Dear All,

                As someone alluded to earlier, to me, it seems like a more base issue than training or regulations.  The incidents related to this demonstration aren't just a reflection of the lack of chemistry knowledge - I would argue that burning different substances in methanol has almost nothing to do with the finer points of chemistry - but a lack of critical thinking.  This is very similar to adding gasoline to your hot lawn mower before you've finished your lemonade (or beer) break :: lack of common sense.  It is also, on a more technical level, a lack of hazard recognition and risk prevention.

 I had 6 years of chemistry industry experience before I jumped into safety as a profession.  I posit that it was only my industry experience that made me conscious that I needed to perform my own risk assessments and institute my own controls or else be hurt (I needed to use a safety shower twice in my career  as an organosilanes R & D Chemist and needed medical treatment in one of those instances).  Most people hopefully aren't as dense as I am. 

The root issue with chemistry teachers and less-seasoned chemists having incidents is how they are educated and groomed from grade school until they graduate from their undergraduate studies.  Some don't even get "it" as tenured faculty.   The "it" is the fact that there is safety, compliance, and ethical risks (pick what order you may) in every nuance of science that we do; even refueling our methanol reservoir.  The issue is that upcoming chemists (in my observations)are hand-held and never let go. 

Institutions give students engineering controls, instructors give students administrative controls and PPE requirements.  When they become their own researchers, EHS reviews their engineering controls and gives recommendations concerning administrative controls and PPE.  Those that EHS misses usually get by just fine with Heinrich's triangle supporting their ignorance.  And those who are the top end of that triangle have EHS scratching their heads and doing incident investigations. 

I had many influential, role-model mentors through my education all the way into my career as I'm sure many schools, institutions, and companies have.  They helped  give me the tools to make me self-sufficient, critical thinking, and reasonably competent.  But it wasn't until I was "on my own" in a company (that had time to make money and to just meet compliance and no more) that I learned to use that critical thinking. 

The status quo for chemistry is hazard.  How do we convince young (in experience) chemists, chemistry teachers, and everyone else that they must evaluate the risk and hazard when they don't realize that we've even been doing it for them all along.  When you change the empty toilet paper roll and leave a spare in the water closet for your significant other  every time they leave you the empty, you're taking away their opportunity to realize the need to do it.  You're also failing to allow them to appreciate you.  How do we gradually change behavior so that we're not divorced and so that we're not allowing young scientists to get hurt?

 

 

Best Regards,

Kyle

____________

Kyle Angjelo  M.S. Chemistry

Chemical Program Manager

Princeton University EHS

262 Alexander St.

Princeton, NJ 08544

609-258-2711

kangjelo**At_Symbol_Here**princeton.edu

 

 

 

From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 8:32 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Chemistry classroom fire injures 6

 

Well, good luck on getting the unions involved.  Here in NY is it the teacher's union that doesn't want to get behind even the required state OSHA (PESH) hazcom and lab standard training of teachers.  The teachers find it boring so the union supports their not going to training which the schools aren't doing anyway.  I go into schools where the art teachers have absolutely no knowledge of these regulations.  And their classrooms look like it.