Mesoporous aluminosilicates efficiently catalyze the ring-opening of epoxides to produce β-alkoxyalcohols in high yields under extremely mild reaction conditions. These materials also catalyze the corresponding Meinwald rearrangement in non-nucleophilic solvents to give aldehydes which can be trapped in situ to provide the corresponding acetals in an efficient tandem process.

Drying and sintering conductive inks for plastic electronics currently limits the rate of their roll-to-roll manufacture. Near infrared radiation is demonstrated to drastically reduce this process time, achieving conduction under 0.03 Ω per □ in 2 seconds compared to conventional hot-air oven (600 seconds) and infrared methods (84 seconds).

Background: The dumping of untreated faecal sludge from non-sewered onsite sanitation facilities causes environmental pollution and exacerbates poor public health outcomes across developing nations. Long-term mechanisms to treat faecal sludge generated from these facilities are needed to resolve the global sanitation crisis and realize the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 “ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all” by 2030. Pyrolysis of faecal sludge removes pathogens and generates biochar, which can be used as a soil enhancer. Methods: The properties of faecal sludge biochars from three full-scale treatment plants in India were determined via Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive x-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, crystal x-ray diffraction (XRD), proximate analyses, and BET surface area porosimetry. Results: Results showed that all three biochars had low specific surface area, high alkaline pH values, high ash content, and negative surface charge. Fourier transform infrared spectra showed the same surface functional groups present in each biochar. X-ray diffraction analysis showed the mineral composition of each biochar differed slightly. Scanning electron microscopy analysis indicated a porous structure of each biochar with ash particles evident. Conclusions: Slight differences in the ash content, surface area, pH and mineral content was observed between the three biochars.