David Harding
LightNews LightNews
banner
groupharding.bsky.social
David Harding
@groupharding.bsky.social
1K followers 360 following 240 posts
Research group at Suranaree University of Technology. Editorial Advisory board @CrystEngComm and @ChemistrySelect. FRSC. All views my own.
Posts Replies Media Videos
groupharding.bsky.social
Spin crossover (SCO) complexes are magnetic switches, but can they be made practical? A key challenge is nanosizing them.

In our latest work, we report the synthesis of SCO nanomaterials with similar SCO behaviour to the bulk.

#ChemSky @rscadvances.rsc.org
pubs.rsc.org/en/content/a...
Reverse micelle synthesis and downsizing effects in iron(III) spin crossover materials
We report the reverse micelle synthesis, structural characterisation and magnetic properties of iron(iii) spin crossover (SCO) nanomaterials based on [Fe(qsal)2]NO3, [Fe(qsal-I)2]OTf and [Fe(qsal-I)2]...
pubs.rsc.org
January 27, 2026 at 1:16 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
Today's lesson from peer review: If something looks unprecedented and really unusual, chances are it isn't.

Look for the obvious things first before jumping to the conclusion that you've discovered something really amazing.
#ChemSky
January 26, 2026 at 3:16 AM
Reposted by David Harding
inorgchemfront.rsc.org
🏆Our annual poll for "Best Covers of the Year" at 𝘐𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘊𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘴 is back.

🎉VOTE NOW for your favourite 2025 covers!
forms.microsoft.com/e/ZVwGz0m3SK
January 23, 2026 at 9:12 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
Thailand moved to single-year grants about 5 years ago. It's fair to say that it hasn't gone well.
jenna-m-norton.bsky.social Jenna Norton @jenna-m-norton.bsky.social · 13d
A reminder as Congress finalizes NIH appropriations: the bill must limit multiyear funding (MYF), Vought's way of cutting the NIH budget without cutting the budget. MYF will devastate the research workforce.

@safa-science.bsky.social wrote this in July. Still relevant: substack.com/@scienceandf...
A Quiet Policy Shift That Could Devastate American Science
Why NIH’s sudden move to multi-year grant funding should alarm every principal investigator and university
substack.com
January 16, 2026 at 1:22 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
Another great paper from our collaboration with Mahidol University, which now has final page numbers.

The structures are fun and we find a 7-fold increase in binding of LiI, compared to the separate ions.
#ChemSky
pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/...
Enhanced Cooperative Lithium Halide Recognition by Heteroditopic Halogen Bonding (XB) Macrocycles
A series of macrocyclic heteroditopic receptors was synthesized to investigate cooperative recognition of alkali-metal halide ion pairs. The receptors combine either a 1,3-bis-iodotriazole (XB) or 1,3...
pubs.acs.org
January 15, 2026 at 1:37 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
Some pics from around the Lake District.
December 30, 2025 at 10:19 PM
groupharding.bsky.social
A last post before Christmas on a just published paper led by a coleague at Mahidol University.
#ChemSky
pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/...
December 24, 2025 at 3:32 PM
groupharding.bsky.social
It was a fun day yesterday visiting Bristol. Lots has changed and lots remains the same. The chemistry is still visible up on the hill.
December 22, 2025 at 12:52 PM
Reposted by David Harding
tesmagazine.bsky.social
Chemistry curricula in UK schools do not reflect the realities of working in science, @rsc.org researchers warn
Chemistry curriculum fails to reflect digital reality, RSC warns
Students are completing time-consuming tasks by hand, whereas professional scientists use advanced tools such as AI and machine learning, says Royal Society of Chemistry
www.tes.com
December 16, 2025 at 4:05 PM
Reposted by David Harding
ccdc.cam.ac.uk
Here's your #CSDPacked 🙌
CSD Packed results.
December 12, 2025 at 4:00 PM
groupharding.bsky.social
I am pleased to see some rationality entering this conversation. The economic numbers are now so overwhelming it's clear we must do something.
mikegalsworthy.bsky.social Mike Galsworthy @mikegalsworthy.bsky.social · Nov 29
🔥 The mood in Brexit-world is changing...
November 30, 2025 at 12:24 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
I teach general chemistry and I can say that while this is unfortunately all too true, many sciences (and engineering) fields would benefit from caring about chemistry a little more.
November 19, 2025 at 12:25 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
There's no question that some degree of regulation is now needed to bring profits into line with other industries, especially as we are mostly publicly funded.
hansonmark.bsky.social Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · Nov 11
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 13, 2025 at 12:09 AM
Reposted by David Harding
crystengcomm.rsc.org
Issue 44 is now online!👇
pubs.rsc.org/en/journals/...

The cover features work by Y. Tozuka, K. Kadota & co describing physically stable cyclodextrin MOFs formed via a drug-assisted amorphous to crystal phase transition 👀⬇️

🔗 doi.org/10.1039/D5CE...
📍Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University 🧪
CrystEngComm front cover for vol 27, issue 44.
November 11, 2025 at 2:00 PM
groupharding.bsky.social
The details within this poll are fascinating. To a certain extent you can see the media the various people comsume in their answers.

But it's very intersting to see Reform pretty much out on thier own.
yougov.co.uk YouGov @yougov.co.uk · Nov 11
🧵/ How far does the public support net zero?

Support: 60%
Oppose: 25%

Net support by party
Green: +81
Lib Dem: +67
Lab: +64
Con: +11
Reform: -44

yougov.co.uk/politics/art...
November 11, 2025 at 11:17 AM
Reposted by David Harding
bestforbritain.org
SUPERB and angrily unvarnished response, by former BBC chairman, Lord Patten.

"I don't think that we should allow ourselves to be bullied into thinking that the BBC is only any good, if it reflects the prejudice of the last person who shouted at it." ~AA
November 10, 2025 at 6:40 PM
Reposted by David Harding
kasperspedersen.bsky.social
👋New preprint: "Interplay of Redox Non-Innocence and Symmetry Breaking in a 4d Coordination Framework"

🧪We’ve made Mo(pyz)₂I₂, the 4d cousin of the Cr(pyz)₂X₂ family — with redox-active ligands, symmetry breaking, semiconducting transport, and very strong magnetic interactions.

🔗👇
November 3, 2025 at 8:31 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
York is one of my favourite cities in England.
professor-dave.bsky.social David K Smith @professor-dave.bsky.social · Nov 2
Living in York, is a great place to reflect on what it means to be 'British'. Founded in 71AD by the Roman Empire, Eboracum was such an important city that two Roman Emperors happened to be here when they died. The multangular tower is largely of Roman construction. @VisitYork
1/12
November 3, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Reposted by David Harding
ausjchem.bsky.social
Just dropped!

A virtual collection from #AustJChem celebrating Nobel Laureate Professor Richard Robson, pioneer of MOFs.

Explore 60 years of his groundbreaking work, free to read until 27 Feb 2026. @csiropublishing.bsky.social @unimelb.bsky.social

connectsci.au/ch/collectio...
The Foundations of a Nobel Prize: Richard Robson | Australian Journal of Chemistry | ConnectSci
connectsci.au
October 31, 2025 at 1:14 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
Nobel prize winner Prof Novoselov talking about the future of materials science at #ACCC10.

Bottom up functionality is one of the poorly explored space. This is absolutely the area where chemistry operates.
October 25, 2025 at 2:24 AM
Reposted by David Harding
chemistryworld.com
Despite calcium bicarbonate's existence being proposed almost 200 years ago, it's structure has remained a mystery until now.
Calcium bicarbonate crystals synthesised for first time
Scientists fill 'historical gap in textbooks' to resolve the crystal structure of this simple yet elusive mineral
www.chemistryworld.com
October 22, 2025 at 7:55 AM
Reposted by David Harding
chemistryworld.com
Julia Robinson spoke to Stuart Batten – Richard Robson's first PhD student to work on coordination polymers – and also had the pleasure of discussing the award-winning work behind this year's Nobel prize with none other than Nobel laureate Susumu Kitagawa.
How the pioneers of metal-organic frameworks won the Nobel prize
From wooden models to thousands and thousands of structures, Julia Robinson tells the story of how Richard Robson, Susumu Kitagawa and Omar Yaghi won the 2025 Nobel prize in chemistry
www.chemistryworld.com
October 16, 2025 at 7:43 AM
groupharding.bsky.social
While experienced chemists are able to spot the mistakes that AI makes, those who are just learning aren't and consequently AI hinders, rather than helps, them to learn.

So, like these authors for right now I don't think we should use it.
October 15, 2025 at 2:47 PM
Reposted by David Harding
daltontrans.rsc.org
In honour of the 2025 #NobelPrize in Chemistry, we’ve curated a collection of impactful articles from across RSC journals on metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) 🏆

Free to read until the end of November 👉 pubs.rsc.org/en/journals/... 🧪
Royal Society of Chemistry graphic for "Celebrating the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry" collection.
October 9, 2025 at 7:41 AM