What If a Firecracker Left No Smoke? This IISER Scientist Found an Unusual Way to Make One
The IISER-M pollution-free firecracker is an alternative fireworks device developed by Dr Samrat Ghosh at IISER Mohali. It was created to preserve some excitement of fireworks while reducing smoke, particulate emissions and burnt debris. This matters because conventional firecrackers can leave pollution and waste after celebrations. Its first prototype used a recycled plastic bottle, a specially developed combustible formulation and a small launcher mechanism. A spark ignited the formulation, creating pressure that pushed the bottle upward like a rocket. The launch produced a loud bang. The sound level could be adjusted, and some formulations could release fragrance instead of a gunpowder smell. The team developed aerial and non-aerial versions. The bottle was launched rather than destroyed, making the device reusable. However, reports described the technology as still under development, with commercialisation, wider adoption and patents not yet established.
What is the IISER-M pollution-free firecracker, and how is it different from a conventional firecracker?
The IISER-M pollution-free firecracker is an alternative fireworks device developed by Dr Samrat Ghosh at IISER Mohali. It was created to preserve some excitement of fireworks while reducing smoke, particulate emissions and burnt debris. This matters because conventional firecrackers can leave pollution and waste after celebrations.
Its first prototype used a recycled plastic bottle, a specially developed combustible formulation and a small launcher mechanism. A spark ignited the formulation, creating pressure that pushed the bottle upward like a rocket. The launch produced a loud bang. The sound level could be adjusted, and some formulations could release fragrance instead of a gunpowder smell.
The team developed aerial and non-aerial versions. The bottle was launched rather than destroyed, making the device reusable. However, reports described the technology as still under development, with commercialisation, wider adoption and patents not yet established.
How does a spark, combustible formulation and recycled plastic bottle produce a launch and a loud bang?
The device combines three main parts: a spark, a combustible formulation and a recycled plastic bottle. The spark starts the reaction in the formulation. This creates pressure inside or around the launcher, giving the device enough force to move upward. The concept replaces the usual exploding firecracker arrangement with a launching mechanism.
In the prototype, the pressure pushed the bottle upwards like a rocket. The rapid launch produced a loud bang, recreating part of the excitement of traditional fireworks. The team could adjust the sound level by changing the formulation. The bottle itself was launched rather than destroyed, so it could potentially be reused.
The article describes the practical mechanism but does not provide a detailed chemical equation or pressure measurement. It reports that the formulation was designed to avoid visible smoke and particulate matter. The device therefore created sound and flight without conventional burnt firecracker debris.
Who was Dr Samrat Ghosh, and why was his background in combustion chemistry useful for developing this device?
Dr Samrat Ghosh was an assistant professor in IISER Mohali’s Department of Chemical Sciences. He developed the IISER-M pollution-free firecracker after scientists were urged to find safer alternatives in 2017. His work focused on rethinking the familiar firecracker rather than simply changing its outer packaging.
His expertise in combustion chemistry was useful because the device depended on a combustible formulation. When triggered by a spark, the material ignited and generated pressure. That pressure launched a recycled plastic bottle and produced a loud bang. The formulation could also be adjusted for sound level and, in some versions, fragrance.
The article does not give a detailed account of Ghosh’s training or the exact chemistry of the formulation. It does establish that his combustion background supported the invention’s central mechanism. His team developed aerial and non-aerial prototypes and later worked on lowering the formulation’s cost.
How much did using distilled cow urine reduce the cost of the formulation?
Using distilled cow urine reduced the cost of the green firecracker formulation by 50%. The change was explored in 2019, about a year after Ghosh’s team developed the initial prototype. The aim was to make the technology cheaper and more practical for possible wider adoption.
According to Ghosh, adding the distilled ingredient did not change the device’s performance. The team reported that the firecracker continued to provide sound, light and flight. It also maintained that the organic formulation produced no particulate-matter emissions. An emission study was being conducted at IISER to analyse the gases released during combustion.
The 50% figure describes a reduction in formulation cost, not a confirmed retail price or total production cost. The reports did not establish commercial availability or widespread adoption. The technology was still under development, and its broader future remained a work in progress.
What other uses could this technology have besides celebrating Diwali?
Ghosh’s technology was not limited to festive fireworks. The article identifies two possible additional uses: driving animals away from agricultural fields and helping clear airport runways. Both applications would use the device’s ability to create a controlled launch and loud sound.
For example, a device could potentially be used near farmland when animals approach crops. Another possible use would involve producing a sound-based deterrent around an airport runway. The article does not explain how the device would be deployed in either setting, so these remain potential applications rather than established uses.
These possibilities show why the invention matters beyond Diwali. It was designed as a different way to create sound and flight, while avoiding visible smoke, particulate matter and conventional debris. However, the reports said the technology was still under development, and wider commercial use had not been established.
Why were scientists asked to develop safer firecracker alternatives in 2017?
In October 2017, concerns about firecracker pollution prompted a search for safer alternatives. The Supreme Court had also temporarily restricted firecracker use in the NCR. These developments created pressure to find ways to preserve celebration while reducing harmful effects associated with conventional crackers.
Then Union Environment Minister Dr Harsh Vardhan called upon scientists to develop safer options, including electronic firecrackers. Dr Samrat Ghosh responded by exploring a different design based on a launcher, a combustible formulation and a recycled plastic bottle. The device aimed to produce sound and flight without visible smoke or particulate emissions.
The request reflected a practical challenge: people valued fireworks, but conventional versions could produce clouds of smoke, gunpowder smells and burnt debris. Ghosh’s prototype addressed those concerns experimentally. The article does not say that the invention became widely available, but it shows how a pollution concern led scientists to rethink a familiar celebration technology.
What happens chemically when a combustible material burns and produces hot gases, pressure, light and sound?
In basic combustion chemistry, a combustible material reacts rapidly with an oxidising substance. The chemical energy stored in the material is released as heat. That heat creates hot gases, and hot gases occupy more space and move quickly. If they are confined or channelled, their expansion creates pressure that can push an object.
The IISER-M device used this principle in a practical way. A spark ignited its combustible formulation, and the resulting pressure pushed the recycled bottle upward like a rocket. The rapid event also produced a loud bang. Light can appear when hot reacting materials and gases emit energy, although the article does not detail the formulation’s exact light-producing chemistry.
The precise chemical reactions, gas composition and temperatures are not provided in the article. Those details would require laboratory analysis. The article does report that an emission study was being conducted at IISER to analyse gases released during combustion.
This brief was written by AI from the original reporting and checked by other models. Names, figures and quotes come from the source; read it for full context.
Read more in the JupiteX app
Pulse is free. New stories every 4 hours, each one broken into the questions that explain it.
Or read more news on the web