The synthesis and properties of [Fe3(CO)11(RCN)] derivatives, and a high-yield general route to mono- and di-substituted derivatives of [Fe3(CO)12]; the crystal and molecular structure of [Fe3(CO)11(NCC6H4-2-Me)]

The clusters [Fe3(CO)11(RCN)] (1: R = Me, C3H5, C6H5, or C6H4-2-Me) have been prepared at low temperature from [Fe3(CO)12] and RCN in the presence of Me3NO. Compounds 1 react essentially quantitatively with a wide range of two-electron donors, L, (viz.: CO, PPh3, P(OMe)3, PPh2H, PPh2Me, PF3, CyNC (Cy = cyclohexyl), P(OEt)3, SbPh3, PBu3, AsPh3, or SnR2 (R = CH(SiMe3)2)) to give [Fe3(CO)11L] (2). In some cases (2), on treatment with Me3NO and then L′ (L′ = a second two-electron donor) yields [Fe3(CO)10LL′] in high yield. The crystal and molecular structures of 1 (L = NCC6H4Me-2) have been determined by a full single crystal structure analysis, and shown to have an axial nitrile coordinated at the unique iron atom, with two CO groups bridging the other two metal atoms.

Societal choice for climate change futures: trees, biotechnology and clean development

The rate and magnitude of predicted climate change require that we urgently mitigate emissions or sequester carbon on a substantial scale in order to avoid runaway climate change. Geo- and bioengineering solutions are increasingly proposed as viable and practical strategies for tackling global warming. Biotechnology companies are already developing transgenic “super carbon-absorbing” trees, which are sold as a cost-effective and relatively low-risk means of sequestering carbon. The question posed in this article is, Do super carbon trees provide real benefits or are they merely a fanciful illusion? It remains unclear whether growing these trees makes sense in terms of the carbon cost of production and the actual storage of carbon. In particular, it is widely acknowledged that “carbon-eating” trees fail to sequester as much carbon as they oxidize and return to the atmosphere; moreover, there are concerns about the biodiversity impacts of large-scale monoculture plantations. The potential social and ecological risks and opportunities presented by such controversial solutions warrant a societal dialogue.

Eliciting consumer preferences for certified animal-friendly foods: can elements of the theory of planned behavior improve choice experiment analysis?

Models used in neoclassical economics assume human behaviour to be purely rational. On the other hand, models adopted in social and behavioural psychology are founded on the ‘black box’ of human cognition. In view of these observations, this paper aims at bridging this gap by introducing psychological constructs in the well established microeconomic framework of choice behaviour based on random utility theory. In particular, it combines constructs developed employing Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour with Lancaster’s theory of consumer demand for product characteristics to explain stated preferences over certified animal-friendly foods. To reach this objective a web survey was administered in the largest five EU-25 countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. Findings identify some salient cross-cultural differences between northern and southern Europe and suggest that psychological constructs developed using the Ajzen model are useful in explaining heterogeneity of preferences. Implications for policy makers and marketers involved with certified animal-friendly foods are discussed.