Michael Rosenthal

(8/2020) As any of us who has spent time in a major city knows, air pollution from automobiles can be a serious problem. I grew up in Youngstown, Ohio, where the major air pollution issue was steel mill exhaust. But my college days in Cleveland and later trips to Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles made me aware of automobile exhaust air pollution. A breakthrough invention, which has been credited with preventing billions of tons of hydrocarbons from entering the atmosphere, is the catalytic converter. This device has become standard equipment on nearly every car, motorcycle, and truck that burns gasoline for propulsion.

The inventors of this device were John J. Mooney, who passed away recently at the age of 90, and Carl D. Keith, both chemical engineers. (my high school teachers suggested I study chemical engineering instead of chemistry – maybe they had something there!). This invention has prevented billions of tons of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides from entering the environment.

A report of the Environmental Protection Agency in the early 2000s suggested that this invention contributed to saving 100,000 lives! It also improved gasoline mileage in vehicles in which it was installed. Another point that Mr. Mooney promoted was his belief that the gasoline industry should cease adding lead to gasoline. As we have written before, lead is a very dangerous pollutant, and should not be released into the environment. Due to Mr. Mooney’s efforts under The Clean Air Act of 1970, which mandated reduced auto emissions, the Engelhard Corporation, for whom Mr. Mooney worked, produced the first production of catalytic converters in 1973.

The first version of this device appeared on 1975 automobiles, and a year later, a greatly improved three-way catalyst was developed. This version of the catalyst neutralized hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxide as well, the latter of which was not treated by the original version of the catalyst. This process changed the auto industry forever!

By the year 2001, it was estimated that 56 million tons of hydrocarbons, 118 million tons of nitrogen oxides, and 464 billion tons of carbon dioxide were prevented from entering the atmosphere due to the catalytic converter. How’s that for a scientific contribution to society! They did receive the recognition they earned and deserved for this invention as President George W. Bush awarded them The National Medal of Technology and Innovation in 2002.

The other major pollutant in gasoline was lead, about which we have previously written. This was recognized by Mr. Mooney who said "Lead affects the brain, particularly of children, and is still one of our major environmental health issues in the U.S. and globally." The Clean Air Act completely banned the use of lead in on-road vehicles on January 1, 1996. I remember the gasoline pumps having a plate on them with the warning about the danger of the lead content as I was growing up. I started driving and thus buying gasoline in the mid nineteen fifties. I just gave away my age.

I can’t resist telling at least a little bit about the chemistry of the catalytic converter process. The converters react oxygen (there’s plenty of that for free in the air) with carbon monoxide (bad stuff!) and unburned hydrocarbons to produce carbon dioxide and water. The 1981 version of the catalytic converter reduces oxides of nitrogen as well. This process does not eliminate air pollution from vehicles, but it makes a huge difference in reducing some of the most toxic chemicals we routinely had been releasing into the environment.

_____________________

Robert L. Park was a professor of physics at the University of Maryland in College Park. Aside from being a really nice person and a great teacher, he was an eminent scientist and a major influence on me and on the development of my broader scientific interests. Dr. Park wrote two important books: Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud and Superstition: Belief in the Age of Science. Dr. Park had a commitment to exposing pseudoscience, the crossing point where people state and write upon what they want to believe, instead of what the scientific process indicates is true. Dr. Park, whom I knew personally and own and have read his books, has been a significant influence on me and my caution in interpreting what I read, and the major influence on what led me to entitle this column Real Science. We lost Dr. Park this past spring, and his death notice can be found in The Washington Post. He was a hero!

It’s nice to have some good news. Helium is an important element in many essential processes, for its role, for example, in keeping the superconducting magnet cool in nuclear magnetic resonance (nmr) spectrometers. However, it cannot be routinely synthesized, so there is always a worry about running out of it. I used an nmr spectrometer in my graduate work at the University of Illinois, and I can assure you that this is a very important instrument for science. There appears, however, to be a likelihood that a large increase in helium supplies will come in the next five years.

Helium is found in nature, and much of it comes from Middle Eastern countries. Because of the political nature of the world we live in, that fact makes for a source not to be taken for granted. Exxon Mobil has a large helium extraction facility in Wyoming. A new Russian helium production facility is planned to open in Russia in 2021, which would greatly reduce the danger of helium shortage, by producing some 80 million cubic meters, half of the worldwide production of 2018! There is also a new process under development to separate helium from natural gas in which it can purified to 99.999 % pure. Most consumers take the supply process for granted, but when important chemicals whose uses are medical or are important in daily living become scarce, we realize how politics can partner with Mother Nature to work for us or against us.

Some people think of science as being a separate part our reality, but I have always believed that the teaching of science, especially in college, and the reporting of scientific events, should always connect to real world applications for better or for worse.

I have refrained from commenting on the coronavirus situation in which we find ourselves and which so drastically affects our daily lives. However, as a retired chemistry professor and science division administrator, I can’t help but feel concern for the education of the next generation of scientists, as colleges remain understandably dependent on distant learning. How can we replicate the learning of laboratory science and learning to do research remotely? How can we replace the day-to-day mentorship relationship of faculty members and students? This situation presents a great challenge to college and graduate school science programs and to the faculty of these programs.

Read other articles by Michael Rosenthal