B. V. Tronov

Organic Chemistry in Socialist Construction

In the present work I set myself the aim of characterizing the development of the organic branches of the chemical industry (i.e., those branches that engage in the extraction and processing of organic substances) in the Soviet Union, of indicating how this industry in our country must and is beginning to differ from the industry of capitalist countries, and of outlining concrete paths for the restructuring of organic chemistry as a science, so that organic chemistry may satisfy to the greatest possible degree the practical requirements of socialist construction.

Organic chemistry, like every other science, arose and grew out of the needs and achievements of human practice. Considering the development of this part of chemistry and of those branches of industry with which it has been connected during the period roughly from the beginning of the nineteenth century, when organic chemistry began to take shape as a separate science, one may distinguish three periods in this interval of time:

1. Until the second half of the last century, industry was limited to the extraction of a few organic substances from natural materials, to the fairly imperfect purification of these substances, and, in rare cases, to their very primitive chemical processing. The materials used relatively widely were: coal, wood, certain agricultural products, plants (chiefly bread grain, potatoes, sugar-bearing plants, plants yielding fibrous materials), and animals (fat, hide). Coal was subjected to dry distillation, but without isolation and chemical processing (on an industrial scale) of the individual compounds formed. Wood was likewise distilled, but with only the crudest separation of the products. Sugar was obtained from sugar cane and beet. From potatoes, grain products, etc., alcohol was obtained by fermentation. Fats were processed into soap and stearin. Hides were tanned by means of a very simple treatment with oak and similar bark (without any conscious application of chemistry). From certain plants fatty and essential oils, medicines, dyes, and other products were obtained, but almost always even without separation into individual compounds.

Corresponding to this state of practice, organic chemistry was then an almost purely descriptive science. Individual compounds (and sometimes even mixtures outright) were described, methods of obtaining them were indicated, and their elementary composition was determined. The doctrine of the structure of chemical compounds was in the most embryonic state (Berzelius’s electrochemical theory, the theory of radicals and types). The largest task that

set itself for organic chemistry of that time was the clarification of the question of the possibility of artificially preparing those compounds which nature gives us in plant and animal organisms. This question had fundamental philosophical significance (the dispute of the materialists with the idealists) and, of course, practical significance, as a question of finding cheaper methods of preparing various practically important products, but this practical significance was then scarcely felt.

The second half of the nineteenth century, the period of the greatest flourishing of capitalism, is characterized by the stormy development of industry. The output of chemical products increased many times over. New kinds of raw materials began to be used, among which petroleum proved especially important. There also appeared certain new branches of the chemical industry, based on a more complex chemical processing of natural materials. The fine processing of the products of the coking of coal led to the development of the production of artificial organic dyes (aniline dyes, alizarin, indigo, etc.), to the production of new explosives (nitro compounds of the aromatic series), a large number of new pharmaceutical preparations, and so on. For certain substances (for example, alizarin and indigo) synthetic methods of preparation completely or almost completely compelled the direct extraction of them from plants to cease.

These practical successes became possible only on a new theoretical basis, on the basis of structural theory. Only knowledge of the structure of a substance makes it possible to direct the transformations of that substance in a definite direction required by practice. The growing needs of industry thus forced theory to be developed so as to satisfy these needs. And the development of theory also revealed new possibilities of synthesis, which sometimes led to the obtaining of compounds entirely unknown before.

However, even in this period the predominant direction in the chemical industry was still the separation and purification of substances directly given by nature, or only the very simplest processing of them. Branches of the organic chemical industry—sugar, fermentation, timber-chemical, fat, leather, and textile—grew quantitatively, but did not experience great qualitative shifts. The petroleum industry was confined to the distillation of petroleum, i.e. to the purely physical separation of it into its component parts, and so forth. Methods for the separation and purification of products were, of course, in many cases considerably improved, but the sources from which they were obtained for the most part remained the same. Even for those branches of industry where the product obtained differed sharply in its properties from the initial material and was sometimes prepared by means of rather complex chemical transformations, the following characteristic features remained in force:

1. Each substance was obtained from only a few materials. For example, ethyl alcohol was prepared only by the fermentation of carbohydrates; methyl alcohol—only by the dry distillation of wood; acetic acid—by the distillation of wood or by the biochemical oxidation of alcohol; saccharine substances—by direct extraction from plants and, on a small scale, by the hydrolysis of starch; gasoline only from petroleum; synthetic organic dyes only from the products of coal coking; soap only from fats.

2. Each kind of natural material was processed only into a few-

products (with the exception of coal, and even its use at that time, from the point of view of modern technical achievements, must be deemed rather monotonous). Petroleum was used only as fuel and for lighting; from potatoes alcohol was obtained and, in small quantities, molasses (glucose); from cotton—fabrics and oil; the forest yielded paper, tar, turpentine, rosin, acetic acid, methyl alcohol, and acetone.

1. Many kinds of raw materials were used very limitedly, not only qualitatively but also quantitatively. In some industries there remained a mass of wastes, which in places were burned, and sometimes simply thrown away. The treatment of wood was especially barbarous. The timber industry accumulated so much sawdust that, because of it, plants had to be moved from place to place.

What has been said here applies to the entire chemical industry on a world scale. In such backward countries as tsarist Russia, the indicated shortcomings manifested themselves with particular force. In Russia the organic chemical industry was almost entirely an extracting industry, not a processing one. At that time we extracted in fairly large quantities alcohol, sugar, petroleum; on a smaller scale vegetable fiber, oils, fats, soap, and stearin were obtained. It may be considered that there were no properly synthetic branches, based on the complex chemical processing of raw materials (except perhaps for the insignificant production of dyes).

Science, in organic chemistry, and structural theory in particular, already at that time made it possible to do much more. In laboratories a whole series of varied syntheses had been developed, allowing many substances to be obtained from very different sources. Scientists pointed to these possibilities. For example, D. I. Mendeleev sharply protested against the use of petroleum only as fuel (he said: “Petroleum is not fuel. One can heat with banknotes too.”).

But capitalist society, especially the capitalism of weakly developed countries, Russia in particular, was not in need of great industrial development. Theory then outstripped practice, and far from all the achievements of science could be used.

Such, in general, was the situation at the very beginning of the 20th century. A sharp shift occurred during the World War and the proletarian revolution that followed it in our country.

By 1914 chemistry and the chemical industry had received special development in Germany; and precisely Germany, during the war, found itself cut off from the greater part of its sources of raw materials. The Germans had then to prepare, from what little they had, everything necessary for military operations. They began to obtain, for example, on a large scale nitric acid from air; sulfuric acid was prepared from gypsum; petroleum products were obtained by semicoking and hydrogenation of coal; alcohol and acetic acid likewise from coal through acetylene; rubber from acetone (and acetone through acetic acid, again from coal). Many branches of synthetic industry received rapid development, and some appeared for the first time.

The war also promoted the development and growth of chemistry in general, and especially of synthetic chemistry, in a number of other countries: the North American United States, England, France, and Japan. These countries, unlike Germany, retained large reserves of diverse

raw materials, but did not previously have an industry capable of meeting the increased wartime demand for chemical products.

After the war, the chemical industry in the capitalist states continued, in general, to develop. However, certain complex synthetic industries froze. For example, German synthetic rubber could not withstand competition with natural rubber, which is obtained very cheaply by the slave labor of colonial peoples.

Finally, in recent years the general crisis has contracted all branches of industry in the capitalist world (although the chemical industry, being the most necessary for the preparation of war, has suffered comparatively less).

A striking exception—the country where there is not and cannot be a crisis—has been the Soviet Union. From 1929 to 1932 the output of all our large-scale industry grew from 21 billion rubles (in 1926–27 prices) to 43 billion rubles, i.e., more than doubled, while in the richest capitalist country these same four years produced a decline of up to 54%. By the end of the 2nd Five-Year Plan, in 1937, the 17th Party Congress approved the total volume of output of all branches of industry in the amount of 92.7 billion rubles, i.e., more than twice as much again.

These figures refer to industry as a whole. The chemical industry, which lagged somewhat behind in the 1st Five-Year Plan, will develop still more rapidly. Here, both in terms of the quantity of raw materials extracted (the most important kinds of them, e.g., coal, petroleum and gases, etc.) and in terms of the products manufactured, the target for 1937 is considerably more than 200%, and sometimes as much as 300% and more, of what it was in 1932.

This concerns the quantitative side of the matter. Socialist industry has no fear of overproduction. However rapidly the productive forces may develop among us, and however much output our industry may provide, the result will not be collapse, but only the further strengthening of the national economy and an improvement in the living conditions of the working people. Every production process in a socialist society can and must be organized so that raw materials are used as fully as possible and so that products are obtained in greater quantity and of better quality.

The relative development of individual branches of industry is determined by the general national-economic plan.

The unlimited possibility for the development of the productive forces and the general conscious planning of all industry constitute very important advantages of the socialist economy, which make it possible to improve technology at maximum rates and to build production on the basis of using all the achievements of science.

Here there is added a very important circumstance that makes it necessary to do this. From the very moment of the proletarian revolution, the Soviet Union found itself, like Germany during the World War, surrounded by enemies. The difference is that Germany was isolated from the outside world for a comparatively short time, while we have been in capitalist encirclement for the seventeenth year already, and the end of this encirclement, perhaps, is not so near. So long as there is no war, the Soviet Union still has trade relations with capitalist countries. But war may break out at any moment, and we may always find ourselves cut off

from all external markets. This means that we must build our economy in such a way that, from our own raw materials and at our own factories, we obtain everything that is needed both for peaceful life and for defense. This must be taken into account in the development of all branches of industry, and especially in the development of the chemical industry. This industry, more than any other, is concerned precisely with changing the properties of the materials themselves, which then go into the manufacture of various products.

Carbon compounds are subject to the most varied processing. The carbon compounds include all the principal kinds of foodstuffs: proteins, fats, and carbohydrates; all substances from which human clothing is made (cotton and linen fabrics, wool, silk, leather); wood and construction materials prepared from wood or straw; soap; a large part of medicines; a large part of dyes; explosives; toxic substances; finally, plastics, from which one can make various small articles, unbreakable glass, photographic film, electrical insulation, and even parts of machines, successfully replacing metals with them.

All this can in principle be prepared from any raw material containing carbon, and in practice the building of socialism in one country requires that this country obtain any necessary products from the kinds of raw materials it possesses. Only by mastering complex chemical production can we be certain that socialist construction will not only not be wrecked, but will not even be greatly delayed by any direct or indirect obstacles created by imperialism.

Therefore, the processing, synthetic branches of the chemical industry must develop in our country at the most rapid tempo.

In the First Five-Year Plan, the chief attention of the Party and the government was inevitably directed toward power engineering, metallurgy, and machine building, since all this is the basis for the development of all other branches of industry and the basis for the socialist reconstruction of agriculture. However, even then two branches of the processing organic chemical industry received a sharp impetus forward. These were: the chemical production of liquid fuel and synthetic rubber.

Tractors, automobiles, and airplanes required enormous quantities of liquid fuel. Satisfaction of the demand for gasoline and kerosene could no longer be achieved by simple distillation of petroleum. Cracking had to be introduced on a broad scale, which increases the yield of light fractions severalfold. In addition, certain important agricultural regions, first of all the West Siberian Territory, do not have their own petroleum reserves. Here a way out was provided by obtaining petroleum products through semicoking of sapropelite and hard coals. It was not for nothing that the wrecker Ramzin, wishing especially to delay the development of the eastern parts of the Union, said: “Do not spoil the fuel by chemical processing.” After the defeat of the wreckers, the development of the coal industry in Siberia in general, and in particular the production of liquid fuel from coals, advanced at a rapid pace. At the 17th Party Conference (1932), Comrade Stalin drew attention to the Siberian sapropelites.

The second complex organic production, quickly established in our country, is the production of rubber, the need for which—for tractors, automobiles,

military affairs, etc., has also increased enormously. Only a few years ago rubber was not produced in our country at all. In 1930, at the 16th Congress, Stalin emphasized the necessity of immediately organizing the rubber industry: “We have no rubber. We shall have rubber.” By now three plants for synthetic rubber have already been put into operation by the method developed by S. V. Lebedev (from alcohol, through butadiene), and another method is close to technical adoption: from acetylene through chloroprene.

In the second five-year plan the relative importance of the processing branches of the organic chemical industry will increase still further. Especially developed will be:

The coke-chemical and aniline-dye industry.

The mining of hard coal in 1937 is planned at 152 million tons (which will amount to 235% of the 1932 output). The production of coke and semicoke is planned at about 50 million tons. From the chemical products there will be obtained chiefly, on the one hand, artificial liquid fuel and, on the other, intermediate products and dyestuffs. Before the war there was in Russia only one factory for processing aromatic hydrocarbons (in Kineshma), whose output was insignificant in quantity and poor in quality. In 1929 the USSR already produced 13,200 tons of dyes (with world production at 220–230 thousand tons), and these were almost exclusively aniline black and azo dyes. In 1933 there were 17,266 tons. For 1937, 50,600 tons are planned, with a considerably more varied assortment. The most valuable and complex dyes are being brought to the fore, such as indigo, indanthrenes, and derivatives of anthracene and carbazole.

Adjacent to the aniline-dye industry is also a whole series of synthetic productions based on aromatic hydrocarbons and phenols: plastics, accelerators for the vulcanization of rubber, flotation reagents, artificial tanning agents, medical, perfumery, aromatic and flavoring substances, photographic chemicals. The output of synthetic tanning agents alone is planned for 1937 at 60,000 tons (i.e., more than all organic dyes).

Chemical utilization of petroleum and natural gases.

It is planned to extract 47 million tons of petroleum and gases in 1937. A considerable quantity of petroleum will go to chemical processing by cracking; in recent times paraffin cracking has begun to be considered the most expedient. It gives gasoline with better antiknock properties (more unsaturated and aromatic hydrocarbons) and a larger yield of gases, which are excellent raw material for syntheses. The principal components of these gases are: ethylene, propylene, butylene, isobutylene, butadiene, paraffins. From ethylene one can obtain ethyl alcohol (a ton of petroleum can yield up to 250–300 kg, which, in Dobryansky’s opinion, is more profitable than preparing alcohol by fermentation), and from alcohol, for example, rubber. Rubber can also be prepared without passing through alcohol, since the cracking of petroleum under appropriate conditions gives up to 25% butadiene. From ethylene there is also prepared ethylene chlorohydrin, used to accelerate the ripening of fruits—

and vegetables (as is ethylene itself) and as a semi-product for syntheses, and glycol (for motor-tractor work, the preparation of explosives, etc.), ethyl chloride (for example, for plastics). The total need for ethylene by the end of the 2nd Five-Year Plan is calculated at 250,000 tons. Glycol will be needed in the amount of 100,000 tons, and chlorohydrin 25,000 tons.

From other unsaturated hydrocarbons there are likewise obtained chlorides, alcohols, glycols, used as solvents, as raw material for further syntheses, etc.

A fairly important field of the chemical utilization of petroleum is the oxidation of its higher fractions for the purpose of obtaining higher fatty acids for the soap-making industry. The yield of acids insoluble in water is more than 50%.

Natural gases released together with petroleum, and sometimes separately from it, consist chiefly of methane. Its thermal treatment gives, depending on the conditions, unsaturated hydrocarbons: ethylene (up to 80% can be obtained), acetylene, and more complex ones; aromatic hydrocarbons; oils similar to petroleum. All these products can also go to further syntheses, while the hydrogen obtained in the pyrolysis of methane is used for the synthesis of ammonia or for the hydrogenation of coal tars, petroleum residues, and other organic substances. Chlorination of methane leads to substances that are used as solvents or serve as material for new syntheses (methyl alcohol, formaldehyde). Finally, by oxidizing methane it is possible also to prepare formaldehyde directly, the demand for which in agriculture (seed dressing) and in industry (especially plastics) is very great.

Wood Chemistry and Artificial Fiber

The forests of the Soviet Union occupy about 1 billion hectares (about one-third of the entire forest area of the world). The total waste from living forest amounts to 2.5 billion tons per year. In 1932, 9 million cubic meters were used. For 1937 it is planned to obtain up to 55 million cubic meters of waste from logging, which can be used chemically.

In this chemical utilization, the former methods—extraction of turpentine and rosin, dry distillation with the production of acetic acid, methyl alcohol, acetone, etc.—will have to be supplemented to a considerable degree, and sometimes give way to new ones, based once again on more complex chemical processes.

Even the carbonization of wood itself is more advantageous to carry out by the wet method, by heating under pressure with catalysts (for example, phosphoric and sulfuric acids, soda, alkalis, magnesium chloride). In this case 50% charcoal is obtained instead of 35–38%; acetic acid 5.5–8.8% instead of 3.2–6%; methyl alcohol 1.2–2.2% instead of 0.96–2%. A very large place in wood chemistry must be occupied by the production of sugar (glucose) by the hydrolysis of cellulose. This sugar can then be used either as such (for cattle feed) or converted into alcohol.

With the combined utilization, the wastes of only large enterprises will yield in 1937: sugar, 3 million tons; acetic acid—270,000 tons; methyl alcohol—45,000 tons.

Thus, a separate major branch of industry is the production of cellulose of woody and other origin (e.g., straw) for artificial fiber. How advantageous it is to obtain fibrous materials precisely in this way is evident from the following figures: 1 ha in America yields 220 kg of cotton fiber, whereas from the increment of wood cellulose from the same area one can obtain 635 kg of artificial fiber.

In the USSR, at the four factories currently in existence, 4,000 tons of artificial silk were produced in 1932. For 1937, 75,000 tons have been planned.

Plastics.

The production of plastics and synthetic resins came into being essentially only at the beginning of the 20th century, and already in 1929 the output of products in the capitalist countries had reached 400,000 tons. Of this, only 40% now goes to articles for everyday use. The remaining 60% is consumed by industry. In Russia before the war there were only a few semi-handicraft installations, working predominantly on imported raw material. Now these installations have been expanded and new factories are arising. The plan for 1932 reached a total of 12,000 tons. The assortment is still small (only four main types of plastics: celluloid, bakelite, albumin, and resol). They are used only for everyday needs and in the electrical and radio industries.

According to the plan of the 2nd Five-Year Plan, the output of plastics in 1937 will reach 270,000 tons, and the most diverse types of them will be produced: asphalt pitch, trolitul, etrol, resols, cellulose esters, vinylite, styrol, neoformalite, glutol, urea plastics, celluloid, galalith, glyptal, alberton, coumarone resins. For the preparation of all these plastics, products and wastes of the most diverse chemical industries will be used: products of the distillation of fossil coals and petroleum, wastes of the forest industry, agriculture, etc.

Such are the principal branches of the organic chemical industry which, in the second Five-Year Plan, are slated to be developed on an enormous scale. Of course, those production sectors that are already well established will also continue to develop, such as the fermentation industry with the further production of synthetic rubber, the sugar industry. The chemical utilization of peat, oil shale, agricultural products, the extraction from plants of medicines, essential oils, tanning substances, etc., will develop.

The characteristic features distinguishing the socialist development of the chemical industry from the condition in which it was found earlier are:

1. A more even (as also for other branches of industry) geographical distribution. Instead of a few industrial regions with a large concentration of diverse production facilities in the European part of the Union, industry in general, and chemical enterprises in particular, will be distributed throughout the entire territory of the USSR, with special attention being paid to the east. In the West Siberian Territory, for example, by the end of the 2nd Five-Year Plan there should be: production of artificial petroleum products—

products from bituminous and sapropelic coals (first of all Kemerovo), a textile combine (Barnaul), an aniline-dye production facility (Kemerovo or Barnaul), an artificial-fiber combine (Kemerovo), a plastics combine (Kemerovo is being planned), fermentation production and synthetic rubber, wood chemistry with varied use of timber and other wastes, the paint-and-varnish industry, sugar factories, etc. In all, Western Siberia, which previously had almost no chemical industry, will receive 11% of all capital investment in the chemical industry of the entire Union. By decision of the 17th Congress, Kuzbass must be transformed into a second Donbass.

1. The obtaining, from one and the same raw material, of the most diverse kinds of products. Each kind of raw material (coal, timber, etc.) will be used, as far as possible, completely, through the construction of large integrated combines, sometimes uniting many branches of industry. Thus the chief chemical center of Western Siberia—Kemerovo—will produce from bituminous coal fertilizers, liquid fuel, dyes, plastics, and so forth.

2. The obtaining of one and the same product from different raw materials, whatever may be found locally. Not only must the Soviet Union as a whole free itself from imports, but each part of the Union will, as far as possible, obtain everything it needs from its own materials. The same Western Siberian Territory, which by 1937 will require about 5 million tons of petroleum products, will not import oil over several thousand kilometers, but will prepare artificial petroleum from its own coal. The northern outskirts of the Union will cover a considerable part of their need for sugar by hydrolysis of wood cellulose, etc.

3. The application of chemical products will expand to a high degree. Chemistry, especially organic chemistry, will produce not only such chemicals as everyone is accustomed to (for example, medicines, dyes, fertilizers, soap, etc.), but will also penetrate into other spheres of the economy where, until quite recently, it was not expected at all. The chemization of metallurgy, chiefly nonferrous metallurgy, is taking place and will take place still more; here flotation makes it possible profitably to work ores that were previously considered completely unprofitable (and flotation reagents are organic substances: amines, xanthates, etc.). New directions are being planned for the chemization of agriculture, such as the use of ethylene and chlorohydrin to accelerate the ripening of fruits and vegetables (and this will make it possible to advance agriculture farther to the north). In general, the chemization of the national economy entails not only a quantitative increase in the output of the chemical industry, but also a qualitative change in a number of other branches, based on new applications of chemistry.

The socialist development of the chemical industry will thus require a broad development of synthetic methods of production, founded on the deep chemical processing of matter. This was evident among us in the first five-year plan, and will be even more strongly evident in the second.

However, what is envisaged even by the second five-year plan is still the use almost exclusively of already-known achievements of world science and technology. Even in the second five-year plan for the chemical industry we are still only catching up in this field with the advanced capitalist countries, and in many respects we shall not yet catch up with America. But the Party has set—

task: not only to catch up, but also to overtake. And we must overtake not only by the quantitative development of industry, but also by qualitative change.

The change must consist above all in the further development of the direction that has become evident. In the organic chemical industry this means the following:

Formerly, from each kind of raw material we obtained only a few products, and each product from only a few materials. In the second five-year plan we shall prepare from one and the same raw material an already very diverse range of products, and this or that product from many kinds of raw material. Further, we must strive to prepare every organic compound from every raw material containing carbon.

For example, from the raw material prevailing in the reserves available in Western Siberia—coal—they already know how to prepare petroleum products, dyes, medicines, plastics, etc., but they still do not obtain such products as sugar and fibrous substances. Yet theoretically it would be entirely possible to carry out, for example, the reaction:

\[ \mathrm{C} + \mathrm{H_2O} \Longrightarrow \mathrm{CH_2O} \]

(formaldehyde), and then to obtain \(\mathrm{C_6H_{12}O_6}\) (glucose), \(\mathrm{C_{12}H_{22}O_{11}}\) (ordinary sugar), and finally \((\mathrm{C_6H_{10}O_5})^n\) (starch and cellulose). The preparation of these substances has in part already been accomplished on a laboratory scale; in part (starch, cellulose) their synthesis has not yet been carried out, but in principle it is entirely possible. Science gives the full possibility of obtaining every organic substance of any complexity from its constituent elements or from any of their compounds. The development of methods for preparing every product needed by humanity from every available raw material (for the time being, from raw material containing the same elements, since the question of the transformation of elements has been worked out far too little) must constitute the chief task in the future development of the chemical industry. This task is of immediate importance precisely for the Soviet Union now, since we have at our disposal far from every kind of raw material; it will not lose its significance even after the establishment of the socialist and then the communist order over the whole globe, since it will still be more advantageous, wherever possible, to prepare everything from local materials.

The organic chemical industry of the future will have, for example, in places where coal deposits occur, to obtain directly from coal, water, and air (its oxygen and nitrogen), with a small addition of other materials containing the missing elements (for example, sulfur, phosphorus), nutritive substances (proteins, fats, carbohydrates, etc.), fabrics, dyes, materials for making household articles and in part (and perhaps sometimes entirely) machines, pharmaceutical agents, and so on. At the same time it must be borne in mind that coal (as they are already beginning to do in our country, carrying out the idea of Mendeleev and Ramsay, supported by Lenin, on underground gasification) will not be extracted as such to the surface of the earth; a mixture of gases will be passed into it, which with the coal will again yield a series of gaseous products, and these will already be subjected to further transformations in the desired direction.

One must also keep in view the possibility of obtaining compounds with entirely new properties and new applications. There is a possible infinite multitude of organic substances, and nature synthesizes only a small...

some of them. Perhaps nutrients may be obtained with extraordinarily easy assimilability, fabrics much stronger than any existing ones, plastic masses stronger than any metal, and perhaps also with such metallic properties as enormous electrical conductivity and thermal conductivity. Not excluded, and on the contrary very probable, is the possibility of synthesizing medicinal agents harmless to man and possessing a strong specific action on particular pathogenic microorganisms (of the salvarsan type, which, of course, cannot be regarded as the extreme limit of achievements in this direction).

The possibilities for the development of science and technology are in principle unlimited, and in socialist society the possibility of making use of them is also unlimited.

The theoretical basis of all branches of the organic chemical industry is the science of organic chemistry. Let us now see whether organic chemistry, in its present form, sufficiently ensures the satisfaction of the needs of socialist construction at the present stage, and in what direction the science must develop further.

Organic chemistry of the second half of the nineteenth century was built upon structural-stereochemical theory. The aim in studying any substance, isolated from natural materials or artificially prepared, was to establish its structural formula. Structural formulas gave a general conception of the properties of compounds, which was sufficient for the chemical industry of that time, since the organic chemical industry was concerned almost exclusively with separating already prepared compounds and purifying them from impurities. Further transformation of substances was of secondary importance, since it was seldom used in production. Therefore chemists dealt little with questions of the course of reactions, of the very mechanism of processes, and especially of their quantitative aspect. In textbooks of organic chemistry one can still find, on this question, only rather fragmentary information in the form of separate rules, often not at all connected with one another and admitting many exceptions.

With the development of the synthetic chemical industry, however, one sometimes has to encounter such exceptions, especially in those cases when the reaction is carried out under different conditions (for example, if the rule was derived from experiments performed at ordinary pressure and at a low temperature, while the production process proceeds with the use of strong heating and high pressures). Thus, from textbooks of organic chemistry it is known that in saturated hydrocarbons the hydrogens of tertiary units are most readily replaced by halogens, secondary ones react with more difficulty, and primary ones still more difficulty. Meanwhile, in the industrial chlorination of natural gases it has been found that isopentane gives 85% of the primary halogen derivative and only 15% of the tertiary.

Thus theory here has lagged behind practice.

Organic chemistry in its present form can no longer explain the course of production processes, and consequently cannot give industry sufficient directions as to how to conduct production. In the absence of a well-developed theory, and in some branches also in the complete

by the absence of any theory whatsoever, industry often had to proceed by groping, with an unnecessary expenditure of time and resources.

What, then, must now be added, or how must science be reorganized, so that it can again point the way for practice?

Here two points of view are conceivable.

Some, carried away by the latest achievements of physics in the field of the structure of matter, believe that chemistry must become, in essence, a part of physics. Atoms consist of electrons; electrons are wave nodes. Consequently, all phenomena that occur with atoms must obey the laws of wave and quantum mechanics, and there is no need to speak of any special chemical laws. Chemistry, as a science, has, so to speak, outlived its day. It is only necessary to apply the achievements of quantum theory to chemistry, and everything will become clear.

The supporters of such views lose sight of the fact that every concrete science, such as physics, chemistry, biology, etc., studies a definite form of matter and its motion. By virtue of the general laws of dialectics, the motion of each form of matter obeys its own regularities. Chemistry studies the form of matter called substance (by the name “substance” it would be most correct to understand forms of matter beginning with atomic nuclei, i.e. electrons and photons, for example, can no longer be classed as substance). At the center of its attention are atoms and the molecules directly composed of them. What we call chemical phenomena are changes of molecules that directly affect only the nearest constituent parts of the latter, i.e. atoms and electrons (and, in the case of complex atoms, only the electrons of their outer shells). The laws of wave and quantum mechanics apply directly to the motions of waves, photons, and electrons, but not to atoms as a whole. Therefore to build all of chemistry on quantum theory is just as wrong as to try to derive all the regularities of biology—for example, the law of natural selection—from the laws of mechanics, physics, and chemistry, on the grounds that living beings consist of molecules and atoms. Living organisms do indeed consist of these parts, but nevertheless they form a new, higher form of matter, the motion of which has its own specific regularities. In order to understand biological phenomena, one must indeed know physics and chemistry, but this is still not enough; biological phenomena cannot be reduced to physics and chemistry. Likewise, the motion of atoms in molecules has specific regularities that are leading for this form of matter. Chemical phenomena cannot be reduced to physics, although the chemist must know physical laws and use them in his science.

Quantum theory must, therefore, be applied in chemistry, including organic chemistry, but its application is not the main thing on which this science must be built. The electronic theory, which considers electrons without yet touching on waves, is also necessary in chemistry (and perhaps closer to it than quantum theory), but it too cannot be the leading one here. The directly chemical regularities must be derived from observation and measurement of the chemical phenomena themselves.

From this point of view, which must be considered the correct one, the reorganization of organic chemistry must consist not only in the application of electrons and quanta. It is necessary to deepen the study of the very processes of change of substances.

in chemical reactions and to deepen this study so that it may contribute as much as possible to socialist construction.

As we have seen above, the socialist development of the organic-chemical industry sets before it the task: from every kind of carbon-containing raw material, to obtain all the organic substances we need, and to obtain them with the least expenditure and with the greatest yield. To solve this production task, science—organic chemistry—must give indications: how a given organic substance will behave under such-and-such conditions, when encountering definite reagents, when subjected to heating, pressure, the action of an electric current, etc. Moreover, the indications of science must be not only qualitative, as for the most part they have been until now; they must have a precise quantitative character, since otherwise industry will not be able to choose the most advantageous method of processing raw material under the given conditions.

Organic chemistry must therefore concern itself chiefly not with the study of substances, but with the study of processes. For expressing the structure of compounds in this study, the customary structural-stereochemical theory is in general sufficient, since the formulas given by this theory are not symbols, but reflect objective reality—the real arrangement of atoms in molecules, not to mention the internal structure of the atoms themselves and the nature of the bonds between them.

The highest criterion of the truth of any scientific proposition is practice, and in this respect structural theory has fully justified itself; on its basis several branches of industry have developed.

In studying processes, it is above all necessary to elucidate the mechanism of reactions, to elucidate it as far as possible in all details, with all intermediate products. Practice gives a number of examples of how, by acting upon the intermediate products with one reagent or another, or by changing the physical conditions, a reaction can sometimes be directed in an entirely different direction.

Thus, in studying the mechanism of alcoholic fermentation, the following scheme was arrived at:

\[ \begin{aligned} 1)\;& \mathrm{CH_2OH - CHOH - CHOH - CHOH - CHOH - CHO} \;\longrightarrow \\ &\longrightarrow\; 2\mathrm{CH_2OH - CHOH - CH{=}O}; \\[6pt] 2)\;& \mathrm{CH_2OH - CHOH - CHO} \;\longrightarrow\; \mathrm{H_2O + CH_2{=}C(OH) - CH{=}O}; \\[6pt] 3)\;& \mathrm{CH_2{=}C(OH) - CH{=}O} \;\longrightarrow\; \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - CH{=}O}; \\[6pt] 4)\;& \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - CH{=}O + CH_2OH - CHOH - CH{=}O} \;\longrightarrow \\ &\longrightarrow\; \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - C(=O) - O - CH_2 - CHOH - CH_2OH}; \\[6pt] 5)\;& \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - C(=O) - O - CH_2 - CHOH - CH_2OH + H_2O} \;\longrightarrow \\ &\longrightarrow\; \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - COOH + CH_2OH - CHOH - CH_2OH}; \\[6pt] 6)\;& \mathrm{CH_3 - CO - COOH} \;\longrightarrow\; \mathrm{CO_2 + CH_3 - C(=O) - H}. \end{aligned} \]

\[ \begin{aligned} 7)\quad & \mathrm{CH_3{-}C(=O){-}H + CH_3{-}CO{-}C(=O){-}H} \longrightarrow \mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2{-}O{-}C(=O){-}CO{-}CH_3};\\[6pt] 8)\quad & \mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2{-}O{-}C(=O){-}CO{-}CH_3 + H_2O} \longrightarrow \mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2OH + HO{-}C(=O){-}CO{-}CH_3}, \end{aligned} \]

etc. Stages 4 and 5 then drop out.

With the appearance of acetic aldehyde, with a carbonyl more active than that in glyceric aldehyde, the latter ceases to react with pyruvic aldehyde. Thus the formation of glycerin (according to equation 5) stops. Therefore fermentation under ordinary conditions proceeds almost entirely with the formation of ethyl alcohol. During the war a large quantity of glycerin was needed. Chemists recalled that glycerin is one of the intermediate products at the beginning of alcoholic fermentation and, knowing the mechanism of this fermentation, changed the conditions so that the formation of glycerin would continue. They added \(\mathrm{Na_2SO_3}\), which reacts with the especially active carbonyl group of acetic aldehyde, so to speak disables this aldehyde, and thus allows glyceric aldehyde to continue being transformed into glycerin. As a result, instead of the usual course of alcoholic fermentation:

\[ \mathrm{C_6H_{12}O_6 \longrightarrow 2C_2H_5OH + 2CO_2} \]

there was obtained glycerin fermentation according to the general equation:

\[ \mathrm{C_6H_{12}O_6 \longrightarrow CH_3 \cdot CHO + CO_2 + C_3H_5(OH)_3}. \]

Thus exact knowledge of the mechanism of the process helps to control this process. By consciously changing the reaction conditions, in such cases we can direct it toward the formation of the product most needed by us at a given moment. The intermediate phases are therefore by no means indifferent for practice, and it must be regarded as inadmissible carelessness when the authors of textbooks*) on one page write the equation:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3O\boxed{\ H + HO\ }NO_2 = CH_3{-}O \cdot NO_2 + H_2O,} \]

and on another:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3\boxed{\ OH + H\ }ONO_2 = CH_3{-}O\,NO_2 + H_2O,} \]

i.e., first it turns out that the alcohol reacts as an acid, and nitric acid as an alkali, and then the reverse.

In order for science to be able to give correct directions to practice, it is necessary to provide the correct theory of production processes, to clarify their true course. First of all, of course, it is necessary to study from this side the processes that have the greatest practical application:

) V. Meyer und P. Jacobson, Lehrbuch der organischen Chemie*.

As such in organic chemistry one may name:

Condensation and cleavage reactions;
Reduction and oxidation reactions;
Hydration and dehydration reactions;
Esterification and saponification of esters;
Halogenation and elimination or substitution of halogens;
Nitration, sulfonation, the Friedel–Crafts reaction.

Each of these types of reactions is applied in a whole series of the most important branches of organic chemical industry. For many of the processes mentioned here, the mechanism has been more or less clarified, especially in recent years. But the quantitative side is weak. Almost always a reaction can proceed in different directions, sometimes in directly opposite ones. Thus esterification and saponification are opposite processes that limit one another:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3O\!:\!H + CH_3-C(=O)-OH \rightleftharpoons CH_3-C(OH)(OCH_3) \rightleftharpoons CH_3-C(=O)(OCH_3) + HOH.} \]

The same is true in a whole series of cases of reduction and oxidation. For example, alcohols (primary and secondary) can be oxidized, losing hydrogen, to aldehydes and ketones:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3-CH_2OH \longrightarrow CH_3-CH=O + H_2;} \]

\[ \mathrm{CH_3-CHOH-CH_3 \longrightarrow CH_3-CO-CH_3 + H_2;} \]

aldehydes and ketones, adding hydrogen, are converted into alcohols:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3-CH=O + H_2 \longrightarrow CH_3-CH_2OH.} \]

In halogenation, nitration, sulfonation, one hydrogen or several can be replaced by a halogen, a nitro group, etc.; moreover, substitution can almost always occur at different positions.

Which of several possible directions predominates is of great importance for production. Meanwhile, the answer to this question is still not provided by clarification of the mechanism of the process. Quantitative data are also needed on the strength of those bonds in the molecule that may be broken in a given reaction. In this respect organic chemistry has so far done very little, and the task of further scientific research work must be the systematic determination of the strength of bonds between atoms. Here, too, it is necessary first of all to deal with the most frequently encountered types of bonds:

1) Bonds between carbon atoms:

\[ \mathrm{C-C;\ C=C;\ C\equiv C;} \]

2) Bonds of hydrogen with other elements—organogens:

\[ \mathrm{C-H;\ O-H;\ N-H;} \]

3) Bonds of carbon with oxygen and nitrogen:

\[ \mathrm{C - O;\ C = O;\ C - N;\ C = N;\ C \equiv N;} \]

4) Bonds of carbon with halides:

\[ \mathrm{C - F;\ C - Cl;\ C - Br;\ C - I.} \]

The strength of bonds may be determined, so to speak, by static methods, from the state of the molecule itself (and not from its change in chemical processes), for example, by calculating the energy reserve (from the heat of combustion), by optical means (absorption spectra for visible light, infrared and ultraviolet rays, the Raman effect, etc.), and so on. But in order to judge what is needed for production, i.e. the chemical activity of a substance, it is best to determine its activity directly in chemical processes. This can be done, for example, by the reaction rate, by the relative yields of the products obtained, by the electromotive force that arises in the given process. It must be said, however, that the values found for bond strength depend not only on the composition and structure of the molecule in which the bond under study is found, but also on the reagent acting on the substance being investigated. In determining, for example, the strength of the bonds of carbon with halides as a function of the position of the halide, it turned out that a halide at a tertiary link is more readily split off under the influence of alkalis and alcoholates, while a halide at a primary carbon atom leaves more readily under the action of amines. Therefore, if we wish to arrange organic radicals in a series according to the increasing or decreasing rate of the reaction by which halogen atoms are split off from them, we obtain not one but two (fortunately two, and not more) different series. The determination of the strength of any type of bond thus requires a whole series of tests. In doing so, of course, the reaction mechanism itself must be known, in order to know precisely which bond is being broken.

Finally, physical conditions are of very great importance: temperature, pressure, etc., and the presence of catalysts.

Heating generally accelerates chemical processes, but it accelerates different reactions differently. As a general rule, it may be observed that an increase in temperature is especially favorable to decomposition reactions rather than addition reactions. But even in substitution reactions, temperature has not only an accelerating but also a directing influence. For example, in the halogenation of aromatic hydrocarbons, heating and light promote substitution in the side chain. A rather complicated case is encountered in the chlorination of hydrocarbons of the paraffin series. As was already mentioned above, the chlorination of isopentane leads 85% to the primary halogen-substituted compound and only 15% to the tertiary one:

\[ \mathrm{ CH_3 - CH_2 - CH(CH_3) - CH_3 + Cl_2 \rightarrow HCl + \begin{cases} CH_3 - CH_2 - CH(CH_3) - CH_2Cl \quad (85\%) \ \text{and} \\ CH_3 - CH_2 - CCl(CH_3) - CH_3 \quad (15\%). \end{cases} } \]

Pentane gave 50% primary and 50% a mixture of secondary chlorides:

\[ \mathrm{CH_3 - CH_2 - CH_2 - CH_2 - CH_3 + Cl_2 \rightarrow HCl +} \]

\[ \mathrm{+\, CH_3 - CH_2 - CH_2 - CH_2 - CH_2Cl \ (50\%)} \]

and a mixture of \(\mathrm{CH_3 - CH_2 - CH_2 - CHCl - CH_3}\) and \(\mathrm{CH_3 - CH_2 - CHCl - CH_2 - CH_3}\).

Such a course of chlorination, as it were, fundamentally contradicts the previously known rule of the greater mobility of tertiary and then secondary hydrogens; it seems to indicate a change in the relations of bond strengths under the conditions of the given process. The reaction was conducted at \(150^\circ\).

I consider the following explanation of the observed anomaly the most probable. The substitution process, of course, takes place when the reacting molecules collide with one another. But if a chlorine molecule approaches some link of a hydrocarbon, this does not mean that a reaction will necessarily occur. The probability of substitution is the greater, the more mobile the hydrogen atoms are, the more weakly they are bound to carbon. The fact that chiefly the hydrogens of tertiary, and then of secondary, links react is evidently explained by the lesser strength of their bond with carbon. It may be, for example, that under the given conditions the hydrogen of a tertiary link is detached on average at one out of 10 encounters with chlorine, that of a secondary link at one collision in 100, and that of a primary link at 1:1000. With a rise in the temperature the reaction will proceed more readily, partly because the molecules move faster and meet more often, partly owing to the weakening of the bonds between the atoms. Let us raise the temperature so much that the hydrogen of a tertiary link is replaced by chlorine at every collision with its molecule. Then the probability of reaction with each hydrogen of a secondary link will be 1:10 (approximately), and for a primary one 1:100. Raising the temperature further, we shall ultimately reach the point at which, in the tertiary, secondary, and primary links alike, the hydrogens will be replaced at every collision. Then the difference in bond strength will lose significance, and the predominant direction of the reaction will be determined exclusively by the probability of encounter with chlorine. And this probability is the greater, the more primary, secondary, and tertiary hydrogens there are in the molecule. In normal pentane the hydrogens of the primary and secondary links are 6 each; i.e., approximately 50% primary chloride and 50% a mixture of secondary ones should be obtained. In isopentane the formation of the primary halogen derivative should predominate.

The circumstance indicated here—the probability of encounter with the reagent of one or another atom of the molecule of the substance under study—must also be borne in mind when assessing bond strengths in general and, in particular, when explaining the influence of temperature.

An increase in pressure in general favors those reactions which are accompanied by a decrease in volume, i.e., in the gas phase, the formation of more complex molecules.

Catalysts are of very great importance. They not only can greatly accelerate or slow a process, but often turn the reaction in quite a different direction from that in which it proceeds under ordinary conditions. It is found that a catalyst cannot cause a reaction, but can only accelerate it; but, in practice, if among several possible directions

if one direction of the process is accelerated many times (even if, under ordinary conditions, imperceptibly), then this direction becomes predominant.

There are several theories in the literature concerning the action of catalysts. The most probable (more correctly, not the most probable in general, but the most probable for many cases of catalysis, since, in all likelihood, different causes may operate in catalysis) explanation of catalysis should be considered to be the formation of intermediate compounds, for the most part so unstable that they cannot be isolated. In these intermediate, usually complex, compounds, the strength of bonds may be sharply altered in comparison with what it was in the original molecules.

The fact, for example, that in benzene hydrocarbons, upon simple heating with halides and other reagents, substitution occurs in the side chain indicates the lesser strength there of the bonds of hydrogen atoms with carbons. This is fully confirmed by the easy oxidizability precisely of the side chains. Experience shows that under the action of such a strong oxidizing agent as chromic-acetic anhydride (a solution of chromic anhydride in acetic anhydride), saturated hydrocarbons (hexane and others) are oxidized more readily than benzene. Aromatic hydrocarbons with a side chain are oxidized still more readily. Meanwhile, benzene is nitrated by strong nitric acid a thousand times faster than hexane, and enters into the Friedel–Crafts reaction many times more easily as well. Evidently, in those complexes which benzene forms with nitric acid, aluminum chloride, and so on, the bonds of the hydrogens with the carbon atoms of the benzene ring are extremely loosened. Consequently, such reactions as nitration, halogenation in the presence of catalysts, etc., cannot serve for determining the strength of bonds in benzene itself.

A very striking example is provided by the determination of the mobility of hydrogen atoms in hydroxyl organic compounds (alcohols and acids) from the electromotive force of their reaction with sodium. We are accustomed to the fact that carboxylic acids (for example, acetic, propionic, butyric) have a more acidic character than phenols, phenols are more acidic than water, and alcohols of the fatty series are inferior to water in the mobility of hydroxyl hydrogen. It turns out that this is valid for the conditions under which measurements are usually carried out, i.e., for aqueous solutions. In the pure state the same compounds are arranged in another order. For example, propyl alcohol gives a greater electromotive force with sodium than propionic acid, while phenol gives a still considerably smaller one. The same is true in benzene solution. In a nitrobenzene medium we have a new change in the relations: in a 10% solution phenol gave a very large electromotive force, while the acid and the alcohol gave many times less; more concentrated solutions (70%) give the advantage to propionic acid (the electromotive force of the reaction with sodium, incidentally, is here several times greater than for the pure acid).

All these examples clearly show that, in order to derive any regularities in the question of the strength of the bond between definite atoms, it is necessary to carry out many series of experiments under the most varied conditions. It is necessary to take into account both the nature of the reagent acting, and the external conditions (temperature, pressure, light, etc.), and the influence of extraneous substances, at first glance foreign, which in fact always exert a greater or lesser catalytic action.

Thus, socialist construction sets before the organic-chemical industry the goal: from all kinds of carbonaceous raw materials (coal, petroleum, wood, peat, etc.) to prepare any organic compounds we need, and to prepare them by the cheapest possible methods, in the best yield and of the best quality. To attain this goal, industry requires a restructuring of its theoretical basis, a restructuring of organic chemistry as a science. For any concrete case, organic chemistry must provide an answer: how, under given conditions of one kind or another, a given organic substance will react, what products and in what yield it will give, and how, consequently, it will be most advantageous to alter the conditions in order to achieve the desired result.

The restructuring of science necessary for this purpose must, concretely, consist in directing the chief attention not to the study of individual organic compounds, but to the study of the processes in which these compounds are formed and transformed. The study of processes must be not only qualitative, but also quantitative. It must also consist in elucidating the very mechanism of the reaction in all its stages and with all intermediate products, and in determining the strength of the bonds that are broken in this process.

Both in setting up the experiments and measurements themselves, and in the theoretical interpretation of their results, one must, of course, make use of all the experimental and theoretical achievements of modern physics. It is necessary to make use of both the electron and quantum theories. But these theories must not be the fundamental ones in chemistry. Chemistry studies a definite form of matter, atoms and molecules, the motion of which has its own specific laws and cannot be wholly reduced to quanta. The laws derived in chemistry must, in the main, be the result of observation and measurement of chemical phenomena, and not mathematical deductions from the theory of quanta.

The restructuring of organic chemistry in accordance with the requirements of socialist construction must be carried out on the basis of the general laws of materialist dialectics. This restructuring must proceed in planned fashion, since only in this way can the enormous tasks ahead be solved in the shortest possible time. In order to catch up with and overtake the advanced capitalist countries in technology, we must still earlier catch up with and overtake them in science.

Basic literature:

Materials of the 16th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) [1930].

Materials of the 17th Party Conference [1932].

Materials of the 17th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) [1934].

“Paths of Development of the Chemical Industry in the 2nd Five-Year Plan” [Communist Academy, Institute of Economics, 1933].