Gas-Phase Reactions of Methamphetamine with Hydroxyl Radicals and Ozone

Gas-phase reactions involving methamphetamine, the hydroxyl radical (OH·), and ozone (O3) at (297 +/- 3) K and 1 atmosphere total pressure were investigated. A bimolecular rate constant, kOH·+methamphetamine, (960 +/- 100) x 10 -12 cm3molecule-1s-1, was measured using the relative rate technique for reactions of methamphetamine with OH·. Pseudo first-order techniques were used to measure the bimolecular rate constant, kO3+methamphetamine , (2.7 +/- 0.5) x 10-17 cm3molecule -1s-1 for reactions of methamphetamine with O 3. Product studies to determine the degradation of methamphetamine in the gasphase were conducted and the products of these reactions were identified. The positively identified methamphetamine/OH· and methamphetamine/O 3 reaction products were: benzaldehyde, ethanedial (glyoxal), and 2-oxopropanal (methylglyoxal). The use of derivatizing agent O-(2,3,4,5,6-pentafluorobenzyl)hydroxylamine (PFBHA) was used to propose phenyl-2-propanone as the other major methamphetamine/OH· and methamphetamine/O3 reaction product. The elucidation of this other reaction product was facilitated by mass spectrometry of the derivatized reaction products coupled with plausible methamphetamine/OH· and methamphetamine/O 3 reaction mechanisms based on previously published volatile organic compound/OH· and volatile organic compound/O3 gas-phase reaction mechanisms

Unsettling planning theory

Recent political developments in many parts of the world seem likely to exacerbate rather than ameliorate the planetary-scale challenges of social polarization, inequality and environmental change societies face. In this unconventional multi-authored essay, we therefore seek to explore some of the ways in which planning theory might respond to the deeply unsettling times we live in. Taking the multiple, suggestive possibilities of the theme of unsettlement as a starting point, we aim to create space for reflection and debate about the state of the discipline and practice of planning theory, questioning what it means to produce knowledge capable of acting on the world today. Drawing on exchanges at a workshop attended by a group of emerging scholars in Portland, Oregon in late 2016, the essay begins with an introduction section exploring the contemporary resonances of ‘unsettling’ in, of and for planning theory. This is followed by four, individually authored responses which each connect the idea of unsettlement to key challenges and possible future directions. We end by calling for a reflective practice of theorizing that accepts unsettlement but seeks to act knowingly and compassionately on the uneven terrain that it creates