Group items tagged

Biomass for energy often mean plant base material although can equally apply to both animal and vegetable draw from material. Biomass is actually a biological material derive form living or recently living organisms. Biomass chemical composition is carbon based and is composed of a mixture of organic molecules containing hydrogen, usually including atoms of oxygen, often nitrogen and also small quantities of other atoms, including alkali, alkaline earth and heavy metals, metals are often found in functional molecules such as the porphyrins which include chlorophyll which contains magnesium. There are five basic categories of material of biomass such as: *Virgin wood- from forestry, arboriculture activities or from wood processing. *Energy crops- high yield crops grown specifically for energy applications *Agricultural residues- residues from agriculture harvesting or processing * Food waste- from food and drink manufacture, preparation and processing, and post-consumer waste *Industrial waste and co-products- from manufacturing and industrial processes. The question is how are we going to use this biomass as a fuel for boilers? But what is a boiler in the first place? A boiler is defined as "a closed vessel in which water or other liquid is heated, steam or vapor is generated, steam is superheated, or any combination thereof, under pressure or vacuum, for use external to itself, by the direct application of energy from the combustion of fuels, from electricity or nuclear energy." Let us then go back to the previous question, how are we going to use this biomass as fuel for boilers. Nowadays, the prime sources of energy in the world are oil, coal and natural gas. But these natural sources of energy has their end too, unfortunately it is already anticipated that within the next 40-50 years these sources of energy will deplete. Worst is, it is also expected that from these sources lies consequences due to their emissions such as

To die for scenic reefs in Red or the South China Sea is dying; pretty fishes and panoramic colors of soft and hard corals are now down to a complex ecology similar to tropical forest ecosystems. Compare to the microorganisms that makes the whole thing more tremendous in doing all the destruction, the predators and consumers, the producer algae and the tiny invertebrates mean nothing. Catalina Reyes of CoECRS. (Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies) and the University of Queensland has published her work alongside 4 colleagues, on the bacteria, fungi and algae that live in this most complex marine ecosystem. The change in this ecosystem recently is because of our overproduction. Oceans now are Cola like, the CO2 we made over the last century or two has made the sea water to feel like one. As to Catalina's research, the acid has effects and that are clearly identifies in the micro-world of corals. She links it all up and explained, "So fish, turtles, sharks, lobsters and other reef organisms may lose their homes, threatening coral reef biodiversity and the livelihoods of tens of millions of people." All reefs, molluscs and others are basically made up of Calcium carbonate, accepted as true to hard corals as well. Due to different reasons erosion of the reef is just a normal phenomenon but at present the erosion has become excessive that it destroys the reefs worldwide at a really disturbing rate.

Crown Capital Eco Management works with government bodies, international entities, private sectors and other non-governmental organizations in providing extensive information to the public, media and policymakers that are involved in addressing environmental issues and sustainable initiatives in a worldwide scale.

The thought could be scary, knowing how much toxins you inhale everyday. Through the help of technology European researchers are gearing up to monitor thousands of people. Smartphones are given away to record the chemicals to which they are exposed every day. Exposome, the term used by European Commission to study the effects of environmental exposures to human health. It was then hope that the four-year studies will benefit public health in ways that genome research so far has not. Exposone could reveal a warning or warnings of environmental health issues for use. "There's been too much emphasis on genetic factors, which contribute relatively little to disease compared with environmental factors," says Martyn Smith, a toxicologist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is participating in the newly funded Exposomics project. Paolo Vineis, an environmental epi¬demiologist at Imperial College London, leads the €8.7-million project. Some studies do not always succeed like the Genome-wide association studies, in which scientists search for genetic variants linked to disease. They have failed to fully explain why some people are more susceptible than others to chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. The new study will work this way, subjects will carry smartphones equipped with sensors to measure exposures, and their blood will be analyzed to monitor molecular changes. The majority of the participants are already concerned in other long-term health studies. In order to understand the triggers for conditions such as heart disease, asthma and lung cancer, goal is to look for biomarker differences between people walking through areas with low air pollution and those exposed to urban fumes. The idea is to differentiate the difference the toxins will cause the human health basing on their environment. Vineis's exposomics approach has already exposed gene-expression signatures that connect people's leukaemia risk with their exposure to heavy me

We all know that regardless of where you live, the weather is often unpredictable. A comfy 60 degree winter day in the Midwest; chilly and breezy on a late spring day in the pacific coast. To some of us, the prevalence of unusual weather is simply the work of Mother Nature. Others are more convinced that our reckless treatment of the earth has made global warming that much more of a reality. The natural level of discomfort that results from the thought of global warming is reinforced by numerous reports claiming inevitable environmental doom. A recent article in the Nature Magazine went as far as predicting that over the next fifty years, well over one million species will cease to exist due to global warming. Impact of the Information Technology Coupled with the fear prompted by environmental experts and know-it-alls is a plethora of scams. Some attempt to persuade our beliefs, while others operate with the intentions of fraud. Far from being verified is one claim that global warming is a man-made predicament. Instead of drawing these conclusions from observable facts, these assumptions are based on methods of computer modeling that generate artificial, manipulable graphic-based visions of the earth. A computer can only process the information fed to it, which in this case is usually fraudulent data intended to stir up controversy. Other types of environmental fraud target those who carry enough concern about the planet to make a difference. These scams typically find their way to you via email, online survey or fraudulent website. Often, criminals will make an attempt to persuade you into contributing to the prevention of global warming, preservation of the rain forest or other environmental issues. These frauds are experienced and rather savvy, able to produce content that makes them appear legitimate. Some of them will even steal logos and other identifying materials to masquerade themselves as reputable environmental organizations. To further complicate m

There are a lot of people who assumes that the sole technology that is now available to substitute fossil fuels is nuclear power especially when climate scientists and some energy policy analysts take a "tough-minded" look at the numbers. Eduardo Porter of the New York Times made that argument last week when he wrote: …nuclear power remains the cheapest and most readily scalable of the alternative energy sources. There are many reasons why nuclear power is a bad solution to the climate crisis. The first reason is that the technology is not available. Nuclear power plants are capital-intensive, technologically complex to manage, and difficult, if not impossible, to site. These issues are not minor, investors chose putting their money somewhere else and communities are greatly against sitting a plant in their backyard. As a consequence, despite our knowledge on how to use electricity this way plus our years of experience practicing it, in the U.S. these plants will never be built in enough amount to reduce global warming. There is a slight difference between the technology of nuclear power generation and the technology of nuclear bomb development. It is now hard to put things back the way it used to be, let us admit that human political systems or organizational processes cannot manage the risks of this technology. Other issues associated with current nuclear technologies that cause them to become problematic. For instance, the toxicity of its fuel and waste should not be ignored. Dangerous accidents are rare but once it happened, the impact is intense and long-lasting. It is hard to judge the danger posed by a poorly managed one while a well-managed plant poses little real danger. There is also a possibility of sabotage. Terrorists taking over a plant and threatening to plant accident could hold a city hostage. Electric utilities are natural monopolies that necessitate government regulation. The investment in infrastructure to produce and send out electrici

With emerging renewable energy alternatives today, it is highly important that they be given enough attention even early on their developmental stages. Such technologies might not be ready for commercial uses yet but their potential should be amply tested and funded. Society's modern lifestyle is in serious need of energy that can be generated and consumed and yet, not compromise the future state for generations to come; to have no anxiety that it would cause damage to the environment. Green energy could come from such sources available in our environment that are naturally replenished and efficient like tides, wind, sunlight and geothermal heat. It is very different from low-carbon energy as the former does not add to the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at all, thus, coming with minimal environmental harm and greenhouse gas. Concerns in climate change and increasing oil prices are some of the contributing factors in drawing the spotlight to renewable energy and its potential for commercialization. Green energy can effectively replace our conventional fuel of today in all its main uses, which are in heating, vehicle fuel and electricity generation sectors. In fact, 19% of the electricity generated around the world today comes from renewable sources. Furthermore, since the emergence of biofuels in the United States 6 years ago, consumption of conventional oil has decreased significantly. For a green energy resource or technology to be sustainable, it has to give the maximum environmental advantage while still serving its purpose.

The economic development of one country is dependent upon the ability of the authorities to set up a highly suitable, competitive and reliable electricity sector. Why is natural gas better than coal boilers? Only when there is extreme environmental pressure or substantial reduction in loads that conversion from coal to 100% natural gas is possible. Not until the 20th century until natural gas was used for production of energy, it was dismissed as a useless byproduct of crude oil production until then. But now natural gas accounts for 23 percent of the world's energy consumption and still growing. The International Energy Agency predicts that the demand for natural gas will grow by approximately 44 percent through 2035. Natural gas is the cleanest-burning conventional fuel not to mention it has been one of the most economical energy sources. It is an environmentally friendly and efficient source of energy. It produces lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions than heavier hydrocarbon fuels such as coal and oil. Natural gas fuels electric power generators, heats buildings and is used as a raw material in many consumer products, such as those made of traditional plastics. However, natural gas has never been a cheaper fuel than coal. Coal is one of the longest-used and is considered as the most abundant fossil fuels on Earth. Coal mining has been going on since then 17th century. Coal burning boilers have also been around for a long time, and while they may not always be popular, these machines have some definite advantages in terms of costs and simplicity. Because it is the most abundant it is the cheapest form of fossil fuel to burn. But coal boilers on the other hand have harmful effects on the environment and human health. Its emissions contain sulfur combines with air to create the poison gas sulfur oxide. When this gas releases into the atmosphere, it causes polluting rain. Extracting coal from mines further damages soil and water resources, adding to the

The economic development of one country is dependent upon the ability of the authorities to set up a highly suitable, competitive and reliable electricity sector. Why is natural gas better than coal boilers? Only when there is extreme environmental pressure or substantial reduction in loads that conversion from coal to 100% natural gas is possible. Not until the 20th century until natural gas was used for production of energy, it was dismissed as a useless byproduct of crude oil production until then. But now natural gas accounts for 23 percent of the world's energy consumption and still growing. The International Energy Agency predicts that the demand for natural gas will grow by approximately 44 percent through 2035. Natural gas is the cleanest-burning conventional fuel not to mention it has been one of the most economical energy sources. It is an environmentally friendly and efficient source of energy. It produces lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions than heavier hydrocarbon fuels such as coal and oil. Natural gas fuels electric power generators, heats buildings and is used as a raw material in many consumer products, such as those made of traditional plastics. However, natural gas has never been a cheaper fuel than coal. Coal is one of the longest-used and is considered as the most abundant fossil fuels on Earth. Coal mining has been going on since then 17th century. Coal burning boilers have also been around for a long time, and while they may not always be popular, these machines have some definite advantages in terms of costs and simplicity. Because it is the most abundant it is the cheapest form of fossil fuel to burn. But coal boilers on the other hand have harmful effects on the environment and human health. Its emissions contain sulfur combines with air to create the poison gas sulfur oxide. When this gas releases into the atmosphere, it causes polluting rain. Extracting coal from mines further damages soil and water resources, adding to the

Natural Disasters Victims: Scammers Wait until we are in our Lowest Opportunists prey on natural disasters' victims and even those who want to help. They would not miss any single chance that they could profit something from any kind of people by taking advantage of their weaknesses.

Another Beautiful City Mankind Starts to Destroy Truly Asia, Malaysia lives up to its slogan. Truly a remarkable paradise this country was and still rising, Malaysia has become one of the world's favorite for travel enthusiasts. and rainforests, mountains and minarets, skycrapers and sampans; are only few to more fun Malaysia can offer.

Jakarta Globe reported. An Indonesian lawmaker announced on Friday that a Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) allegedly implicated six companies in tax fraud totaling Rp 1.7 trillion ($187 million). Companies were identified as follows, Permata Hijau Sawit, Asian Agri Group, Wilmar Nabati Indonesia, Alfa Kurnia, INJ International and EMA Majokerto Hospital by a Markus Melkias Mekeng.

Renewable energy sources (RES) supply 14% of the total world energy demand. The future growth in the energy sector will be primarily in the new regime of renewable energy, and to some extent natural gas-based systems and the conventional oil and coal sources will then die out.

Although it is common for companies to push sustainability results by establishing definite, time-bound goals, attaining them is a distinct process for every enterprise. Innovation, investment and operational savvy all play a part in achieving success; but the most significant factor is formulating a vigorous culture of sustainability that incorporates this approach into every facet of the business. Recently, our company announced that over the past three years we have made noteworthy improvements in our environmental performance. This included reduction of our energy usage by 12%, our greenhouse gas emissions by 15.7%, and attaining a leading-edge level of 3.5 hectoliters of water used for every hectoliter of beer made, posting an 18.6% reduction. These efficiency improvements were all achieved mainly without any major investment in new, sophisticated technology. Like any global company reach, our worldwide operations face various local conditions. Challenges ranging from the capabilities and age of equipment to the diversity in quality and availability of raw materials mean that choosing a "one-size-fits-all" approach is often impossible. The main approach that can steer a company toward environmental maturity is to develop a culture of environmental conservation and awareness into all aspects of every employee's tasks on a daily basis. This idea has been around for a while; however, it is also something that is not often observed in reality. For us, ascertaining that we provide incentives and challenges to our 118,000 fellow workers to make gradual changes in the work environment - big or small, within our more than 140 breweries and soft drink facilities - was the best method to attain our three-year goals. Along the way, we discovered some essential factors in establishing such a culture of sustainability: 1.Elevate sustainability initiatives to the same level as other business-critical functions Having employees scattered worldwide

Alarmed that hope was soon be gone on the emphasis on "green" energy, presidents Obama's re-election has put a new optimism in the step of environmentalists restoring hope not just for more aggressive climate-change policy but to continue on the said project despite the unforeseen failure and serial bankruptcies of Solyndra and other green-energy in unison. In 1970's we were at the lowest in terms of energy resources are concerned because hydrocarbon energy such as oil, natural gas and coal were in short supply, expensive and were being imported from unstable regions overseas, we were then left with no choice but endow with renewable energy. The problem with hydrocarbon energy is that it produces eccentric amount of air pollution. As time passes by, technology has found a way to reduce air pollution. It appears that unpredictably, conventional domestic hydrocarbon energy has become abundant again despite unrelenting federal hostility. The global-warming crusade is still hanging onto its dreams of political relevance. Why is this green energy important? Now that we had proven that green energy is the golden road to prosperity was in fact a lie, but somehow the strategy of forcing higher-cost energy sources on consumers and propping them up with taxpayer subsidies is somewhat been blinded from the laws of economics. Meaning we are all paying twice. To be sure, if the government will support financially and authorize any form of economic activity, it will "create jobs." However, as Ms. Furchtgott-Roth, author of Regulating to Disaster, she patiently explains, this kind of reasoning ignores the famous lesson of Frederic Bastiat about what is unseen: "What is seen according to Bastiat, are the jobs directly created by the government, and what is not seen are the workers displaced by the effects of increased taxes, tariffs and government regulation." The idea could have been more believable if we actually got some of the green jobs. In fact, new emp

Fossil fuels-coal, oil, and natural gas-are America's primary source of energy. America's annual consumption of fossil fuels grown rapidly. 89 % of these consumption are consumed by boilers, transportation, residential usage, fuels for direct heating of process. The balance is used for feed-stocks, raw materials, and other miscellaneous uses. And most of the dirty fuels such as coal and residual oil go into boilers. Fuel burned are by far the largest single source of air pollution. This pollution is from sulfur oxide. It is also a significant source of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. Boiler combustion is sufficiently important to warrant the effort to analyze the complete nature of the problems. Fuel consumption in boilers is divided into three sectors: utility boilers producing steam for generation of electricity which is actually consuming probably 59%, industrial boilers producing steam or hot water for process heat,generation of electricity or space heat consuming about 24%, and boilers for space heating for commercial and institutional facilities consuming the 17%. The fuels consumed by boilers in large quantities are natural gas, distillate oil, and coal. Additional energy is derived from the burning of waste such as bark, bagasse, liquid hydrocarbon waste materials, etc. These said fuels contribute only a small percent to energy requirements. But they may however present environmental problems. Although problems have not been address due to the fact that these problems are not full understood. New Sources performance Standards for burning boilers waste are to be developed in the near future. For fossil fuels, various combination of consuming sectors and type of fuel, have independent significant and insignificant environmental consequences. Boilers have three different types, the atertube, firetube and cast iron therefore to determine the overall pollution due to boilers are hard to determine and complicated. In addition each type varie

As we all know earthquake is a catastrophic natural disaster. Most earthquake-related deaths are caused by the collapse of structures and the construction practices play a tremendous role in the death toll of an earthquake. In southern Italy in 1909 more than 100,000 people perished in an earthquake that struck the region. Almost half of the people living in the region of Messina were killed due to the easily collapsible structures that dominated the villages of the region. Though there are some ways to prevent this from happening, it can never be considered as risk avoidance. A larger earthquake that struck San Francisco three years earlier had killed fewer people (about 700) because building construction practices were different type (predominantly wood). Survival rates in the San Francisco earthquake was about 98%, that in the Messina earthquake was between 33% and 45%) (Zebrowski, 1997). Even a moderate rupture beneath a city with structures unprepared for shaking can produce tens of thousands of casualties. Due to this fact, Crown Eco Management determined that safety measures for this could not be compared to fraud prevention. Although probably the most important that we should know, direct shaking effects are not the only hazard associated with earthquakes, other effects such as landslides, liquefaction, and tsunamis have also played important part in destruction produced by earthquakes. According to the Crown researchers, some earthquakes are not natural. Human beings can actually cause them. That's the case with an earthquake in Lorca, Spain, last May. The quake measured 5.1 on the Richter scale and killed nine people. According to an analysis published in Crown Eco Management, the Lorca quake was caused by the extraction of groundwater from an aquifer near the fault that slipped. In circumstance, it does not take much to trigger an earthquake. Oil and gas wells, rock quarries, even the added pressure of a reservoir lake behind a new dam can cause

IFC finances projects across the waste value chain from upstream industry/populations to downstream disposal and energy utilization: Upstream: Municipal and solid waste, industrial and manufacturing, hazardous and medical waste; Midstream: collection and transport; separation and process; Downstream: waste disposal; energy recovery. IFC's investment approach is to promote development of the waste industry in emerging markets, help reduce costs, and allow the industry to become competitive. We support integrated solid waste (SW) management approaches, with regional strategies to gain economies of scale and drive down costs. Through our work, we leverage existing formal and informal sectors for collection and recycling, to maximize poverty and social impacts, improve health and safety, and drive gender equality. IFC investments encourage low cost, technically viable, and climate favorable waste collection and disposal solutions with energy recovery where feasible. Additionally, we support upstream waste generation to adopt "3Rs" - Reuse, Reduce Recycle. We access concessional finance to enable waste projects in LICs where full cost recovery is not yet possible due to inability to pay or insufficient regulatory framework.