If I Had a Billion Dollars… Part Three
Imagine a $1 billion research grant, what would you do? Five Power List Planet Protectors reveal their answers…
| 2 min read | Discussion
Susan Richardson: I would do a multi-city, giant human epidemiologic study of drinking water DBPs, and instead of focusing on the regulated ones (as previous studies have done), I would include the more toxic DBPs (including the 72 we can measure now). If this were done, we could know for sure which specific DBPs are causing the bladder cancer, miscarriage, and birth defects consistently reported. And….then we can find good ways to get rid of them.
Andrew Ault: I think with $1 billion dollars I would launch a global atmospheric monitoring system that combines both the latest analytical instrumentation with established monitoring technologies with a focus on under sampled regions of the world, particularly the Global South. So often, the idea of long term measurements is not viewed as “exciting” or “sexy”, but they are invaluable and very difficult to establish and maintain. This network would include both urban and more remote areas, which are often within different networks measuring different things, but by bringing them together would help develop a larger picture view of air pollution on a global scale.Distinct from current networks, I would allocate a large fraction of the funds to analytical measurement development, which could be tested at specific sites before broader adoption and implementation within the network. By streamlining the process from initial testing to broader implementation, we could advance our understanding of the climate and health challenges from aerosols and air pollution in an accelerated manner.
The Analytical Scientist Presents:
Enjoying our content? Join a growing community of like-minded individuals with the hottest topics at your fingertips, specially curated by our Editorial team.
Michael Gonsior: This is easy as an analytical chemist. Mass spectrometry evolution continues to be remarkable and combining different types of mass spectrometers will create a workflow that is most suitable to tackle the challenge of structural elucidation of compounds in extremely complex mixtures and at very low concentrations of individual compounds. Combining extremely sensitive MS approaches (LC-triplequadropole MS/MS) with ultrahigh resolution MS instruments would assist in a powerful workflow. Now, combine this with quantitative extreme resolution NMR (1H and 13C) and you create the analytical power to transformatively advance the field. Just these instruments would cost easily $5 million. Let's now create a workforce of 100+ scientists that work together on the biggest analytical/environmental challenges within the "Anthroposphere and Planetary Boundary Center" and you will easily spend $1 billion.
Torsten Schmidt: To be honest, I never thought about such a huge grant. But if I had such a substantial amount of money available specifically to support my research, I would use the existing base of our Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU) at the University of Duisburg-Essen (UDE) and establish here the most advanced freshwater research facility in the world. This would include a strong outreach component, as the importance of freshwater systems for environmental and human well-being is not yet sufficiently recognised by the public. With our recent successes in securing funding, albeit on a much smaller scale, we are already taking small steps towards reaching that goal.
Janusz Pawliszyn: I would continue development of reliable and sustainable on-site and high throughput analytical screening technologies.
