|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | {{Chem321 navigation}} | | {{Chem321 navigation}} |
| − | Please type up your answers in Microsoft Word, Word Perfect, OpenOffice Writer or RTF file format, and email to me before midnight on Wednesday, July 31st. Do not post your answers on the wiki.
| + | To be posted. |
| − | | |
| − | # Explain briefly the meaning of the following terms: Understorey reinitiation, the Green Revolution, Waste Reduction At Source (WRAS), the Biomass Pyramid, Green Chemistry
| |
| − | # (~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.
| |
| − | # (~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 '''[http://gcande.org/ 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?!''
| |
| | | | |
| | [[Category:Chemistry 321]] | | [[Category:Chemistry 321]] |
