Our group had a round table discussion on Green Chemistry where my side claimed Singapore should adopt green chemistry and the other side had some counterpoints for that claim. The following are the two articles I found online that discussed green chemistry in different perspective and they will help us verify our claim.
It begins with the positive side effects of green chemistry. To elaborate more on this, green chemistry is all about designing environment-friendly chemicals which are commercially viable. But its good virtues do not end there. Not only it can reduce hazardous chemical outputs and by-product from industries, but also it can have positive impact on from climate change to the global food supply. Moreover, it opens up new fields of opportunity for new businesses. It discussed how new companies have intense focus on advanced materials to get an edge in biofuels, bioplastics, green building materials or environmentally friendly home products. Actually, it is just hard for a manufacturing company to find Green Chemistry not applicable to any part of its operation.
The article also pointed out that a number of deaths linked to harmful chemicals were caused by the designers of the compounds in everyday products who are not adequately aware of toxicity level possessed by their compounds. Hence, rather than relying on harmful & toxic materials or calling for more stringent regulations, green investors have unanimously decided to have a focus green materials such as biofuels, building materials and bioplastics as the investment parameter. And because of the growing consumer interest in environment-friendly products, it is such an opportune time for green investors to do green businesses.
This first article presented the idea of Green Chemistry in a different perspective by highlighting how new start-ups are racing for new materials to have an edge on biofriendly products. It also explained the reasons investors wants to invest in Green Chemistry and how can green chemistry in turn benefits them. That is why this article is refreshing piece of information about Green Chemistry.
The second article is about advancing nanotechnology in a sustainable world using G chemistry, the idea proposed by James E. Hutchison, a Chemistry Professor at the University of Oregon who is also and innovators in nanofabrication and assembly processes and is a pioneer in the use of green chemistry.
Nanotechnology is the study of materials that are in size of about a billionth of a meter. But this field is still young and researches are ongoing to find and synthesize new materials with specific physical properties. During such work, the involvements of hazardous chemical substances are inevitable. Hutchison urged that scientists need to be proactive in advancing nanotechnology from the current discovery phase to production phase through a green framework which is efficient and reduces waste. He also believed that now is the time to seriously consider the design of materials, processes and applications that minimize hazard and waste as the technology will sooner or later be in transition period to the application phase.
To sum it up, this second article is a good example of how Green Chemistry concept can be applied to another technology that is not even exposed to the public yet. Also, Hutchison’s understanding and idea of Green Chemistry, which is actually designing the processes or applications with their impact on environment in mind before they are commercially available to the public, is a real good example of carefully thought out design process for the scientists around the world.
Below are the 5 vocabularies related to Green Chemistry.
Biofuels: A fuel from a relatively recently dead biochemical materials
Bioplastics: A form of plastics manufactured from sources of biomass such as corn and beans.
Toxicity: An indication of the degree of potential hazards and adverse effects possessed by a material to living organisms.
Sustainable: Being able to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Environmentally benign: Environmentally friendly
References:
“Green Chemistry’s race to innovation”. Retrieved March 9, 2009 from http://news.cnet.com/Green-chemistrys-race-to-innovation/2100-13838_3-6217663.html
“Green Chemistry can help nanotechnology mature”. Retrieved March 9, 2009 from http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/uoo-gcc021507.php
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Friday, February 6, 2009
Green Lectures From Last Friday
On 30th of January, NUS has invited three special guests to shed some light on climate change and energy problems for NUS students and let me summarize the lecture given by the individual speakers.
The first speaker is Dr. Palmer. According to him the world is producing 7 gigatonnes of carbon emissions per year. He went through the usual list of things that could be done to reduce that figure. Among those items, he emphasized on one particular technology that has some potential as part of the solution in response to climate change. It is called carbon capture and storage (CCS).
The technology mainly comprised of three parts: the capture of CO2, transport of the captured CO2 to a storage site, and then the actual storage. Transport can be done using pipelines or vehicles. As for storage sites, he mentioned natural reservoirs, depleted oil and gas fields or at the bottom of oceans (since liquid CO2 is denser than water at about 2750 m below sea level). Capturing CO2 would be made easier for power plants and steelworks by burning coal in oxygen rather in atmosphere. It is expensive but still possible. The bottom line is that CCS is possible with existing technologies and so is possibly part of the solution.
The second part of the lecture is carried on by Dr. Sovacool. His focus was on factors having impact on technology including business and society. The example he brought to us was about how electric cars had become obsolete. Back then it was the electric cars that were introduced to the public first. However, when the cost of the oil plummeted, Henry Ford mass-produced fuel engines. Through advertisements and auto-shows, where electric cars were outnumbered by their fuel brethrens, they were able to change the public’s perception on fuel engines. To sum it all up, when the great depression occurred, the electric car companies were wiped out resulting in the current state of world’s transport portfolio.
The last speaker A/P Rajasekhar Bala also shared his knowledge about climate change. He showed us the evidences to support global warming with charts and figures. He then talked about some potential consequences of global warming which should be very much familiar to us by now. As he continued, he gave me a new insight on one topic which explained the difficulties in dealing with climate change. Since the problem is global and the effects are long-lasting which will not be easily remedied in any time soon. Besides, there are still nonnegotiable political issues centering global warming. Finally, the change or process to fight the climate change can also disrupt economy and life style.
I must say I really appreciate receiving the opportunity to attend the lectures of these top figures in green society. Let me stress again that we need everyone’s responsibility, contribution and immediate action to achieve the better world we all long for. Remember that this is not the only problem the world is facing right now. If I can recall correctly what Dr. Palmer said, if the global warming is the only most challenging problem we will be facing for this century, we are very much lucky indeed.
The first speaker is Dr. Palmer. According to him the world is producing 7 gigatonnes of carbon emissions per year. He went through the usual list of things that could be done to reduce that figure. Among those items, he emphasized on one particular technology that has some potential as part of the solution in response to climate change. It is called carbon capture and storage (CCS).
The technology mainly comprised of three parts: the capture of CO2, transport of the captured CO2 to a storage site, and then the actual storage. Transport can be done using pipelines or vehicles. As for storage sites, he mentioned natural reservoirs, depleted oil and gas fields or at the bottom of oceans (since liquid CO2 is denser than water at about 2750 m below sea level). Capturing CO2 would be made easier for power plants and steelworks by burning coal in oxygen rather in atmosphere. It is expensive but still possible. The bottom line is that CCS is possible with existing technologies and so is possibly part of the solution.
The second part of the lecture is carried on by Dr. Sovacool. His focus was on factors having impact on technology including business and society. The example he brought to us was about how electric cars had become obsolete. Back then it was the electric cars that were introduced to the public first. However, when the cost of the oil plummeted, Henry Ford mass-produced fuel engines. Through advertisements and auto-shows, where electric cars were outnumbered by their fuel brethrens, they were able to change the public’s perception on fuel engines. To sum it all up, when the great depression occurred, the electric car companies were wiped out resulting in the current state of world’s transport portfolio.
The last speaker A/P Rajasekhar Bala also shared his knowledge about climate change. He showed us the evidences to support global warming with charts and figures. He then talked about some potential consequences of global warming which should be very much familiar to us by now. As he continued, he gave me a new insight on one topic which explained the difficulties in dealing with climate change. Since the problem is global and the effects are long-lasting which will not be easily remedied in any time soon. Besides, there are still nonnegotiable political issues centering global warming. Finally, the change or process to fight the climate change can also disrupt economy and life style.
I must say I really appreciate receiving the opportunity to attend the lectures of these top figures in green society. Let me stress again that we need everyone’s responsibility, contribution and immediate action to achieve the better world we all long for. Remember that this is not the only problem the world is facing right now. If I can recall correctly what Dr. Palmer said, if the global warming is the only most challenging problem we will be facing for this century, we are very much lucky indeed.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Singapore's Actions Against Global Warming
By now everybody should have watched “Inconvenient Truth” and has general idea about global warming. So I would not re-define what is global warming but instead I would like to focus on what Singapore has done so far to fight against the climate change.
In an on-going effort to become the manufacturing and business centre that closely approaches environmental neutrality, Singapore takes part in active role against global warming. Here, I use the word ‘active’ because, in my opinion, if you compare the amount of damage Singapore has caused to environment and the initiative it takes to address the environmental problems, it can be considered a responsible country indeed in global scale.
It is true that Singapore’s energy portfolio still includes fossil fuel. However, we should also bear in mind that not every renewable energy sources can be the answer to the country’s quest for green energy. Hydropower is not possible obviously because of geographical reason. Nuclear energy will be the last resort also due to its potential hazards. Other forms of energy are still under careful analysis on feasibility and affordability. Singapore government set aside $300 million to develop alternative sources of energy like solar and bio-fuel 2 years ago.
But when we think carefully enough, new energy is not the only elixir to cure the global warming. With the foundation of National Environment Agency (NEA) in 2002, Singapore has started policy for conserving energy. NEA has put a significant amount of effort in educating people about efficient energy. The policy was widely spread through every possible media to the public. Their energy saving tips form switching off the stand by power of house hold appliances to using compact fluorescent lamps help people incorporate the efficient energy concept into their daily life style.
On the other hand, government is also trying to reduce the green house gas emissions in every possible scenario. Singapore ratified Kyoto protocol, an international treaty to legally bind the commitments of the nations for reduction of green house gases, in 2006 April. In October 2006, Singapore switched its emission standard from Euro 2 to Euro 4 which is more stringent so that Singapore’s ambient air quality can be maintained. Last year SMRT played a part with ‘Go Green with SMRT’ campaign to encourage the public to commute in public transport rather than private vehicles.
Moreover laws and regulations are also enforced to minimize the industries’ impact on air quality. They are there to make sure that every manufacturing company in Singapore complies with pollution control requirements. Companies are also encouraged to come up with their own ecoprojects to manage their waste and chemical disposal.
Actually Singapore has already met its 2012 target of reducing carbon intensity level by 25% from its level in 1990. Carbon intensity is a measure of Carbon dioxide emission per dollar generated by economy. But we still can and should do more. All of us have moral duty towards our next gernerations. Efforts called for are hard, but the results will be excellent if everyone participates at the right level of commitment and responsibility. Then only we will be able to pass down a greener Gaia to our future generations.
With references to
http://www.nea.gov.sg/
www.wildsingapore.com
In an on-going effort to become the manufacturing and business centre that closely approaches environmental neutrality, Singapore takes part in active role against global warming. Here, I use the word ‘active’ because, in my opinion, if you compare the amount of damage Singapore has caused to environment and the initiative it takes to address the environmental problems, it can be considered a responsible country indeed in global scale.
It is true that Singapore’s energy portfolio still includes fossil fuel. However, we should also bear in mind that not every renewable energy sources can be the answer to the country’s quest for green energy. Hydropower is not possible obviously because of geographical reason. Nuclear energy will be the last resort also due to its potential hazards. Other forms of energy are still under careful analysis on feasibility and affordability. Singapore government set aside $300 million to develop alternative sources of energy like solar and bio-fuel 2 years ago.
But when we think carefully enough, new energy is not the only elixir to cure the global warming. With the foundation of National Environment Agency (NEA) in 2002, Singapore has started policy for conserving energy. NEA has put a significant amount of effort in educating people about efficient energy. The policy was widely spread through every possible media to the public. Their energy saving tips form switching off the stand by power of house hold appliances to using compact fluorescent lamps help people incorporate the efficient energy concept into their daily life style.
On the other hand, government is also trying to reduce the green house gas emissions in every possible scenario. Singapore ratified Kyoto protocol, an international treaty to legally bind the commitments of the nations for reduction of green house gases, in 2006 April. In October 2006, Singapore switched its emission standard from Euro 2 to Euro 4 which is more stringent so that Singapore’s ambient air quality can be maintained. Last year SMRT played a part with ‘Go Green with SMRT’ campaign to encourage the public to commute in public transport rather than private vehicles.
Moreover laws and regulations are also enforced to minimize the industries’ impact on air quality. They are there to make sure that every manufacturing company in Singapore complies with pollution control requirements. Companies are also encouraged to come up with their own ecoprojects to manage their waste and chemical disposal.
Actually Singapore has already met its 2012 target of reducing carbon intensity level by 25% from its level in 1990. Carbon intensity is a measure of Carbon dioxide emission per dollar generated by economy. But we still can and should do more. All of us have moral duty towards our next gernerations. Efforts called for are hard, but the results will be excellent if everyone participates at the right level of commitment and responsibility. Then only we will be able to pass down a greener Gaia to our future generations.
With references to
http://www.nea.gov.sg/
www.wildsingapore.com
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
An Expanding Engineering World and Multi-disciplinary Culture
Suffice it to say that engineers are good at dealing with complex information, processing that information and deducing solutions to the problems from them. To begin with, engineers by nature are people who love analytical thinking, problem solving and designing. I would say those abilities are innate to most of them to a certain extent. For example, in general, those who hate mathematics or programming may find engineering as a major challenge.
Education helps students with inherent reasoning and critical thinking skill sets enhance their potential to the next level. Since engineering has its roots in science, the concept of cause and effect is a very prominent aspect of engineering. That is why it is a second nature for engineers to find root causes of the problem first before tackling it. When they have found possible root causes, engineers screen through them, make discussions and pull out and prioritize the most possible ones so that they can have a list of corresponding solutions. Finally they come up with the most efficient solution that is well harmonious with the business objectives.
As engineering students, we have been under constant exposure to the contexts of analysis, design and troubleshooting. Especially when we do projects, not only the process of algorithmic thinking but also the elements of human relation, interpersonal communication, time management and presentation skills come into picture. Each of these qualities contributes to the making of an engineer. Hence, engineers are able to adapt the industries other than manufacturing – service industry for instance.
The idea of cross-discipline makes it possible for engineers to work in a range of fields. We have already heard about engineers in banking, sales, marketing and many other areas. It is indeed good news but that raises a question. How do we define ‘Engineer’? It was obvious back then that people who build sky-rise buildings, tunnels and shopping malls were regarded as engineers. Since a few decades ago, people started relating engineers with their everyday electronics gadgets. I understand that the term becomes looser and vaguer as it evolves. But will it not be controversial to call a sales personnel who is not from engineering background but with technical knowledge-so that he can raise his sales pitch to attract customers-a sales ENGINEER? Simply put, does this type of job scope fall under engineering category? It may or may not matter. It is just my opinion.
Education helps students with inherent reasoning and critical thinking skill sets enhance their potential to the next level. Since engineering has its roots in science, the concept of cause and effect is a very prominent aspect of engineering. That is why it is a second nature for engineers to find root causes of the problem first before tackling it. When they have found possible root causes, engineers screen through them, make discussions and pull out and prioritize the most possible ones so that they can have a list of corresponding solutions. Finally they come up with the most efficient solution that is well harmonious with the business objectives.
As engineering students, we have been under constant exposure to the contexts of analysis, design and troubleshooting. Especially when we do projects, not only the process of algorithmic thinking but also the elements of human relation, interpersonal communication, time management and presentation skills come into picture. Each of these qualities contributes to the making of an engineer. Hence, engineers are able to adapt the industries other than manufacturing – service industry for instance.
The idea of cross-discipline makes it possible for engineers to work in a range of fields. We have already heard about engineers in banking, sales, marketing and many other areas. It is indeed good news but that raises a question. How do we define ‘Engineer’? It was obvious back then that people who build sky-rise buildings, tunnels and shopping malls were regarded as engineers. Since a few decades ago, people started relating engineers with their everyday electronics gadgets. I understand that the term becomes looser and vaguer as it evolves. But will it not be controversial to call a sales personnel who is not from engineering background but with technical knowledge-so that he can raise his sales pitch to attract customers-a sales ENGINEER? Simply put, does this type of job scope fall under engineering category? It may or may not matter. It is just my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)