Difference between revisions of "Chem321:Problem Set 5"
m (Better link) |
m (tweak) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
# (100-150 words) What is meant by Zero Waste to Landfill, and how did Haworth Furniture achieve this in practice at their factories (you may need to consult their 2009 sustainability report). | # (100-150 words) What is meant by Zero Waste to Landfill, and how did Haworth Furniture achieve this in practice at their factories (you may need to consult their 2009 sustainability report). | ||
# (~200 words) In the video assigned for Unit 11, Paul Anastas talks about "doing the right things wrong". Explain exactly what he means by this, and how green chemistry overcomes this. | # (~200 words) In the video assigned for Unit 11, Paul Anastas talks about "doing the right things wrong". Explain exactly what he means by this, and how green chemistry overcomes this. | ||
| − | # (200 words) Explain the process of wood liquefaction. What are the benefits, and what is hindering the wider use of this technology? | + | # (~200 words) Explain the process of wood liquefaction. What are the benefits, and what is hindering the wider use of this technology? |
| − | # (150-200 words) At the | + | # (150-200 words) At the [http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/newsreleases/2011/february/annual-green-chemistry-conference-slated-june-21-23-in-dc.html Green Chemistry Conference I attended in 2011], I heard two different speakers (including one from a pharmaceutical company) state categorically that '''every green chemistry process I have ever seen introduced onto the plant has always been cheaper to run than the "dirty" process it replaced'''. How is this possible, given the common viewpoint that cleaning up a process must always cost money?* |
<nowiki>*</nowiki> ''One speaker at the conference beautifully explained this common myth, by pointing out that green products at the supermarket invariably cost more to buy - so they must cost more to make, right?!'' | <nowiki>*</nowiki> ''One speaker at the conference beautifully explained this common myth, by pointing out that green products at the supermarket invariably cost more to buy - so they must cost more to make, right?!'' | ||
[[Category:Chemistry 321]] | [[Category:Chemistry 321]] | ||
Latest revision as of 00:38, 10 August 2015
WORLD (Chemistry 321) |
 |
| MAIN PAGE |
|---|
| Syllabus — Schedule |
| Welcome page Contact Dr. Walker |
| This week |
| Today's tasks — (tomorrow) |
| Course units 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 |
| Moodle site |
|
|
| Course content |
| Assignments Paper - Acme - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 |
| Practice problems |
| Discussions |
|
|
| General wiki help |
| Basic editing Create an account Protocols Tutorial Demo, for practice |
Please type up your answers in Microsoft Word, Word Perfect, OpenOffice Writer or RTF file format, and email to me before 11:59pm on Wednesday, July 29th. Do not post your answers on the wiki.
- Explain briefly the meaning of the following terms: Understorey reinitiation, the Green Revolution, Waste Reduction At Source (WRAS), the Biomass Pyramid, Green Chemistry, Environmental Management System, genetically modified crops, catalyst.
- (~200 words) Biotechnology allows genetic modification of crops so that they become naturally pest-resistant. Discuss the pros and cons of GM crops, and explain why they were largely banned in Europe.
- (100-150 words) What is meant by Zero Waste to Landfill, and how did Haworth Furniture achieve this in practice at their factories (you may need to consult their 2009 sustainability report).
- (~200 words) In the video assigned for Unit 11, Paul Anastas talks about "doing the right things wrong". Explain exactly what he means by this, and how green chemistry overcomes this.
- (~200 words) Explain the process of wood liquefaction. What are the benefits, and what is hindering the wider use of this technology?
- (150-200 words) At the Green Chemistry Conference I attended in 2011, I heard two different speakers (including one from a pharmaceutical company) state categorically that every green chemistry process I have ever seen introduced onto the plant has always been cheaper to run than the "dirty" process it replaced. How is this possible, given the common viewpoint that cleaning up a process must always cost money?*
* One speaker at the conference beautifully explained this common myth, by pointing out that green products at the supermarket invariably cost more to buy - so they must cost more to make, right?!
