Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jamie Torrance, Lecturer and Researcher in Psychology, Swansea University

Every night, millions of people across the world tune in to watch influencers spin slot machines, chase jackpots and ride emotional rollercoasters of wins and losses. Online viewers erupt with cheers, emojis and pleas for “one more spin”.

But behind the flashy graphics and charismatic streamers, lies a complex web of psychological triggers, parasocial relationships where fans feel like friends with creators who don’t know they exist, and normalised risk-taking.

New research by my colleagues and I into gambling livestreams reveals how these broadcasts are reshaping the landscape of online betting, and blurring the lines between entertainment and gambling advertising in ways that traditional media never could.

Gambling livestreams have exploded in popularity over the past few years. These are live broadcasts where content creators, including well known celebrities such as the musician, Drake, gamble in real time, often with slots, casino-style games such as roulette and sports betting, while thousands watch online and participate through chat.

Platforms like Twitch once hosted vast amounts of this content until implementing partial restrictions in 2022. But the streams didn’t disappear. Instead, they migrated to newer, less regulated platforms like Kick which has become popular for gambling content.

Young adults are particularly drawn to these streams. On Kick alone, for example, viewers aged 18 to 34 make up the largest demographic, representing approximately 60% of the platform’s global audience. Many of these viewers are of legal gambling age, creating a perfect storm of accessibility and influence.

The business model can be very lucrative. Top streamers are often paid by gambling operators to broadcast themselves betting, sometimes with company money rather than their own. They may earn additional revenue through affiliate links that direct viewers to betting sites. It’s advertising dressed up as entertainment, but far more powerful.

What we discovered

No empirical research had been conducted on this topic in the UK. So, we interviewed 15 young adults who watched gambling livestreams regularly, as part of a wider study. Our questioning focused on the psychological pull of gambling livestreams, what features viewers encounter and the self-reported harms they have experienced. What emerged was a portrait of sophisticated manipulation meeting genuine entertainment value.

Participants described forming deep connections with streamers, following their favourite personalities across multiple platforms like they would a friend. This pathway often started via streams unrelated to gambling, such as video game livestreams. However, when streamers then migrated to producing gambling content, many viewers followed.

What seemed to fascinate the majority of our participants were the eye-watering amounts of money staked, won and lost by streamers. In some instances, more money was lost by streamers in one evening than a single viewer would make in a year.

Collectively spectating these intense gambling sessions provided participants with a shared sense of community, with viewers either rooting for a big win or the chance to witness a crippling loss.

The casino-style features embedded into the streaming platform were also described in detail. Viewers earn “channel points” for watching streams, creating progression systems that mirror slot machine reward schedules.

They can bet these points on stream outcomes, essentially gambling on gambling. These points can then be redeemed for custom rewards, such as a shout-out from the streamer.

Most troubling was how participants told us they initially watched streams as a safer alternative to gambling themselves, hoping to satisfy their gambling urges vicariously. Instead, the opposite occurred. They reported intensified cravings and increased real-money gambling as a result of viewership. This phenomenon is known as the “urge paradox”.

Why this matters

Hundreds of thousands struggle with gambling harm in the UK, with young adults representing a particularly vulnerable group.

Traditional gambling advertising faces strict regulations. But livestreams exist in a regulatory vacuum. They aren’t 30-second TV spots, but multi-hour immersive experiences that build relationships, create community and normalise high-risk behaviour.

The combination is uniquely potent. Viewers aren’t just seeing ads but forming parasocial bonds with trusted figures who model gambling behaviour in real time. They’re participating through gamified features that mirror gambling mechanics. They’re watching unedited emotional reactions that feel authentic, even when the financial risk for streamers can be artificial.

Participants in our study recognised the manipulation. They knew streamers often used operator money and received revenue shares for sharing affiliate links. Yet this awareness didn’t deter them. The content remained influential regardless.

Age verification on livestreaming platforms can be particularly poor. Multiple participants noted seeing children in stream chats and described sign-up processes as requiring little more than “clicking to confirm that you’re 18 plus”.

Policymakers must treat livestreams as the powerful advertising vehicles they are, requiring mandatory disclosure of financial relationships, robust age verification and cross-border enforcement mechanisms.

Some countries are leading the way. Germany banned gambling advertising via streamers entirely in 2024, while the UK has restricted influencer marketing to minors. However, enforcement remains patchy as content simply migrates to less regulated platforms.

As these platforms multiply, comprehensive regulation that reflects the sophistication – and potential harm – of this digital gambling landscape is urgently needed. Without it, the line between entertainment and exploitation will only continue to blur.

Jamie Torrance has received funding from Gambling Research Exchange Ontario, the Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG), the International Centre for Responsible Gambling and the Economic and Social Research Council.

– ref. Why people are watching livestreams of influencers gambling – and how it could be fuelling addiction – https://theconversation.com/why-people-are-watching-livestreams-of-influencers-gambling-and-how-it-could-be-fuelling-addiction-266532

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Naida Redgrave, Senior Lecturer in Creative Writing & Co-Course Leader in Journalism, University of East London

Warning: includes some minor spoilers.

Brides is a warm and relatable story of two 15-year-old British Muslim schoolgirls travelling alone to Syria in 2014.

It’s not the first film to explore post-9/11 and 7/7 Britain through a Muslim lens. Films like My Brother the Devil (2012), Four Lions (2010), and After Love (2020) have each offered nuanced depictions of British Muslimhood. However, Brides is the first to address the personal impact of racism and Islamophobia through the lens of young Muslim women whose choices stem from complex social and emotional factors, rather than a duty to Islam.

The film comfortably passes the Bechdel test, which evaluates gender representation by assessing whether at least two named women engage in a conversation about something other than a man. It also passes the Riz test, an evaluative framework inspired by actor Riz Ahmed’s 2017 speech to the UK House of Commons. It measures whether Muslim characters are portrayed with agency beyond stereotypes of terrorism, oppression, or religiosity.

To achieve both is rare for Muslim representation on western screens and is what makes the film feel so refreshing. Woven throughout are delicate challenges to stereotypes often ascribed to Muslim characters.

Brides tells the story of Doe (Ebada Hassan) and Muna (Safiyya Ingar) who embark on a hazardous journey from the UK to Istanbul. They travel across Turkey and finally to the Syrian border. Many in the UK will recognise the real-world parallel.

Writer Suhayla El-Bushra and director Nadia Fall have stated that Brides reimagines the case of the “Bethnal Green trio”. In 2015, three east London schoolgirls, Amira Abase, Kadiza Sultana and Shamima Begum, fled the UK to become “Isis brides”, leaving their families in shock and generating much media outrage and public fury.

Yet rather than focus on radicalisation, this buddy-girl adventure is interspersed with short flashbacks and longer sequences that contextualise the girls’ desire to escape. These culminate in a racist attack on Doe by a white male classmate and Muna’s suspension from school as she retaliates violently to protect her friend. Before we arrive at this climactic point (shown shortly before the girls reach the border) there are many examples of the everyday racism and Islamophobia that blight their lives.

While the roots of Islamophobia reach deep into western orientalism (the stereotyping of eastern cultures), its modern form has dominated British political debate since the early 2000s. British mosques and Muslim communities, more generally, have persistently been portrayed as breeding grounds for anti-western rhetoric and even terrorism, through a constant stream of online and print stories.

Brides references these through a montage of Islamophobic headlines, such as the Sun’s notorious 2015 claim that one in five British Muslims have sympathy for jihadis.

Brides depicts the real-world consequences of media scaremongering through the various insults and threats that its young heroines are subject to. The unnamed white boy who later attacks shy Doe uses obscene language towards her, prods her hip with a pencil and invades her personal space in the classroom.

The more truculent and outgoing Muna is called a slur by a female classmate. Rather than punish the racist kids, the headteacher moves Muna to a different class and threatens her with the government’s counter-terrorist strategy, Prevent, for retaliating against the racist slur.

The headteacher also tells Doe that she should “rise above” racism after the white boy accuses her of not washing her hair and pulls off her headscarf in the playground.

The attack comes after Doe delivers a charity food parcel to the boy’s home from her community. His sense of personal humiliation is clearly the motivation for his later racist attack. Fall and El-Bushra’s decision to include this detail is striking, as humiliation is often discussed as a driver of misogynistic extremism, but rarely acknowledged as a root of racist or Islamophobic violence.

The uncomfortable classroom scenes echo many real-life incidents and show how, as groups like The Runneymede Trust have pointed out, government policy and the media can fuel Islamophobia in schools and everyday life.

The real Bethnal Green trio grew up in inner city London, but Brides is set in an unspecified coastal area of southern England. By choosing this location, the film again gestures toward the long-term rise of nationalism and Islamophobia in parts of the UK that have been hard hit by recession, under-investment and austerity politics, which was first noted by researchers in the 2000s.

Girls just want to have fun

The recent wave of Islamophobia and racism have been fuelled by the perception that misogyny is endemic in Muslim communities.

Although various religious doctrines are used to justify or condone violence against women, gendered violence and sexual abuse is a social problem that crosses all classes, regions and religions within the UK.

Brides highlights this point as Doe’s widowed mother is subject to the violent rages of her white boyfriend, Jon (Leo Bill) who also displays sexualised behaviour towards her daughter. As young women, both Doe and Muna attract unwanted sexual attention from older men of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, both in the UK and Turkey.

This emphasises that the sexualisation of young women is a result of patriarchy, rather than specific communities or religions. This serves as a corrective to numerous stereotypical representations of Muslim women in which they are shown only in relation to dominant men within their communities – often as either victims or terrorists.

Brides explores Muna and Doe’s friendship through banter and shared enjoyment of ordinary teen girl tastes and interests, such as fun fairs, junk food and romance.
In the end, the film is less about terrorism than about the systems that make dehumanisation seem reasonable. Fall’s timely and perceptive film succeeds not only as great female-centred drama, but as an important intervention into the crude racial politics of the contemporary moment.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Brides offers a unique insight into the roots of far-right activism and Islamophobia in Britain – https://theconversation.com/brides-offers-a-unique-insight-into-the-roots-of-far-right-activism-and-islamophobia-in-britain-266876

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Keith Rochfort, Assistant Professor, School of Biotechnology, Life Sciences Institute, Dublin City University

As colder months set in, respiratory infections begin to climb: everything from the common cold and flu to COVID-19. It’s a time when healthy lungs matter more than ever. Yet the very tissue that lets oxygen pass from air to blood is remarkably delicate, and habits such as vaping can weaken it just when protection is most needed.

The lungs are often pictured as two simple balloons, but their work is far more intricate. They act as a finely tuned exchange system, moving oxygen from inhaled air into the bloodstream while releasing carbon dioxide produced by the body’s cells.

At the centre of this process lies the blood–air barrier: a paper-thin layer where tiny air sacs called alveoli meet a dense network of hair-thin pulmonary capillaries. This barrier must remain both strong and flexible for efficient breathing, yet it is constantly exposed to stress from air pollution, microscopic particles and infectious microbes.

Vaping can add another layer of strain, and growing evidence shows that this extra pressure can damage the surface that makes every breath possible.

Read more:
Want to quit vaping this year? Here’s what the evidence shows so far about effective strategies

The cloud from an e-cigarette carries solvents such as propylene glycol, flavouring chemicals, nicotine (in most products) and even trace metals from the device itself. When this cocktail reaches the lungs it doesn’t stay on the surface. It seeps deeper, irritating the endothelium – the thin layer of cells lining the blood vessels that mesh with the air sacs.

Read more:
What’s in vapes? Toxins, heavy metals, maybe radioactive polonium

Healthy endothelium keeps blood flowing smoothly, discourages unnecessary clotting and acts as a selective gatekeeper for the bloodstream – controlling which substances, such as nutrients, hormones and immune cells, can pass in or out of the blood vessels while blocking harmful or unnecessary ones.

Studies show vaping can disrupt these defences, causing endothelial dysfunction even in young, otherwise healthy people. Controlled human exposure experiments reveal rises in endothelial microparticles – tiny cell fragments released when vessel linings are under stress.

My own research group has linked these changes to surges in inflammatory signals and stress markers in the blood after exposure to vaping aerosols. Together these findings indicate that the endothelium is struggling to maintain its protective role.

Laboratory work shows that vaping aerosols (even without nicotine) can loosen the tight seal of pulmonary endothelial cells. When the barrier leaks, fluid and inflammatory molecules seep into the alveoli. The result: blood–gas exchange is disrupted and respiratory infections become harder to fight.

COVID-19 is usually thought of as an infection of the airways, but the SARS-CoV-2 virus also injures blood vessels. Doctors now describe the condition as causing endotheliopathies – diseases of the blood-vessel lining. In severe cases, capillaries become inflamed, leaky and prone to clotting. That helps explain why some patients develop dangerously low oxygen levels even when their lungs are not full of fluid: the blood side of the barrier is failing.

Read more:
How COVID-19 damages lungs: The virus attacks mitochondria, continuing an ancient battle that began in the primordial soup

The virus exploits a key protein called ACE2, normally a “thermostat” that helps regulate blood pressure and vessel health. SARS-CoV-2 uses ACE2 as its doorway into cells; once the virus binds, the receptor’s protective role is disrupted and vessels become inflamed and unstable.

Vaping and COVID-19: a dangerous combination

My team is using computer models to investigate how vaping may affect COVID-19 infections. Evidence already shows vaping can increase the number of ACE2 receptors in the airways and lung tissue. More ACE2 means more potential entry points for the virus – and more disruption exactly where the blood–air barrier needs to be strongest.

Both vaping and COVID-19 drive inflammation. Vaping irritates and inflames the blood-vessel lining while COVID-19 floods the lungs with pro-inflammatory molecules. Together they create a “perfect storm”: capillaries become leaky, fluid seeps into the air sacs and oxygen struggles to cross the blood–air barrier. COVID-19 also raises the risk of blood clots in the lung’s vessels, while vaping has been linked to the same, compounding the danger.

Read more:
Is lung inflammation worse in e-cigarette users than smokers, as a new study suggests?

Vaping can also hinder recovery after a bout of COVID-19. Healing the fragile exchange surface requires every bit of support the lungs can get. Vaping adds extra stress to tissues the virus has already damaged, even if the vaper feels no immediate symptoms. The result can be prolonged breathlessness, persistent fatigue and a slower return to pre-illness activity levels.

The blood–air barrier is like a piece of delicate fabric: it holds together under normal wear but can tear when pushed too hard. Vaping weakens that weave before illness strikes, making an infection such as COVID-19 harder to overcome. The science is still evolving, but the message is clear: vaping undermines vascular health. Quitting, even temporarily, gives the lungs and blood vessels the cleaner environment they need to heal and to keep every breath effortless.

Keith Rochfort receives funding from Research Ireland.

– ref. How vaping primes the lungs for COVID-19 damage – https://theconversation.com/how-vaping-primes-the-lungs-for-covid-19-damage-266162

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lala Rukh, PhD Candidate, Energy, University of Galway

After comparing electricity tariffs on a spreadsheet, I can confirm that deciphering the plans feels a bit like learning ancient Greek.

As part of my doctoral research, I decided to explore smarter electricity plans (those that use smart meters and offer fluctuating prices) from different providers. That’s when I realised the standing charges – those fixed costs all customers must pay regardless of usage – took up such a large proportion of my bill that other changes might not make much difference.

Three spreadsheets and two mugs of coffee later, it was clear that choosing the “smarter” electricity plan is more of a labyrinth than a lightbulb moment. If a researcher in sustainability gets tangled in opaque pricing structures, what hope is there for the rest of the population?

In the UK, as well as in Ireland, energy standing charges are regulated, fixed daily fees. All suppliers levy these fees (as well as what’s known as a “public service obligation levy” in Ireland) regardless of how much electricity the customer uses. The charges cover upkeep of the network, meter servicing, billing and customer support.

My PhD focuses on energy performance in homes and sustainability behaviour. As part of my ongoing research, I asked people if they had ever thought about switching their energy plan or provider. Typically, they would shrug and say that they thought they were on the best one.

Many don’t know (or don’t care) about green tariff options. And many are not willing to endure the paperwork or the headache of changing plans. This tends to be the case even if it means they are stuck with something that is far from ideal.

Why is it so complex? First, there are about 20 providers in the UK and a dozen in Ireland. And then there are standard or smart meters to decide on, and 24-hour flat rates or peak/off-peak bands. This is before consumers even get to the “green premium” that pushes up the price they will pay per kWh slightly.

Once consumers have weighed all this up, some still have to consider things like direct-debit discounts, export credits if they have solar panels, and rates for charging electric vehicles. They could be forgiven for wondering if doing the right thing by the planet was meant to be this hard.

The puzzle behind ‘green’ plans

Beyond money and frustration, I found that there is an emotional toll for people in feeling like they have done something meaningful only to hit another barrier further down the line. That disillusionment can lead to “sustainability fatigue”, where the urge to give up outweighs the urge to improve.

In both the UK and Ireland, providers are also required to give consumers an estimated annual energy bill. This figure is generic (it is based on the national average of a three- or four-bedroom house) and as such it doesn’t help households greatly.

From my research, I have found that houses (and especially apartments) of very similar build type vary significantly in terms of energy use. After all, people clearly consume energy differently.

Smart meters could help hugely because they give households an insight into their energy use moment by moment. For instance, the energy expert Hannah E. Daly discovered that an old water pump in her home was silently consuming at least 800 watts of power.

This is the strength of smart meters – they make the invisible visible. When people can see which appliances are driving up their energy use, they are more motivated to change their behaviour or upgrade inefficient devices. They could also shift consumption to cheaper or cleaner times of day – the hours when energy use is best suited to the grid and often cheapest for the consumer (for example, 2am until 5am).

Leaders, brands and marketers often urge consumers to live more sustainably and switch to renewable energy and recyclables where possible. Yet the fine print can feel like it’s designed to trip people up. Sustainability should be baked into every product and service as standard.

For example, the EU-mandated energy label makes it easier for consumers to choose more energy-efficient appliances. In a similar way, all products and services should have a standardised sustainability rating — gold, silver or bronze could work well for this — to help customers understand how sustainable each option is.

Energy suppliers force the work on to consumers, making them jump through hoops just to be a bit greener. If going sustainable is truly the future, it probably shouldn’t feel like a luxury.

Lala Rukh receives funding from the Research Ireland for the ERBE Centre for Doctoral Training under grant agreement No 18/EPSRC-CDT/3586. She is affiliated with the University of Galway, Ireland and MaREI, the Research Ireland Centre for Energy, Climate and Marine research and innovation.

– ref. Green electricity deals are too complex – even as a researcher in sustainability I’ve been confused – https://theconversation.com/green-electricity-deals-are-too-complex-even-as-a-researcher-in-sustainability-ive-been-confused-265825

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amalendu Misra, Professor of International Politics, Lancaster University

At the start of September 2025, US president Donald Trump sent a naval task force into the Caribbean to tackle drug trafficking in the region. The initiative has led to strikes on four alleged drug boats off the Venezuelan coast so far, killing at least 21 people.

The strikes have been condemned by Venezuela and Colombia, while some international lawyers and human rights groups have questioned their legality. Human Rights Watch, for example, has suggested the strikes amount to “unlawful extrajudicial killings”. However, these attacks are unlikely to stop.

In a post on X on October 3, after US forces killed four people in an attack on a suspected drug boat, US defence secretary Pete Hegseth wrote: “These strikes will continue until the attacks on the American people are over!!!!” Trump claimed, without providing evidence, that this boat was carrying enough drugs to kill 25,000 to 50,000 people.

The Trump administration now looks to be considering moving its campaign in the Caribbean to a second phase. On October 5, while speaking at a US Navy base in Virginia, Trump boasted that drug traffickers are “not coming in by sea any more, so now we’ll have to start looking about the land”. A leaked memo sent to Congress a few days earlier also suggests the US government has decided it is in a “non-international armed conflict” with drug cartels.

Trump’s threats to escalate military pressure against the cartels may be part of a broader campaign to force Venezuela’s leader, Nicolás Maduro, from office. The White House sees his government as illegitimate and has consistently accused Maduro of being a central figure in the Latin American drugs trade. There is little proof that this is the case.

A wider military confrontation with cartels across the region may therefore be unlikely. But it should not be discounted. On October 7, CNN reported that the Trump administration has produced a classified legal opinion that seeks to justify lethal strikes against a list of cartels and suspected drug traffickers.

The opinion argues that the president is allowed to authorise deadly force against a broad range of cartels, beyond those the US government designated as terrorist organisations in early 2025. But is a direct military confrontation really a viable strategy to curtail the power and reach of cartels in the region?

Read more:
Trump labels drug cartels as terrorist groups – what it means for Mexico and beyond

Striking the cartels

Some observers, including the US-based Washington Office on Latin America, have suggested that “the US military’s overwhelming capacities would allow it to disrupt the activities of a specific criminal group, destroy complexes of drug labs and capture kingpins”.

These moves would not be without their challenges. In response to direct military action, it is possible that the cartels may look to attack US military personnel and civilians across the region. The cartels are vindictive in nature and have a history of targeting law enforcement, military personnel and government officials throughout Latin America.

Shortly after becoming president of Mexico in 2006, Felipe Calderón declared a “war on drugs” and deployed military force against the cartels. They retaliated violently, with many public officials assassinated in broad daylight. The cartels may well respond in a similar way if US forces launch operations against them.

This could include retaliation within US borders. In its 2024 National Drug Threat Assessment report, the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) detailed how the cartels have deep networks within the US. These networks, which span from large cities such as Los Angeles and Chicago to rural areas, provides them with the infrastructure to carry out retaliatory attacks.

The US homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, revealed in an interview with Fox News on October 5 that “cartels, gangs and terror groups” had already “put bounties on the heads of several federal immigration agents, offering US$10,000 (£7,500) to kill them and US$2,000 for their capture”.

“They’ve released their pictures; they’ve sent them between their networks”, Noem added. “It’s an extremely dangerous and unprecedented situation.” The cartels engage in various other criminal activities in addition to trafficking drugs, including the smuggling of migrants into the US.

The killing of a high-value drug kingpin or the arrest of a cartel boss also does not necessarily bring an end to that organisation. It only leads to fragmentation and the emergence of new tiers of leaders and groups that are often more violent than their predecessors.

Research supports this argument. The killing of the Los Zetas cartel leader, Heriberto “El Lazca” Lazcano, in October 2012 by Mexican marines was followed by higher levels of gang violence in the subsequent years as internal conflict between different factions intensified.

Addiction at home

Fentanyl and other opioids entering the US from Latin America have fuelled the worst drugs crisis in the country’s history. According to the US National Institute of Health, more Americans were killed by fentanyl-laced pills and other addictive drugs in 2021 alone than in all the wars the US has fought since the end of the second world war.

The DEA says Mexican criminal organisations, including the Sinaloa Cartel, play a key role in producing and delivering fentanyl and other illicit drugs into the US. But, to truly be successful in its war against the cartels, the US government needs to first address the problem of drug addiction at home.

According to a national 2023 survey on drug use in the US by American Addiction Centers, 48.5 million Americans aged 12 and older have battled a substance use disorder. This corresponds to 16.7% of the total population. A war on drugs needs to be a war against addiction in the US. Anything short of that will only fix the problem temporarily.

Amalendu Misra is a recipient of Nuffield Foundation and British Academy fellowships.

– ref. Why US military action against Latin America’s cartels won’t win the war on drugs – https://theconversation.com/why-us-military-action-against-latin-americas-cartels-wont-win-the-war-on-drugs-266933

Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Griffin, Professor in Materials Chemistry, Lancaster University

Three scientists have been awarded the 2025 Nobel prize in chemistry for discovering a new form of molecular architecture: crystals that contain large cavities.

Susumu Kitagawa from Kyoto University, Japan, Richard Robson from the University of Melbourne, Australia, and Omar M. Yaghi from the
University of California, Berkeley, in the US, will share a prize sum of 11 million Swedish kronor (£870,000).

The prize recognises the pioneering contributions of the three scientists in the development of something called metal-organic frameworks (Mofs). Mofs are a diverse class of crystalline materials that have attracted much attention in chemistry due to the presence of microscopic open cavities in their structures. They are helping to revolutionise green technology, such as harvesting water from desert air and capturing CO₂.

The widths of the cavities can range from a few angstroms (an angstrom is a unit of length equal to one hundred-millionth of a centimetre) to several nanometres (a millionth of a millimetre). That means they are far too small to see with the naked eye or even with most forms of microscopes. But they’re the perfect size for housing various molecules.

The development of Mofs can be traced back to the late 1950s when researchers started to discover “coordination polymers”. These are materials made up of linked chains of metal ions (atoms that have lost or gained electrons) and carbon-based bridging molecules known as linkers. These materials did not contain cavities, but they were based on the same metal-organic chemistry that would later give rise to Mofs.

In the late 1980s, Robson’s research group reported that some coordination polymers could be prepared as framework-like structures where, crucially, the carbon-based linkers formed three-dimensional arrangements around clusters of liquid solvent molecules. As mentioned in Robson’s research article, this revealed “an unusual situation in which approximately two-thirds of the contents of what is undoubtedly a crystal are effectively liquid”.

In the mid-late 1990s, Yaghi’s group demonstrated that it was possible to prepare coordination polymers that retained their structures even after the solvent molecules were removed from the cavities. This was a surprising result, which dispelled the prevailing assumption that such frameworks are fragile and would collapse if the solvent was removed.

In 1997, Kitigawa’s research group showed that the open cavities could be used to absorb gas molecules. He also showed that, in many cases, the framework itself expands as gas molecules are absorbed into it and contracts as they are released. These coordination polymers with permanent, open cavities came to be known as Mofs.

The discoveries by the three scientists effectively marked the birth of modern Mof chemistry, with many thousands of research articles published on them since.

Wide range of applications

Why are Mofs so interesting for chemists? The microscopic cavities within Mofs provide a unique and controllable location for chemistry to take place. A key application of Mofs is gas storage. In many cases, these materials can hold gases at much higher densities than in their free gaseous state.

This offers significant advantages for green technologies such as fuel-cell-powered vehicles, in which hydrogen fuel has to be transported as efficiently as possible. Many Mofs work particularly well for specific gases, which means they can also help separate gas mixtures in exhaust streams, or capture CO₂ from the air to mitigate the effects of global warming.

Mofs can also act as effective catalysts for chemical reactions taking place in the cavities. One of the key advantages of Mofs as catalysts is that it is relatively straightforward for chemists to switch and swap the metals and carbon-based linkers in order to tune the properties for a particular purpose.

As well as gas molecules, Mofs can also accommodate other small molecules, such as pharmaceuticals. This means they can be used to store and deliver drugs to a particular target, where their porous nature allows for controlled release of therapeutic chemicals.

In recent years, Mofs have shown promise for many other applications, including batteries, thermal energy storage and chemical sensors (devices that can monitor and detect chemicals such as contaminants). Excitingly, there remain many other applications that have yet to be explored.

Despite having been discovered over three decades ago, Mofs remain one of the hottest research areas in materials chemistry and will no doubt do so for many years to come.

John Griffin receives funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and the Faraday Institution, and has previously received funding from the Leverhulme Trust.

– ref. Nobel chemistry prize awarded for crystal materials that could revolutionise green technology – https://theconversation.com/nobel-chemistry-prize-awarded-for-crystal-materials-that-could-revolutionise-green-technology-267033