list of meetings.

C&EN's latest list of meetings and events of interest to those in the chemical community is for August 2009 through June 2010. This listing includes international as well as domestic meetings. Please submit meeting information to Linda Wang, 1155-16th St., N.W., Washington,
DC 20036; (202) 872-4579,
fax (202) 872-8727,
e-mail: l_wang@acs.org.

August 2009
Aug. 2-6. ChemEd 2009. Radford, Va. Website: www.radford.edu/~chemed2009/
Aug. 2-7. 42nd IUPAC
Cong.: Chemistry Solutions. Glasgow, Scotland,
Email: iupac2009@rsc.org
Aug. 3-6. IBC's 14th
Ann. Drug Discovery & Development of Innovative Therapeutics World Cong. Boston. IBC Customer Service, (800) 390-4078,
e-mail: reg@ibcusa.com
Aug. 16-20. ACS 238th
Natl. Mtg. & Expo. Washington, D.C. ACS Mtgs., 1155-16th St., N.W., Washington, DC 20036, (800) 227-5558, fax (202) 872-6128,
e-mail: natlmtgs@acs.org
Aug. 23-27. 8th
World Cong. of Chemical Engineering. Montréal, Quebec. Canadian Soc. for Chemical Engineering. 130 Slater St., Suite 550, Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2, (613) 232-6252, fax (613) 232-5862,
e-mail: info@wcce8.org
Aug. 23-28. 19th Intl. Symp. on Fluorine Conf. Jackson Hole, WY.
Email: fluorine@bama.ua.edu
Aug. 26-28.
CPhI South America. São Paulo, Brazil. CMP Information, Bettina Gohl, 31-346-559-405, fax 31-346-573-811,
e-mail: bgohl@cmpi.biz

September 2009
Sept. 1-2. 9th
World Cong.: Nanomaterials for Industry: Energy-Consumer Products-Environment. Long Island, N.Y. Executive Conf. Management, P.O. Box 700272, Plymouth, MI 48170, (734) 737-0507, fax (734) 737-0508,
e-mail: ecm@executive-conference.com
Sept. 2-5. 3rd
European Conf. on Chemistry in Life Sciences. Frankfurt.
E-mail: tg@gdch.de
Sept. 6-9.
British Pharmaceutical Conf. 2009. Manchester, England.
Sept. 6-10.
Euroanalysis 2009. Innsbruck, Austria.
Email: euroanalysis09@come-innsbruck.at
Sept. 6-11.
European Symp. on Organic Reactivity. Haifa, Israel.
Email: esor2009@paragon-conventions.com
Sept. 8-11.
Organic Process Research & Development. Lisbon, Portugal. Kate Laird, Scientific Update, e-mail: sciup@scientificupdate.co.uk,
Sept. 13-17. 54th
Ann. Safety in Ammonia Plants & Related Facilities Symp. Calgary, Canada.
Sept. 14-15.
CHF Innovation Day/ Perkin Medal Award. Philadelphia. Chi Chan, 315 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, PA 19106, (215) 873-8249,
e-mail: innovationday@chemheritage.org
Sept. 14-16.
Pharma ChemOutsourcing Conf. & Exhibit. Long Branch, N.J. The ChemOutsourcing Conf., 164 West Forest Avenue, Teaneck, NJ 07666, (201) 452-4023, fax (201) 862-1217,
e-mail: info@chemoutsourcing.com
Sept. 20-23.
Advances in Polyolefins 2009. Santa Rosa, Calif. Pal Arjunan (281) 557-3320, ext. 310, e-mail: parjunan@cmrhoutex.com; or James E. McGrath, (540) 231-5976,
e-mail: jmcgrath@vt.edu,
Sept. 20-24.
22nd Mtg. of the Intl. Soc. for Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds. Charleston, S.C. Michele M. Schantz,
e-mail: Michele.schantz@nist.gov
Sept. 21-23.
North American Thermal Analysis Soc. 37th Ann. Conf. Lubbock, Texas. Lois Hall, (270) 745-2220,
e-mail: natas@wku.edu
Sept. 23-24.
Chemspec Latin America. Mexico City.
Sept. 27-Oct. 3.
HESTEC 2009. Edinburg, Texas. Gilbert Maldonado, Hispanic Engineering, Science & Technology Program, (956) 381-3361,
e-mail: gilmal@utpa.edu
Sept 29-Oct.
1. Eurocoat 2009. Barcelona. Didier Roger, 33-141-984-031,
e-mail: droger@etai.fr

October 2009
Oct. 4–6.
Tactical Approaches to the Challenge of Drug Failure. Philadelphia. ACS Prospectives, (800) 227-5558,
e-mail: ACSProSpectives@acs.org
Oct. 6–7. 22nd Intl.
Activated Carbon Conf. Pittsburgh. (724) 457-6576,
e-mail: Barb@pacslabs.com
Oct. 7–10.
ACS 37th Northeast Regional Mtg. Julianne Smist,
e-mail: jsmist@spfldcol.edu
Oct. 13–14.
Synthetic Heterocyclic Chemistry. San Diego. Kate Laird, Scientific Update,
e-mail: sciup@scientificupdate.co.uk
Oct. 13–15. 2009
Asia-Pacific Intl. Chemical Engineering Exhibit; 6th Sino-U.S. Chemical Engineering Forum Exhibit; Chemical Industry Achievement Exhibit to remember the P. R. China’s 60th Anniversary. Beijing. Hu Shirui, 86-10-6385-3376,
e-mail: apcchebj@vip.163.com
Oct. 13–15.
CPhI Worldwide. Madrid.
Oct. 13–15.
Rubber Expo & Intl. Rubber Conf. 2009. Pittsburgh. American Chemical Soc., Rubber Div., P.O. Box 499, Akron, OH 44309, (330) 972-7814, fax (330) 972-5269
Oct. 13–16. 5th Sino-U.S.
Conf. of Chemical Engineering. Beijing. G. Glenn Lipscomb, (419) 530-8088,
e-mail: glenn.lipscomb@utoledo.edu or sinousche5@home.ipe.ac.cn,
Oct. 13–15.
Asia-Pacific Intl. Chemical Engineering Exhibit. Beijing.
E-mail: apcche@sina.com
Oct. 15–18.
SACNAS Natl. Conf. Dallas. Soc. for Advancement of Chicanos & Native Americans in Science, (831) 459-0170,
e-mail: info@sacnas.org
Oct. 21–24.
ACS 44th Midwest Regional Mtg. Iowa City, Iowa.
Oct. 21–24.
ACS 61st Southeastern Regional Mtg. San Juan, Puerto Rico. Ingrid Montes
e-mail: imontes@uprrp.edu
Oct. 25–29.
Materials Science & Technology 2009. Pittsburgh. Ron Parrington, (607) 533-7000,
e-mail: ron@imrtest.com
Oct. 27–29.
L.A.B. Exhibit & Conf. Birmingham, England. 49-341-678-8195,
e-mail info@lab-uk.co.uk
Oct. 28–30.
Drug Discovery Partnerships: Academia & Industrial Interactions. Boston.
Oct. 29–30.
Nanotx USA '09 Conf. & Expo. Dallas.
Oct. 29–31.
AISES 2009 Natl. Conf. Portland, Ore. American Indian Science & Engineering Soc., P.O. Box 9828, Albuquerque, NM 87119, (505) 765-1052, fax (505) 765-5608,
e-mail: info@aises.org

November 2009
Nov. 2–4.
Process Chemistry in the Pharmaceutical Industry with Special Emphasis on Continuous Manufacturing. Durham, N.C. ACS Prospectives, (800) 227-5558,
e-mail: ACSProSpectives@acs.org
Nov. 4–7.
ACS 65th Southwest Regional Mtg. El Paso, Texas. Joe Hightower,
e-mail: jhigh@rice.edu
Nov. 8–12. 2009
AAPS Ann. Mtg. & Expo. Los Angeles, Calif. American Assoc. of Pharmaceutical Scientists, 2107 Wilson Blvd, Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22201-3042, (703) 243 2800,
Nov. 8–13. 2009
AIChE Ann. Mtg. Nashville. American Inst. of Chemical Engineers, 3 Park Ave., New York, NY 10016-5991, (800) 242-4363
Nov. 12–15.
Ann. Mtg. of the Soc. for Glycobiology. San Diego. Tom Oeltmann, e-mail: president@glycobiology.org; or Kelley Moremen,
e-mail: moremen@uga.edu
Nov. 15–18.
15th Biennial Winter Workshop in Psychoses. Barcelona.
Nov. 17–19. 2009
Chem Show. New York City.
E-mail: info@chemshow.com

December 2009
Dec. 1–3.
CPhI India. Mumbai.
Dec. 3–4.
New Horizons in Catalysis. Cologne, Germany. Kate Laird, Scientific Update,
e-mail: sciup@scientificupdate.co.uk
Dec. 7.
SOCMA 88th Ann. Dinner. Alicia Massey, Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Assoc., 1850 M St., N.W., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 721-4165,
e-mail: masseya@socma.com

January 2010
Jan. 19–22. Organic Process Research & Development. San Diego. Kate Laird, e-mail: sciup@scientificupdate.co.uk, website: www.scientificupdate.co.uk

Jan. 20–21. Stem Cells World Congress. San Francisco. Select Biosciences, Suite 1D, 30 Controls Dr., Shelton, CT 06484, (203) 926-1400, fax (203) 926-0003, e-mail: naenquiries@selectbiosciences.com, website: www.selectbiosciences.com/conferences/SCWC2010

Jan. 23–27. Lab Automation 2010. Palm Springs, Calif. Assoc. for Lab Automation, 330 West State St., Geneva, IL 60134, (888) 733-1252, fax (630) 578-0172, e-mail: bdreier@labautomation.org, website: www.labautomation.org

Jan. 26–30. 2010 SDA Ann. Mtg. & Industry Convention. Boca Raton, Fla. Soap & Detergent Assoc., 1500 K St., N.W., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 347-2900, e-mail: info@cleaning101.com, website: www.cleaning101.com

February 2010
Feb. 1–4 IMAC 25th Conf. & Expo on Structural Dynamics. Jacksonville, Fla. Soc. for Experimental Mechanics, 7 School St., Bethel, CT 06801, (203) 790-6373, e-mail: sem@sem1.com, website: www.sem.org

Feb. 11–12. Screening Europe. Barcelona. Select Biosciences, Suite 1D, 30 Controls Dr., Shelton, CT 06484, (203) 926-1400, fax (203) 926-0003, e-mail: naenquiries@selectbiosciences.com, website: www.selectbiosciences.com/conferences/SE2010

Feb. 16–19. Informex 2010. San Francisco. (800) 981-2741 or (972) 620-3008, e-mail: informex@accureg.com, website: www.informex.com

Feb. 18–22. AAAS Ann. Mtg. San Diego. American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, 1200 New York Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20005, (202) 326-6400, e-mail: webmaster@aaas.org, website: www.aaas.org

Feb. 20–24. Biophysical Soc. 54th Ann. Mtg. & 16th Intl. Biophysics Cong. San Francisco. Biophysical Soc., 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 634-7114, e-mail: society@biophysics.org, website: www.biophysics.org

Feb. 28–March 5. Pittcon 2010. Orlando, Fla. Pittsburgh Conf. on Analytical Chemistry & Applied Spectroscopy, 300 Penn Ctr. Blvd., Suite 332, Pittsburgh, PA 15235, (412) 825-3220 or (800) 825-3221, fax (412) 825-3224, e-mail: info@pittcon.org, website: www.pittcon.org

March 2010
March 8–10. DIA 22nd Ann. Euromeeting. Monaco. Drug Information Assoc., 800 Enterprise Rd., Suite 200, Horsham, PA 19044, (215) 442-6100, e-mail: dia@diahome.org, website: www.diahome.org

March 8–10. Global Plastics Engineering Conf. (GPEC 2010). Orlando, Fla. Michael Montpetit, (734) 433-2399, e-mail: mcmont1954365@aol.com, website: www.sperecycling.org

March 14–18. 23rd Conf. of the Organic Reactions Catalysis Soc. Monterey, Calif. Website: www.orcs.org

March 15–18. DCAT Week 2010. New York City. Drug, Chemical & Associated Technologies Assoc., One Washington Blvd., Suite 7, Robbinsville, NJ 08691, (609) 448-1000 or (800) 640-3228, fax (609) 448-1944, e-mail: info@dcat.org, website: www.dcat.org

March 18. 84th DCAT Ann. Dinner. New York City. Drug, Chemical & Associated Technologies Assoc., One Washington Blvd., Suite 7, Robbinsville, NJ 08691, (609) 448-1000 or (800) 640-3228, fax (609) 448-1944, e-mail: info@dcat.org, website: www.dcat.org

March 21–23. 2010 NPRA Ann. Mtg. Phoenix. Natl. Petrochemical & Refiners Assoc., 1899 L St., N.W., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 457-0480, fax (202) 457-0486, e-mail: info@npra.org, website: www.npra.org

March 21–25. ACS 239th Natl. Mtg. & Expo. San Francisco. ACS Mtgs., 1155—16th St., N.W., Washington, DC 20036, (800) 227-5558, fax (202) 872-6128, e-mail: natlmtgs@acs.org, website: www.acs.org

March 21–25. 2009 AIChE Spring Natl. Mtg. San Antonio. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 3 Park Ave., New York, NY 10016-5991, (800) 242-4363, website: www.aiche.org/SBE/Events/Spring.aspx

March 23–26. Analytica. 22nd Intl. Trade Fair for Instrumental Analysis, Lab, Technology & Biotechnology with Analytica Conf. Munich, Germany. Website: www.analytica.de

March 29–April 3. NOBCChE Ann. Conf. Atlanta. Natl. Organization for the Professional Advancement of Black Chemists & Chemical Engineers, Natl. Office, P.O. Box 77040, Washington, DC 20013, (800) 776-1419, fax (202) 667-1705, website: www.nobcche.org

April 2010
April 5–9. 2010 Materials Research Soc. Spring Mtg. San Francisco. Materials Research Soc., 506 Keystone Dr., Warrendale, PA 15086, (724) 779-3003, fax (724) 779-8313, e-mail: info@mrs.org, website: www.mrs.org

April 11–15. Soc. for Biomolecular Sciences 16th Ann. Conf. & Exhibit. Phoenix. Soc. for Biomolecular Sciences, 36 Tamarack Ave. #348, Danbury, CT 06811, (203) 743-1336, e-mail: email@sbsonline.org, website: www.sbsonline.org

April 13–15. In-Cosmetics. Paris. Richard Hesk, 44-20-8910-7959, e-mail: richard.hesk@reedexpo.co.uk, website: www.in-cosmetics.com

April 12–15. American Coatings Show & Conf. Charlotte, N.C. Dirk Ebener, (770) 618-5830, fax (770) 618-5831, e-mail: dirk.ebener@nuernbergmesse-north-america.com, website: www.american-coatings-show.com/conference

April 15–16. ChemSpec India. Mumbai. Cynthia Challener, (802) 472-6503, fax (802) 472-5046, e-mail: challener@vtlink.net, website: www.chemspecindia.com

April 17–21. American Assoc. for Cancer Research 101st Ann. Mtg. Washington, D.C. American Assoc. for Cancer Research, 615 Chestnut St., 17th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19106, (215) 440-9300 or (866) 423-3965, fax (215) 440-7228, e-mail: aacr@aacr.org, website: www.aacr.org

April 19–23. World Showcase for Industrial Technology. Hannover, Germany. Hannover Fairs USA, Princeton Office, 212 Carnegie Ctr., Princeton, NJ 08540, (609) 987-1202, website: www.hannovermesse.de

April 21–23. CPhI Japan. Tokyo. CMP Information, Industrieweg 54, P.O. Box 200, 3600 AS Maarssen, the Netherlands, 31-346-559-444, fax 31-346-573-811, e-mail: CPhI@cmpi.biz, website: www.cphijapan.com

May 2010
May 2–5. Soc. for Biological Engineering 2nd Intl. Conf. on Stem Cell Engineering. Boston. Website: www.aiche.org/sbe/events/stemcelleng.aspx

May 3–6. BIO 2010. Chicago. Biotechnology Industry Organization, 1225 Eye St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 962-6655, e-mail: reg2008@bio.org, website: www.bio.org

May 3–6. 2010 Offshore Technology Conf. Houston. Offshore Technology Conf., (972) 952-9494, e-mail: service@otcnet.org, website: www.otcnet.org

May 16–19. 100th AOCS Ann. Mtg. & Expo. Orlando, Fla. American Oil Chemists' Soc., (217) 359-2344, e-mail: meetings@aocs.org

May 23–26. 7th Middle East Refining & Petrochemicals Exhibit & Conf. Manama, Bahrain. Fawzi Al-Shehabi, Arabian Exhibition Management, P.O. Box 20200, Manama, Bahrain, 97-317-550-033, fax 97 317-553-288, e-mail: Fawzi@aeminfo.com.bh, website: www.mepetrotech.com

June 2010
June 19–24. HPLC 2010. 35th Intl. Symp. on High-Performance Liquid-Phase Separations & Related­ Techniques. Boston. Renee Olson, CASSS, 5900 Hollis St., Suite R3, Emeryville, CA 94608, (510) 428-0740, e-mail: rolson@casss.org, website: www.hplc2010.org

continue reading »»

IPCS events: 2009

The meetings listed below are closed to the general public and are invitation-only events.

23-24 March 2009
Planning meeting for International Workshop on identifying important Life Stages for monitoring and assessing risks from exposures to Environmental Contaminants, Washington DC, USA.

30 March-3 April 2009
International Chemical Safety Cards Peer-Review Meeting, WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland.

27-29 April 2009
Drafting Group meeting on Guidance for Immunotoxicity Risk Assessment for Chemicals, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

2-4 June 2009
WHO/IPCS Consultation on DDT Hazard Assessment, WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland.

16-24 June 2009
71st Meeting of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (JECFA), Geneva, Switzerland.

24-26 June 2009
WHO and Rotterdam Convention Secretariat Joint Workshop to Improve Capacities for the Identification of Severely Hazardous Pesticide Formulations for Submission under the Rotterdam Convention Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania.

6-8 July 2009
WHO/IPCS International Workshop on Principles of Characterizing and Applying PBPK Models in Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.

29-30 July 2009
Risk Assessment Toolkit Briefing Meeting of Pilot Countries Leading into Pilot Phase, Bangkok, Thailand.

16-25 September 2009
Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), Geneva, Switzerland.

28 September-1 October 2009
Sixth Meeting of Users of the IPCS INTOX Data Management System, Cardiff, United Kingdom.

continue reading »»

International Programme on Chemical Safety

Health Sector Focus
International Conference on Chemicals Management
Panel members from left to right: Dr Jadamba Tsolmon, Vice Minister of Health, Mongolia; Dr Maria Neira, Director of Public Health and Environment, WHO; Dr Rob Visser, Deputy Director, Environment Directorate, OECD; Professor David Mwakyusa, Minister of Health & Social Welfare, Tanzania; Mrs Elisabet Falemo, State Secretary, Environment Ministry, Sweden; Mr Ben van Beurden, Executive Vice President, Shell Chemicals; Dr Peter Orris, World Federation of Public Health Associations. The session was moderated by Mr Paul Hohnen.

Statement of Dr Maria Neira on the occasion of the high-level round table [pdf 30kb]
Moderators summary from the high-level round table [pdf 22kb]

Health-aspects of the Strategic Approach
Over 700 delegates from Governments, non-governmental, intergovernmental organizations and industry met during the second session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management to review progress with the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). A resolution on the health-aspects of the sound management of chemicals was moved by the Governments of Belarus, Morocco, Panama, Suriname, Thailand and Zambia together with Physicians for Social Responsibility and the World Federation of Public Health Associations. The resolution, endorsed by the Conference as a whole:

* emphasizes the need to fully engage the health sector in national, regional and international SAICM fora; the essential cross-sectoral responsibilities of national focal points; and the importance of regional health and environmental interministerial processes as a springboard for effective intersectoral actions;
* encourages the health sector to take full advantage of SAICM institutional arrangements;
* underlines the need for all stakeholders to assist in the development of resources to permit a greater degree of sectoral balance in representation in SAICM fora and in implementation activities;
* calls on the health sector to actively participate in actions to implement ICCM decisions with respect to identified priority issues and calls on the WHO to intensify its activities in the sound management of chemicals in support of SAICM;
* decides to develop a strategy for strengthening the engagement of the health sector in SAICM’s implementation for the intersessional period and to evaluate it at ICCM3; and
* requests that the outcomes of the Conference regarding human health be considered by the World Health Assembly (WHA).

World Health Assembly resolution on SAICM, 2006 [pdf 16kb]
Report by the World Health Organization to the second session of the ICCM [pdf 127kb]
August 2008: Update on health sector implementation of SAICM [pdf 132kb]
Background on health sector engagement in SAICM
Worker's health and safety, WHA 60.26 (2007) [pdf 31kb]

continue reading »»

Series Online

* Accounts of Chemical Research
* ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces—New in 2009
* ACS Chemical Biology
* ACS Chemical Neuroscience—New in 2010
* ACS Nano
* Analytical Chemistry
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Analytical Edition (1929–1946)

* Biochemistry
* Bioconjugate Chemistry
* Biomacromolecules
* Biotechnology Progress
(Published by the Am. Inst. of Chem. Engineers)
* Chemical Research in Toxicology
* Chemical Reviews
* Chemistry of Materials
* Crystal Growth & Design
* Energy & Fuels
* Environmental Science & Technology
* Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Journal of Industrial & Engineering Chemistry (1909–1922)
* Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development (1962–1986)
o Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals (1962–1986)
o I&EC Product Research and Development (1962–1968)
o Product R&D (1969–1977)
o Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Product Research and Development (1978–1986)
* Inorganic Chemistry
* Journal of the American Chemical Society
* Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
* Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Chemical & Engineering Data Series (1956–1958)
* Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Journal of Chemical Documentation (1961–1974)
o Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences (1975–2004)
* Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
* Journal of Combinatorial Chemistry
* Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o Journal of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry (1957–1962)
* Journal of Natural Products
(Copublished with the Am. Soc. of Pharmacognosy)
* The Journal of Organic Chemistry
* The Journal of Physical Chemistry A
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o The Journal of Physical Chemistry (1896–1946)
o The Journal of Physical and Colloid Chemistry (1947–1950)
o The Journal of Physical Chemistry (1951–1996)
* The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
View this journal's publication history (previous titles)
o The Journal of Physical Chemistry (1896–1946)
o The Journal of Physical and Colloid Chemistry (1947–1950)
o The Journal of Physical Chemistry (1951–1996)
* The Journal of Physical Chemistry C
* The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters—New in 2010
* Journal of Proteome Research
* Langmuir
* Macromolecules
* Molecular Pharmaceutics
* Nano Letters
* Organic Letters
* Organic Process Research & Development
* Organometallics

continue reading »»

The RNA World.

Genetic information flows from DNA, in the nucleus of each cell, to RNA, which carries the information out of the nucleus into the body of the cell and uses the instructions encoded in it to produce proteins (which act as enzymes and also provide the structural framework of cells). However, the duplication of DNA requires numerous enzymes that catalyze those reactions. And enzymes are proteins themselves – the end product of the information coded in DNA. In other words, proteins are required for DNA synthesis and DNA is required for protein synthesis.

How then could the first living cell with DNA-based molecular biology have originated by spontaneous chemical processes on the pre-biotic earth? This has been the chicken and egg problem of life’s evolution from chemicals – Which came first, DNA or the protein molecule?

In the late 1960s, several biologists – including Francis Crick, Carl Woese and Leslie Orgel – suggested that the ancestor molecule was neither DNA nor protein, but RNA. RNA, they suggested, might have catalyzed reactions necessary for replication as well as provided the genetic information necessary to replicate itself. Self-replicating RNA-based systems would have arisen first, and DNA and proteins would have been added later. DNA could have evolved from RNA and, then, being more stable, taken over RNA’s role as the guardian of heredity.

This idea further got support in the early 1980s from the independent discoveries of Thomas Cech and Sidney Altman of a kind of RNA that catalyzes a reaction. These catalytic RNA molecules have subsequently been termed as “ribozymes.” In 1986, Walter Gilbert, in an article in Nature, portrayed the primordial world as “RNA World” where RNA molecules catalyze their own synthesis. Since then, the term “RNA World” has stuck to the general hypothesis – RNA first, DNA and protein later.

Researchers continue to discover new func- tions for existing RNA, illustrating repeatedly how versatile these molecules can be. The recent determination of the structure of the ribosome, showing that it is a ribozyme, gave further support to the belief in the RNA World. However, there are many difficulties and problems in the RNA World.

Leslie Orgel, one of the scientists who first proposed it in the 1960s, himself concedes that researchers who have attempted to illustrate the possibility of spontaneous generation of the chemical elements of RNA itself have had only modest success. Ribose, the sugar that is part of the backbone of the RNA molecule, is difficult to create from hypothetical early earth conditions, except in very small quantities. Stanley Miller and his colleagues have also recently reported “ribose and other sugars have surprisingly short half-lives for decomposition at neutral pH, making it very unlikely that sugars were available as pre-biotic reagents.”

RNA World assumes that in the primordial world, ribonucleotides spontaneously condense into polymers to form RNA molecules and RNA molecules, once formed, would have the catalytic activity to replicate itself, and a population of such self-replicating molecules would arise. However, it is objected that even if RNA could have formed spontaneously, it would have been continuously degraded by spontaneous hydrolysis and other destructive processes operating on the primitive Earth.

Joyce and Orgel point out many detailed problems with these postulates of RNA World. They finally suggest not to accept “the myth of a self-replicating RNA molecule that arose de novo from a soup of random polynucleotides. Not only is such a notion unrealistic in light of our current understanding of pre-biotic chemistry, but it should strain the credulity of even an optimist’s view of RNA’s catalytic potential.”

Similarly, Crick has expressed great doubt about the RNA World. He says, “At present, the gap from the primal ‘soup’ to the first RNA system capable of natural selection looks for- biddingly wide.”.

continue reading »»

Outsourcing R&D Innovation takes on New Meaning

Innovative drugs are the lifeblood of pharmaceutical companies, but the cost of developing them is rising to unsustainable levels. Pharma executives are already saying that as the economy falters, they foresee bleak prospects and mergers unless their companies get more innovative drugs into their pipelines. The clock is ticking on the race to increase productivity, as key patents worth a projected $30 billion in revenue will expire between 2010 and 2013, opening the floodgates to competition from generics, according to Barbara Ryan, an analyst at Deutsche Bank. This imperative is propelling increased outsourcing of R&D operations as companies trim overcapacity.¹

Meanwhile, certain other trends are inexorably converging to raise the stakes:

* Costs keep going up. A 2001 study by Joseph DiMasi and colleagues at the Tufts Center for Drug Development calculated the tab for developing a new drug at $802 million in capitalized costs, compared to $231 million in 1987. A follow-on report in 2003 pegged the cost at $897 million, noting that only 21.5 percent of the candidates that enter phase I trials are eventually approved by the FDA. DiMasi explains that more drugs are targeted at chronic conditions and degenerative diseases, requiring larger and more exhaustive clinical trials.

* More money spent results in fewer new drugs. A 2004 FDA paper noted that NIH investment in basic research, and pharmaceutical and biotech investment in applied research went up 250 percent between 1993 and 2003, but the number of new molecular entities (NMEs) approved declined. A pharma company executive estimated the industry is now spending about $60 billion on R&D.² But in 2007, only 17 NMEs were approved, the lowest number since 2003.³

* Insurers only pay for real innovation. Health care insurers are balking at paying for new drugs that do not show a clear benefit over existing treatments.

* Increased development time translates to regulatory risk. A new chemical entity took about 8 years in the 1960’s to get to a NDA (new drug application) but can take between 12 to 15 years today as the FDA raised the safety bar for drugs targeting chronic conditions. Longer lead times mean increased vulnerability to competition and shortened time for pharmas to capitalize on their discovery efforts.

In the search for increased productivity on a tighter budget, global pharmaceutical companies are increasingly behaving like thrifty biotechs and outsourcing non-core discovery, development and manufacturing activities. Outsourcing is a time-honored strategy used in several different industries, but the catch is, outsourcing solely to cut costs, while an appealing transitional tactic to meet quarterly numbers, is not sustainable. Pharma companies today are reducing discovery risk by collaborating with biotechs to discover early stage compounds, as well as by sponsoring basic research at universities or licensing compounds. Pharmas are also reducing R&D labor costs by laying-off skilled scientists as programs close, either outsourcing jobs abroad (off-shoring), or establishing wholly owned divisions in other countries where they can get U.S. trained scientists at lower cost. But this strategy only is sustainable if salaries remain low over the long term. Moreover, there are inevitably hidden costs involved in communication and language barriers, cultural issues, chain of custody issues, and the risk of losing control over IP, especially when off-shoring. To be sustainable over the long term, outsourcing has to increase value and competitiveness. The primary strategic issue for pharma is how to develop and preserve intellectual property as a key competitive differentiator and outsource to increase productivity, not just reduce costs. If outsourcing is done to capture value, costs will fall in line as well.
To understand why, take a look at the experience of some other industries.



Microscale, parallel experimentation technology enables a single scientist using milligrams of expensive, early-development material to rapidly explore a broad experimental space and develop comprehensive data sets and direction information in days, rather than weeks or months.

The semiconductor industry goes fabless.
Pare away extraneous functions but mind your core expertise.
The semiconductor industry is extremely innovation driven, and business cycles are volatile. Labor costs are not significant, but R&D and capital equipment are expensive. Semiconductor companies have a shorter product lifecycle than pharma. For example, the time span between one generation of Pentium chip and the next is at most five years. Worldwide semiconductor outsourcing services revenue is estimated at $47.4 billion in 2008, a 10.8% increase from 2007 revenue of $42.8 billion, according to Gartner, an analyst group. Gartner forecasts the semiconductor outsourcing services market will reach $66.8 billion in 2012.

In the 1990s, the concept of outsourcing chip manufacturing to foundries abroad became popular. This did not occur in a vacuum. Manufacturers such as National Semiconductor built semiconductor fabrication plants or fabs in Taiwan, but divested them in the late 1980’s. The Taiwanese government offered subsidies to keep the factories afloat. Companies like Hewlett Packard, Texas Instruments, and Motorola realized that if they went fabless they could slash overhead considerably, as building and maintaining a modern fab costs north of $4 billion. They outsourced their manufacturing to the foundries, but kept their core expertise in chip design as well as certain profitable niche businesses like image sensors and analog devices, in-house.

At this point, semiconductor companies may outsource sections of specialized R&D projects, such as designing devices on a nanometer scale. But they jealously guard circuit design IP. For example, the only difference between the chips of Texas Instruments and those of its rivals is design, because chips are all manufactured in the same foundries using identical integration and design rules.

Outsourcing for value led to a new model of doing business and gave a huge boost to the industry. The semiconductor companies were able to take advantage of specialized equipment and expertise as needed, so they could focus on their core technology, reducing costs in the process. The industry effectively split into two entities, one dealing with chip design and the other on development, integration, and manufacturing. This type of outsourcing also generated new types of companies that focused purely on design innovation. Companies like Saifun, which proclaims its mission to be the leading provider of IP for the non volatile memory market or Galileo Technology, which develops chips and networks for cable and satellite communications, sprang up once foundries were established.

The medical device industry outsources everything but the kitchen sink
Compress product development by outsourcing non-core IP
The medical device industry on the other hand, comprises a few dozen large players and hundreds of smaller companies, and is valued at globally over $300 billion. The top 25 companies generated $173.5 billion in product revenues in 2007.4

Medical device manufacturers are innovation dependent, as product lifecycles are short. R&D is costly and advanced, incorporating complicated electronics, software and innovative materials. All materials and systems, while they need not be novel, have to be FDA compliant. Innovation is in the design and integration. Like the pharma industry, devices have a better chance of approval if they offer significant or unique benefits over existing solutions.

Medical device manufacturers shorten the development cycle by outsourcing whatever they can, including prototyping, materials, electronics; virtually everything except for core IP. For example, a company like Medtronic will not outsource the development of the algorithm that their pacemaker uses to monitor heart rhythm, but rather will set up a separate infrastructure for a one-time project that needs specialized expertise, or will contract with a CRO or a company like DuPont to develop the biocompatible coating of a device. Medtronic might also outsource the prototyping or reliability testing according to given specs or enter a joint development project.

As regulatory approval and reimbursement by insurers is paramount, medical device companies tend to work backwards from what is needed for approval through stages of development. The pharma industry, however, doesn’t have that option. Their level of uncertainty is even higher. For pharma, strategic outsourcing of early discovery work is the key to healthier pipelines.



Microscale, parallel experimentation combined with advanced informatics can deliver directional information in near real time so that scientists can visualize and analyze results immediately, determine which compounds hold promise, and avoid dead ends.

Back to pharma
Lesson: fail compounds early and often
In the pharma industry timing is everything. The later failures occur in the development process, the more costly they are. Half of compounds in development fail phase 3 trials. In an average drug development cycle, according to Tufts, moving 5 percent of clinical failures from phase 3 to phase 1 cuts cost by $15 to $20 million.

Chorus, an experimental R&D venture established by Eli Lilly and Versant in 2001, is an interesting direction in strategy, operating on the assumption that only 10 percent of drug candidates make it to proof of concept. With the goal of managing early stage risk by shortening the time to decision points, Chorus attempts to fail drug candidates earlier in development, while agnostically generating more viable candidates. This autonomous group of a few dozen experts focuses on developing IP and outsources all experimentation possible. At this point, Chorus scientists assert that they can slice 12 to 18 months off the time estimated for certain drugs to reach proof of concept. But the jury is still out. Removing risk in the pipeline is correlated — but not directly linked to the endpoint of getting more candidates approved.

Outsourcing to increase productivity
Reuters Business Insights estimated that less than 15 percent of drug preclinical operations are outsourced. And most labs still operate manually and serially with a team of scientists using trial and error processes. Most CROs use the same manual, serial, trial and error approach, they just employ cheaper labor. The logical step forward in pharmaceutical outsourcing for preclinical R&D is to partner with contract research organizations that use microscale, parallel experimentation technology that combines automation with advanced informatics. The benefits and advantages of this approach, compared to traditional preclinical R&D techniques, are threefold. 1) Automated parallel experimentation speeds preclinicalresearch by integrating sample preparation, processing, and analysis which enables a single scientist to deliver hundreds of experimental results in days, rather than weeks or months. 2) Advanced informatics enables predicting outcomes earlier and gives directional analysis to accelerate preclinical development. 3) And microscale experimentation uses much less (typically milligrams versus grams) expensive, early-development material, allowing more experiments earlier and at less cost.

Outsourcing using automation enables shortening the path to viable IP, because it is possible to explore different scenarios, running hundreds or even thousands of experiments in parallel, while receiving economies of scale on a per experiment basis. Automation can streamline a diverse array of workflow tasks, including solubility profiling, polymorph and salt selection, liquid formulations, forced degradation, excipient compatibility, biocatalysis, and process optimization.
New automation systems can improve experiment throughput 10 to 100-fold while eliminating costly, labor-intensive and rote work. Microscale, parallel experimentation technologies now make it possible to run up to 25,000 experiments a year, compared to a human scientist who can conduct about 500 experiments a year.
A system should also accommodate several different analysis methods as well as link to third party hardware. This enables the broadening of experiments without increasing cycle time. An automated system can improve safety as well, as it can precisely and accurately dispense powders and solids while protecting workers from exposure to biological and toxic chemical hazards.





Advanced informatics enable 1) fast and accurate statistical design of parallel experiments (top) and 2) comprehensive data-set analysis for directional information (bottom) in near real time.

t is not only what you know but how fast you know it
A critical business performance lever is the ability to acquire and manipulate information from data sets. Informatics can improve data visualization and analysis as large sets of comprehensive data delivered in days, not weeks, can provide directional information and shorten the discovery path. Receiving real time directional information using multivariate data and integrating analysis into operations enables assessing which compounds hold promise, and which are dead ends. Flexibility in prioritizing experiments enables pursuing promising directions that may shift in importance. Moreover, it is easier to work with, analyze and share digital rather than handwritten data. A contract research organization should collaborate to set standard protocols for investigating and transforming data, to incorporate data neutral formats into existing software systems, and standardize ontologies for characterizing data.
Judging by current economic trends it is almost certain companies will be required to do more with less. It is a critical time for pharma, but outsourcing using new technologies offers the opportunity to reinvent the R&D process to make it more productive. Just as in the semiconductor and medical device industry, the next wave of outsourcing should be focused on freeing up internal resources to generate innovation. Microscale, parallel experimentation and sophisticated informatics enable better control over IP. Using technology to replace rote tasks and advanced bio informatics to analyze data protects core technology development by keeping closer control and protecting IP confidentiality. At the end of the day, drug discovery remains a numbers game. But outsourcing to generate more viable preclinical compounds and receiving more directional information about them early on can shorten the path to a fuller, more promising pipeline.

Rules of engagement
Outsourcing for strategic advantage requires rigorous planning and partnership based on close communication and cooperation. To achieve the best results with a CRO:

* Be specific about goals, timelines, and responsibilities
* Audit the CRO for qualifications, strengths, data and time management, and stability.
* Require case study references that demonstrate sustainable value through increased productivity and reduced costs.
* Look for experimental results that are delivered in near real-time as actionable, directional information so you can predict outcomes earlier and accelerate preclinical development.
* Set up framework for communication, as outsourcing adds a layer of steps. Assign a point person or team to work with the CRO. Have an expert retained in-house to supervise progress.
* Set up a legal framework for IP ownership and non disclosure. Establish competitive nature of material up front; it is essential to sign contracts that explicitly protect IP.
* While core IP is held closely, as a major worry with outsourcing is the chain of custody of sample data and results, there are ways to outsource sections out of context.

References

1. [http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/11/25/the-clock-is-ticking-on-another-big-pharma-merger/trackback/]. Note: the direct source is a report by Barbara Ryan, analyst at Deutsche Bank, released November 2008.
2. [(http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_45/b4107044232450.htm)].
3. [http://www.fiercebiotech.com/special-reports/2007-fda-approvals]
4. [http://www.devicelink.com/mx/archive/08/05/news1.html]


Footnote:
Originally published in Drug Discovery World, Winter 2008/9 Volume 10 Issue 1 and reproduced with their kind permission. All rights remain with RJ Communications & Media Ltd’

The Author
Richard Boehner is the President of Symyx Technologies High Productivity Research business unit. He joined Symyx in 2007 to lead the application of its microscale, parallel experimentation and advanced informatics technology for large and small molecule contract research services. Previously he served in corporate development and strategic planning roles at Sun Chemical Corporation, MacDermid Incorporated, Great Lakes Chemical and Allied Signal. Mr. Boehner has a B.S. and an M.B.A. from Colorado State University.

continue reading »»

American Chemical Society

American Chemical Society describes important publication changes to its journals

WASHINGTON, July 17, 2009 — With its customers expressing strong preferences for accessing research advances online, rather than in print, the American Chemical Society (ACS) Publications Division is pursuing a series of product, platform and pricing initiatives in 2009-2010 designed to meet the information demands of scientific readers and the research libraries that support them. ACS publishes 36 highly regarded peer-reviewed journals and a weekly news and industry magazine, Chemical & Engineering News, in print and digital formats. In 2009, ACS Publications' Web platform was awarded Best eProduct, Website or Platform of 2008 by the Professional and Scholarly Publishing Division of the Association of American Publishers.

Key among the changes is an immediate shift from traditional size print to a novel "rotated and condensed" print format that will be used for most of the Society's publications. Three ACS titles — the flagship Journal of the American Chemical Society (the most cited journal in chemistry), Chemical Reviews (the highest impact factor journal in chemistry) and Accounts of Chemical Research — will remain in their traditional format. The weekly magazine Chemical & Engineering News, which is subscribed to by the Society's base of 154,000 members, will also remain in its traditional format. In addition, effective in 2010, ACS will end two discount programs, one for libraries and one for its members, applicable solely to its print-format journals. The Society will maintain its practice of offering deeply discounted electronic subscriptions as a benefit to it members. It has also announced a time-limited, print-to-digital upgrade program in 2009 to further assist customers in controlling costs, ending subscription duplication, and transitioning to ACS' award-winning Web platform.

Susan King, Ph.D., Senior Vice President, Journals Publishing Group, notes that most subscribers and readers now prefer to access ACS journals online. Nonetheless, the cost reductions associated with the move to a new two-up, rotated and condensed print format will enable the Society to extend the viability of the printed format to institutional customers whose users continue to demand that medium, she says. In order to share the cost-saving benefits of the new format with library customers, ACS has announced plans to keep prices flat on its print journals for 2010. What the Society elects to do thereafter will depend on market conditions and customer demand during the next 12-18 months, King reports.

Brandon Nordin, ACS Publications' Vice President of Sales, Marketing, and Web Innovation, cited two interconnected trends driving the changes. One is the decade-long shift in preference to the Internet for time-sensitive creation and delivery of journal content. The other is the economic downturn that has particularly squeezed budgets of institutional libraries since 2008. "Earlier this year we were asked by consortia representing our largest customers worldwide to think creatively to help libraries retain access to highly valued content essential to research in the face of a flat-to-down funding environment," Nordin says. "Reducing print publishing costs allows us to focus resources on the ACS Web Editions preferred by the majority of our customers and readers," he notes. To further illustrate the point, Nordin points out that while total print subscriptions typically number in the hundreds per journal title, ACS services more than 70 million article requests a year online.

In briefing customers about the format change, ACS also announced a Print-to-Digital upgrade program for its institutional library customers. This program credits customers who cancel their discounted print subscriptions before Sept. 30, 2009, with a rebate equivalent to 30 percent of their 2009 print purchases to be applied to their 2010 ACS Web Editions renewals. Several of ACS' largest customers have already taken advantage of this program. "Most institutions find their users prefer the easily searched, 24/7-accessible, and quickly accessed Web editions of journals. Librarians are further attracted to the more attractive pricing and low cost per use of ACS Web Editions. ACS will continue to monitor both readers' views and library customers' purchase patterns to determine its future product media and formats," Nordin explained. "But for today, and throughout 2010, online access and print subscriptions both remain options for ACS customers to select based on their own preferences," he emphasized. "Unfortunately this move has been misinterpreted in several blogs — and subsequently picked up in mainstream media outlets — and then erroneously reported as a complete end to ACS print-based journal distribution. Such assertions are incorrect."

Reader reaction to the print format change has been muted thus far, King says. Most admit they seldom, if ever, use the print versions beyond scanning the table of contents. Indeed, for every comment received expressing concern about the reduced size and legibility of the condensed format, others suggest ACS is not moving to an all Web-and-mobile digital publishing mode quickly enough, she notes.

ACS Publications issued the following summary clarifications regarding its recently announced actions:

a. All ACS journals will continue to be available in print, with most in the new condensed print format. Three ACS journals, the Journal of the American Chemical Society, Chemical Reviews and Accounts of Chemical Research, will remain unchanged throughout 2010, as will Chemical & Engineering News.

b. Condensed printing rotates pages into 'landscape' mode and displays two pages per physical printed page. This maintains approximately 70 percent of each standard page image. Researchers frequently elect a similar option when printing digital PDF documents in Adobe's popular Adobe Reader, to save themselves both printer costs and paper, and to enhance document portability. For more on ACS condensed print, click here.

c. In evaluating its actions, ACS Publications was guided by its customers and readers. Over the last decade and half, since ACS introduced its first online journals, users and subscriptions have been migrating to a Web-delivered experience. This trend has accelerated in the last three years, fundamentally changing the economics of printing and distribution for the Society's journals.

d. Beginning in 2010, ACS will no longer extend the special sales program that offered institutions a deeply discounted print rate as an adjunct to their Web editions purchases. This program, originally introduced to help buffer libraries from the costs of maintaining duplicate subscriptions in print and digital format, represented less than 10 percent of ACS library subscriptions in 2009, and was no longer cost-effective to maintain.

e. Similarly, given market data showing the majority of its active member users preferred to access scientific research via the Web, ACS is ending its discount on print editions that had been maintained as a special benefit for ACS members. The Society will continue its popular practice of offering members discounted subscription access to Web editions of journals on a title-by-title basis for personal, non-commercial use.

continue reading »»

Nanotechnology for Next Generation Solar Cells

American Chemical Society

This editorial marks the introduction of a new feature for The Journal of Physical Chemistry: JPC Virtual Issues. Each Virtual Issue will consist of a selection of 40 or fewer articles, including Reviews and Feature Articles, published in JPC over the past two years that report important advances in different subdisciplines of physical chemistry and will be accessible through the JPC A/B/C home pages. For reference, the introduction describing each issue, complete with a list of highlighted articles, will be published as editorials in the journal. It is our hope that readers of JPC will find these topical collections of articles to be a valuable resource in learning about the state of the art in a subdiscipline of physical chemistry.

This inaugural JPC Virtual Issue focuses on the important area of solar cell research. The research papers selected from various laboratories around the world provide valuable fundamental information as well as insights into the mechanisms of energy conversion processes, kinetic and thermodynamic limitations, and methodologies to improve energy conversion efficiency.

The emergence of new strategies in the design of energy conversion and storage systems during the past couple of years has resulted in many fascinating and important research developments. Of particular interest are efforts to design new nanostructured architectures and molecular assemblies for the next generation of solar cells. Three different types of solar cells based on the advances in nanotechnology have emerged: (i) dye sensitized solar cells (DSSC), (ii) hybrid organic solar cells, and (iii) quantum dot solar cells. The capture and conversion of light energy in these solar cells is facilitated by modifying a nanostructured semiconductor interface with a dye, conjugate polymer, or semiconductor nanocrystals, respectively. Improving the efficiency of photoinduced charge separation and transport of charge carriers across these nanoassemblies remains a challenge.

The basic concepts involved in the development of nanoassemblies for light energy harvesting applications are featured in ref 1. The reviews of Peter, Hodes, and Kamat(2-4) on the dye-sensitized nanocrystalline solar cells (DSSC) and quantum dot solar cells highlight recent progress including the processes that dictate the photoconversion efficiency. The thermodynamic and kinetic criteria for successful cell design are outlined in these articles. Imahori has presented strategies for utilizing photoinduced charge separation in donor−acceptor molecules to fabricate nanostructured semiconductor based solar cells.(5)

The photosensitization of nanostructured TiO2 films with visible light absorbing dyes has led to the development of DSSC with efficiencies greater than 10%. Although there have been significant successes, certain challenges remain in DSSC research. The focus of recent research has been on maximizing photoconversion efficiency by molecular design, developing new nanostructure architectures, and establishing the fundamental processes in light harvesting assemblies.(6-16) The use of ionic liquids as a replacement for common solvents has shown promise in the development of solid state DSSC.(17-19)

The morphology and optoelectronic properties of polythiophene- and polyphenylenevinylene-based conjugated polymers and oligomers continue to be evaluated for aiding the development of organic hybrid solar cells.(20-23) Insight into the origin of disorder in the system, the degree of carrier localization, and the role of chain interactions has been attempted by classical molecular dynamics simulations(24) and by monitoring the ultrafast decay component in the polarization anisotropy.(25) Time-resolved microwave conductivity experiments have shown that the phase separation of the polymer and PCBM ([6,6]-phenyl C-61-butyric acid methyl ester) achieved through controlled annealing retards the recombination of charge carriers and thus facilitates charge collection in a solar cell.(26) Conductive atomic force microscopy (c-AFM) has also been recently employed to map the electronic properties of conducting polymers.(27) New strategies are required to improve the performance of these cells by extending the absorption into the red and overcoming the limitations induced by photodegradation.

Research emphasis in the area of quantum dot solar cells has been aimed at utilizing the unique optical and electronic properties of semiconductor nanocrystals for capture and conversion of light energy.(28-32) The size-dependent properties of CdSe, CdS, and other semiconductor nanocrystals make them suitable for tuning the photoresponse of solar cells. However, the efficiencies of quantum dot sensitized solar cells have remained rather low (1−2%) compared to DSSC and organic hybrid cells. The semiconductor/electrolyte interface plays a crucial role in dictating hole transfer and anodic corrosion of the semiconductor. More concerted efforts are needed to design functionalized or hybrid nanostructures in order to improve the efficiency of these solar cells and minimize the photocorrosion processes.(33, 34)

As the quest for energy solutions continues, we can expect many new exciting discoveries to aid in the capture and conversion of light energy economically and efficiently. Needless to say physical chemistry will continue to play an essential role in providing a fundamental understanding of light induced processes and charge transfer events.

References
1. Kamat, P. V.Meeting the clean energy demand: Nanostructure architectures for solar energy conversion J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 2834– 2860http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp066952u[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
2. Peter, L. M.Characterization and modeling of dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 6601– 6612http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp069058b[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
3. Hodes, G.Comparison of Dye- and Semiconductor-Sensitized Porous Nanocrystalline Liquid Junction Solar Cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 17778– 17787http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp803310s[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
4. Kamat, P. V.Quantum Dot Solar Cells. Semiconductor Nanocrystals as Light Harvesters J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 18737– 18753http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp806791s[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
5. Imahori, H.; Umeyama, T.Donor-Acceptor Nanoarchitecture on Semiconducting Electrodes for Solar Energy Conversion J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 9029– 9039http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp9007448[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
6. Liang, M.; Xu, W.; Cai, F. S.; Chen, P. Q.; Peng, B.; Chen, J.; Li, Z. M.New triphenylamine-based organic dyes for efficient dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 4465– 4472http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp067930a[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
7. Campbell, W. M.; Jolley, K. W.; Wagner, P.; Wagner, K.; Walsh, P. J.; Gordon, K. C.; Schmidt-Mende, L.; Nazeeruddin, M. K.; Wang, Q.; Gratzel, M.; Officer, D. L.Highly efficient porphyrin sensitizers for dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 11760– 11762http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp0750598[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
8. Wang, Z. S.; Cui, Y.; Dan-Oh, Y.; Kasada, C.; Shinpo, A.; Hara, K.Thiophene-functionalized coumarin dye for efficient dye-sensitized solar cells: Electron lifetime improved by coadsorption of deoxycholic acid J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 7224– 7230http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp067872t[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
9. Xu, W.; Peng, B.; Chen, J.; Liang, M.; Cai, F.New triphenylamine-based dyes for dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 874– 880http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp076992d[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
10. Fabregat-Santiago, F.; Bisquert, J.; Palomares, E.; Otero, L.; Kuang, D. B.; Zakeeruddin, S. M.; Gratzel, M.Correlation between photovoltaic performance and impedance spectroscopy of dye-sensitized solar cells based on ionic liquids J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 6550– 6560http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp066178a[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
11. Qin, P.; Yang, X. C.; Chen, R. K.; Sun, L. C.; Marinado, T.; Edvinsson, T.; Boschloo, G.; Hagfeldt, A.Influence of pi-conjugation units in organic dyes for dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 1853– 1860http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp065550j[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
12. Eu, S.; Hayashi, S.; Urneyama, T.; Matano, Y.; Araki, Y.; Imahori, H.Quinoxaline-fused porphyrins for dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 4396– 4405http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp710400p[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
13. Morandeira, A.; Fortage, J.; Edvinsson, T.; Le Pleux, L.; Blart, E.; Boschloo, G.; Hagfeldt, A.; Hanmiarstrom, L.; Dobel, F.Improved photon-to-current conversion efficiency with a nanoporous p-type NiO electrode by the use of a sensitizer-acceptor dyad J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 1721– 1728http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp077446n[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
14. Cao, Y. M.; Bai, Y.; Yu, Q. J.; Cheng, Y. M.; Liu, S.; Shi, D.; Gao, F. F.; Wang, P.Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells with a High Absorptivity Ruthenium Sensitizer Featuring a 2-(Hexylthio)thiophene Conjugated Bipyridine J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 6290– 6297http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp9006872[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
15. Colodrero, S.; Mihi, A.; Anta, J. A.; Ocana, M.; Miguez, H.Experimental Demonstration of the Mechanism of Light Harvesting Enhancement in Photonic-Crystal-Based Dye-Sensitized Solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 1150– 1154http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp809789s[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
16. Barnes, P. R. F.; Anderson, A. Y.; Koops, S. E.; Durrant, J. R.; O’Regan, B. C.Electron Injection Efficiency and Diffusion Length in Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells Derived from Incident Photon Conversion Efficiency Measurements J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 1126– 1136http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp809046j[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
17. Yamanaka, N.; Kawano, R.; Kubo, W.; Masaki, N.; Kitamura, T.; Wada, Y.; Watanabe, M.; Yanagida, S.Dye-sensitized TiO2 solar cells using imidazolium-type ionic liquid crystal systems as effective electrolytes J. Phys. Chem. B 2007, 111, 4763– 4769http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp0671446[ACS Full Text ], [PubMed], [ChemPort]
18. Kang, S. H.; Kim, J. Y.; Kim, Y.; Kim, H. S.; Sung, Y. E.Surface modification of stretched TiO2 nanotubes for solid-state dye-sensitized solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 9614– 9623http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp071504n[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
19. Shi, D.; Cao, Y. M.; Pootrakulchote, N.; Yi, Z. H.; Xu, M. F.; Zakeeruddin, S. M.; Graetzel, M.; Wang, P.New Organic Sensitizer for Stable Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells with Solvent-Free Ionic Liquid Electrolytes J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 17478– 17485http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp807191w[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
20. Ramakrishna, G.; Bhaskar, A.; Bauerle, P.; Goodson, T.Oligothiophene dendrimers as new building blocks for optical applications J. Phys. Chem. A 2008, 112, 2018– 2026http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp076048h[ACS Full Text ], [PubMed], [ChemPort]
21. Greene, L. E.; Law, M.; Yuhas, B. D.; Yang, P. D.ZnO-TiO2 core-shell nanorod/P3HT solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 18451– 18456http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp077593l[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
22. Tsai, M. S.; Hsu, Y. C.; Lin, J. T.; Chen, H. C.; Hsu, C. P.Organic dyes containing 1H-phenanthro[9,10-d]imidazole conjugation for solar cells J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 18785– 18793http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp075653h[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
23. Mikroyannidis, J. A.; Stylianakis, M. M.; Sharma, G. D.; Bahraju, P.; Roy, M. S.A Novel Alternating Phenylenevinylene Copolymer with Perylene Bisimide Units: Synthesis, Photophysical, Electrochemical, and Photovoltaic Properties J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 7904– 7912http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp901651z[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
24. Vukmirovic, N.; Wang, L.-W.Electronic structure of disordered conjugated polymers: Polythiophenes J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 409– 415http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1021/jp808360y[ChemPort]
25. Dykstra, T. E.; Hennebicq, E.; Beljonne, D.; Gierschner, J.; Claudio, G.; Bittner, E. R.; Knoester, J.; Scholes, G. D.Conformational Disorder and Ultrafast Exciton Relaxation in PPV-family Conjugated Polymers J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 656– 667http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp807249b[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
26. Grzegorczyk, W. J.; Savenije, T. J.; Heeney, M.; Tierney, S.; McCulloch, I.; van Bavel, S.; Siebbeles, L. D. A.Relationship between Film Morphology, Optical, and Conductive Properties of Poly(thienothiophene): [6,6]-Phenyl C-61-Butyric Acid Methyl Ester Bulk Heterojunctions J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 15973– 15979http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp8044548[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
27. Pingree, L. S. C.; MacLeod, B. A.; Ginger, D. S.The changing face of PEDOT:PSS films: Substrate, bias, and processing effects on vertical charge transport J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 7922– 7927http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1021/jp711838h[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
28. Mora-Sero, I.; Bisquert, J.; Dittrich, T.; Belaidi, A.; Susha, A. S.; Rogach, A. L.Photosensitization of TiO2 layers with CdSe quantum dots: Correlation between light absorption and photoinjection J. Phys. Chem. C 2007, 111, 14889– 14892http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp074907w[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
29. Lee, H. J.; Yum, J. H.; Leventis, H. C.; Zakeeruddin, S. M.; Haque, S. A.; Chen, P.; Seok, S. I.; Grazel, M.; Nazeeruddin, M. K.CdSe quantum dot-sensitized solar cells exceeding efficiency 1% at full-sun intensity J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 11600– 11608http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp802572b[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
30. Tachibana, Y.; Umekita, K.; Otsuka, Y.; Kuwabata, S.Charge Recombination Kinetics at an in Situ Chemical Bath-Deposited CdS/Nanocrystalline TiO2 Interface J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 6852– 6858http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp809042z[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
31. Shalom, M.; Dor, S.; Ruhle, S.; Grinis, L.; Zaban, A.Core/CdS Quantum Dot/Shell Mesoporous Solar Cells with Improved Stability and Efficiency Using an Amorphous TiO2 Coating J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 3895– 3898http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp8108682[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
32. Guijarro, N.; Lana-Villarreal, T.; Mora-Sero, I.; Bisquert, J.; Gomez, R.CdSe Quantum Dot-Sensitized TiO2 Electrodes: Effect of Quantum Dot Coverage and Mode of Attachment J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 4208– 4214http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1021/jp808091d[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
33. Cui, S.-C.; Tachikawa, T.; Fujitsuka, M.; Majima, T.Interfacial Electron Transfer Dynamics in a Single CdTe Quantum Dot-Pyromellitimide Conjugate J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 19625– 19634http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp807591d[ACS Full Text ], [ChemPort]
34. Tvrdy, K.; Kamat, P. V.Substrate Driven Photochemistry of CdSe Quantum Dot Films: Charge Injection and Irreversible Transformations on Oxide Surfaces J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 3765– 3772http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1021/jp808562x[ACS Full Text ], [PubMed], [ChemPort].

continue reading »»

Congress Poised.

Congress Poised to Defer Permanent Chemical Plant Security Legislation Until 2010
As Congress considers the latest proposal to establish a permanent regulatory framework on chemical plant security (see client alert), recent developments indicate that this debate will likely last into 2010 while the existing, temporary program continues under a one-year extension.

The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (“CFATS”) program of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) began under temporary authority inserted into a DHS appropriations bill in 2006. That authority, which is set to expire on October 4, 2009, appears likely to be extended in similar fashion, as both the House and Senate have included provisions to prolong CFATS authority for one year in their current appropriations bills. The extension seems likely to pass, as it has significant support in both houses of Congress and the Obama Administration, and would solve the short-term problem of the looming deadline of October 4.

Chemical plant security has been on the legislative agenda since soon after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, but disagreement on key issues--particularly proposals to require that facilities adopt “inherently safer technology” (“IST”)--has thus far prevented the passage of permanent legislation. IST refers to technical or methodological changes that reduce a plant’s potential for a hazardous chemical release, in contrast to security measures that may leave existing processes as they are, but harden the plant’s defenses against sabotage.

In 2006, after four years of gridlock on chemical plant security, legislators compromised on a temporary solution, a short provision requiring DHS to develop CFATS, a program that requires plants that use certain hazardous chemicals above threshold quantities to conduct security vulnerability assessments and respond with site security plans. Section 550 of the 2007 DHS appropriations act, included a three-year sunset clause under which the authority expires in October 2009.[2] While the IST debate continued in a diminished form as DHS began implementing CFATS, the issue of chemical plant security recently began to regain its former urgency with the approach of this deadline. (For more background information on the IST debate, see here

The leading current proposal for a permanent CFATS program authority, H.R. 2868, would retain the core components of the current program but would add, among other things, a strong IST requirement and a citizen suit provision, a form of enforcement that critics argue can be appropriate in environmental legislation, but unworkable in a security program.[4] The House Homeland Security Committee approved H.R. 2868 on June 23, but another House committee with jurisdiction, Energy and Commerce, has not yet held its hearings on the bill.[5] (A client alert on this bill can be found at here. The Senate as yet lacks a concrete proposal to debate and remains “some weeks away” from the introduction of an equivalent bill.[7] According to a lawyer for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, “it is unrealistic to expect, and it is not likely that we will have a permanent reauthorization bill in place by the end of September.”[8]

Both houses appear prepared to extend the status quo for another year, which would allow the debate on H.R. 2868 and any other proposals to continue for most of 2010, if necessary. The House has already passed a DHS appropriations bill, H.R. 2892, that includes a one-year extension of the CFATS authority.[9] Meanwhile, the Senate’s own DHS appropriations bill, S. 1298, also contains the extension, although this bill has thus far been approved only by the Appropriations Committee.[10] The Obama Administration actively supports the extension, having included a request in its proposed 2010 budget,[11] as well as asking for the extension in recent hearings.[12] Thus, the political forces appear to be aligned to maintain CFATS in its current form for another year while Congress continues its work toward a definitive statute that ultimately resolves the long-standing dispute over IST.

For more information, please contact Mark Duvall at here.

As Congress considers the latest proposal to establish a permanent regulatory framework on chemical plant security (see client alert ) recent developments indicate that this debate will likely last into 2010 while the existing, temporary program continues under a one-year extension.

The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (“CFATS”) program of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) began under temporary authority inserted into a DHS appropriations bill in 2006. That authority, which is set to expire on October 4, 2009, appears likely to be extended in similar fashion, as both the House and Senate have included provisions to prolong CFATS authority for one year in their current appropriations bills. The extension seems likely to pass, as it has significant support in both houses of Congress and the Obama Administration, and would solve the short-term problem of the looming deadline of October 4.

Chemical plant security has been on the legislative agenda since soon after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, but disagreement on key issues--particularly proposals to require that facilities adopt “inherently safer technology” (“IST”)--has thus far prevented the passage of permanent legislation. IST refers to technical or methodological changes that reduce a plant’s potential for a hazardous chemical release, in contrast to security measures that may leave existing processes as they are, but harden the plant’s defenses against sabotage.

In 2006, after four years of gridlock on chemical plant security, legislators compromised on a temporary solution, a short provision requiring DHS to develop CFATS, a program that requires plants that use certain hazardous chemicals above threshold quantities to conduct security vulnerability assessments and respond with site security plans. Section 550 of the 2007 DHS appropriations act, included a three-year sunset clause under which the authority expires in October 2009.[2] While the IST debate continued in a diminished form as DHS began implementing CFATS, the issue of chemical plant security recently began to regain its former urgency with the approach of this deadline. (For more background information on the IST debate, see here.

The leading current proposal for a permanent CFATS program authority, H.R. 2868, would retain the core components of the current program but would add, among other things, a strong IST requirement and a citizen suit provision, a form of enforcement that critics argue can be appropriate in environmental legislation, but unworkable in a security program.[4] The House Homeland Security Committee approved H.R. 2868 on June 23, but another House committee with jurisdiction, Energy and Commerce, has not yet held its hearings on the bill.[5] (A client alert on this bill can be found at here. The Senate as yet lacks a concrete proposal to debate and remains “some weeks away” from the introduction of an equivalent bill.[7] According to a lawyer for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, “it is unrealistic to expect, and it is not likely that we will have a permanent reauthorization bill in place by the end of September.”[8]

Both houses appear prepared to extend the status quo for another year, which would allow the debate on H.R. 2868 and any other proposals to continue for most of 2010, if necessary. The House has already passed a DHS appropriations bill, H.R. 2892, that includes a one-year extension of the CFATS authority.[9] Meanwhile, the Senate’s own DHS appropriations bill, S. 1298, also contains the extension, although this bill has thus far been approved only by the Appropriations Committee.[10] The Obama Administration actively supports the extension, having included a request in its proposed 2010 budget,[11] as well as asking for the extension in recent hearings.[12] Thus, the political forces appear to be aligned to maintain CFATS in its current form for another year while Congress continues its work toward a definitive statute that ultimately resolves the long-standing dispute over IST.

continue reading »»

Chemical & Engineering News

safe chemical
Congress should require EPA to declare certain uses of commercial chemicals as safe, says the American Chemistry Council, a major chemical industry group.

That new mandate for EPA, according to ACC, should come as part of a congressional revision of the federal chemical control law, the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Currently, that law only authorizes the agency to examine whether a chemical could harm people or the environment.

This call from ACC is part of how the trade group wants to see TSCA modernized. The industry organization released its principles for reforming the law on Aug. 4.

After years of opposing reform of the statute, ACC earlier this year endorsed revision of TSCA. The trade group has joined a growing chorus of environmental, health, environmental justice, and labor groups calling for an update of TSCA. Congress has shown an interest in the issue this year, and the Obama Administration is expected to offer its position on a revised TSCA in coming weeks (C&EN, March 9, page 24).

A revised TSCA requiring EPA to deem that specific uses of a substance are safe could relieve a major headache of the chemical industry – a growing spate of state and local laws banning individual compounds. For instance, several states have banned certain brominated flame retardants. Backing ACC's position are the Consumer Specialty Products Association and the Soap & Detergent Association.

The industry groups aren't the only ones with ideas for TSCA reform. Also on Aug. 4, a coalition of health and environmental groups calledSafer Chemicals, Healthy Families released their ideas for a rewrite of that law. Representatives of the coalition and the chemical industry say many of their positions are strikingly similar.

Unlike ACC, however, the coalition is seeking federal support for greener chemistry research as well as a national policy favoring more benign products over those posing potential health hazards.

continue reading »»

Chemical Neuroscience.

The New Peer-Reviewed Journal on the Molecular Basis of Neuronal Function.
In January 2010, the American Chemical Society will launch a new peer-reviewed research journal,ACS Chemical Neuroscience, dedicated to understanding the molecular basis of neurological function in all organisms and model systems

will publish high-quality research articles and reviews that showcase chemical, quantitative biological, biophysical and bioengineering approaches to the understanding of the nervous system and to the development of new treatments for neurological disorders.

Scientists—chemists, biologists, biochemists, molecular psychologists, biophysicists, bioengineers and physicians using multiple pproaches to study the nervous systems of organisms ranging from invertebrates to humans across various stages of development, maturation, and aging will be invited to submit their original work to ACS Chemical Neuroscience.

Manuscript submissions will be accepted in August. The journal will be particularly interested in receiving manuscripts that focus on aspects of chemical neurobiology and bio-neurochemistry such as the following:

# Neurotransmitters and receptors
# Neuropharmaceuticals and therapeutics
# Neural development—Plasticity, and degeneration
# Chemical, physical, and computational methods in neuroscience
# Neuronal diseases—basis, detection, and treatment
# Mechanism of aging, learning, memory and behavior
# Pain and sensory processing
# Neurotoxins
# Neuroscience-inspired bioengineering
# Development of methods in chemical neurobiology
# Neuroimaging agents and technologies
# Animal models for central nervous system diseases

Research articles reporting the identification of general principles that govern how information is processed by neuronal circuits; or using genetic model systems in conjunction with system biology, imaging, electrophysiological, and computational neuroscience (neuroinformatics) will also be welcomed.

continue reading »»

video Explosion, Aug 1973.

videos. Lodi, NJ Chemical Plant Explosion, Aug 1973

7 HURT, 2 MISSING IN CHEMICAL PLANT EXPLOSION, FIRE. NEW JERSEY FACILITY DAMAGED. CAUSE OF BLAST NOT DETERMINED; PROBE CONTINUES.

Lodi, N.J. (AP) -- Seven persons were injured and two were unaccounted for in an explosion and general alarm fire at a sprawling chemical plant here Tuesday. Five of the injured were reported in critical condition. According to police, the blast at the Washine Division plant of the Mallinkrodt Chemical Works occurred at 7:50 a.m. The fire was brought under control about four hours later, but firemen were unable to enter the building for several more hours. The explosion destroyed a section of the plant, which consisted of several connected buildings on a square-block site. According to a company spokesman, the explosion occurred in a manufacturing area at the rear of the plant, which employs more than 150 persons. Police first said 10 persons were unaccounted for, but a spokesman later said the others apparently went directly to their homes after the blast. The plant manufactures food chemicals and industrial chemicals and solvents, according to the firm's spokesman. He said the plant also has a number of storage tanks for chemicals, some of which may have blown up after the initial explosion, and others which were charred by the blaze but did not explode.

"Something blew and maybe several other tanks popped," said 1st Asst. Fire Chief Eddie Sagui of the explosion.

Police said the cause of the blast was under investigation. The plant is on Main Street, a major artery in this industrial borough of 25,000 population. Firemen, some called in from nearby communities, were still wetting down areas surrounding the fire more than six hours after the initial blast, to prevent further explosions. Flames continued to flare up at the factory through the afternoon. Windows were knocked out in a house and appliance store across the street from the plant and an abandoned factory next door. The roof of the abandoned building was set ablaze, but the fire was quickly controlled. An outer layer of bricks was knocked from a tall chimney at the chemical plant, leaving it looking like a charred relic of some war. The injured were taken to Hackensack Hospital, where a spokesman said five were in critical condition and two in fair condition.

The Cumberland News Maryland 1973-08-15

continue reading »»

Chemical Plant Fire Evacuates Thousands

(AP) Thousands of residents were evacuated and the Texas A&M University campus closed Thursday as a fire burned at a chemical plant that processes explosive ammonium nitrate.

Black smoke settled over Bryan, a city of about 80,000 people about 100 miles north of Houston, after the fire started about noon at the nearby El Dorado Chemical Co., said fire dispatcher Andy Throne. The plant blends and packages fertilizer and other chemicals, including ammonium nitrate, a chemical used to make explosives.

No explosions had been reported as of Thursday evening.

The plume of smoke extended more than 60 miles from the plant and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality officials were en route to conduct air monitoring, said spokeswoman Andrea Murrow.

St. Joseph Regional Health Center's emergency room treated four people with respiratory ailments possibly related to the fire before it began diverting people to College Station Medical Center, where spokeswoman Melissa Purl said five people were treated for smoke inhalation.

Radio warnings urged residents to avoid the smoke. Throne said the evacuation was considered mandatory but no one was being forced from their homes.

Evacuees were being taken in at A&M's air-conditioned Reed Arena, used as a shelter during hurricanes Katrina and Rita - and a middle school and high school in College Station, which is about seven miles south of Bryan. A&M's Pearce Pavilion was being reserved for pets.

Texas A&M spokesman Lane Stephenson said offices and classes were closed as a precaution, but he anticipated classes resuming Friday.

Bryan city officials said 900 people had arrived at the university by Thursday evening. City spokesman Kendall Kessel said officials hoped residents would be able to return home Thursday night.

The fire department was expected to let the fire burn itself out due to the chemicals involved.

El Dorado Chemical's Web site describes the facility as a place where customers can stock up on ammonium nitrate fertilizer "by the truckloads" 24 hours a day.

continue reading »»