A safer, greener way to make solar cells: Toxic solvent replaced

Scientists at SPECIFIC Innovation and Knowledge Centre, Swansea University, have found a way to replace the toxic, unsustainable solvents currently needed to make the next generation of solar technology.

Printed carbon perovskite solar cells have been described as a likely front runner to the market because they are extremely efficient at converting light to electricity, cheap and easy to make.

A major barrier to the large-scale manufacture and commercialisation of these cells is the solvents used to control crystallisation of the perovskite during fabrication: this is because they are made from unsustainable materials and are banned in many countries due to their toxicity and psychoactive effects.

SPECIFIC’s researchers have discovered that a non-toxic biodegradable solvent called γ-Valerolactone (GVL) could replace these solvents without impacting cell performance.

GVL’s list of advantages could improve the commercial viability of carbon perovskite solar devices:

  • It is made from sustainable feedstocks
  • There are no legal issues in its use around the world
  • It is suitable for use in large-scale manufacturing processes
  • It is non-toxic and biodegradable

Carys Worsley, who led the research as part of her doctorate, said:

“To be truly environmentally sustainable, the way that solar cells are made must be as green as the energy they produce. As the next generation of solar technologies approaches commercial viability, research to reduce the environmental impact of large-scale production will become increasingly important.”

Professor Trystan Watson, research group leader, added:

“Many problems need to be resolved before these technologies become a commercial reality. This solvent problem was a major barrier, not only restricting large-scale manufacture but holding back research in countries where the solvents are banned.

We hope our discovery will enable countries that have previously been unable to participate in this research to become part of the community and accelerate the development of cleaner, greener energy.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by Swansea University. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Third dose of Covid jab to be trialled in UK

The findings will help scientific advisers decide if re-vaccinating people in the autumn is necessary.

Share Button

High levels of contaminants in killer whales

Little is known concerning environmental contaminants in predators at the top of a food chain. A study published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry has demonstrated that new types of brominated flame retardants accumulate in the tissues of killer whales near Norway and are also passed on to nursing offspring.

Investigators also detected human-made chemicals called perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the tissues of adult killer whales. Thresholds for health effects of PFAS in marine mammals are not established, but the chemical has been linked to reproductive and endocrine effects in wildlife. In addition, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which have long been banned, were detected in the blubber of 7 of the 8 killer whales in the study at levels that exceeded the proposed threshold for toxicological effects in marine mammals.

“Levels of pollutants in top predators give not only an indication of ecosystem health, but of the persistence of chemicals, passive mobility in the environment, and active biotransport with migrating animals,” the authors wrote. “Our results are relevant for the continued environmental monitoring of contaminants in the Arctic.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by Wiley. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Your Relationship With Your Alarm Clock

If you use an alarm clock to wake up in the morning, think about relationship you’d like to create with your alarm clock. What would be the healthiest and happiest version of that relationship for you?

If you were an alarm clock, what kind of relationship would you want to have with your human?

For instance, maybe your alarm clock would appreciate it if you’d pat it on the head now and then and say, “Thanks for waking me up today. I appreciate you!”

How would your alarm clock feel about being put across the room and kept at a distance from you? How would it feel if you groaned when it sounded off?

How would your alarm clock feel if you kept using the snooze feature? Would it potentially lose respect for you?

Have you ever thought about the kind of relationship you’d like to have with your alarm clock? How would you like to feel towards it, and how would you like to imagine that it feels towards you?

I normally use an alarm clock to wake up in the morning, set for 5am. I never use the snooze alarm since that wouldn’t help me experience the kind of relationships I want to have – with my alarm clock, with myself, and with the start of my day.

I like relating to my alarm clock on the basis of mutual trust and mutual respect. My alarm clock is my buddy who helps me start the day at the time of my choosing. It’s very reliable. I like knowing that I can trust it to sound off when I tell it.

If my intention was to get up at a certain time, and I didn’t just leave the alarm set by mistake, then it’s important to get up to honor that relationship. If I can trust that my alarm will sound off, I also want my alarm to trust me too – to trust that I’ll get up when I intended to get up.

While it may sound odd to have a relationship with an inanimate object, you’re already doing that anyway. Some patch of neurons in your brain is already storing your associations to your alarm clock. Like it or not, that relationship exists in your mind, and it will continue to exist. So you already have some stored thoughts and feelings towards your alarm clock. Do those thoughts and feelings serve you well? Or could you modify how you’re framing that relationship make it better?

If you’re going to have a relationship with your alarm clock in your mind anyway, why not make it what you want it to be? Make it a relationship that serves you well. Make it a relationship that helps you get the results you want.

If your relationship with your alarm clock is dysfunctional, do you really think that will help you create and maintain highly functional habits? How is that going to be good for your day’s startup routine?

For me a good relationship with any device involves trust, respect, and appreciation. I don’t want to use devices that I don’t trust, respect, and appreciate. Especially if it’s the first device that connects me with my day, I really want that to be a positive and uplifting relationship. If the very first sound I hear to begin my day immediately links me with a negative emotion, a downer thought, or a corrupted relationship, well… that’s a stupid relationship then, isn’t it? How is that possibly going to do me any good, especially if I let that relationship wallow unfixed for years?

If you have a messed up relationship with your alarm clock – or with however you like to begin your day – I invite you to fix that relationship. Start by making a real decision about what kind of relationship you’d like to have. Then go have a little talk with your alarm clock to share your thoughts and feelings about the kind of relationship you’d like to create with it. Imagine that it’s listening to you attentively, and then listen internally for what it wants to see from you.

Imagine creating a truly win-win relationship here. Consider what kind of relationship your alarm clock would love to have with you. What does it want from you? What kinds of behaviors would it like to see from you? How would it like to be treated? You might think that this is taking the idea a bit far, but I encourage you to think along these lines anyway since it can help you get clarity about the right kind of relationship for you.

I have a very positive relationship with my alarm clock. I can get up right away when it goes off and leverage it for a good start to my day. I’ve never put it across the room. I’ve never used the snooze alarm. I like and respect my alarm clock. I honor its purpose in my life. I appreciate what it does for me. I don’t have to burden myself with a negative relationship that I might drag forward into all of my future years. This relationship is all in my mind anyway, so it’s my choice what to make of it. Why not assert your freedom of choice here as well?

If it helps you get up feeling a little happier and a little more enthusiastic to imagine that your alarm clock is proud of you… or to imagine that your alarm clock likes being appreciated by you… that’s all good. Feeling appreciation is wonderful, so why not give yourself any reason to begin your day with that sort of feeling? Use your imagination to help you here. Don’t let a lack of imagination cage you in a negative relationship.

What is your version of a golden relationship with your alarm clock? What would that look like? What thoughts and feelings would you like to bring to this relationship? Whatever it is, you can create that relationship. But it sure helps tremendously if you take a moment to consciously decide what that relationship is going to be.

Share Button

Covid: WHO urges Wales to delay giving children jabs

Wales asked to donate vaccines to low-income countries by the World Health Organization.

Share Button

Closer to gene therapy that would restore hearing for the congenitally deaf

Researchers at Oregon State University have found a key new piece of the puzzle in the quest to use gene therapy to enable people born deaf to hear.

The work centers around a large gene responsible for an inner-ear protein, otoferlin. Mutations in otoferlin are linked to severe congenital hearing loss, a common type of deafness in which patients can hear almost nothing.

“For a long time otoferlin seemed to be a one-trick pony of a protein,” said Colin Johnson, associate professor of biochemistry and biophysics in the OSU College of Science. “A lot of genes will find various things to do, but the otoferlin gene had appeared only to have one purpose and that was to encode sound in the sensory hair cells in the inner ear. Small mutations in otoferlin render people profoundly deaf.”

In its regular form, the otoferlin gene is too big to package into a delivery vehicle for molecular therapy, so Johnson’s team is looking at using a truncated version instead.

Research led by graduate student Aayushi Manchanda showed the shortened version needs to include a part of the gene known as the transmembrane domain, and one of the reasons for that was unexpected: Without the transmembrane domain, the sensory cells were slow to mature.

“That was surprising since otoferlin was known to help encode hearing information but had not been thought to be involved in sensory cell development,” Johnson said.

Findings were published today in Molecular Biology of the Cell.

Scientists in Johnson’s lab have been working for years with the otoferlin molecule and in 2017 they identified a truncated form of the gene that can function in the encoding of sound.

To test whether the transmembrane domain of otoferlin needed to be part of the shortened version of the gene, Manchanda introduced a mutation that truncated the transmembrane domain in zebrafish.

Zebrafish, a small freshwater species that go from a cell to a swimming fish in about five days, share a remarkable similarity to humans at the molecular, genetic and cellular levels, meaning many zebrafish findings are immediately relevant to humans. Embryonic zebrafish are transparent and can be easily maintained in small amounts of water.

“The transmembrane domain tethers otoferlin to the cell membrane and intracellular vesicles but it was not clear if this was essential and had to be included in a shortened form of otoferlin,” Manchanda said. “We found that the loss of the transmembrane domain results in the sensory hair cells producing less otoferlin as well as deficits in hair cell activity. The mutation also caused a delay in the maturation of the sensory cells, which was a surprise. Overall the results argue that the transmembrane domain must be included in any gene therapy construct.”

At the molecular level, Manchanda found that a lack of transmembrane domain led to otoferlin failing to properly link the synaptic vesicles filled with neurotransmitter to the cell membrane, causing less neurotransmitter to be released.

“Our study suggests otoferlin’s ability to tether the vesicles to the cell membrane is a key mechanistic step for neurotransmitter release during the encoding of sound,” Manchanda said.

The National Institutes of Health supported the study.

Story Source:

Materials provided by Oregon State University. Original written by Steve Lundeberg. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Covid: Government criticised over pre-pandemic planning

Ministers failed to prepare for a threat on the scale of the pandemic, the spending watchdog says.

Share Button

Did Earth’s early rise in oxygen help multicellular life evolve?

Scientists have long thought that there was a direct connection between the rise in atmospheric oxygen, which started with the Great Oxygenation Event 2.5 billion years ago, and the rise of large, complex multicellular organisms.

That theory, the “Oxygen Control Hypothesis,” suggests that the size of these early multicellular organisms was limited by the depth to which oxygen could diffuse into their bodies. The hypothesis makes a simple prediction that has been highly influential within both evolutionary biology and geosciences: Greater atmospheric oxygen should always increase the size to which multicellular organisms can grow.

It’s a hypothesis that’s proven difficult to test in a lab. Yet a team of Georgia Tech researchers found a way — using directed evolution, synthetic biology, and mathematical modeling — all brought to bear on a simple multicellular lifeform called a ‘snowflake yeast’. The results? Significant new information on the correlations between oxygenation of the early Earth and the rise of large multicellular organisms — and it’s all about exactly how much O2 was available to some of our earliest multicellular ancestors.

“The positive effect of oxygen on the evolution of multicellularity is entirely dose-dependent — our planet’s first oxygenation would have strongly constrained, not promoted, the evolution of multicellular life,” explains G. Ozan Bozdag, research scientist in the School of Biological Sciences and the study’s lead author. “The positive effect of oxygen on multicellular size may only be realized when it reaches high levels.”

“Oxygen suppression of macroscopic multicellularity” is published in the May 14, 2021 edition of the journal Nature Communications. Bozdag’s co-authors on the paper include Georgia Tech researchers Will Ratcliff, associate professor in the School of Biological Sciences; Chris Reinhard, associate professor in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences; Rozenn Pineau, Ph.D. student in the School of Biological Sciences and the Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Quantitative Biosciences (QBioS); along with Eric Libby, assistant professor at Umea University in Sweden and the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico.

Directing yeast to evolve in record time

“We show that the effect of oxygen is more complex than previously imagined. The early rise in global oxygen should in fact strongly constrain the evolution of macroscopic multicellularity, rather than selecting for larger and more complex organisms,” notes Ratcliff.

“People have long believed that the oxygenation of Earth’s surface was helpful — some going so far as to say it is a precondition — for the evolution of large, complex multicellular organisms,” he adds. “But nobody has ever tested this directly, because we haven’t had a model system that is both able to undergo lots of generations of evolution quickly, and able to grow over the full range of oxygen conditions,” from anaerobic conditions up to modern levels.

The researchers were able to do that, however, with snowflake yeast, simple multicellular organisms capable of rapid evolutionary change. By varying their growth environment, they evolved snowflake yeast for over 800 generations in the lab with selection for larger size.

The results surprised Bozdag. “I was astonished to see that multicellular yeast doubled their size very rapidly when they could not use oxygen, while populations that evolved in the moderately oxygenated environment showed no size increase at all,” he says. “This effect is robust — even over much longer timescales.”

Size — and oxygen levels — matter for multicellular growth

In the team’s research, “large size easily evolved either when our yeast had no oxygen or plenty of it, but not when oxygen was present at low levels,” Ratcliff says. “We did a lot more work to show that this is actually a totally predictable and understandable outcome of the fact that oxygen, when limiting, acts as a resource — if cells can access it, they get a big metabolic benefit. When oxygen is scarce, it can’t diffuse very far into organisms, so there is an evolutionary incentive for multicellular organisms to be small — allowing most of their cells access to oxygen — a constraint that is not there when oxygen simply isn’t present, or when there’s enough of it around to diffuse more deeply into tissues.”

Ratcliff says not only does his group’s work challenge the Oxygen Control Hypothesis, it also helps science understand why so little apparent evolutionary innovation was happening in the world of multicellular organisms in the billion years after the Great Oxygenation Event. Ratcliff explains that geologists call this period the “Boring Billion” in Earth’s history — also known as the Dullest Time in Earth’s History, and Earth’s Middle Ages — a period when oxygen was present in the atmosphere, but at low levels, and multicellular organisms stayed relatively small and simple.

Bozdag adds another insight into the unique nature of the study. “Previous work examined the interplay between oxygen and multicellular size mainly through the physical principles of gas diffusion,” he says. “While that reasoning is essential, we also need an inclusive consideration of principles of Darwinian evolution when studying the origin of complex multicellular life on our planet.” Finally being able to advance organisms through many generations of evolution helped the researchers accomplish just that, Bozdag adds.

Share Button

Walking for fitness: Staying motivated

Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission.

Advertising & Sponsorship

Mayo Clinic Marketplace

Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic.

Share Button

Unpublished hospital patient safety reports exposed

BBC Panorama finds dozens of reports into concerns over hospital services have not been made public.

Share Button