Reactions

Kind words go far

I would like to say a word on behalf of the industrial chemists and chemical engineers who have technical careers and who are mostly ignored by ACS and C&EN. Most ACS awards go to academics, but few professors actually carry out their own experiments, as compared with their industrial counterparts, who frequently spend many hours in the lab. The contributions of industrial scientists get overlooked because, in part, these chemists have fewer publications than academics. However, patents and product introductions, the raison d'être of industrial scientists, may have more societal impact than papers in the Journal of the American Chemical Society.

An excellent example of my point is a recent C&EN “People” section (Sept. 5, page 72). Three academics are recognized for becoming professors. Then there are several industry people recognized for the following accomplishments: “business director,” “group president,” “group president,” “vice president,” “vice president,” “director,” “global business director,” “commercial director,” “global business director,” “sales representative,” “manager of marketing,” “chairman of the board,” “vice president,” “senior technology fellow” (at last a practicing scientist), “vice president,” “market manager,” “president,” “chief operating officer,” “vice president,” “managing director,” and “vice president.” C&EN would do well to motivate the legions of chemists and chemical engineers in industry by some form of recognition.

Larry N. Lewis
Scotia, N.Y.

Tunnel vision on hydrogen

In response to the point-counterpoint article about the possibilities of a hydrogen economy, it seems that two points are possibly overlooked in much of the rhetoric surrounding this important issue (C&EN, Aug. 22, page 30).

First, we already have an infrastructure in place for which hydrogen would seem to be nearly a “drop-in” replacement-our natural gas delivery and use system. The pipes are there, and the end-use objects are already designed to use fuel delivered as a gas.

Second, as James P. Collman has been arguing for years, methanol is a much better candidate as a replacement for gasoline than is hydrogen. It is a liquid and so can be stored at room pressure, and its calories per volume are much higher than they are for hydrogen stored at consumer-friendly pressures. So it may behoove us as a nation to consider increased research into methanol production from a variety of sources, including using wind-power-generated hydrogen to reduce carbon dioxide. Pressure-induced separation of carbon dioxide from air may be economically feasible if solar energy is used to provide the energy required to generate the pressure. An example may be a Stirling-engine-driven compressor. A by-product may be liquid nitrogen usable for superconducting magnets, which could enhance efficiency in electricity-using sectors.

The bottom line is that we may be banging our heads against the wall when we focus on how to make hydrogen work as a transportation fuel. We need to keep our minds open and think outside of the box.

Michael G. Kinnaird
Durham, N.C.

WHAT IS YOUR VISION FOR ACS?

Now through 26, please complete an online survey at chemistry.org/visionsurvey to let us know what you think. Your ideas are important, as they will shape the strategic priorities and activities of the society.