The festive award ceremony was moderated by Professor Michael Dröscher, Secretary General and Treasurer of the GDNÄ. Its Vice President, Professor Heribert Hofer, gave the introduction and presented the medal. 

This was followed by a laudatory speech given by two representatives of the young target audience, both members of the GDNÄ’s Young Network. Kevin Yuan is in his first semester of medical school, while Eric Andresen has successfully completed his Abitur and plans to study physics. Heribert Hofer: ‘The two did this with great enthusiasm, with a fine sense of humour, very entertaining and yet very informative about the award winner and his activities.’ It was a brilliant performance that also visibly impressed the honouree.

© Stefan Buchholz

In his keynote speech, Jacob Beautemps presented some rules for the use of social media. In addition to good visualisation and structure, it is important to focus on the questions of the target group, among other things. 

‘The audience was impressed by both the laudatory speech and the keynote address,’ reports Heribert Hofer. After Jacob Beautemps’ speech, there was a highly interesting discussion between the knowledgeable guests and the honouree.

© Stefan Buchholz

Dr Beautemps, you are 32 years old, have already won several awards for your approach to science communication, and on 3 December you will also receive the Lorenz Oken Medal from the GDNÄ. What makes you so successful?
I don’t know if I’m that successful. But at least I’ve been active on various media channels for eight years now, and so far I haven’t made any major mistakes. As a science YouTuber, I publish two new videos on scientific topics every week – always based on studies and other reputable sources, which I cite transparently, as in a scientific paper. My community likes that, and it has now grown to more than 700,000 people. I also make documentaries for television, such as the series Science for Future on SWR, and contributions to the children’s programme Tigerenten Club on ARD. At the beginning of the year, my first book, entitled Rethinking Our Future, was published. Well, everywhere I try to work as accurately as possible and be transparent with my sources.

What is your favourite format?
Definitely YouTube. The medium is uncomplicated, fast and flexible. I have complete freedom in designing the videos; no one interferes. That doesn’t mean I don’t like to learn new things – for example, from the television professionals I work with. I then use this new knowledge for my videos. For the past year, I have also been running an English-language channel for an international audience. Take a look at The German Science Guy.

@ IdeenExpo

On stage at IdeenExpo 2024 in Hanover, Jacob Beautemps demonstrates how to make ice using nitrogen. Held every two years since 2007, the event aims to inspire young people to take an interest in science and technology.

How do you choose your topics?
I’m particularly interested in topics that will be relevant in the future and topics that are widely discussed but which hardly anyone looks into in any depth. It’s always important to relate them to our lives. One example is the heat pump. There was a lot of debate about it and most people didn’t even know what the principle behind it was. So I did a deep dive that lasted almost 20 minutes, but really explained the principle. In the end, more than 1.2 million people watched the video. 

Your spectrum ranges from the polio vaccine to noise makers in the jungle to electricity from rain. How do you manage to report competently on all these topics?
Fortunately, I have a great team that helps me with research and implementation. There are currently five of us in the editorial team. Our goal is always to produce scientifically sound videos based on the latest research. 

And if a mistake happens?
That happens, and then it’s important to deal with it transparently. I address the mistake in one of the next videos and set the record straight. That builds trust. 

How does the audience react to your posts?
On YouTube, first with click numbers; currently, there are an average of 4.5 million views per month. I am fortunate that I hardly ever have to deal with hostility, and when I do, I don’t argue with people, but refer them to the sources, which I always cite. It’s nice when I can inspire others. I get comments like: Hey, you got me interested in renewable energies, and now I’m studying it. Or: I report on a start-up, visit it again later and meet people there who became aware of the company through me and now work there. 

There are other successful science YouTubers in Germany. Is that unwelcome competition for you?
On the contrary, we benefit from each other. For example, people who watch a video by Mai Thi often watch one of mine afterwards – and vice versa. We also have different areas of focus. I mostly deal with innovations, while other science YouTubers may focus more on nutrition or medicine. That’s the beauty of YouTube: you don’t have to fight for airtime like you do on TV, but instead promote each other.

@ Beautemps

At the award ceremony in Stuttgart, you will give a speech and present some rules for successful knowledge transfer. What are they?
I can give a few examples. We know from research how helpful it is to work with questions. This is not just about arousing curiosity with questions. Experiments have shown that specifically addressing misconceptions is very helpful in dispelling them. Without these questions, the same experiments showed that there is hardly any learning effect. Maximum transparency is another point. This includes introducing yourself and your expertise and explaining where the information you are presenting comes from. This creates trust, which is the be-all and end-all of good communication. Messages become particularly memorable when they are visualised and emotionalised. There are lots of tricks for doing this – I will give a few examples in Stuttgart. 

How did you actually get into science communication?
It was a complete coincidence. I actually wanted to become a teacher. While studying physics and social sciences, I worked part-time at Günther Jauch’s production company in Cologne, always behind the camera. When I was asked if I could set up a YouTube channel for the company, I did so, but again behind the camera. At some point, I was asked if I would like to get in front of the camera. At first I said no, not really, but in my mid-twenties I did it anyway. Then one thing led to another. 

A doctorate is not essential for your profession. Nevertheless, you decided to do it. Why?
Out of pure curiosity. I was interested in the question of why and how people use educational videos and what makes such videos successful. I conducted a study with around five thousand adults from Germany who frequently watch science videos and came to some interesting conclusions. For example: an important reason for the audience to engage with a topic is the person in front of the camera. This creates a parasocial relationship, the feeling of knowing the other person, even if you have never met them in person. You spend time together, and over time, trust develops. From my findings, I have derived a guide with 17 rules for the best possible production of educational videos. In principle, however, the study can be useful to anyone who wants to communicate competently. The same rules apply when I give a presentation, teach a course or want to explain something that is not entirely trivial. 

What are your plans for the future?
I have many plans, but one project is particularly close to my heart: next year, I want to work with colleagues from the field of science communication to launch an award for innovations made in Germany. Germany is a highly innovative country, and we want to show that to a large audience. At the moment, many people here are too pessimistic. There will be awards in various categories, for example for innovations in the fields of medicine, energy and mobility. The Federal Agency for Breakthrough Innovations will help us to identify the most convincing projects from what we hope will be a large number of applications. We will then present them in videos and let our communities vote on the winners. We are currently looking for partners and asking companies and scientific institutions for their support.

Professor Kucera, you have taken on the role of Scientific Director for the GDNÄ Conference 2026 in Bremen. What attracted you to this role?
I am familiar with the GDNÄ from my time at the University of Tübingen. I still remember well the meeting organized by Christiane Nüsslein-Volhard, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine and then president of the GDNÄ. With its interdisciplinary lectures and student program, the conference was a model of modern science communication for me. All of this fits in very well with the science city of Bremen, where I have been working for thirteen years. So I was happy to accept when the current president of the GDNÄ asked me to take on the task. 

How can we imagine your work as scientific director?
I prepare the stage for the GDNÄ on site and support it with my contacts in Bremen’s science, education, and cultural scene. This involves recruiting speakers, finding good venues for the accompanying program, and establishing contacts with schools and the city administration. I am happy to invest the time and energy required for this. For us, the GDNÄ meeting is a welcome opportunity to demonstrate the strengths of Bremen as a center of science.

  © DHI Bremen

What are these strengths?
In 2005, the Stifterverband named Bremen the first German “City of Science.” This is testament to the rapid development that universities, institutes, and the entire scientific community in Bremen and Bremerhaven have undergone over the past 50 years. I myself have always been impressed by the high density of scientific institutions located around our campus in the technology park, which are closely networked with each other. The university is at the center, surrounded by high-tech companies and non-university institutes. Distances are short, and the cafeteria is often a common meeting place – which promotes cooperation. With our focus on marine research, artificial intelligence, and robotics, but also on the social sciences, we can compete internationally. In addition, Bremen is a great city that has a lot to offer. People here are proud to live in a city of science and enjoy attending lectures, exhibitions, and discussion events. The people of Bremen are aware of the importance and benefits of science for society.

This fits in with the motto of the 2026 meeting: Knowledge creates benefits – use science.
Yes, also with regard to the application of research, Bremen is a very suitable venue for the GDNÄ.

As Vice President for Research and Transfer at the University of Bremen, you are responsible for the application of research. How do you proceed?
It is important to me to support our researchers in their commitment to transfer and to clearly communicate our appreciation for them. I try to understand what promotes transfer and what hinders it. To this end, I hold many discussions and try to involve colleagues from across the entire spectrum of disciplines at the university. It is also important for us to maintain contact with local players in Bremen, from the cultural scene to business associations such as the Chamber of Commerce and the Industry Club. Close networking is the key to success for the location as a whole.

You have been in office for three years. What has happened in terms of transfer?
We have achieved a lot. One example is the Digital Hub INDUSTRY, where we work with small and medium-sized companies in the region to develop tailor-made digital solutions for the industry of tomorrow. Another example is the transfer center for sustainable materials, matena innovate! center, which was founded in December 2024. We were able to prevail in fierce competition and win the Hamburg-based Joachim Herz Foundation for the promotion of our location. Here, research teams from the university and our partner institutes develop new approaches from research to application maturity. The focus is on topics such as stationary energy storage for renewable energies, sustainable feed for aquaculture, and sensor materials for the hydrogen economy. We are benefiting from a change in the overall climate when it comes to transfer: its importance is increasingly recognized by society, and its image has improved significantly in recent years.

© Volker Diekamp, Universität Bremen

Expedition MSM 111 in Baffin Bay: In the conference room of the research vessel Maria S. Merian, scientists discuss the initial results of a deep-sea drilling project. Together, they attempt to understand the stratification of the ocean floor. “As it later turned out, our initial interpretations were completely wrong,” says Michal Kucera (center), who was the expedition leader at the time.

You are Czech, studied in Prague, earned your doctorate in Sweden, and your scientific career has taken you to the US, the UK, and several universities in Germany. How do you assess the German scientific scene in international comparison?
The freedom of research at German universities is fantastic. They do not have to finance themselves through tuition fees and are therefore less commercially oriented than universities in Anglo-Saxon countries. Teaching is more important there than in Germany, there are many tutorials for students, and the curriculum is more flexible than in Germany. While in Germany it is often a matter of complying with rules, for example with regard to teaching obligations, in the UK teaching is distributed flexibly among the teaching staff according to need. On the other hand, Germany’s great advantages are its excellent research funding and its globally unique research infrastructure. These make the country a major scientific power. I, for example, benefit greatly from access to excellent marine science equipment and state-of-the-art research vessels. 

Do you still have time for your own research?
Yes, but unfortunately not as much as I used to. That’s why I’m not starting any new large-scale projects at the moment, but am concentrating on evaluating the results of past expeditions. For example, there are samples from a deep-sea drilling expedition that I led in Baffin Bay in 2022. We expect to gain new insights into the melting behavior of the Greenland ice cap in the past, which is important for our future in a warmer global climate. During this expedition, we also collected sediment cores in southern Greenland that contain valuable information about the climate over the last ten thousand years. They will help us understand why the Vikings left their settlements in Greenland in the 15th century after living there for four hundred years. Incidentally, the MSM 111 expedition with the research vessel Maria S. Merian took place as part of the University of Bremen’s Cluster of Excellence “The Ocean Floor – Earth’s Unexplored Interface,” the continuation of which was recently approved.  

Let’s take another look at the GDNÄ conference in 2026: What can participants look forward to?
Fascinating lectures on current topics in the natural sciences and a great accompanying program. For example, a reception is planned at the Bremen Overseas Museum. The museum, with its collection of natural history, ethnology, and trade that is unique in Europe, will celebrate its 130th anniversary in 2026. Another highlight is a visit to Universum Bremen. The popular science center is located directly on the university campus and invites us to participate and experiment during an exclusive guided tour.

Professor Buchholz, you have been a member of the GDNÄ for a long time. How long exactly?
Actually, for more than a quarter of a century. I was brought in by Professor Heribert Offermanns, a gifted chemist and member of the Degussa Executive Board. I worked for him for several years as an executive assistant, writing speeches for him, for example. Mr Offermanns was my mentor – he convinced me of the qualities of the GDNÄ.

What particularly appealed to you?
The wide range of topics and the interdisciplinary approach to the natural sciences. Even as a child, I was interested in nature in all its diversity and fascinated by the infinity of the universe. When it came to choosing a degree course, I found it difficult to decide between chemistry, biology and physics. In the end, I chose chemistry, which in retrospect was the right choice for me.

 In what way?
Because chemistry has many links to other disciplines. The most exciting time in my professional career was the years I spent in biotechnology, where I was able to work with biologists, physicists and engineers, among others. These were wonderful interdisciplinary teams that achieved great results. I am thinking, for example, of fermentatively produced amino acids that replace amino acids obtained from animal material. During the BSE crisis, this was an important and profitable innovation for the company.

 © Evonik

You started at what was then Degussa and remained loyal to the company and its successor companies, now Evonik, until your retirement. Were you not tempted by an academic career?
Yes, basically, that was my original goal, but based on my assessment during my studies, I felt that chemistry had been relatively well researched and the basic molecules were already known. Of course, you can still produce an infinite number of new molecules, but that wasn’t my path. I was more interested in innovation, in using knowledge for new processes and products. I also found the practical transfer of research results into large-scale production exciting. It’s difficult, but it succeeds time and again. One example is the very skin-friendly, nature-identical and biodegradable biosurfactants that one of my project teams developed over the last decade: today, they are used in dishwashing detergents and skin care products, for example. As a biotech manager who worked exclusively with biologists and engineers for several years, I felt very much at home in the chemical industry. 

The German chemical industry is not doing well at the moment. Is there a lack of innovation?
Yes, but not only in terms of new chemical products. We already have a lot of good products. The chemical industry is a mature industry that is undergoing a gigantic transformation. Energy and raw materials are expensive, cheap competition and weak demand are squeezing margins. Consolidation is inevitable; the chemical industry will shrink. At the same time, it is urgently needed, not least to combat climate change and better protect the environment. However, radically new approaches are required. I see opportunities in the combination of chemistry and artificial intelligence, which will give the field a major boost. And we must not miss out on this development.

 © Evonik

That sounds like a good topic for the next GDNÄ meeting in Bremen in 2026.
Yes, a contribution on this topic is indeed planned. Lectures on industrial biotechnology and the electrocatalytic production of green hydrogen are also planned. The Nobel Lecture will be given by Benjamin List from the Max Planck Institute for Coal Research in Mülheim. He will report on his research into organocatalysis, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2021. 

In the GDNÄ, you are not only group chairman for chemistry, but also designated secretary general. At the beginning of 2027, you will take over the honorary position from Michael Dröscher. What motivates you?
The GDNÄ suits me and my interest in fundamental and interdisciplinary issues. That is what the GDNÄ has stood for for two hundred years. I find that impressive and important, and I am happy to contribute to its future development. 

Do you already have any ideas?
In my studies at the University of the Third Age at Goethe University Frankfurt, I am currently focusing intensively on natural philosophy. This also involves our ability to understand nature and its limits. We are learning a great deal about scientific theories and the history of science and are engaged in lively discussions on these topics. I could also imagine such a range of topics being offered at the GDNÄ. The great popularity of my course shows that there is interest in such fundamental questions.

Ekkehard Winter, long-standing foundation manager and member of the GDNÄ Board of Directors, on new ways to improve STEM education in Germany.

Dr Winter, you became a member of the GDNÄ a good thirty years ago. Back then, in the mid-1990s, you were just starting your career in major German science foundations. What made the GDNÄ interesting to you?
It was definitely personalities such as Hubert Markl, Joachim Treusch and Detlev Ganten, who were successive presidents of the GDNÄ at the time. They are the pioneers of modern science communication in Germany, and we owe them a great deal. I attended GDNÄ meetings on a regular basis, and I was particularly impressed by the 200th anniversary celebrations in Leipzig three years ago. All these meetings offer high-quality lectures that thoroughly illuminate a topic – not just snippets of knowledge like at other events with a similar target audience. 

Almost a year ago, you were appointed to the GDNÄ Executive Board. What does that mean for you?
I have been appointed for two years, until the end of 2026. I enjoy contributing my decades of experience in mathematics and science education. My network of contacts – whether in foundations, universities, research museums or politics – could also be helpful. So far, I have attended two GDNÄ strategy meetings and each time I have been impressed by the productive discussions among peers and the refreshing contributions of young members. 

You know many organisations for young people in science. What is your impression of the still relatively young jGDNÄ?
Its members are bursting with ideas and want to achieve something – including for their own careers. This is similar elsewhere and very welcome. I also think it’s good that young people organise their own events between GDNÄ meetings. But it’s also part of the bigger picture that the initiative currently thrives on the enthusiasm of particularly committed members. But what happens when they go abroad? Or when they hardly have any time for voluntary work? Is there a risk of the organisation falling apart? To prevent this, a kind of liaison office will be needed in a year or two – a hub that holds everything together. All this costs money, and without funding it will be difficult to achieve. I’m happy to help think about this.

 © Marlene Anders

Are there any funding opportunities on the horizon?
Let’s take foundations, for example. Many of them are now less involved in programmes for individuals due to strategic decisions and also for cost reasons; they tend to support structures instead. This would therefore be a good fit for a jGDNÄ hub. However, there are many other funding opportunities available through civil society or government institutions, some of which can be combined. What is missing is an overview that highlights the strengths, weaknesses and special features of the various offers. Creating a ‘funding map’ would be a great topic for a bachelor’s thesis! 

One suggestion from the jGDNÄ is a mentoring programme that brings young people together with established GDNÄ members from science and industry. A good idea?
A very good idea! I am reminded of an experience I had as managing director of the Telekom Foundation. We set up a programme that brought together doctoral students with leaders from various fields, including top managers from industry. Each mentee had a mentor who was very enthusiastic about participating and often came from a different discipline than their mentee. It worked extremely well. But it has to be well organised and requires enthusiasm, time and money. 

The jGDNÄ is an umbrella organisation that also houses the GDNÄ’s long-running and successful school programme. How do you rate the programme?
From what I have seen in recent years, it has developed wonderfully. It plays an important role in the ecosystem of STEM education, i.e. in the fields of mathematics, computer science, natural sciences and technology. Such programmes strengthen the fascination for subjects that are urgently needed but have always lacked young talent. Fundamentally, this is unlikely to change in the future. This makes programmes for schoolchildren all the more important, as they spark enthusiasm and nurture talent from the sidelines, so to speak. 

The jGDNÄ runs several programmes, including a small teacher programme run by the GDNÄ. Do you see any potential here, and if so, how can it be exploited?
There are incredibly dedicated teachers, especially in the STEM subjects. I know from conversations with Paul Mühlenhoff, the head of the GDNÄ programme, that this is also the case there. These teachers often really enjoy getting together outside their own schools and exchanging ideas. In their home schools, they are often seen as troublemakers because they like to try new things and raise standards. One idea, for example, would be a teachers’ café at the next meeting in Bremen in 2026. Established and aspiring STEM teachers with an interest in exchange and cooperation would be invited. I have coordinated several meetings of this kind and have always been amazed at how little teachers know about initiatives in other federal states and how keen they are to take up good ideas. Our federal education system is so provincial! We should change that, and the GDNÄ could make an important contribution here. 

You retired two years ago. In addition to your honorary positions, including at the GDNÄ, you are now studying philosophy of science at the University of Münster. Was that a good decision?
Yes, definitely. Until now, I didn’t have the time to delve into the history of ideas and theoretical constructs in the natural sciences. However, these areas should not only be of interest to retirees; in my opinion, they should also be included in the teaching of STEM subjects at schools and universities. With its long history, the GDNÄ could also be a good place for this.

Professor Bolm, you decided early on to pursue a career in chemistry, became a university lecturer and have remained in this field for over thirty years. Would you choose the same path again?
Yes, it has always been the right choice for me. I can conduct my research at my own discretion and support talented young people in their development: these are advantages I enjoy every day. It is not a nine-to-five job; you are always challenged, and occasionally my team thinks I work too hard. There is a trend among young people to turn their backs on academia and look for a quieter job. I try to counteract this, among other things with my lecture ‘Why you should stay at university’. I will be giving it again soon. 

What are your main arguments in favour of a career in academia?
Freedom of thought and the opportunity to do what you like best in your job. 

What sparked your enthusiasm for research and chemistry in particular?
There were no role models in my family. But my parents gave me chemistry sets and I was allowed to buy all the chemicals I needed for my experiments at a nearby pharmacy. That wouldn’t be possible today; adults would consider it too risky, but in the 1960s and 1970s it wasn’t a problem. I owe a lot to my biology teacher. She was doing a PhD in microbiology and taught biology with a strong focus on chemistry. Her fascination was contagious, and at some point I realised: I’m going to be a chemist.

 © Carsten Bolm

Carsten Bolm’s large, internationally diverse working group in front of the institute building.

It seems that you pursued this plan with determination.
It may seem that way from the outside. I myself felt quite erratic during that time. I moved eight times, in Germany, Switzerland and the USA, and nowhere did I stay longer than two years. The fact that this led to an academic career has a lot to do with luck, with meeting the right people at the right time. 

You mentioned the fascination of chemistry. What exactly fascinates you?
Chemistry requires both brainpower and manual dexterity, a wonderful combination. It is also the only discipline in which new substances are constantly being created – substances that did not exist before. That never ceases to inspire me. 

You are an organic chemist, but you also work in mechanochemistry. How do the two fit together?
At the beginning of an academic career, you have to specialise in a few research questions in order to gain a profile and visibility in the professional world. Later, I gradually expanded my spectrum, including in the direction of mechanochemistry. It is often used in the geosciences, for example when it comes to grinding materials energy-efficiently and without solvents using a ball mill. Twenty years ago, this was still uncharted territory in organic synthesis chemistry, but today mechanochemistry is regarded as a significant methodological advancement. In my working group, we use the process to improve existing synthesis methods and to discover new ground in chemistry – the unusual reaction conditions in the ball mills are good for a few surprises.

  © Carsten Bolm

How do such new approaches emerge at your institute?
Often through interdisciplinary exchange. When searching for new active substances to combat diseases, for example, I work a lot with medical professionals. Sulphur chemistry plays a central role in this, for example in the development of new tuberculosis inhibitors. Thanks to interdisciplinary cooperation, we have been able to significantly expand the substrate range of sulfoximines, which are particularly suitable for use in medicinal chemistry and plant protection. We also collaborate with engineers, for example in the recently reconfirmed RWTH Excellence Cluster Integrated Fuel & Chemical Science Center, or FSC2 for short. Here, we support the development of environmentally friendly liquid energy sources. Whether at our own university or as part of large EU projects, we always rely on high-calibre, reliable partners. And that suits us very well. 

What role do contacts with industry play in your work?
A very important one. I would even say that without industry contacts, it would be impossible to work in my field. My working group, for example, has close contacts with the pharmaceutical industry in order to jointly develop new active substances. A plant protection company is currently testing a new class of compounds discovered in our laboratories. And like many other chemistry institutes at German universities, we benefit greatly from the Chemical Industry Fund in promoting young academics. It awards prizes and grants, which is very important for our young scientists. 

How do you see Germany’s position as a centre for chemistry? 
We are concerned that the large chemical companies are offering fewer and fewer jobs for our graduates. But if you look long enough, you will find something – this is especially true for chemists with doctorates. These are often positions in smaller companies. Overall, the industry is suffering from enormous energy costs and many companies are currently considering relocating abroad. Rapid political intervention to reduce costs would be helpful. 

Almost 30 years ago, you accepted a professorship at RWTH and stayed despite other offers. What kept you in Aachen? 
The strong location, good research conditions and high quality of life. I come from Braunschweig, did my habilitation in Basel and dreamed of a life in southwestern Germany. But I ended up in Aachen. At the time, I thought that if an offer came from Freiburg, I would sign it blindly. A little later, the call from Freiburg actually came. The RWTH made such a generous counteroffer that I couldn’t say no. Another offer followed – but once again, RWTH was better. And over time, I have come to really appreciate the city, its proximity to Belgium and the Rhineland. 

How did you come to the GDNÄ?
Through a phone call a year and a half ago. Michael Dröscher, a chemist like me and long-time secretary general of the GDNÄ, asked me if I would be interested in working with them. I was familiar with the GDNÄ at the time, but I didn’t have a clear picture of its goals. I think that’s the case for many people at universities. I then travelled to the meeting in Potsdam and found it extremely successful. I was impressed by the interaction between the disciplines and the appreciative cooperation between young and old – I had never experienced anything like it before. The GDNÄ’s Young Network was founded in Potsdam and has developed magnificently since then. It immediately gives you lots of new ideas. 

Such as?
Perhaps we will be able to organise a series of lectures on topics related to modern chemistry in Aachen, together with representatives of the jGDNÄ. If that works, it could also be a format for other university cities. Another idea would be to send GNDÄ members on lecture tours to German universities in order to put the society and the jGDNÄ in the university spotlight. 

You were elected to the GDNÄ Executive Board as representative for chemistry. What do you want to achieve in this role? 
One of my main tasks at the moment is to recruit top-class chemists to give lectures on their research that are as accessible as possible for the 2026 meeting in Bremen. The topics should be current and of interdisciplinary interest. It’s a wonderful position and fits in perfectly with my goal: I want to make chemistry more visible – in science and in the public eye – and the GDNÄ along with it.

  © Stefanie Zimmer

The laboratory as a place of learning: Dr Renè Hommelsheim (right) answers Christian Keiser’s questions about sulphur chemistry.

How do such new approaches emerge at your institute?
Often through interdisciplinary exchange. When searching for new active substances to combat diseases, for example, I work a lot with medical professionals. Sulphur chemistry plays a central role in this, for example in the development of new tuberculosis inhibitors. Thanks to interdisciplinary cooperation, we have been able to significantly expand the substrate range of sulfoximines, which are particularly suitable for use in medicinal chemistry and plant protection. We also collaborate with engineers, for example in the recently reconfirmed RWTH Excellence Cluster Integrated Fuel & Chemical Science Center, or FSC2 for short. Here, we support the development of environmentally friendly liquid energy sources. Whether at our own university or as part of large EU projects, we always rely on high-calibre, reliable partners. And that suits us very well. 

What role do contacts with industry play in your work?
A very important one. I would even say that without industry contacts, it would be impossible to work in my field. My working group, for example, has close contacts with the pharmaceutical industry in order to jointly develop new active substances. A plant protection company is currently testing a new class of compounds discovered in our laboratories. And like many other chemistry institutes at German universities, we benefit greatly from the Chemical Industry Fund in promoting young academics. It awards prizes and grants, which is very important for our young scientists. 

How do you see Germany’s position as a centre for chemistry? 
We are concerned that the large chemical companies are offering fewer and fewer jobs for our graduates. But if you look long enough, you will find something – this is especially true for chemists with doctorates. These are often positions in smaller companies. Overall, the industry is suffering from enormous energy costs and many companies are currently considering relocating abroad. Rapid political intervention to reduce costs would be helpful. 

Almost 30 years ago, you accepted a professorship at RWTH and stayed despite other offers. What kept you in Aachen? 
The strong location, good research conditions and high quality of life. I come from Braunschweig, did my habilitation in Basel and dreamed of a life in southwestern Germany. But I ended up in Aachen. At the time, I thought that if an offer came from Freiburg, I would sign it blindly. A little later, the call from Freiburg actually came. The RWTH made such a generous counteroffer that I couldn’t say no. Another offer followed – but once again, RWTH was better. And over time, I have come to really appreciate the city, its proximity to Belgium and the Rhineland. 

How did you come to the GDNÄ?
Through a phone call a year and a half ago. Michael Dröscher, a chemist like me and long-time secretary general of the GDNÄ, asked me if I would be interested in working with them. I was familiar with the GDNÄ at the time, but I didn’t have a clear picture of its goals. I think that’s the case for many people at universities. I then travelled to the meeting in Potsdam and found it extremely successful. I was impressed by the interaction between the disciplines and the appreciative cooperation between young and old – I had never experienced anything like it before. The GDNÄ’s Young Network was founded in Potsdam and has developed magnificently since then. It immediately gives you lots of new ideas. 

Such as?
Perhaps we will be able to organise a series of lectures on topics related to modern chemistry in Aachen, together with representatives of the jGDNÄ. If that works, it could also be a format for other university cities. Another idea would be to send GNDÄ members on lecture tours to German universities in order to put the society and the jGDNÄ in the university spotlight. 

You were elected to the GDNÄ Executive Board as representative for chemistry. What do you want to achieve in this role? 
One of my main tasks at the moment is to recruit top-class chemists to give lectures on their research that are as accessible as possible for the 2026 meeting in Bremen. The topics should be current and of interdisciplinary interest. It’s a wonderful position and fits in perfectly with my goal: I want to make chemistry more visible – in science and in the public eye – and the GDNÄ along with it.