Domain: chemistry.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to chemistry.org.
Comments · 7
-
Re:not evil? how about global warming?
a single economy ticket on a transatlantic flight uses about a ton of CO2
This is Slashdot - why hasn't anyone called BS on this yet? One ton? Per passenger? The source of this carbon has to be the fuel... which means the commenter is implying a plane carries over 200 TONS OF FUEL converted directly into CO2. This is wrong. Judging from this document, a large jetliner could carry 40 short tons of fuel at the most, all of which does not produce CO2 on anything like a pound for pound basis. CO2 is most definitely emitted in non-negligible quantities - but please provide some facts. -
Re:Transparent Aluminum?
No, this would.
-
RSC and ACS
The home pages for the Royal Society of Chemistry http://www.rsc.org/ and the public face of the American Chemical Society, http://www.chemistry.org/, as well as the American Physics Society http://www.aip.org/. It's a lot of foraging, but it will get you the technical gory details. If your local library has it, Chemical and Engineering News has roundups both in the front of the magazine, and in a one-page science-technology roundup. The rest of the mag is pretty much chemical industry, but has articles on particular areas at times.
As a previous poster mentioned, Science http://www.sciencemag.org/ and Nature http://www.nature.com/ are good all in one stops.
Personally, I start every monday lunch off with browsing the table of contents of JACS, J. Phys. Chem., Organometallics, Inorganic Chemistry, and J. Org. Chem. If you're not a chemist, these will probably bore you to death, but it's where I get my science news from, other than the Tuesday NYT. -
Re:Bush Promoting Science? Come On!
Here's another one: Money Talks.
The NSF's budget has increased every year during the Bush administration. From 2001-2003, for example, the NSF granted more money to more researchers every year. Last year's budget proposed by Bush, according to the ACS included similar increases:
The FY05 administration request for NSF is $5.7 billion, a 3-percent increase or $167 million over the FY04 budget.....a 4.7-percent increase for the NSF Research & Related Activities account. .....The biggest increase in NSF's FY05 budget goes to its Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction account, which receives a 37.6-percent increase, bringing its funding level to $213.2 million in 2004.
The FY05 NSF increases would bring the average annual research grant award size to approximately $142,000, up $3,000 over FY04. Average annual grant duration would continue to be 3 years.
Oh yeah, and the NIH budget doubled[pdf] from 1999 to 2003. For several of those years, a man named George W. Bush was president. -
Re:Bush Promoting Science? Come On!
Here's another one: Money Talks.
The NSF's budget has increased every year during the Bush administration. From 2001-2003, for example, the NSF granted more money to more researchers every year. Last year's budget proposed by Bush, according to the ACS included similar increases:
The FY05 administration request for NSF is $5.7 billion, a 3-percent increase or $167 million over the FY04 budget.....a 4.7-percent increase for the NSF Research & Related Activities account. .....The biggest increase in NSF's FY05 budget goes to its Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction account, which receives a 37.6-percent increase, bringing its funding level to $213.2 million in 2004.
The FY05 NSF increases would bring the average annual research grant award size to approximately $142,000, up $3,000 over FY04. Average annual grant duration would continue to be 3 years.
Oh yeah, and the NIH budget doubled[pdf] from 1999 to 2003. For several of those years, a man named George W. Bush was president. -
Re:I already saw it on CNN
Hey, if it can happen to a 767....
-
Re:did it ever actually work?It wasn't a matter of oxygen being absorbed by concrete, it was a matter of oxygen being consumed by microbes, which gave off carbon dioxide. The researchers couldn't find excess CO2, so they didn't think that the microbes were the culprits behind the missing oxygen. It turned out that the concrete was absorbing the extra CO2 and thus hiding the evidence pointing to the microbes as the true cause of the missing oxygen.
"microbes were using oxygen to metabolize the excess organic matter that had been added to the agricultural, savanna, and rain forest soils to encourage plant growth."
This info comes from the following link that was included at the end of the Wikipedia article:
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/acsdispla
y .html?DOC=vc2%2F2my%2Fmy2_biosphere.html