Document RLdNjXQmj822xQVvn8rx1R2X

A public airing of Lake Erie's woes Severity of Lake Erie's pollution debated AlChE calls expert panelists, opens meeting to the public, to air the problems of the sickest Great Lake Lake Erie has its pollution problems, but an epitaph is premature. This is the impression that must have traveled home with chemical engi neers and others who attended a pro gram billed as a panel-audience dia logue, held during the 65th national meeting of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers in Cleveland. They also probably left with the un satisfied feeling that much basic in formation about Lake Erie and its problems is far from known. These were the dominant impres sions that emerged from the panel dis cussion, titled "Lake Erie--sick, dying, or dead?" The panel session itself was a test effort by the institute to conduct an open, public discussion at a national meeting. To this end, the meeting was open without charge or registration to all interested parties. It drew, in addition to 200 engineers attending the meeting, some 200 other persons--mostly members of civic, conservation, and allied groups. Remarkably restrained in these days of confrontation, the panel-audience discussion nevertheless brought out the differences of opinion that exist among experts viewing the same in formation. The panel was deliber ately designed to present different points of view, according to session chairman E. H. Bollinger of B. F. Goodrich. It consisted of George Harlow of the Federal Water Pollu tion Control Administration, Herbert Allen of the U.S. Bureau of Com mercial Fisheries, consultant John Kinney, and J. E. Richards of the Ohio Department of Health. Points of view were indeed wideranging in many areas. For example, panel comments indicate agreement that Lake Erie is polluted along the shorelines and that there is a severe algae bloom problem in the lake's shallow western basin. Beyond this point, unanimity breaks down. One reason for different interpre tations of pollution severity in Lake Erie is a paucity of data from the past on which to determine trends. Even some of the data that are avail able seem open to question. For ex ample, Dr. Allen cites the changes in fish species and the conventional in terpretation that change in water quality is at least a major cause. Mr. Kinney, however, points out that there is some question of whether this is due to pollution or simply to poor fish management in the past. Mr. Kinney, representing the view most divergent from the more con ventional one, is particularly con cerned about the effects of confusion over what he terms the three types of pollution: actual pollution, po litical pollution, and hysterical pol lution. Already," he says, areas idjacent to the lake are beginning to feel the effects on industrial develop ment, as other areas in the U.S. ex ploit the idea that Lake Erie will shortly become a swamp, a condition he says the lake is far from. Mr. Kinney calls for a reversal in the approach to the problems that ex ist--not to delay action, he says, but to put the most effort where it will do the most good. He would put the emphasis on the effect of discharges on lake water quality, rather than on the waste load aspect. This difference in emphasis shows up strongly on the question of where to dispose of dredgings from lake har bors which in the past have been dis posed of in the lake. FWPCA's Har low says that the quantity of pol lutants carried to Lake Erie in dredg ings is considerable, and that they should not be dumped in the lake. Mr. Kinney agrees that the dredg ings are polluted. But, he questions whether this necessarily means that they cause pollution in the lake. Cer tainly, he says, polluted dredgings Panel chairman Bollinger Quiet debate in an age of confrontation should not be dumped in shallow areas where the shoreline can be affected. However, studies by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, he says, have in dicated that when put in proper dis posal sites in the lake, there is no effect on water quality. He is con cerned that political and public pres sure will push the Corps of Engineers into a costly dike building program, which would have little if any effect on overall lake water quality. Although Lake Erie has been most prominent in the national spotlight on Great Lakes pollution and control, the beleaguered lake seems likely to escape, at least for the time being, the controversy over DDT now boil ing up around Lake Michigan, among other areas (C&EN, May 12, page 28). Figuring prominently in hearings before the Wisconsin Natural Re sources Department on a petition to ban DDT was seizure by the Food and Drug Administration of 34,000 pounds of coho salmon from Lake Michigan. The fish contained 13 to 19 p.p.m. of DDT. First analyses for DDT in Lake Erie coho were made just two days before the AIChE panel discussion and were reported there by Dr. Allen. Performed on 2- to 3-pound fish, the analyses showed a level of 1 p.p.m. on a whole fish basis and 0.6 p.p.m. on filet steaks. The FDA limit on fish for sale is 5 p.p.m. DSW 200989 MAY 19, 1969 C&EN STLCOPCB4059053 ACS NEWS Dr. Martin Stiles named editor of JACS University of Michigan professor succeeds Dr. Marshall Gates, who has held/tfie post since 1963 The Journal of the American Chem ical Society will have a new editor July 1. Dr. Martin Stiles, professop of chemistry at University of Mic gan, Ann Arbor, Mich., succeeds^Jr. Marshall Gates, professor of chemistry at University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y. Dr. Gates is resigning after six years as JACS editor anc^3 years as associate editor. After almost 20 ^ars with the journal, Dr. GatesAays, "It's time JACS had youngeyand more aggres sive leadership." /He also admits that editing JACS has been taking more of his time eacy year, with the result that there isAoo little time, he feels, to do an adequate job of teaching. Dr. Stys joined the University of Michigay faculty in 1954, after receiv ing his TCi.D. from Harvard University,j The 4yyear-old chemist is a membeij of the executive committee of ACS Division of Organic Chemist and was, for three years, an assistaht editor of The Journal of OrgJxic Chemistry. His primary area of inter Jest in organic chemistry has been |eac- tion mechanisms. Dr. Stiles was fel low of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation 1961-65 and a John Simon Gi/ggenheim memorial fellow 1962-63.* Teaching device. Dr. Stil feels that a fundamental journal such as JACS is, basically, a teaching!device. Two things it must not becime, he notes, are a repository for cfeta that accumulate for future reference only, and a news sheet devoted to reporting the latest tentative conclusions about the "hottest" problem in soml narrow field of research. Previous elitors of JACS, he points out, have\ wisely^ steered a course between these feo i falls, with the result that a high per centage of the mo'St important research papers are submitted to the journal. Most chemists want their papers placed before as wide an audience as possible, he says. At the same time, he also feels that chemists are stimu lated by seeing original accounts of important findings outside the area of their own current efforts. Thus, it's not surprising, he notes, that JACS, with its broad scope, is not only highly regarded but is also very popular among the world's chemists. The editor's task in such a broad enterprise is very demanding, he says, Dr. Martin Stiles Takes over July 1 and the editor cannot be expected^o singlehandedly select papers for xrnblication on such a broad spedftim of topics. Dr. Gates has done^remark ably fine job" of gettingyffiective re view of manuscripts, yfaile working with a very small ec^forial staff, Dr. Stiles says. As new editor, Jfowever, Dr. Stiles has formed a beard of editors conj sisting of eight prominent chemisy chosen to represent as many fields/n chemistry asfpossible. Dr. Stiles vfms to assign t each of these working edi tors manf papers submitted fo/ pub lication The editors will chgpse re views^ and make the difficult^ecision whdner to publish. tie board of editors wilf comprise Robert G. Parr, Joh/s Hopkins University; Dr. B. Seympur Rabinovitch, University of Washington, Seat tle; Dr. Thomas Dunn/University of Michigan; Dr. Kennejp B. Wiberg, Yale University; Dr. ifelson J. Leon ard, University of Illiaois; Dr. Robert L. Letsinger, Northwtem University; Dr. Robert W. Parw, University of Utah; and Dr. Jack Halpem, Uni versity of Chicagol Dr. Carl H^ Brubaker, currentlyl associate edit for JACS under Dr.lGates, will^antinue in that position* Careful review. An^mpgfTant ele ment in the JACS tradition is the careful review of manuscripts prior to publication, Dr. Stiles notes. Editors vary in the relative weights they as sign to the opinions of reviewers ns. authors of controversial papers, but experience indicates, he feels, that careful reviewing increases a journal's usefulness. Finding experts who can advise the editors on questions of originality, sci entific rigor, and the quality of writing in a given paper is not too difficult, Dr. Stiles says. Achieving high stand ards in such matters requires hard work and good communication among authors, editors, and reviewers, he points out, but these people usually try to be objective and the frame work for evaluating a paper on these points is fairly clear. However, he says, there are two main pipKlpmc 0f editing JACS that It fram applying "nonscientific" ^criteria inldeciding which papers to ac cept for fae journal. These problems, he saysAre most difficult to cope with. One ct these problems is to decide whickT papers should appear in a generayoumal, such as JACS, and which sh/uld appear in more specialized ials. In rejecting a paper on such rounds, Mr. Stiles points out, the r editor may both anger the author and create suspicion among editors of other journals to which the author may turn. A generation ago, he notes, almost all fundamental research pa pers by American chemists appeared in JACS. Today, it would be phys ically impossible to publish then^all in one journal. The other problem in wfiich non scientific criteria must b^pplied is in choosing which reseMm results should be published as aJSCommunication to the Editor" in addition to, or instead of, appearing>5 an article with full de tails in a laxr issue. When a paper is rejected from the communications sec tion, dfe editor is saying that the workflacks the urgency and novelty traffitionally represented in that sec- on of JACS. The author, of course, lias a strong bias in both situations in which nonscientific decisions are made, Dr. Stiles points out. For both problems, Dr. Stiles and his team of editors hope to find reason able solutions. In doing so, they will maintain cognizance of an important fact--chemists today cannot afford time to read more than a small fraction of the published material that lies out side their immediate research efforts. C&EN MAY 19. 1969 DSW 200990 STLCOPCB4059054