves are after are the platinum group metals—platinum, palladium, and rhodium—that reduce nitrogen oxides and oxidize carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons in auto exhaust fumes. These metals have become even more precious in recent years. According to British metals and catalyst supplier Johnson Matthey, platinum prices have increased by more than 80% over the past two years, hitting nearly $2,000 per troy ounce in April. Meanwhile, palladium costs have increase 37% and rhodium prices have more than doubled, reaching $450 and $9,063 per ounce, respectively. Granted, even though the levels of platinum group metals in the converters are measured in grams, they seemingly contain enough of the stuff to fetch more than $50.
The canisters don’t contain the metals in an easy-to-fence coin. They are coated onto a ceramic substrate. Thus, they must be chemically extracted. One wonders if there are organized crime operations dedicated to this or whether illicit converters are showing up in normal catalytic converter recycling channels.
Chemistry Newsbytes
May
2
2
Posted by Bethany Halford and Lisa Jarvis on May 2, 2008 in Chemistry is Everywhere
Pig-urine flavored cigarettes? The science of swine! Popular Science
Silicon Valley venture capitalists launch whopper of a green tech fund. CNet
Australian scientists make advances in getting plants to produce useful fatty acids. The Money Times
One we missed earlier this week: Are “green” cleaning supplies really safer? LA Times
Chemistry professor Abul Hussam won $1 million for his arsenic-removing water filter. So what has he done with his prize? Islamica Magazine
A brief history of the periodic table. The Guardian
DNA helps some men dupe antidoping tests. NY Times
All lab, no lecture: “The Illustrated Guide to Home Chemistry Experiments.” BoingBoing
Figuring out food science: A call for help on hydrocolloid chemistry. Khymos
Rest In Peace, Albert Hofmann
Apr
30
30
Posted by Rachel Pepling on April 30, 2008 in Uncategorized
The father of LSD died from a heart attack Tuesday at his home in Basel, Switzerland. He was 102. Who knew a shelved compound could have such an impact on society? Okay, so clearly Hofmann had an inkling. C&EN’s Managing Editor, Ivan Amato, wrote a lovely piece (subscription required) at the time of Hofmann’s 100th birthday. He told me today, “The thing about Hofmann, and particularly his discovery of LSD, that amazes me the most is how it so fantastically links the categories of materialism and psychology.”
Where Chic Geeks Meet To Eat
Apr
30
30
Posted by Corinne Marasco on April 30, 2008 in Chemistry and Food
In the Central Square section of Cambridge, Mass., lies the Miracle of Science Bar & Grill. If you guessed from the name that Massachusetts Institute of Technology is nearby, you’re right, and the decor is distinctly scientific. The menu is displayed periodic table-style on a chalkboard (the prices are where the atomic weights would be) and is organized according to entrée type–appetizers, sandwiches, desserts, etc. Hb is hamburger, Cb is cheeseburger, C1 and C2 are chicken skewers and Br is a dessert brownie. The tables look like lab benches, drinks are served in beakers, and condiments arrive in test tubes.
Overall, it sounds like a place for pub grub and beer. A review in the April 20, 2007, edition of The Tech, MIT’s campus paper, concluded, “Overall the food was pretty good, though nothing really to write home about.” Although the student reviewer thought the food was expensive, the prices he quoted sounded average to me; here in the D.C. area, a $7.50 hamburger is not unusual. Reviews on Yelp.com confirm my impression that this place is a stop, not a destination. Still, it sounds like the kind of place where you go once just so you can say that you’ve been.
A tip of the toque to the Serious Eats blog, where I found this story.
Photo: Scott Beale/Laughing Squid
Recent Comments