Welcome to what the President has called "the Official Week of Pork Consumption," Analyzing It Sociologically...
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/113_44194.html
Friday, May 1, 2009: Prime Minister Han Seung-soo eats pork belly strip at a restaurant in Seoul, Friday, to promote the safety of domestic pork amid growing fear over influenza A (H1N1), formerly known as swine flu. ['promote the safety' or promote the sales: How does eating pork in public address the biophysical issues of the public health concerns? It doesn't. It's called 'symbolic politics', another nice picture:...]
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/113_44608.html
The Next Friday, May 8, 2009: Presidential Chief of Staff Chung Jung-gil, third from left, Kim In-jong, second from left, chief of the presidential security service, and other officials enjoy some pork at Cheong Wa Dae, Friday, as part of a campaign to encourage people to eat pork products, after the Mexico-originated (is it?) swine flu (is it?) hit Korea and other parts of the world. The presidential office designated May 11-15 the ``week of pork consumption” during which foods made of pork will be served to its officials. / Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/113_44608.html
I posted my comments below, in the regular comments.
1. Mikah Lee
ReplyDelete2. The upcoming EV
3. Now that we've watched the documentary about electric cars in class, it is strange to describe these vehicles as 'future technology'. Yet many articles covering the future release of new EV models seem to be implying that this is completetely new and not yet completed.
It seems as though Nissan is willing to step forth and 'sacrifice' itself in order to create increasing consumer demand for the electric car, seeing that Nissan considers the EV to be a non-profitable vehicle at the moment.
This strikes me as odd, simply because it sounds too... noble. Why would a car company even consider doing something that they do not expect to be profitable? Maybe they're hoping for profit in the long-run? Perhaps Nissan just wants to call dibs on the Asian EV market that has yet to be introduced (as far as I know), but the fact that they think that an affordable price range is important seems almost suspiciously considerate.
What is it that they want to achieve? Is Nissan so independent from oil companies that it can afford starting off a brand new (well, sort of) market which will undoubtedly be attacked by said oil companies?
Maybe this is just another 'hopeful project' that car companies are showing the public only to make everyone believe that car companies are trying their best for our environment (even though this whole EV thing could have been implemented internationally years ago), with no clear detail and release dates. Besides, what is taking them so long? We obviously have the technology that is necessary for the electric car, so why wait till late 2010? Maybe car companies are simply biding their time with these EVs, only intending to release them properly when combustion engines no longer sell (or oil is no longer available).
I guess we shall have to wait and see..
-------------------------------------------------
Nissan's Upcoming EV Will Be a Real Car
By Eric Loveday, Author, May 6th, 2009
According to officials at Nissan, their upcoming EV will be a "real" car.
Nissan's EV is still unnamed at this point. But Nissan promises that it will be a "real" car. What makes it a real car? According to Nissan, it will be about the size of the Nissan Sentra, will seat five people in comfort, and carry a price tag close to a traditional mid size sedan.
Nissan is not very specific about the vehicle yet, but keep offering some small clues towards what we should expect from their upcoming EV. The EV is slated for late 2010.
According to Nissan's vice president of product planning Larry Dominique speaking of the EV, "This has to be everything anybody has come to expect of an internal combustion engine car. That includes keeping the cost of the vehicle in line, as Nissan's research shows 80% of consumers want to buy "green" but won't do so if they have to pay a premium."
If they come to market in the $25,000 range, you can factor in the $7,500 federal tax credit and get a realistic price considerably under $20,000. Nissan admits that they will not make a profit on the EV, but the vehicle has to be made to one day make EVs profitable and mainstream.
Nissan's EV will be much larger than most current EVs and those expected to reach the market soon including the MiniEV and the Mitsubishi i-MiEV. Nissan hopes that consumers will buy their EV as an everyday car for a family of five and not as a second car as the two listed above are intended to be.
Source: Wards Auto
--------
http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1020475_nissans-upcoming-ev-will-be-a-real-car
1. Martin Weiser
ReplyDelete2. Algue grown in Waste
3. Just found this article about the solution of a "state institution" doing research on how to get independent from fossil fuels. I'm looking forward to see the oil companies fighting against NASA.
Semi-permable membrans make it able to grow algae in giant plastic bags in the ocean. While also taking CO2 ouf of the atmosphere and cleaning sewage provided as nutrition.
So the mentioned main reasons for unprofitable algae oil when it comes to land-based production seem to be eliminated: evaporation and price.
----------------------------------
NASA Envisions "Clean Energy" From Algae Grown in Waste Water
NASA scientists have proposed an ingenious and remarkably resourceful process to produce "clean energy" biofuels, that cleans waste water, removes carbon dioxide from the air, retains important nutrients, and does not compete with agriculture for land or freshwater.
When astronauts go into space, they must bring everything they need to survive. Living quarters on a spaceship require careful planning and management of limited resources, which is what inspired the project called “Sustainable Energy for Spaceship Earth.” It is a process that produces "clean energy" biofuels very efficiently and very resourcefully.
"The reason why algae are so interesting is because some of them produce lots of oil," said Jonathan Trent, the lead research scientist on the Spaceship Earth project at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. “In fact, most of the oil we are now getting out of the ground comes from algae that lived millions of years ago. Algae are still the best source of oil we know."
Algae are similar to other plants in that they remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, produce oxygen as a by-product of photosynthesis, and use phosphates, nitrogen, and trace elements to grow and flourish. Unlike many plants, they produce fatty, lipid cells loaded with oil that can be used as fuel.
Land plants currently used to produce biodiesel and other fuels include soy, canola, and palm trees. For the sake of comparison, soy beans produce about 50 gallons of oil per acre per year; canola produces about 160 gallons per acre per year, and palms about 600 gallons per acre per year. But some types of algae can produce at least 2,000 gallons of oil per acre per year.
The basic problem is growing enough algae to meet our country's enormous energy-consumption demands. Although algae live in water, land-based methods are used to grow algae. Two land-based methods used today are open ponds and closed bioreactors. Open ponds are shallow channels filled with freshwater or seawater, depending on the kind of algae that is grown. The water is circulated with paddle wheels to keep the algae suspended and the pond aerated. They are inexpensive to build and work well to grow algae, but have the inevitable problem of water evaporation. To prevent the ponds from drying out or becoming too salty, conditions that kill the algae, an endless supply of freshwater is needed to replenish the evaporating water.
When closed bioreactors are used to grow algae, water evaporation is no longer the biggest problem for algae's mass-production. Bioreactors, enclosed hardware systems made of clear plastic or glass, present their own problems. They can be computer-controlled and monitored around the clock for a more bountiful supply of algae. However, storing water on land and controlling its temperature are the big problems, making them prohibitively expensive to build and operate. In addition, both systems require a lot of land.
"The inspiration I had was to use offshore membrane enclosures to grow algae. We're going to deploy a large plastic bag in the ocean, and fill it with sewage. The algae use sewage to grow, and in the process of growing they clean up the sewage," said Trent.
It is a simple, but elegant concept. The bag will be made of semi-permeable membranes that allow fresh water to flow out into the ocean, while retaining the algae and nutrients. The membranes are called “forward-osmosis membranes.” NASA is testing these membranes for recycling dirty water on future long-duration space missions. They are normal membranes that allow the water to run one way. With salt water on the outside and fresh water on the inside, the membrane prevents the salt from diluting the fresh water. It’s a natural process, where large amounts of fresh water flow into the sea.
Floating on the ocean's surface, the inexpensive plastic bags will be collecting solar energy as the algae inside produce oxygen by photosynthesis. The algae will feed on the nutrients in the sewage, growing rich, fatty cells. Through osmosis, the bag will absorb carbon dioxide from the air, and release oxygen and fresh water. The temperature will be controlled by the heat capacity of the ocean, and the ocean's waves will keep the system mixed and active.
When the process is completed, biofuels will be made and sewage will be processed. For the first time, harmful sewage will no longer be dumped into the ocean. The algae and nutrients will be contained and collected in a bag. Not only will oil be produced, but nutrients will no longer be lost to the sea. According to Trent, the system ideally is fail proof. Even if the bag leaks, it won’t contaminate the local environment. The enclosed fresh water algae will die in the ocean.
The bags are expected to last two years, and will be recycled afterwards. The plastic material may be used as plastic mulch, or possibly as a solid amendment in fields to retain moisture.
“We have to remember,” Trent said, quoting Marshall McLuhan: “we are not passengers on spaceship Earth, we are the crew.”
For further information, please visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/greenspace/
Or visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/ames
Ruth Dasso Marlaire
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
-----------------------------
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/features/2009/clean_energy_042209.html
1. Mark Whitaker
ReplyDelete2. Pork, Beef, and Political Legitimation: State Encouragement for Pork--in the wake of "Swine Flu"; Symbolic Politics and Lack of Action Mixing
3. Even though I'm unconvinced that it should be called 'swine flu' (even institutions are not discussing it in this term now--a strange multi-continent admixture of human influenza, bird flu from north America, and swine flu from two completely different continents somehow was natural (that's another story)), what is interesting is the Korean governments forms of talk/legitimation to keep Koreans eating swine/pork in the midst of fear of 'swine flu'.
I think of the 'institutionalization, legalization, and legitimation/delegitimation' issues that remain contentious in any flowing infrastructure of commodities. In this case, pork, instead of energy:
I additionally think of the international, boundaryless risks of Beck's risk society where previous forms of institutions look rather silly in attempting to deal with such things as permanent international travel and WTO-little regulated trade, despite governments claiming they are protecting us? Note the 'random testing' regime of food that is discussed in the article below.
Another section on American beef in Korea was timed to appear in the newspaper on the eve of the anniversary protests against the imports of American suspected mad cow/low regulated beef. Symbolic politics once more.
-------------------------------
04-28-2009 21:05
Pork From North America Subject to Stricter Inspection
[infrastructure of consumption--a long path before the market relations of the consumer---] About half of pork imports to Korea are from the United States, Mexico and Canada, where cases of swine influenza have been reported. Shipments will be subject to a stricter set of tests.
Despite health authorities' assurances, the shipments may face a boycott by Korean consumers. The World Health Organization (WHO) says that pork is swine flu-free when treated at 71 degrees Celsius or above.
According to agriculture officials, Korea imported a total of 339,990 tons of pork for $876 million last year.
The U.S. shipments topped the list with about
106,400 tons for $253 million.
Canada came in second with
59,400 tons or $127 million.
The Mexican shipments amounted to
2,012 tons or $69 million. [REALLY expensive, compared to U.S. and Canada pork,...]
The North American shipments totaled 168,000 tons.
Considering total pork consumption reached 930,000 tons, the imports accounted for 37 percent.An official from a pig farmers' association said, ``We fear a general contraction in pork consumption. It wouldn't be limited to imported pork but is likely to sweep the pork market as a whole.''
In order to boost safety on imported pork, the government has decided to check all pork shipments from the affected areas for swine influenza. The countries of origin that are up for strengthened tests are the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
All pigs that are imported for breeding purposes are subject to examinations irrespective of their countries of origin.
Previously, imported meats underwent checks upon arrival and were transported for another simple set of tests at distribution points.
Being checked were the existence of synthetic antibiotics and other harmful ``environmental hormones.'' But at this stage, only 10 percent of imports were sampled for random examination.The remaining 90 percent went through testing by documentation and a [sight-only] look-through for visible signs of decomposition.
Shipments flagged would be sent back to the exporting country or destroyed.
foolsdie@koreatimes.co.kr
---
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2009/05/123_44019.html
2.
05-08-2009 21:03
People [Infrastructurally] Encouraged to Eat Pork
PICTURE:
Presidential Chief of Staff Chung Jung-gil, third from left, Kim In-jong, second from left, chief of the presidential security service, and other officials enjoy some pork at Cheong Wa Dae, Friday, as part of a [SYMBOLIC LEGITIMACY] campaign to encourage people to eat pork products, after the Mexico-originated 'swine flu' hit Korea and other parts of the world. The presidential office designated May 11-15 the ``week of pork consumption” during which foods made of pork will be served to its officials. / Courtesy of Cheong Wa Dae
By Na Jeong-ju
Staff Reporter
Cheong Wa Dae plans to launch a campaign Monday to encourage people to eat pork in a move to protect pig raisers from falling sales due to fears over the H1N1 influenza A, formerly known as swine flu.
The presidential office has designated May 11-15 as the ``week of pork consumption,'' and will [infrastructurally] have the meat served at all cafeterias for the presidential staff and visitors, it said in a press release.
Ministries and state-run firms will also join the campaign to [conduct symbolic politics, and provide the symbolic discourses of legitimacy attached to the infrastructure of international pork to] ease public anxiety over the disease, [or really, to encourage profit for suppliers as more important than public health, more like?] a presidential spokesman said.
The Office of Presidential Chief of Staff and the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, or NongHyup, held a joint event at Cheong Wa Dae Friday to encourage consumption of domestic pork.Chief of Staff Chung Chung-kil, NongHyup Chairman Choi Won-byung, presidential secretaries and senior government officials ate pork for lunch.``We organized the event to urge the public to consume pork and share the pain felt by pig farmers,'' the spokesman said. ``Many people now know that pigs are not the cause of influenza A, but are reluctant to eat the meat due to fears. We hope the campaign will be helpful for pig farmers.''Korea's health authorities recently changed the name of the influenza from swine flu to influenza A on a recommendation from the World Health Organization (WHO).
The WHO said the name could mislead the public. [and lower supplier's profits by making]If cooked to over 71 degrees Celsius, the meat is safe, according to [supposedly trustworthy] health officials.
Domestic pork sellers [in a conflict of interest?] have launched their own campaigns to promote the [corporate propaganda about] safety of the meat.
The association of pig raisers agreed to cut wholesale pork pieces to boost demand and is working with the government to produce advertisements [!!] for the mass media on pork safety [or rather, for pork sales].
jj@koreatimes.co.kr
Reader's Comments ▶ Other View
ezlife (67.40.115.63) 05-09-2009 04:35
Well, I'll be da**ed as I'm sure I read that Korean customs was going to really clamp down on all pork imports coming from Mexico and the US. Wonder what changed the situation???
---
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/117_44608.html
3.
The timing of public press legitimating government beef position during the anniversary of the beef protests in May 2009.
05-05-2009 13:30
129 Tons of US Beef Fail to Quarantine Checks
South Korea's quarantine authorities said Tuesday that nearly 129 tons of U.S. beef have failed to clear quarantine inspections since Seoul resumed imports late last year, according to Yonhap News Agency.
South Korea lifted a ban on U.S. beef imports in November 2008, nearly seven months after the two countries concluded a new deal that eased restrictions considerably.
The National Veterinary Research and Quarantine Service said 128.7 tons of U.S. beef imports were disqualified between November and March this year, as they either had decayed, had no U.S. export quarantine certificate or failed to meet import sanitation requirements.
"Importers will be required to return, bury, or incinerate the disqualified beef imports," an official of the service was quoted as saying.
South Korea first banned imports of U.S. beef in December 2003, when the United States confirmed its first case of mad cow disease. Imports resumed in October 2006, but Seoul suspended quarantine inspections after banned backbones were detected in a shipment in October 2007.
In April last year, Seoul and Washington signed a new import agreement. But massive street protests against the deal across South Korea prompted the two sides to hold additional talks, in which they agreed to limit imports to meat from cattle under 30 months old, deemed less vulnerable to mad cow disease.
---
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2009/05/123_44359.html
05-19-2008 11:05
Seoul to Get Written Assurances on US Beef Import Ban
South Korea is likely to win concessions concerning its quarantine inspection of American beef during the additional negotiations between the two allies over the weekend, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said Monday.
The ministry said Trade Minister Kim Jong-hoon would brief reporters on what has been discussed on U.S. beef between South Korea and the United States Tuesday.
The ministry has yet to reveal the main contents of the briefing but Yonhap News said it will have something to do with clauses that would be included in the beef agreement so South Korea could ``exercise quarantine sovereignty'' in case mad cow disease occurs in the United States. Kim is scheduled to meet the press Tuesday.
``Exercising quarantine sovereignty'' is interpreted as meaning that South Korea will be empowered to halt U.S. beef imports.
Kim Won-woon, chairman of the National Assembly's unification and foreign affairs and trade committee, also told Yonhap News that he received a report from the Foreign Ministry that there had been a progress in the latest bilateral talks. ``The key is whether South Korea has been guaranteed `quarantine sovereignty' in connection with beef imports from the U.S.,'' Kim was quoted as saying.
In recent days, thousands of South Koreans have participated in candlelight vigils calling on their government to scrap the beef deal. Faced with fierce opposition, the government has delayed issuing a government notice on the resumption, a measure required to restart imports. Imports were initially scheduled to resume last week.
Last month's deal to reopen South Korea's market to American beef came just hours before South Korean President Lee Myung-bak held his first summit with U.S. President George W. Bush in Washington, D.C. The pact was widely seen as a concession aimed at getting the U.S. Congress to approve a broader trade deal.
South Korea suspended imports of U.S. beef after the first American case of mad cow disease appeared in December 2003 in a Canadian-born cow in Washington state.
Scientists believe mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy, spreads when farmers feed cattle recycled meat and bones from infected animals. In humans, eating meat products contaminated with the illness is linked to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, a rare, fatal malady.
[and now the Canadians are using the WTO to force Canadian beef into Korea; though it's strnage because much of USA beef is sourced from Canadaian stock, then legitimated as 'comign from the USA' and then shipped to Korea. It's a shell game with public health? You decide.]
---
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/205_24379.html
1. Sohyun Park
ReplyDelete2. U.S. Drops Research Into Fuel Cells for Cars
3. This article talks about the Obama administration’s drop in hydrogen fuel cells research. The Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that the government will focus on projects that would give quicker results. I wondered what projects there would be and the FutureGen program interested me. And actually I found that the FutureGen was a costly and risky project since it is a $1.8 billion project funded by public money.
-----------------------------
WASHINGTON — Cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells, once hailed by President George W. Bush as a pollution-free solution for reducing the nation’s dependence on foreign oil, will not be practical over the next 10 to 20 years, the energy secretary said Thursday, and the government will cut off funds for the vehicles’ development.
Developing those cells and coming up with a way to transport the hydrogen is a big challenge, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in releasing energy-related details of the administration’s budget for the year beginning Oct. 1. Dr. Chu said the government preferred to focus on projects that would bear fruit more quickly.
The retreat from cars powered by fuel cells counters Mr. Bush’s prediction in 2003 that “the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free.” The Energy Department will continue to pay for research into stationary fuel cells, which Dr. Chu said could be used like batteries on the power grid and do not require compact storage of hydrogen.
The Obama administration will also establish eight “energy innovation hubs,” small centers for basic research that Dr. Chu referred to as “Bell Lablettes.” These will be financed for five years at a time to lure more scientists into the energy area.
“We’re very devoted to delivering solutions — not just science papers, but solutions — but it will require some basic science,” Dr. Chu, who won a Nobel Prize for his work in physics, said at a news conference.
He said he would probably reverse another Bush administration decision and restore funds for FutureGen, a program to build a power plant prototype. The plant would turn coal into gas, separate out the carbon dioxide — a major contributor to the greenhouse gases that cause global warming — and pump it underground. Then it would burn the hydrogen, which is nearly pollution-free.
An international partnership had selected a site in Mattoon, Ill., for construction of the plant, but the Bush administration decided that the costs were too high and that the money should be spread among more projects.
The Obama administration will also drop spending for research on the exploration of oil and gas deposits because the industry itself has ample resources for that, Dr. Chu said.
While the budget request for the Energy Department is $26.4 billion, an increase of less than 1 percent, actual spending will actually be far higher because some projects will be financed by the economic stimulus package, said Steve Isakowitz, the department’s chief financial officer.
While Dr. Chu emphasized the allocations for research, a former Energy Department official, Robert Alvarez, pointed out that the budget still includes $6.4 billion for nuclear weapons and $4.4 billion for naval reactors, nuclear nonproliferation activity and safe storage of surplus plutonium. “Weapons still make up the largest single expenditure,” he said.
---
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/science/earth/08energy.html?ref=science
1. Soo-Bin
ReplyDelete2.Mexico raises death toll from flu outbreak to 48
3. Few days ago, I read an article about the flu. It said that the situation was actually foreseen because of the automatical system. I can't remember the detail things but I will write as far as I remember. The pigs were treated like products. And the situation is likely to be infected because the size of the farm.
When this happening has break out, I simply thought that there it is like mad cow disease. I mean... people did something bad or wrong and as a result the effect has returned.
The important thin hier is ,I think, that the flu can occur in any kind of animals. And can harm human.
Not only for animal but also for human being, there should be a kind of moral farming system which will cost a little bit but have positive effect on both sides...
-----------------------------------------
Mexico raises death toll from flu outbreak to 48
Sat May 9, 2009 10:17pm BST Email | Print | Share| Single Page[-] Text [+]
By Dan Trotta
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The number of Mexicans confirmed killed by the new flu virus rose by three to 48, Mexico's Health Ministry said on Saturday, as life returned to normal in Mexico City where restaurants and other businesses have reopened after being closed for days.
Mexico's death toll from the H1N1 flu was previously 45 but ministry spokesman Carlos Olmos told reporters tests had confirmed three more suspected fatal cases, with two of the victims dying in the first week of May.
The new H1N1 flu, which combines swine, human and bird elements, has sickened more than 4,200 people in 29 countries and killed three people outside of Mexico -- one in Canada and two in the United States.
The government was testing thousands of samples to confirm which patients with severe respiratory symptoms were actually infected with the flu, Olmos told a news conference.
He said over 5,000 tests had been done on suspicious cases and that 1,578 people were ill with the ailment but were being successfully treated.
After the virus was first detected on April 23, Mexico banned public events and shut down schools, bars, restaurants and many businesses to prevent people from gathering. Officials say a policy of disinfecting public spaces has helped control its spread.
Schools in the capital, which has been hardest hit by the virus, will open again on Monday.
But the state government of Jalisco, home to Mexico's second-largest city Guadalajara, said schools, nightclubs and theaters there will remain shut for another week after the discovery of three suspected flu deaths.
Health authorities have said that as many as 176 people in Mexico may have died from the new flu but the actual number may never be known since many of the dead were buried before they could be tested.
The World Health Organization has kept its global pandemic alert for the outbreak at 5 out of 6 because the new virus was not spreading rapidly outside North America, where U.S. officials expect it to reach all 50 states.
On Friday, Guatemala's health minister confirmed two more people had been infected with the H1N1 flu, bring the total number of cases in the Central American country to three, while Panama's government also confirmed its first two cases of infection.
(Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Writing by Mica Rosenberg)
-----------------
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE5481AR20090509?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0
1. Dakyung Lee
ReplyDelete2. Styrofoam Increases Biodiesel Power
3. New study done by Iowa State University shows a possibility of styrofoam being used as a source of biodiesel power. With further studies, the researchers are seeing the potential of this material being used for fuel conversion. The researchers are looking further into this project because it may bring both economic and environmental benefits, as it could serve as both the solution for trash disposal and power generation.
It was interesting to see that with continuing advancement in technology and more researches conducted, with increasing interest in finding alternative sources of energy, that an everyday object like a styrofoam has the potential of acting as a source of biodiesel power. One thing that caught my interest even more was the fact that this finding was not free of problems, despite all its advantages. The fact that emission of carbon monoxide, soot and nitrous oxides cannot be completely avoided means that there can be negative effects from using styrofoam to increase biodiesel power output. This made me realize that there is the reality of facing drawbacks and downsides in many of the studies done to find alternative energy sources, and this is perhaps why continuous researches are being done today. Obviously, it will be important for researchers to carefully look into both the advantages and disadvantages regarding using styrofoam as a source of biodiesel power, and to decide whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, as well as find out the consequences that the disadvantages can present to the general well-being of human beings and the environment.
--------------
Styrofoam used to increase biodiesel power output? That’s what a new study claims. Funded in part by the Department of Defense, the study looked for solutions for trash disposal and power generation under battlefield conditions, where recycling is not usually an option.
The study found that by dissolving polystyrene packing peanuts in biodiesel, scientists can actually increase the power output of the fuel, while finding a solution to disposing of the material at the same time. The polystyrene, a polymer used to make disposable styrofoam, can be dissolved into biodiesel at a concentration of 2 to 20 percent, though power output tends to decrease as polystyrene concentration increases. Although plastic doesn’t break down easily in petroleum-based diesel, it breaks down almost instantly in biodiesel.
Iowa State University researchers Najeeb Kuzhiyil and Song-Charng Kong tested the polystyrene-biodiesel blend in a tractor engine. They found that power output increased as polystyrene concentrations increased to 5 percent. After 5 percent, however, power output tended to drop off as the polymer increased the biodiesel’s viscosity.
When the fluid gets too viscous, it doesn’t completely combust in the engine, leading to a power output decrease and potential for overheating of the fuel injection pump.
Though it is usually more energy efficient to recycle trash rather than convert it to fuel, polystyrene may be an exception as it’s not as easily recycled, economically speaking, in the industry. This makes the material a likely candidate for fuel conversion.
While the biodiesel mix has both environmental and economic advantages, it is not free of problems. As the concentration of polystyrene in the mix increases, so do the emissions of carbon monoxide, soot and nitrous oxides, which don’t completely burn off in the engine. The study co-authors hope to refine the engine’s fuel injection system to yield a more complete burn and fewer emissions.
-----
http://www.enn.com/energy/article/39868
1. Kyuhee Shim
ReplyDelete2. Pesticides banned in Ontario
3. I guess Canada is beginning to feel the effects of synthetic pesticides because Ontario and Quebec are imposing new rules that will ban the use of harmful pesticides. Ontario in particular has decided that it will even ban the sale of cosmetics containing certain ingredients.
After reading Silent Spring I am relieved to see this new law. It is no secret that many of the pesticides widely in use today are poison to the human body. And the fact is that the farmers who use them unaware of their toxic capabilities. I remember the author mentioning how poisons are sold with ample warning signs alerting the purchaser but that pesticides are displayed on store counters with hardly any warnings, despite the fact that many of them are probably more poisonous. This article had a photo that showed a sign that read ‘Caution- pesticide application’, and this is why I think this law is important. It tells people that the products they mindlessly use deserve caution and restraint because they are not just chemicals that kill pests.
Companies aren’t so thrilled to see this law. Once again they are arguing that the ban lacks scientific basis, which I think is unfair because the effects of pesticides usually appear after decades or perhaps even after a generation. Asking us to ignore the possible threats of the chemicals means that they want people to take a risk on their health. Given a choice between a highly toxic pesticide that can kill all of my bugs and a less strong one that won’t kill me in forty years, I would definitely choose the latter. Anyway, personally I believe that there is enough research and evidence to back this law, they’re just being ignored.
4.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Ontario to enact toughest pesticide ban in Canada
MARIA BABBAGE
THE CANADIAN PRESS
Ontario will enact the toughest rules in Canada when its pesticide ban takes effect today, a move that could land the province in the legal crosshairs of an international trade dispute.
Ontario is joining Quebec in restricting the use of pesticides, but its rules go further by prohibiting the sale and cosmetic use of more than 80 ingredients and 250 products, with few exceptions, experts say.
Other provinces are considering similar restrictions to protect the environment and public health, including British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick, said Lisa Gue of the David Suzuki Foundation.
Science hasn't yet proven what effect, if any, pesticides have on our health, but given the risks, governments must err on the side of caution, Gue said from Ottawa.
"The lack of scientific certainty cannot be an excuse to delay action to protect health and the environment," she said.
"And that's exactly what Quebec, and now Ontario, have done."
Both provinces have even banned weed killer 2,4-D even though it has been deemed safe by Health Canada – a move that sparked a NAFTA challenge of Quebec's ban.
Dow AgroSciences LLC, which manufactures 2,4-D, has decided to sue the federal government and seek $2 million in damages, arguing that Quebec's rules violate Canada's trade obligations because it prohibits a product without any scientific basis.
The company wouldn't say whether it will go after Ontario's ban as well.
"Our legal action is focused solely on Quebec at this time, and I won't speculate on any other action that we might take in Canada," said spokeswoman Brenda Harris.
"What I do think is important is that when provinces or jurisdictions are considering these types of things, that they really look closely at science, and making sure that science is part of the process."
Ontario's environment minister said he isn't worried by the potential threat of a lawsuit.
"We think we're doing absolutely the right thing by banning pesticides from our laws and gardens, and we'll have to wait and see what the courts say about that," said John Gerretsen.
"But I'm quite confident that they will uphold the right of Ontario to take this kind of an action."
Experts, such as the Ontario College of Family Physicians, have warned that the long-term effects of exposure to pesticides can be devastating, especially to pregnant women and children.
But unlike Quebec, Ontario municipalities are forbidden from enacting tougher anti-pesticide rules.
When Premier Dalton McGuinty announced the ban a year ago, he mistakenly said towns and cities could have stronger bylaws if they wanted to – a move many applauded.
Two weeks later, he admitted that he "screwed up," but shifted the blame to Gerretsen, who had failed to correct his boss in front of reporters.
The government's refusal to change the legislation angered some municipalities and health groups, as well as the Ontario New Democrats.
"I still think municipalities should be able to go beyond what the province put in place," said Peter Tabuns, the party's environment critic.
"The City of Toronto had rules in place that had gone beyond what's going to be enforced in Ontario."
Ontario will still allow pesticides to be used in farming, forestry or for health and safety reasons, such as controlling mosquitoes that can carry diseases like the West Nile virus.
Golf courses will also be able to use pesticides, but must meet certain conditions to minimize the effects on the environment.
CropLife Canada, a pesticide industry association, says lawns and gardens represent only about four per cent of the pesticide business across Canada.
Quebec, which announced its ban in 2003, prohibits the use and sale of 20 ingredients in lawn pesticides and has additional restrictions for their use outside public daycares and schools.
6. ------------------------------------------
7. http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/621989
1. Yoon Hye Sung
ReplyDelete2. Pollution Causes Genetic Changes that Lead to Asthma
3. Whenever I read articles about environmental problems, I felt that environmental problems affect various parts of other factors. Some problems are related to politics, societies, etc. And I was surprised at this news that air pollution causes genetic changes. Furthermore, those changes have a bad effect on unborn infants. That's really terrible. I heard that asthma is not really a serious disease, but it can kill people if it is connected with other situations. We may not realize this problem so seriously, but I think the bad effect on infants may make very big problems in the future. Also, I think there will be some other problems by environmental problems. What do we have to do? Can we restore the environment? I'm not sure that we can restore the situation. Maybe, human-beings are now punished because of our sin. We've been making the environment sick. We should try more before the problems become worse.
-----------------------
(NaturalNews) Prenatal exposure to air pollution appears to cause genetic changes that predispose unborn infants to asthma later in life, according to a new study conducted by researchers from the Center for Environmental Genetics a the University of Cincinnati and published in the journal PLoS ONE.
"Our data support the concept that environmental exposures can interact with genes during key developmental periods to trigger disease onset later in life, and that tissues are being reprogrammed to become abnormal later," lead researcher Shuk-mei Ho said.
Researchers had pregnant women wear backpack air monitors that analyzed the women's exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), a type of pollution produced by combustion that is characteristic of the air in high-traffic areas. The researchers also examined the expression of the ACSL3 gene in their unborn children.
High maternal exposure to PAHs was significantly associated with chemical changes in the fetus related to the expression of ASCL3. At the age of five, children who had exhibited these changes in the womb were significantly more likely to have asthma than children who had not. The researchers believe that air pollution induces changes in gene expression without actually changing the structure of the gene itself, as in a mutation.
"We know that children living in polluted areas have a higher incidence of asthma but what we didn't know was it was affecting a gene," said Keith Prowse, vice-president of the British Lung Foundation. "If you look at cord blood and you find the gene has been modified you know the child is more likely to get asthma so you can treat them early."
Scientists know that ASCL3 is expressed in the lung, and believe that it plays a role in setting or maintaining the structure of cell membranes. They do not yet know exactly how expression of the gene contributes to the development of asthma.
Sources for this story include: news.bbc.co.uk.
----------
http://www.naturalnews.com/z026235.html