Why Chemistry Matters to Everyone

(PhysOrg.com) -- Mark Peczuh says society would benefit if everyone was familiar with the basic principles of science.

The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry and UNESCO have named 2011 the International Year of Chemistry as a way of increasing public appreciation and understanding of chemistry and chemists. It is also the centenary of Marie Curie’s receipt of the Nobel Prize in chemistry. And the Connecticut Valley Section of the American Chemical Society (CVS, ACS) turns 100 this year. Mark Peczuh, associate professor of chemistry, and chair of the CVS, ACS comments on the importance of chemistry to all of us.
You have dedicated a lot of time in the past few years to trying to educate non-scientists about science and particularly chemistry. Isn’t it over the heads of most people? How much do most people need to know?
Society would enjoy a few significant benefits if everyone were familiar with some of the basic principles of science, and chemistry in particular. There would be things like: the ability to understand if a certain product (e.g., household cleaner, nutritional supplement, etc.) can actually do what it claims it can; or the accuracy of the arguments in policy debates (e.g., clean air act, carbon taxation/climate change, etc.) that are important to being a responsible citizen; and freedom from an unsubstantiated fear of ‘chemicals.’
The term ‘chemical’ is too often associated with ‘toxin;’ that’s not usually the case. All material things are made up of chemicals. The key is that understanding some basics can inform you on which chemicals are dangerous and why.
We keep hearing that students in the U.S. are far behind students from other countries in terms of learning about math and science. Are there factors in our society that turn students off from these topics even while we are adapting new technology and products hourly?
To say they are far behind students from other countries is unfair, but the sentiment that we need to improve performance is valid. In fact, the recent report commissioned by the National Academies (”Rising Above the Gathering Storm”) warned that we must emphasize science and technology innovation to drive our economy and quality of life.
There is a fundamental difference between the U.S. and the rest of the world in terms of K-12 education. In terms of how access to postsecondary education is regulated. In simple terms, a larger fraction of American students have access to a college education. A majority of students here get into college, and anyone can take math and science courses. Conversely, in many other countries, the educational system can dictate what advanced schools students go to and how many. As a result, there is intense competition for admission into advanced math and science academies and universities. Students must study harder, longer, and earlier in life to score well on admissions tests if they want to become a scientist, a doctor, or be in any other scientific profession.
You are using Twitter to share some of your research findings. Does it inhibit your ability to write a scientific paper about the findings or reveal them at a conference?
Tweeting about research findings is quite common. Tweets frequently report results that have been published (at least online) via the traditional peer-review process. I’m directly or indirectly behind Twitter handles involving my department (@UConnChem), my research group (@peczuh_research), and me (@mwpeczuh). There is a slow push by the community and by funding agencies for open-source science - keeping an electronic notebook that can be accessed by anyone at anytime. Comments and questions about individual experiments can then be posted, and the experiments can be reproduced by others. There are significant pros and cons to this approach that make it controversial. My research group does not currently post in this way.
A somewhat related example of Twitter’s role for sharing scientific information is the ongoing catastrophe at the Daiichi nuclear power plant in Fukushima, Japan. There have been an enormous number of tweets on all aspects of the science behind the developments at the power plant. Twitter has served as a conduit to other online content that has enhanced the primary scientific information.
You are chair of the Connecticut Valley Section of the American Chemical Society, which recently posted two YouTube videos. One of the videos notes how many things - from peanut butter to insulin to housing materials - we would be without if we didn’t have chemistry. And the other makes a joke about the language of chemistry to make the point that the work of chemists can be explained in jargon OR in a simple way. Has there been a translation problem that inhibits curiosity about science?
Despite the ‘American’ in its name, the ACS is a huge international organization with over 160,000 members who are chemists; in fact, it’s the largest professional organization in the world.
I think scientists sometimes have a barrier to communicating with the public for two reasons. First, pretty much all scientists are fascinated and enthusiastic about the research they do. That usually means that if you ask about his or her research, you’re going to get an earful. Secondly, he or she doesn’t usually want to miss a detail about the experiments that are done for fear of misleading you or misrepresenting the data. To the scientist, jargon is helpful because it efficiently relays ideas. The downside is that you exclude people who don’t know the jargon.
In the end, budding scientists and the broad public have to remember that research is messy. Answers to questions, especially the big questions, take a while to become clear. It’s not a linear path from question to answer. Sometimes in an attempt to understand results you go down the wrong conceptual path. Science gets to the truth, but it’s not fast. The best science communicators relay complex ideas in simple terms that are accessible to most people.
In the past, you have run salon-like sessions at places like Starbucks just to get the conversation going on various topics. Are you still doing this? What are some of the hottest topics?
There have been two incarnations of these informal science gatherings. We did a series of Science Cafés a couple of years ago. The topics included stem cell research, renewable energy technologies, drug discovery, and science policy. The format of our cafés was to have a short presentation by experts in the field followed by extensive question-and-answer sessions.
More recently, I’ve tagged along with two other faculty - Ken Noll from molecular and cell biology and Kristin Wold from dramatic arts - to do some Science Chautauqua. They blend entertainment and education in the tradition of the early 20th century Chautauqua (essentially adult education assemblies). We’ve hosted three events: Kepler and the Music of the Spheres, Darwin, The Man Behind the Idea, and Once Upon a Time in the Canadian Rockies: The Story of the Burgess Shale.
Both the Science Cafés and the Chautauquas led to extended conversation after the ‘formal’ programming had ended. There is definitely a segment of the population interested in this activity.
It has been said that inorganic chemistry is the hardest course at any college, yet it is essential for most would-be scientists and engineers. Do you think that’s true? Do you think it scares students away? Do you have any advice on how to get through it?
I am an organic chemist. That means I ask questions about molecules that contain primarily carbon along with some hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, etc., all of which are on the first row of the periodic table. Inorganic chemists like to tease organic chemists by saying, “Organic chemists are very generous colleagues. They work on molecules involving first row elements and they leave the rest of the periodic table (encompassing five to seven rows of elements) to us.” It was only after I had taken inorganic chemistry that I realized how fascinating it was. I think I was a victim of the fear you mentioned.
The truth is that inorganic chemistry isn’t more difficult than any other sub-discipline in chemistry. It’s called the periodic table for a reason - there is a periodicity in the properties and behaviors of the elements. If you can become familiar with the trends, you can understand about the structure and properties of all types of molecules and materials. Since so many of the materials surrounding us in our daily lives - metals, minerals, glass, ceramics -and most catalysts used in organic chemistry fall under the purview of inorganic chemistry, students can very easily find examples with which they can identify.
How did you get interested in chemistry anyway?
My childhood curiosity was nurtured by a number of enthusiastic teachers. I received my ‘elemental’ education in Carbon County, Utah; the name is for the significant coal deposits that are in the area. My surroundings played a big role in sparking my scientific curiosity. My house was across the street from the local community college. The science building housed a number of biological specimens - frogs, worms, snakes, the usual. A friend and I loved to wander through those samples when no one was around. We were driven by a macabre curiosity and also a daredevil attitude. We were not supposed to be in the lab where the samples were housed, so going against the rules was part of the fun.
My high school biology teacher introduced me to molecular biology, which really sent me down the path to chemistry. My organic chemistry course in college convinced me that organic chemistry was where my interests in science truly lay.

Provided by University of Connecticut