Aircraft stripping and painting Birch, Stuart; Trego, Linda E Aerospace Engineering (0736-2536). Vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 21-23. Jan.-Feb. 1995

The application and stripping of aircraft paint ideally involves long service-life coats with low maintenance requirements and ease and cost-effectiveness of application and removal; an increasingly important criterion is the environmental innocuousness of the chemistries of application and stripping. Attention is given to the Large Aircraft Robotic Paint Stripping System, whose design addresses guidelines for emissions to the environment and workers' health. (AIAA)

Descriptors: Aircraft; Aerospace engines; Paints; Emissions; Chemistry; Robotics; Coating; Painting; Criteria; Maintenance; Aircraft components; Guidelines; Design engineering; STRIPPING; PAINTS; AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE; AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY; ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION; COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT

An Environmentally Safe and Effective Paint Removal Process for AircraftAuthor: Kozol J.Source: JOM, Volume 53, Number 3, 1 March 2001, pp. 20-21(2)Publisher:Minerals, Metals & Materials SocietyAbstract:To reduce hazardous waste from fleet and depot aircraft paint stripping and to conform to regulations banning toxic chemical paint strippers, the U.S. Naval Air Systems Team (materials division, depots, and headquarters) teamed with the U.S. Air Force at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center for concept development, characterization, and demonstration of a mature, advanced paint-removal system, the Boeing xenon/flashlamp CO2 (Flashjet®) process. Extensive metallic and composite-materials testing was conducted. This paper describes the development and characterization program leading to authorization of the process for use on fixed-wing navy aircraft.

Stripping aircraft paint with starch Ashley, Steven Mechanical Engineering. Vol. 119, no. 4, pp. 58-62. 1997

Strict federal environmental regulations banning widely used but toxic chemical paint strippers are forcing the aerospace industry to find new ways to remove paint from aircraft. One of the prime depainting alternatives is an environmentally safe method that blasts paint and surface finishes away with abrasive wheat-starch particles propelled by compressed air. EnviroStrip method is based on abrading coated surfaces by blasting them with engineered wheat-starch particles. Considered by some to be a technological breakthrough, the technique has been proven effective and safe for use on both aluminum and composite surfaces, offering the possibility of `nose-to-tail' paint stripping in a single operation.

Descriptors: Paints; Particulate composites; Aircraft industry; Aircraft; Aluminum base alloys; Compressed air; Aerospace; Blasting; Mechanical engineering; Abrasives; Abrasion; Abrasive blasting; Strippers; Surface finish; Abrasive finishing; Aircraft components; Regulations

21st Century aircraft depainting strategiesKozol, Joseph (Naval Air Warfare Cent Aircraft Div); Conrad, Dayle; Hartle, Steven; Ivey, Randall; Slife, Richard; Berkel, Thomas Source: International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition (Proceedings), v 42, n 1, Evolving Technologies for the Competitive Edge, 1997, p 677-688ISSN: 0891-0138 CODEN: ISSEEG Conference: Proceedings of the 1997 42nd International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition. Part 1 (of 2), May 4-8 1997, Anaheim, CA, USA

Abstract: Current chemical paint strippers for aircraft contain toxic and hazardous components and depainting operations are a major source of hazardous waste generation in the DOD. Federal and state agencies have begun to restrict the use of these hazardous materials and Government directives require significant reductions in hazardous waste generation. The Naval Air Systems Team (Laboratories, Depots and Headquarters) has teamed with the Air Force at Warner Robins Air Logistics Command in investigating advanced paint removal technologies and has taken a multi-process approach to meeting the requirements of aircraft and component stripping at various levels of maintenance. This paper describes the results of development and application of current and emerging technologies which can be used safely on aircraft metallic or composite surfaces. (12 refs.)

Ei controlled terms: Protective coatings  -  Painting  -  Stripping (removal)  -  Cleaning  -  Aircraft  - Environmental protection

Green inkAnon Source: Paper Europe, v 11, n 4, Jul, 1999, p 14ISSN: 0955-7806 CODEN: 002986 Publisher: Whitmar Publ Ltd

Abstract: An environment-friendly printing ink has recently been developed. Called Alpha-Eco Intense, it combines optimum performance with the increasing demand for printing inks that will do less harm to the environment. It has the characteristics that give significant improvement in rub resistance, extend run lengths between cylinder washes and improve efficiency by reducing build-ups in the swan neck delivery. Alpha-Eco ink uses a new vegetable based binder which gives the ink high gloss and good rub resistance along with excellent dot sharpness. In addition, the ink has high flexibility and dampening solution tolerance and is suitable for many substrates including paper or board, glossy or matt, uncoated or recycled.

Ei controlled terms: Ink  -  Printing  -  Paper products  -  Printing properties  -  Environmental impact  - Cost effectiveness

Vegetable oil inks show slow growth Milmo, Sean INK WORLD. Vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 18, 21. Sept. 2000

Sales of vegetable oil-based inks have been growing steadily in Europe, bolstered by approval from printers and environmental legislation, but producers are nonetheless complaining of slow growth. Looking at the US ink market, where their products have a much higher market share, they believe that much more could be sold with the help of more government support and a more favorable public opinion. This article also discusses the beneficial qualities of vegetable inks, and current EU legislative efforts.

Descriptors: Environmental Engineering; Environmental legislation; Clear air act; European ink manufacturer; Vegetable oils; Printing machinery; Industrial emissions; Marketing; Sales; Laws and legislation; Air pollution control; Volatile organic compounds; Printing; Oxidation

Natural Life  Sept-Oct 2003 p11(3)

Good companies: socially and environmentally responsible businesses. (profiles of companies that have instituted sustainable practices)(listing of green business resources)

Priesnitz, Wendy

Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2003 Life Media

Just a few years ago, the term "green business" was an oxymoron. But no longer are those two words in opposition to each other. Increasingly, owners and managers of both large and small businesses are realizing that it pays to be green. And an improved bottom line is a great motivator for good behavior.

According to University of Oregon management professor Michael Russo, companies with superior environmental performance have higher returns on investment compared to their competitors. Russo authored an award-winning study of 243 companies in the late 1990s, He says, "Greener companies tend to promote innovation, conserve valuable resources in their production systems and enhance their reputation for both prospective employees and potential customers. They go beyond the minimum required by law, and their shareholders reap the rewards."

So simply put, green business is good business. But a true green business doesn't just cloak itself in a veneer of feel-good jargon while conducting business as usual. Instead, it offers carefully considered products and services created and delivered in a way that contributes to the well-being of both people and planet while helping create an equitable and ecologically sustainable economy.

Rona Fried, veteran green business owner and President of Sustainablebusiness.com, puts it this way, "Sustainable businesses are companies that unabashedly embrace the goal of enhancing life on earth as an integral part of their business strategy. These companies show exceptional leadership by their explicit commitment--and the significant resources they allocate to back it up--to address the ecological crisis as it relates to their industry."

Cleaning Up the Printing Process

A good example of a sector that could be described as having its own ecological crisis is the printing and graphics art industry. To its credit, it is also an industry that has made great strides in cleaning up its mess over the past decade.

Clean Choice Printers is one small business that has been part of the movement to green the printing industry. Owners Don and Sandy Rennick say they were prompted to start a green business after reading a book called Get a Life by Susan Brandum and Wayne Roberts. "We wanted to run a safe, clean business that would not harm the environment and we found a way to do just that," say the Rennicks. "Traditional offset print shops, for the most part, are left with no

alternative but to use what is available to them. Unfortunately, all of what's available, in order to keep up with the industry, is toxic and harmful and produces waste. Having already invested thousands of dollars in equipment, and also in order to compete with other large shops, they are forced to continue using conventional systems."

The Rennicks invested in the latest digital technology that would print in a clean, non-toxic, non-polluting way. Their process uses no toxic solvents or other chemicals, utilizes only water-based inks that are 70 to 85 percent organic, produces no ozone and minimal C02, uses no water and recycles both waste paper and ink cartridges.

And everything they do--from their business name to educating their customers--highlights the environmental aspect of their service. And the niche marketing has paid off, helping the Rennicks take their environmental message to the broader business community. Their client list includes a wide range of businesses and non-profits such as Canadian Environment Network, Canadian Organic Growers, the Sierra Club, the Green Party, natural foods businesses and organic producers.

Hospitality Goes Green

The food service and hospitality industry is another often wasteful and polluting sector that is slowly but surely greening itself, from the proliferation of fair trade coffee, to organics being served in high end restaurants, to hotel environmental policies.

Just a few years ago, city councils were banning McDonald's styrofoam burger boxes, calling them "McToxics" And there were dark rumors, never substantiated, that tropical rain forest land was being cleared for its cattle to graze. But even this notorious fast food giant has begun to slowly but surely green itself--largely in response to declining market share and concerns from its small business owner franchisees.

As the greasy fast food chains are becoming healthier and more environmentally aware, at least in one instance, their by-products are being used by one of the greener of green businesses. Change is always in the air in Northern California and this time change smells like French fries.

Thanksgiving Coffee Company has just converted its entire fleet of delivery tracks to pure B 100 Biodiesel, a clean-burning alternative fuel derived from leftover and recycled vegetable oils. This conversion is the latest step in the company's industry-leading sustainability program, which permeates all aspects of the business.

"We have a basic philosophy here," says Thanksgiving Coffee CEO Paul Katzeff from his roasting facility in Fort Bragg on California's north coast. "You get 'Total Quality' by caring about the taste of the coffee, honoring the farmers and respecting the environment."

The biodiesel conversion is the latest in a multi-year environmental sustainability program for the 25-year-old company. In 1998, they financed an assessment by the non-profit Trees for the Future to determine carbon emissions produced in the processing, delivery and consumption of their product, and subsequently planted 75,000 trees in Ethiopia--the birthplace of coffee--to mitigate their operation's impact on global warming. The trees sequester an amount of carbon-

based greenhouse gasses equal to the amount of those produced in the process of getting the coffee from tree to cup. The calculations included not only their electrical use for lighting the factory, but also the gas used to deliver the beans, propane used to roast the coffee and energy used by consumers to brew the 50 million cups a year that Thanksgiving's customers drink.

Fighting Causes With Music

Musicians have always displayed compassion and concern for social and environmental issues, often lending their voices to good causes. However, even concerts supporting environmental causes can be bad for the environment, using a lot of electricity, not to mention the other resources used to tour musicians around the world. And now, a Minneapolis, Minnesota-based marketing firm with a focus on social responsibility is dealing with that problem, while helping both musicians and green businesses market themselves.

MusicMatters blends social activism, marketing, special events and music. It is a small company that was founded in 1997 by Michael Martin, a former real estate investment banker with an MBA who ran Concerts for the Environment in the early 90s.

Using what Martin calls "effect marketing", MusicMatters finds a way to link a company and a cause, usually using top-name musicians like the Dave Matthews Band, which participated in the One Sweet Whirled global warming campaign with Ben & Jerry's ice cream. In another initiative, MusicMatters' CoolTour project makes it easy for bands to fight global warming. They will help a band calculate their tour's carbon dioxide footprint, then erase it by helping finance wind-generated electricity through NativeEnergy.

Good for the Bottom Line

Small- and medium-sized businesses comprise up to 90 percent of all companies in the U.K., U.S. and Canada. They also produce much of the business waste and many of the environmental incidents. A recent study commissioned by the U.K.'s Environment Agency found that only one-fifth of micro businesses--those with fewer than 10 staff--take measures to limit their environmental impact.

But the entrepreneurs profiled here have discovered what the big corporations have known for awhile--that good environmental citizenship is great for the bottom line. These business owners know that social and environmental responsibility is not just for large, multi-national companies that have a global impact. It is the responsibility of every citizen ... and if change begins at home, small companies can play an important role their local communities.

Green Business Resources

Clean Choice Printers R.R. #1, McDonalds Corners, ON K0G 1M0 Canada phone/fax (613) 278-0177, (877) 463-2639 Email: info@cleanchoiceprinters.com Web: www.cleanchoiceprinters.com

Thanksgiving Coffee Company P.O. Box 1918, Fort Bragg, CA 95437 USA phone: (707) 964-0118, (800) 462-1999 fax: (707) 964-0351 web: www.thanksgivingcoffee.com

MusicMatters 2110 Lyndale Ave S, Suite M, Minneapolis, MN 55405 USA phone: (612) 377-1142 fax: (612) 377-1141

Dancing With the Tiger: Learning Sustainability Step by Natural Step by Brian Nattrass and Mary Altomare (New Society Publishers, 2002)

The Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line by Bob Willard (New Society Publishers, 2002)

The Ecology of Commerce: A Declaration of Sustainability by Paul Hawken (HarperBusiness, 1994)

Growing a Business by Paul Hawken (Fireside, 1988)

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things by William McDonough and Michael Braungart (North Point Press, 2002)

Source Citation: "Good companies: socially and environmentally responsible businesses." (profiles of companies that have instituted sustainable practices)(listing of green business resources) Natural Life, Sept-Oct 2003 p11(3). Science Resource Center. Thomson Gale. 15 April 2006 <http://0-galenet.galegroup.com.mill1.sjlibrary.org:80/servlet/SciRC?ste=1&docNum=A107250188>

Document Number: A107250188

Buying GreenHarnessing the Incredible Procurement Power of Governments, Hospitals, Colleges and America’s Biggest Corporations to Protect the Environmentby Josh Harkinson and Jim Motavalli E, September/October 2002 , Vol. XIII, no. 5

SIDEBARPushing ProcurementCities and States Seize the Time With New Initiatives

Highlights in recent green purchasing efforts around the country include these, part of an extensive Center for a New American Dream listing at www.newdream.org/procure/activities.html: Santa Monica, California, which is buying 100 percent renewable electricity for all city facilities, with a net reduction of greenhouse gases totaling 13,672 tons annually…Lee County, Florida, which uses an environmentally preferable purchasing (EPP) policy to eliminate hazardous wastes (including anything containing high levels of volatile organic compounds) from its vehicle maintenance operations. Among the products now off-limits are aerosol spray cans and brake cleaners with chlorinated solvents…

The State of Vermont, where a “Clean State Initiative” is endeavoring to purchase only chlorine-free paper and textile products because of concerns about the environmental impact of dioxin (a byproduct of chlorine bleaching). Similar initiatives exist in San Francisco and Oakland, California…The City of Berkeley, California is running its recycling collection vehicles on 100 percent biodiesel fuel made from recycled cooking oil. The city’s Solid Waste Management District plant debris trucks also use the fuel -- which cuts down on the release of dangerous particulate matter…Los Angeles now buys 14 percent of its electricity -- amounting to some 70 million kilowatt-hours annually -- from clean, renewable sources. The city’s airports are also buying green power…Not to be outdone, San Francisco adopted a Clean Air Program in 1993 that encourages city agencies to use mass-transit and to purchase alternative-fueled vehicles. The city also established a green building program that resulted in an estimated $6 million in savings in 1999…New York City operates a municipal fleet of more than 300 hybrid-electric Toyota Prius vehicles, which get more than 50 miles per gallon…By adopting energy efficiency measures, Montgomery County in Maryland saved $2.3 million and the emission of more than 7,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases…In Ohio, state contracts include provisions for tree-free papers made of seaweed, U.S. currency, bananas, old denim, tobacco leaves and coffee beans.

"Green" Battery Promises Millions in Savings

An environmentally safe battery replacement offers improvements over existing aircraft batteries.

AFRL's Propulsion Directorate, Power Division, Battery Branch, Wright-Patterson AFB OHFrom http://www.afrlhorizons.com/Briefs/Mar01/PR0007.html

The Propulsion Directorate successfully designed and tested an innovative nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) aircraft battery (see Figure 1). This battery effectively demonstrates the capability for replacing current nickel-cadmium (Ni-Cd) and sealed lead acid (SLA) batteries and satisfies required form, fit, function, and environmental standards. Completing this effort will provide the United States Air Force (USAF) and Navy with a high-performance, standard battery for over 30% of the Department of Defense (DoD) aircraft fleet.

USAF aircraft employ Ni-Cd and SLA rechargeable batteries for main aircraft starting and emergency power. These batteries are maintenance-intensive, require yearly tear down and rebuild, and expose maintenance personnel to hazardous materials (HAZMATS) such as lead, sulfuric acid, and cadmium. After useful life, Ni-Cd and SLA batteries require disposal as HAZMATS. Annually, USAF disposal exceeds 800,000 lbs of lead and cadmium from aircraft batteries, creating waste that must be treated according to local, state, and federal laws and regulations. Elimination of lead and cadmium would reduce approximately 25% of procurement costs and an estimated $36 million in operation and maintenance costs for full implementation.

Funded by the USAF Strategic Environmental Research and Development and the Aeronautical Systems Center Pollution Prevention programs, the environmental aircraft battery project began in FY94 to develop a sealed, maintenance-free, prototype battery that demonstrates an environmental alternative to current aircraft batteries. Program goals included eliminating

environmentally hazardous cadmium and lead materials. Ni-MH battery technology, demonstrated in an F-16 configuration, is technically compatible and an environmentally improved alternative to Ni-Cd and SLA batteries in many USAF and Navy system applications. The battery has lower periodic maintenance requirements; higher energy density, efficiency per unit volume, and specific power; and eliminates HAZMAT handling and disposal.

The Ni-MH battery can be integrated into USAF and other DoD aircraft with minor or no modification to existing systems and could also satisfy commercial aircraft requirements. It offers increased capacity and energy density to meet More Electric Aircraft Generation II goals.

Figure 1. Layout and interconnections of the 20 cells in the Ni-MH battery

Dr. John Erbacher and Ms. Sandra Turner (UTC) of the Air Force Research Laboratory's Propulsion Directorate wrote this article. For more information contact TECH CONNECT at (800) 203-6451 or place a request at http://www.afrl.af.mil/techconn/index.htm.

Reference document PR-00-07.

Title: CHERNOBYL: IF YOU CAN MAKE IT HERE... ,  By: Baker, Stephen, Matlack, Carol, Business Week, 00077135, 03/30/98, Issue 3571Database: Academic Search Premier

It's the ultimate proving ground for ultratough robots

It's called ``nuclear lava.'' Fortunately, the hellish stuff exists in only one place: Chernobyl. After the No.4 nuclear reactor blew its top on Apr. 26, 1986, tons of scorching nuke fuel oozed from room to room, consuming cement, melting steel pipes, and contaminating everything in its path. With time, the mess cooled and congealed. Today, a floor of rock-hard, radioactive lava marks history's worst nuclear accident.

In places, the lava wells up eerily from the floor. One such ``stalagmite'' looks like an elephant's foot. Curiosity is dangerous, though. Every second you linger, you're getting zapped by radiation. Even quick visits in protective suits can mean soaking up 30 rads (a unit of radiation exposure). That's about 100 times the dose most people get in a year from X-ray exams and sunlight. But Chernobyl workers regularly brave the danger to monitor conditions inside.

Despite their daring, the workers haven't been able to keep up with the deterioration of the concrete-and-steel sarcophagus that was hastily thrown over the reactor 12 years ago. It is now sinking into the wreckage. The vault is cracking and rain seeps in, creating radioactive ponds that threaten the water table. And when the wind picks up, workers have to spray chemicals on the debris inside to keep radioactive dust from being blown into the atmosphere. Left untended, the structure could collapse, unleashing another deadly cloud of radiation over the Ukrainian countryside some 75 miles north of Kiev. So the Group of Seven has pledged $758 million to reinforce the tomb. The job will take years--and would surely claim many lives if done exclusively by humans.

VALIDATION. Instead of sacrificing more lives, robots will handle the repairs. That's turning Chernobyl into a testing ground for new robot technology, because the machines able to withstand its invidious radiation will be top contenders for many future cleanup tasks. Nuclear reactors built in the '70s will begin reaching the end of their design lives in the 2010s and will need to be dismantled. By 2030, some 400 plants will probably be decommissioned. Each could require a small army of robots that spends years on the task--further swelling the reviving market for these steel-collar workers. ``Everyone wants a chance to validate their technologies'' at Chernobyl, says Maynard A. Holliday, an investigator at the Energy Dept.'s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif.

That potential demand adds more luster to these mechanical marvels, which have staged a dramatic turnaround. In the 1980s, robot sales headed downward. They bottomed out in 1987 at $299 million. For the next six years, the market bounced around in the $400-million range. Since 1993, though, robots have been coming back. Last year, shipments squeaked past the $1 billion mark for the first time in the U.S. Much of the market is for factory robots. But it includes so-called field robots--such as the one being developed for Chernobyl--designed for all sorts of hazardous tasks, such as repairing offshore oil rigs and inspecting underground storage tanks (table, page 170).

There will also be glamour work for mobile robots in space, which is ``hot'' because there's no atmosphere to screen radiation from the sun. An early endeavor could be constructing the international space station, once its materials are launched late this year and next. And future NASA missions call for robots to explore other planets, mine asteroids, and maybe build a moon base.

Chernobyl will test the mettle of the toughest machines, though. Intense radiation is lethal for ordinary silicon chips, so the computer brains and sensors commonly found in robots won't do. The first company to get a crack at Chernobyl will be Pittsburgh-based RedZone Robotics Inc., a spin-off from Carnegie Mellon University. RedZone's engineers are putting together Pioneer, a $2.7 million robot funded by NASA and the Energy Dept. that moves on tank tracks and carries various radiation-hardened equipment.

Pioneer should roll into the Chernobyl sarcophagus sometime this summer to map the lava's radioactivity and make stress tests on the shelter. The information will help Chernobyl officials plan the immense job ahead--first, shoring up the vault, and eventually removing the lava.

If Pioneer performs well, it promises to be the basis for a new generation of muscular construction robots to be manufactured in Ukraine. The technology will be given to a Ukrainian startup that can engage local nuclear weapons scientists. They will create newer and better machines--and, it is hoped, resist the temptation to sell their services to aspiring nuclear powers.

TOY STORY. Still, many Ukrainian officials are cool to the U.S. robotics push. In the drab brick buildings around the entombed reactor, Chernobyl's managers complain that Americans, their eyes on missions to distant planets, are foisting unnecessarily complex technology on Ukraine. ``For me, the robot is just an expensive toy,'' grumbles deputy director Valentin Kupny. ``I don't need it.''

While anxious to protect their children from radioactivity, the Ukrainians have special respect for the workers who regularly dart into the wreckage to snap pictures or measure the accumulating rainwater. Technician Sergei Koshelov ventures in several times a month. ``The main thing is, you have to get out fast,'' he says. Deputy manager Artur Korneev, who decorates his office with photos he took in the reactor's poisonous central hall, doubts Pioneer can improve upon the work already done by humans.

Chernobyl's caretakers also worry about costs. Maintaining the tomb for Reactor No.4 is taxing Ukraine's meager cash resources. The Ukrainians were dismayed late last year when they learned that the cost of Pioneer was to come out of Washington's $78 million contribution to the G-7's rehabilitation plan. The Ukrainians wanted to cancel the robot and restore the $2.7 million. ``It was almost a showstopper,'' admits Timothy Denmeade, RedZone's business development manager. Washington agreed to fund the robot separately.

RedZone's engineers hope the Ukrainians will learn to love Pioneer once they see it in action. Unlike a human rushing about with a camera, the 1,000-pound robot, designed to withstand a staggering 1 million rads, can explore all 2,500 square meters of Chernobyl. Dragging a 100-

meter power and remote-control line, it will push its way through the rubble behind a small bulldozer blade, clearing paths that will also help people dash in and out faster.

The robot will send back streams of information, including visual images. The Livermore team that devised the vision system for the Pathfinder robot, which gave humans new visions of Mars, is creating a ``rad-hard'' version for Pioneer. And researchers at the University of Iowa's Ames Research Center are preparing a ``smart'' coring arm that will extract samples of the concrete structure. As this tool bores into a surface, it measures the force required and analyzes the material's chemical composition. Later, NASA may use the coring arm to drill into a comet.

The Chernobyl data will be compiled in a 3-D map. With mouse clicks, engineers will be able to read chemical composition, temperature, radiation levels, and structural strength at almost any particular spot--an invaluable aid for planning the massive shelter repair work ahead.

For RedZone, the project is a long-delayed homecoming of sorts. The company was created following the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, when a group of Soviets flew to Pittsburgh and asked William L. ``Red'' Whittaker for robots like the ones that Carnegie Mellon built for the Three Mile Island cleanup. Whittaker founded RedZone to provide the technology--but ran afoul of U.S. government controls on high-tech exports to the Soviet Union.

So RedZone turned to building robots for the nuclear industry. It has been a small but steady business. But once RedZone's technology braves the killer rads of Chernobyl, it could be in hot demand for hazardous chores.

Where Humans Fear To Tread

State-of-the-art mobile robots could help clean up Chernobyl, and there are many other potential applications for these rugged machines:

o Inspection and repair of nuclear power stations o Maintaining nuclear reactors in naval ships and submarines

o Checking underground storage tanks and pipelines for leaks

o Site surveys and cleanups of hazardous-waste dumps

o Detecting and disposing of bombs and other terrorist weapons

o Deep-sea research and maintenance of offshore oil rigs

o Exploring the surface of planets and mining minerals on asteroids

o Constructing the space station and a base on the moon

DIAGRAM: Pioneer Nuclear Warrior

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): IN THE VAULT: Maintaining the reactor's steel-and-concrete sarcophagus is so costly that the Group of Seven is chipping in

Copyright 1998 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Title: Crop health checker stems water pollution ,  By: Young, Emma, New Scientist, 02624079, 8/28/2004, Vol. 183, Issue 2462Database: Academic Search Premier

A SENSOR that calculates exactly how much nitrogen a crop needs is slashing fertiliser use in field trials. The system will not only save farmers money but also reduce fertiliser run-off, and so reduce nitrate pollution of water courses. "This pollution problem is serious. It's much bigger than we'd even like to talk about," says Jim Schepers of the US Department of Agriculture, who is leading the work.

The system, which is mounted on a tractor, shines rapid pulses of red and infrared light onto the leaf canopy of the crop, and sensors detect the reflected light. Healthy leaves absorb red and near-infrared light. But the stressed leaves of undernourished plants reflect more infrared light than healthy ones. So comparing the ratio of infrared to red in the reflected light enables the system to work out how much foliage there is in a patch of field and how healthy it is. It can then calculate how much fertiliser to apply.

Farmers often base the amount of fertiliser required for a field on maps of the previous year's yields. But this method is not very accurate. "In the central part of the US, we have a lot of poultry, swine and beef production. This generates tremendous amounts of manure, which is then applied to the land, but farmers often don't keep track of how much they apply where. I don't think this is unique to the US," Schepers says. Often, too much fertiliser is used. Every summer the run-off of nitrates into the Mississippi river causes a "dead zone" of oxygen-depleted water, which can cover more than 18,000 square kilometres in the Gulf of Mexico.

The system is now being tested on 500 hectares of crops at 12 locations in the US. But earlier, smaller-scale trials have shown good results. One trial on 13 hectares of corn in Nebraska found the system could reduce fertiliser use by more than 100 kilograms per hectare. The system costs between $2000 and $3000. But with fertiliser in the US costing 60 cents a kilogram the investment would soon pay for itself. The sensor can also be used to predict crop yields from the health of the foliage.

David Lamb, who works on remote sensing and precision agriculture at the University of New England in Armidale, Australia, also sees uses for the sensors in viticulture. To ripen properly, grapes need sufficient light. "We are keen to use the sensor to monitor the nutrient status of vines, but because the density of the vine canopy is linked intimately to the amount of sunlight that gets to the grapes, you're looking at potential for quality sensing as well," he says.

Other groups have designed sensors to estimate crop nitrogen requirements, based on the amount of ambient light reflected off the crop's leaves (New Scientist, 13 November 1999, p 6). But these systems won't work under heavy cloud cover or in shadow, Schepers says.

PHOTO (COLOR): A bumper crop, but at what cost?~~~~~~~~

By Emma Young

Title: Eternal sunshine for your cell ,  By: LaGesse, David, Silver, Marc, U.S. News & World Report, 00415537, 4/4/2005, Vol. 138, Issue 12Database: Academic Search Premier

The hot Hawaiian sun wasn't enough to lull Randolph Gray to sleep. No, the Round Rock, Texas, engineer was distracted by a group of teen girls fretting about dying cellphone batteries. "People were already running around the beach with bags and coolers," says Gray. "So why not add solar panels?" A few years after that vacation, Gray has his own company, Innovus Designs, that makes the Eclipse Solar Gear line of products with built-in, electricity-generating panels.

His firm is just one of several companies trying to sell the sun as a routine power source for portable electronics. They're making new jackets, bags, and other gear with plastic panels that convert sunlight to electricity. "It's about recharging mobile devices while they're actually mobile," says Scott Jordan, whose company, ScotteVest, has added solar panels to the back of jackets.

Not that these solar options can completely cut the cord: The panels merely add a boost to batteries, extending their life but hardly replacing wall outlets. It takes a lot of rays to fully recharge a dead cell battery--perhaps half a day's worth when skies are clear. And forget trying to charge anything bigger than a phone or MP3 player. These small, flexible panels can't squeeze enough sun juice to power a drained laptop or a portable TV. And, of course, the panels don't help much on a cloudy day and add $100 to $250 to the cost of gear.

So it would seem cheaper and more reliable to carry a second, charged-up battery. But that requires planning; the makers of the new solar accessories want to effortlessly add the sun's power to your normal routines. Eclipse Solar Gear--which, actually, wouldn't be much good in such a celestial event--plans a full line of cases (eclipsesolargear.com) with built-in panels, from coolers to fishing tackle boxes to tool chests. First to market is the Reactor Solar Backpack ($130), a durable-feeling day pack with flexible solar panels. The Solar Flare messenger bag ($130) should be available this month, Gray says. An optional battery pack, which would serve as a reservoir of power, may be available later this year.

A battery pack already is standard in solar backpacks from Voltaic Systems (voltaicsystems.com). The Voltaic backpack is considerably more expensive at $230 but also comes with larger solar panels that can charge gadgets as much as 50 percent faster than the Eclipse models. And the built-in battery means the pack should be gathering power even if your phone isn't plugged in. Both the Voltaic and Eclipse products have a 12-volt outlet for use with the adapters that charge a gadget via a car's cigarette lighter.

ScotteVest's solar panels are an addition to its line of clothing, which features multiple hidden pockets for carrying electronics--and includes channels for wires to connect the devices in what the company calls a "personal area network." The solar panels ($225) attach to its Finetex jackets ($200), which come in either red or black and have 30 pockets, plus another dozen or so in an optional fleece liner. The solar panels are more flexible than those in the bags and relatively stylish. The coats also come with a battery for storing power, but attaching that battery to your gizmos could pose a bit of a challenge. ScotteVest adopted a setup that relies on

Universal Serial Bus adapters. USB power adapters are less common than those for cigarette lighters, and some devices, like early iPod music players, can't draw power through USB. Jordan says he plans to add a cigarette-lighter port to upcoming versions.

The future has long held promise for solar power, which has never lived up to the hype. But rising oil prices have given solar research new life--one company, Konarka Technologies in Massachusetts, may soon market power-gathering fibers that can be woven into tents and clothing. Who knows: Maybe they'll end up in beach towels, too?

To soak up more technology tips, visit www.usnews.com/tametech.

PHOTO (COLOR): WATTS IN THE BAG. Plug a gadget into this Solar Flare bag, and the sun can recharge that device's batteries.PHOTO (COLOR): POWER PACK. Voltaic's backpack battery stores solar energy while you're outdoors.PHOTO (COLOR): SOLAR CHIC. The optional power panels for this Finetex jacket resemble the reflective strips on running gear. Just don't let that power cord dangle!~~~~~~~~By David LaGesseEdited by Marc Silver

Copyright 2005 the U.S. News & World Report, L.P. All rights reserved.

Title: LIGHTING DISPOSAL ,  American School & University, 00030945, Nov98, Vol. 71, Issue 3Database: Academic Search Premier

Pending regulations offer alternatives for recycling fluorescent lamps.

There has been significant controversy and confusion over both the existing and pending regulations for the disposal of spent fluorescent lamps. More than 500 million lamps are disposed of annually. The majority of these, approximately 400 to 450 million, are not disposed of properly. Only about 50 million presently are recycled or disposed of in a hazardous-waste landfill.

According to the existing regulations, all lamps for disposal must be treated as hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act if they fail a toxic characteristic leaching procedure test. This test identifies whether a waste is toxic and must be managed as hazardous waste. Most lamps will fail and, as with all hazardous waste, the generator is responsible for the lamp from the moment it is purchased to its disposal.

Pending regulations

The pending regulations are offering a more generator-friendly approach. The EPA released the first of these proposed regulations in july 1994. This proposal listed two options for regulation and disposal of spent fluorescent mercury-containing lamps: Universal Waste Rule or Conditional Exclusion. The Universal Waste Rule (UWR) option would allow mercury-containing lamps to be excluded from the hazardous-waste regulations as long as the lamps are recycled. This would make lamp disposal easier for the generator since they could use a bill of lading for the transportation in lieu of a hazardous waste manifest. The Conditional Exclusion (CE) option would allow generators to dispose of lamps in a municipal landfill or send the lamps to a state-permitted, licensed mercury/lamp recycling plant.

The controversy stems from two issues: cost and the true effects of mercury on the environment through each disposal option. Proponents of the Universal Waste Option claim that the UWR will make the disposal cost of fluorescent lamps more economical for the generator since lamps will not be subject to hazardous-waste taxes and regulations. This method also offers the generator the least exposure to future liability and will ensure fewer mercury air emissions due to the packaging and transportation requirements that reduce the occurrence of breakage (Best Management Practices).

Proponents of the CE option claim that the greatest level of emissions is during transport and not the final disposal, i.e. a landfill. Many favor adding the Best Management Practices to the CE option to negate this point. Another reason for the support of the CE option is it is considerably less expensive than the UWR option since lamps can be put in a municipal landfill. Supporters believe this encourages generators to make the switch to energy-efficient lighting. However, the total cost for disposal in a lighting retrofit is usually no

more than I percent of the entire retrofit cost.

In the meantime

There is still no decision between the two options. What does this mean for those generators disposing of fluorescent lights in a manner that complies with state regulations?

A generator of hazardous waste has an inescapable liability. This means the generator must accept ultimate responsibility for how the waste is disposed.

It is important to choose a permitted facility to eliminate as much potential future liability as possible. Auditing any facility before use is recommended.

A few other features to look for are: insurance levels and types such as General and Pollution Liability, permits and approvals (not just an EPA number), and closure funding.

It is just as important to ask these questions of the recycling facility as it is to make the choice to recycle. Remember, a low price may have a hidden long-term cost.

Contact the state environmental agency for questions on how to handle spent fluorescent lamps.

Information taken from "Spent Fluorescent Lights ... Recycle or Landfill?", Energy Efficiency Journal, Volume 6, Number 2.

Copyright 1998 by Prism Business Media All rights reserved. Copyright of American School & University is the property of Prism Business Media and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. 

Title: TURNING OUT THE LIGHTS ON MERCURY POLLUTION ,  By: Szivos, Frank, E Magazine: The Environmental Magazine, 10468021, Nov/Dec96, Vol. 7, Issue 6Database: Academic Search PremierSection: In Brief

TURNING OUT THE LIGHTS ON MERCURY POLLUTION

Fluorescent bulbs may seem like the "light at the end of the tunnel" as alternative energy-savers--they use a quarter of the energy of incandescents to produce the same amount of light, cutting energy consumption and pollution emissions from coal-fired power plants.

But there's a catch--fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, lead and cadmium, and the current disposal methods--usually land-filling or incinerating them--contributes to the growing problem of mercury pollution. Since mercury is classified as a hazardous waste, all mercury-containing lamps should be disposed of at a hazardous waste landfill or sent to a recycling facility. But that doesn't always happen. Ray Graczyk, president of Northeast Lamp Recycling, says careless disposal inevitably leads to the hazardous release of mercury.

The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) estimates that the U.S. uses 650 million mercury-containing lamps a year, with 28,000 pounds of mercury flowing into the environment through improper disposal: These toxins can accumulate in living tissues and lead to brain and kidney damage.

In May 1996, Graczyk's company became the first Connecticut facility to recycle mercury-containing lamps. Separating the glass and metals from the toxic substances, the cleaned glass and metal components are sold for remanufacturing, while the mercury is sent to a reclamation facility or reused in thermometers.

In 1994, Florida became the first state to pass legislation prohibiting the incineration of fluorescent bulbs. "Florida's program is the first and will hopefully be the model for the nation to follow;' says Bob Cannon, whose Largo, Florida Cannon Contracting Company is also recycling fluorescents.

Cannond designed a recycling tube that consumers bring home with their new florescent bulb, to later use as protection during transport to a recycling facility. Four local stores have also agreed to collect recycled bulbs from consumers and send cycled to a recycling center.

So far, there is only a 10 to 15 percent annual florescent recycling rate in Florida, but Cannon is still committed. "This is a problem that affects all of us," he says. "And it's only the start."

CONTACT: Northeast Lamp Recycling, 250 Main Street, East Windsor, CT 06088/(860)292-1992; Cannon Contracting Company, 13496 Coronado Drive, Largo, FL 34644/(904)233-2808. -- Frank Szivos

PHOTO (COLOR): Recycling fluorescent bulbs will help put an end to mercury pollution.

Copyright of E Magazine: The Environmental Magazine is the property of Earth Action Network, Inc.. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the author in certain cases. Content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.Source: E Magazine: The Environmental Magazine, Nov/Dec96, Vol. 7 Issue 6, p21, 3pItem: 9612021752

Title: THE BIG SNIFF ,  By: Mecham, Michael, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 00052175, 6/14/2004, Vol. 160, Issue 24Database: Academic Search Premier

NASA's Aura aims for a big-picture look at ozone, continental pollution and global atmospheric change

Smog now spreads from continent to continent. Man is trying to restore the health of the Earth's life-sustaining ozone shield by curtailing some industrial activities, only to find that he's hurting his own cause by what he's doing elsewhere. Greenhouse gases — a lot are man-made hut some are from nature — are warming the lower atmosphere and changing the climate.

Discovering just how much good news and bad news there is for Earth's atmosphere — and where it's coming from — is the goal for Aura, the third spacecraft in NASA's Earth Observing Satellite series. Managed by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, the EOS trio is an unprecedented effort to monitor global climatic change on land, sea and in the atmosphere.

Aura is set for launch July 8 from Vandenberg AFB, Calif., on a Boeing Delta II for what is expected to be at least a six-year mission. Originally set for liftoff June 19, the flight was postponed owing to a stuck helium pressurization valve in the second stage.

Satellites have been on the front line of ozone depletion studies since the deteriorating effects of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other man-made chemicals were first recognized as an environmental scourge more than three decades ago. Their wintertime images of the swelling of the South Pole's "Ozone Hole" helped lead to the 1987 Montreal Protocol that restricted CFC production, and to the Copenhagen agreement five years later that set a schedule for the elimination of their production.

The ozone story is complicated: When it's in the stratosphere (7-31mi. above the Earth's surface), ozone is a benefit by shielding the planet from ultraviolet radiation. But when it's closer to the surface in the troposphere, ozone is a pollutant that threatens people's health. Just as CFCs cause a chemical reaction in the stratosphere that eats ozone away, industrial activity contributes to greenhouse gases that promote ozone accumulation in the troposphere. Additionally, ozone naturally seeps down from the upper atmosphere, and natural activities — volcanoes, forest fires — contribute to the greenhouse effect. So, on balance, what's the net effect?

Ozone and greenhouse gases are just part of the environmental headlines that Aura is investigating. It's also on a smog patrol, examining the air quality of the troposphere on a global basis, not just above urban centers where there's lots of data already, but also over unpopulated land masses and the oceans.

How these and other activities contribute to global climatic change is the third big goal of the Aura mission.

The EOS series began with the 1999 launch of Terra. Built by Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, it carries a set of five instruments that take in the whole picture of the Earth's atmosphere, land and seas, and their interaction with solar radiation (AW&ST Oct. 4,1999, p. 54).

Aqua was next, three years later. Built by Northrop Grumman Space Technology (NGST) here, it concentrates on Earth's water cycle (AW&ST Apr. 1, 2002, p. 50). Two of its six instruments duplicate a set on Terra and illustrate the way the EOS trio complements one another. Like Aqua, its sister spacecraft, Aura will be injected into a 685-km. (425-mi.) polar orbit for instrument checkout before being raised to its 705-km. working orbit, where it will trail Aqua by 15 min. It will bring up the tail of a procession of five satellites that atmospheric scientists have dubbed the A-Train. Led by Aqua, and with Aura playing the caboose, the train includes Cloudsat, Calipso and Parasol (see p. 50). Early planning for a sixth A-Train member is underway.

Because timing for its linkage with the A-Train is critical, Aura's launch window is a mere 3 min. It will be launched on a 7-series Delta II with nine solid rocket booster motors, the same as Aqua was. It employs a 10-ft. fairing, a 3-ft. stretch beyond the standard 7920 launcher configuration used for Landsat 7.

When NGST won the Aqua/Aura competition, its T330 EOS Common Spacecraft design of a graphite fiber reinforced plastic/aluminum honeycomb satellite was a key to the company's success. The 300-series can be stretched to meet the demands of different missions. Next up is the National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), the new meteorological satellite system for all U.S. civil and military needs.

The 22.5-ft.-high, 6,470-lb. Aura is virtually identical to Aqua in terms of its weight distribution, solar panel, avionics, electrical system and interfaces, notes Dana Southwood, Northrop Grumman's EOS program manager. The fact that their instruments were distributed differently — Aqua had six relatively small ones; Aura has four large ones — proved inconsequential. The common spacecraft heritage allowed NGST to complete Aura's instrument checkouts in a third the time and with 10% fewer people than on Aqua. The company also encountered one-fifth as many testing discrepancies on Aura as on Aqua.

"We learned quite a bit integrating the Aqua suite of what things were best to emphasize," Southwood explained. For instance, the Aura team paid a lot of attention to integration and testing before putting instruments on the spacecraft, which helped builders predict which instruments would need interference testing.

Greg Davidson, who heads NGST's civil space programs, attributes Aura's manufacturing and checkout successes to the company's commitment to the use of Six Sigma tools, noting that Goddard's program management team was included in NGST's planning sessions under the Six Sigma imprimatur.

Test flows are one example of the program's process improvement. High data sets allowed the Aura team to save time by combining electromagnetic interference tests with instrument checkouts. Mechanical and electrical workers were cross-trained to help each other as another

way to streamline the process. As Aqua improved Aura, Aura will improve NPOESS, Davidson says.

The flexibility of the T330 design meant that when Aura's Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) arrived late, it didn't hold up the satellite's assembly and test schedule. Normally that might have meant a 4-5-month delay, Southwood said. NGST worked through the problem by using a TES engineering model and then confirming its findings with retrograde tests once the real TES arrived. (Launch delays have not been attributed to the spacecraft.)

SINCE THEY LEARNED so much building Aqua, there was an urge to update the Aura bus that could sometimes be frustrating. "We had to work very hard not to improve things so much that the design would change," Southwood recalled.

"NGST cut a good deal by agreeing to give us a copy of the bus that Aqua was using for Aura," says Goddard's Mark Schoeberl, the Aura project scientist. "It made life simpler for Aqua and Aura, and saved us about $100 million."

Aura's cost is $785 million, including development and launch vehicle. The amount charged for the spacecraft itself was half the cost of Aqua. Last month, Goddard recognized Northrop Grumman Corp.'s longtime service with its Contractor Excellence Award in part because of its Aqua/Aura program work.

Aqua and Terra's instruments combined new designs with proven systems and pulled in the work of an array of international collaborators. The creation of Aura follows that tradition, but with a twist. "Aqua was a new spacecraft with heritage instruments," says Davidson. "Aura is an old spacecraft with new instruments."

Aura's instrument heritage includes the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS), and flights of Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometers on four spacecraft. But the satellite's instrument package will bring an unprecedented sensitivity and depth of coverage to the study of the Earth's atmospheric chemistry from its surface to the stratosphere. Collectively, the instruments will span the ultraviolet through the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum, measure temperature variants and compile vertical profiles of 20 chemical constituents and a half-dozen atmospheric physical properties. Its four instruments are aligned in a row and work as a common unit. Starting at the front, they are:

Microwave Limb Sounder from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. As the name implies, MLS looks only at the limb, a thin band on the horizon that stretches from the upper atmosphere through the stratosphere. It searches for ozone-destroying chemical species as far as 3,000 km. ahead of the spacecraft, measures carbon monoxide in the upper atmosphere (which influences the transport of pollution), and makes water vapor, ice content and temperature measurements that will be useful in climatic studies.

High-Resolution Dynamics Limb Sounder from the University of Colorado, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Oxford University and Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. HRDLS uses infrared emissions to look backward through the limb to obtain day/night profiles of trace gases and aerosols. Its special focus is on nitrogen dioxide, nitric oxide and CFCs in the polar regions, where the largest ozone depletions occur in winter and spring. Other studies of the boundary

between the stratosphere and troposphere will help separate natural ozone pollution from man-made sources. And its measurements of aerosols that absorb and reflect solar radiation will help studies of climatic change.

Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer from JPL. TES uses IR to observe emissions from Earth's surface to the lower stratosphere. Far more sensitive than previous instruments of its type, it has a spatial resolution of 2.3 km. at the limb and 5 X 8 km. at the nadir, fine enough to detect specific ozone concentrations in urban areas. By looking sideways, it can measure the height of gases in the atmosphere. It will complete a global survey every other day, using the off day for specific tasks, such as volcano monitoring or seasonal biomass studies. By detecting water vapor, methane, ozone and aerosols, it will contribute to understanding climate change.

Ozone Monitoring Instrument from the Netherlands Agency for Aerospace Programs and the Finnish Meteorological Institute. With a 2,600-km. nadir swath, OMI has the widest view of any of Aura's instruments. Working with backscatter and reflected light in UV and the visible spectra, it is Aura's primary instrument for recording global ozone change by measuring column amounts of trace gases. It will map columns of sulfur dioxide and aerosols to help in air quality studies, and it will track dust, smoke and industrial aerosols.

"We had to work very hard not to improve things so much that the design would change"

Orbit Injection: 424 mi.Final orbit: 437 mi.Inclination: 98.2 deg.1:45 p.m. ascending nodePhasing: 15 min. behind AquaRepeat Cycle: 16 days/233 revolutions

Size Stowed 8.8 X 7.6 X 22.5 ft.Size Deployed15.4 X 55.9 X 22.5 ft.

12-Panel Single-wing Solar Array 4,600 watts (Power at end of life)

Weight Total: 6,470 lb.Spacecraft dry: 3,934 lb.Instruments: 2,242 lb.Propellant: 295 lb.[*]*Figures rounded

DIAGRAM: Aura's four instruments complement each other in describing the atmospheric physical properties and chemical constituents from Earth's surface to the top of the stratosphere.

PHOTO (COLOR): Aura's specialty is distinguishing between how industrial activities and natural causes influence ozone depletion, the spread of pollution and climatic change.~~~~~~~~

Title: BRIDGE ADVANCES PLASTIC LUMBER USE ,  By: Gregorski, Tim, Roads & Bridges, 87509229, Oct98, Vol. 36, Issue 10Database: Academic Search PremierSection: BRIDGES '98

A new recycled plastic bridge at the U.S. Army's Fort Leonard Wood Post in Missouri, attests to the greatly expanded potential for recovering a solid waste in the U.S. while providing an alternative to conventional wood construction. Completed in June, the bridge spans a creek on Fort Wood's Gammon Field and represents the reuse of some 13,000 lb of mixed plastics that had been otherwise destined for a landfill.

"This construction was significant in that, while larger-sized structures have been built using recycled plastic lumber, no other known structure has the structural capacity of this bridge," said Richard Lampo, researcher at the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (CERL), which led the project to build the bridge.

The recycled plastic bridge replaces an older wooden bridge at Fort Wood.

The 25-ft x 26-1/2-ft. wide structure sits on the six steel beams that had supported the original bridge and was designed to accommodate loads equivalent to light vehicles.

"I drove my half-ton pickup truck over it," said Stan Martin, civil engineering technician in Fort Wood's Directorate of Public Works (DPW). "The bridge looks great. It looks just like a painted wooden bridge until you get up close and see that it's plastic."

A joint effort

The bridge was built with donated materials under a joint project involving CERL, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Fort Wood's DPW.

McLaren Consulting designed the bridge using a protocol they developed for recycled plastics in coordination with the American Society for Testing and Materials and the Plastic Lumber Trade Association (PLTA). The safe capacity of the new bridge is more than 30 tons over the entire structure.

"The railings meet code requirements while deflections and dynamic response are well within accepted limits for this type of bridge," said Malcolm McLaren, president of M.G. McLaren.

Advantages of recycling

Over 8.4 billion lb of plastic containers are produced each year in the U.S., with some 6 billion lb landfilled as waste. Recognizing the environmental and potential economic benefits of reusing some of the waste plastic, several entrepreneurs started making plastic lumber and timber products.

"Historically, markets for mixed plastics have been weak, which has greatly limited recycling of these materials," said Terry Grist, environmental protection specialist at the EPA Headquarters' Office of Solid Waste. "The success of projects such as this one will serve to open up new markets for these materials and provide the opportunity to increase the overall recovery rate for plastics."

CERL has been working since the early 1990s with Rutgers University, the EPA and a group of 11 plastic lumber manufacturers to improve product quality and develop standards and specifications for the materials. CERL's interest was to infuse this environmentally friendly technology into the Corps' military and civil works construction.

Recycled plastic lumber offers a replacement for wood products, many of which are treated with chemicals, to resist rot and insect attack.

"We have wooden bridges and they're a maintenance problem," said Fort Wood's Martin. "We have to send crews out two or three times a year to replace deteriorated lumber and fasteners that have worked loose. Most of our bridges are on running or hiking paths so the splinters and loose fasteners become a safety hazard."

Martin estimates that bridges made with treated wood last about 15 years under the climate and usage frequency at Fort Wood. Untreated wood bridges may have to be replaced as often as every five years. In contrast, CERL's Lampo projects a 50-year, maintenance-free service life for the recycled plastic lumber bridge although the steel supports may need repainting.

Under a watchful eye

Fort Wood's DPW and CERL will continue to monitor the bridge's performance. By successfully demonstrating recycled plastic lumber in a large-scale, structural application, the project opens up potential for diverting waste plastics to beneficial use--and the supply of raw materials is virtually limitless.

"It would take 87 miles of a bridge the same width as this one to use up just one year's landfill plastics," Lampo said, or the equivalent of 462,500 bridges sized like the one at Gammon Field. "We're not going to run out of raw materials any time soon."

According to McLaren, "The challenge is to promote the acceptance of these materials within the regulatory, design and construction communities. I believe the future of our industry demands the use of alternate materials for construction and the use of discarded materials is an obvious benefit to society."

Information for this article provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratories.

The recycled plastic bridge at the U.S. Army's Ft. Leonard Wood Post reuses approximately 13,000 lb of mixed plastics that had been otherwise destined for a landfill.

~~~~~~~~

edited by Tim Gregorski

Copyright of Roads & Bridges is the property of Scranton Gillette Communications Inc.. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the author in certain cases. Content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.Source: Roads & Bridges, Oct98, Vol. 36 Issue 10, p58, 1pItem: 1219102

Title: Plastic's bad rap ,  By: Libin, Kevin, Canadian Business, 00083100, 5/26/2003, Vol. 76, Issue 10Database: Academic Search Premier

EPI's green garbage bags break down accepted wisdom

Nobody likes schlepping all those blue bins full of used margarine tubs and juice jugs to the curb every week. But at least the hassle is made bearable by the feeling that we're doing our bit to help Mother Earth. The only trouble is that years after recycling programs were rolled out in Canada, their benefits remain debatable. In March, a group of leading environmentalists from Sweden turned decades-old orthodoxy on its head, announcing that all the painstaking rinsing and sorting of recyclables we responsible citizens have done for so long has turned out to be, well, a waste--and that we'd be better off both environmentally and economically if we incinerated it all. In cities where recycling has proved unprofitable, garbage collectors end up dumping the contents of blue boxes into landfills. Even when it is profitable, the applications for reconstituted products are still pretty narrow. "How many park benches and fence posts do we need?" asks Joseph Gho, CEO of EPI Environmental Products Inc.

Still, the thought of dumping truckloads of plastics into landfills is unappetizing, to say the least. Unlike most disposables, the acres of Saran Wrap and diapers we toss each day don't break down naturally, meaning they'll be around for generations. But Gho plans to turn that bit of accepted wisdom on its head, too, with an additive that makes plastic entirely biodegradable.

His Vancouver-based firm isn't the first to try turning the environmentally unfriendly material green. With a potential market in the billions, earth-friendly resins have been tried by most big-league chemical firms. The best they could do was add organic starches to the mix so that naturally occurring micro-organisms would, over time, eat the plastic--or at least most of it. The critters still couldn't digest the polymer molecules, leaving behind tiny plastic particles. Worse, the process is triggered by moisture, causing garbage bags to dissolve in the rain and food wrap to break down on supermarket shelves. "If a guy goes shopping and gets a bunch of plastic bags, we don't know where he's going with them," says Gho. "He might be going home or he might be going camping or he might be going boating." For biodegradable plastics to be practical, he argues, they have to break down only when the customer wants them to.

Unlike the starch-based resins available from DuPont and others, where customers must source their polyethylene or polypropylene entirely from the manufacturer, EPI markets an additive that manufacturers mix with their own resin. The degradation process is triggered by light, heat or stress--but it occurs at a rate tailored to the buyer's requirements, breaking down over months or years. "We can actually control the life cycle of plastic," says Gho, who started EPI in 1991. "Our main thrust is to give the customer a product that's going to do the job he wants."

And how does EPI manage that? Gho won't say. He guards his "secret formula" with the same vigilance the Colonel did his blend of 11 herbs and spices. (A former EPI employee once tried selling the recipe himself before Gho's lawyers shut him down.) But one of Gho's UK licensees, Symphony Plastic Technologies, has convinced giant British retailers like Tesco and Safeway to

carry EPI-treated garbage bags, while more major European supermarkets have started using the additive in their grocery sacks--a £250-million-a-year market in the UK. More products are on the way, from bread bags to utensils and containers. In April, EPI's additives were approved for use in food wrap in the US by the Food and Drug Administration.

But the disappearing plastic is already finding its way into landfills worldwide: sanitation authorities are using EPI-treated film to drape over trash heaps. Historically, it has been necessary to bury garbage with several inches of soil each day to keep vermin and odors under control, says Habib Kharrat, a senior engineer at Puente Hills Landfill near Los Angeles. Sheathing it with paper-thin EPI wrap, which degrades in months, is not only cheaper than trucking in dirt, but it also makes the dump--which receives 12,000 tons of garbage a day--more compact. "In the landfill, space is critical," says Kharrat.

EPI has won support from composting groups worldwide. Next, Gho is hoping he can win the approval of Canadian and US investors, with a share offering in the near future. Though the company's revenues are in the low double-digit millions, Gho believes he's at the starting point of a major growth curve for sales of the vanishing polymer. Meanwhile, we responsible citizens shouldn't get too enthused about fewer trips to the curb with those recycling boxes--it only means that our trash bins will be fuller.

PHOTO (COLOR)

~~~~~~~~

By Kevin Libin

Copyright of Canadian Business is the property of Rogers Media, Publishing Ltd.. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the author in certain cases. Content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.Source: Canadian Business, 5/26/2003, Vol. 76 Issue 10, p181, 2pItem: 9842218 

Title: THE SEVEN MYTHS OF 'RECYCLED' PLASTIC ,  Earth Island Journal, 10410406, Fall96, Vol. 11, Issue 4Database: Academic Search Premier

A political storm erupted in Berkeley, California last February, when the Berkeley Ecology Center's recycling trucks stopped picking up "recyclable" plastic bottles. The media had a field day, hooting at "politically correct" environmentalists. Some indignant residents demanded that the recycling trucks continue to pick up discarded plastic containers. The following article, drawn from the Berkeley Plastics Task Force Report, explains the logic behind the plastics lockout.

The plastics industry has poured millions of dollars into public relations campaigns promoting plastic recycling. The American Plastics Council spent $18 million on a nine-month advertising effort praising recycling. Dow Chemical routinely spends more money advertising the company's plastic recycling research than it lavishes on the actual research. This relentless advertising has been successful in creating a number of widely circulated myths.

Myth: A "chasing arrow" symbol means a plastic container is recyclable.

Fact: The arrows are meaningless. Every plastic container is marked with the chasing-arrow symbol. Many people believe the symbol means "recyclable," or even "recycled." Actually, the only information in the symbol is the number inside, which indicates the general class of resin used to make the container.

The plastics industry adopted the chasing-arrow symbol in 1988 to identify the resins when state legislatures were discussing bans on plastic containers. The plastics industry says it never intended to suggest recyclability or recycled content; the symbol was only a catchy graphic to identify the types of resin. The symbol is clearly misleading, but the plastic industry has resisted efforts to modify it.

Myth: Plastics that go into a curbside recycling bin get recycled:

Fact: Many plastics are nonrecyclable. The recyclable types must be separated out. The rest go to waste. Picking up plastics at curbs costs about $800 per ton. People believe that plastic collected at the curb is converted into new packaging, but most recovered plastic packaging is made into secondary products (textiles, parking lot bumpers or plastic lumber) that are not recyclable. This does not reduce the use of virgin materials in plastic packaging.

Myth: Curbside collection will reduce the amount of plastic landfilled.

Fact: Since most plastic reprocessing leads to secondary products that are not recycled, this material is diverted only temporarily from landfills.

Further, if collection makes plastic pack- ages seem more benign, people may buy more plastic packages. Curbside plastic collection programs, intended to reduce municipal plastic waste,

might backfire if total use rises faster than collection. Because only a small fraction of certain types of plastic is reprocessed, the net impact of curbside collection could be more plastic in landfills.

Myth: Packaging resins are made from petroleum refineries' waste.

Fact: Plastic resins are not made from useless or toxic industrial waste, but are made from ethane (the same natural gas used in homes to heat water and to cook), a nonrenewable resource.

Myth: Plastic recyclers pay for the ads that promote plastics' recyclability.

Fact: Most ads portraying plastic recycling are placed by virgin-plastic manufacturers -- to promote plastic sales. The ads are designed to counter the negative public conception of plastic as nonrecyclable, environmentally harmful and a major component of the waste stream that must be landfilled or burned.

The Council for Solid Waste Solutions, an association of major resin-producing companies, is trying to increase curbside pickup of plastics The Council's "Blueprint for Plastic Recycling" is aimed squarely at convincing municipalities to add plastics to curbside recycling services. How this material is to be handled after pickup is not addressed. Communities have adopted collection programs only to find that there is no reasonable market for the material, Before recycling plastics, cities first must to clean and separate them to market specifications.

Myth: Using plastic containers conserves energy.

Fact: Energy studies of packaging often overlook the energy required to synthesize plastic resin. Making plastic containers uses. as much energy as manufacturing glass containers from virgin materials, and much more than making recycled glass containers.

Myth: Our only choice is recycling or wasting.

Fact; Many people take plastic packaging as a given and narrow the issue down to the simple question of how best to dispose of it. Better alternatives include: reducing or eliminating consumption of plastic packaging; using refillable containers; buying in bulk; selecting products that use little or no packaging; choosing packaging that can be recycled and is made from recycled materials; and holding companies accountable for the material they sell by legally requiring recycled content.

The Complete BPTF Reports is available from the Ecology Center [2530 San Pablo Ave., Berkeley CA 94702, (510) 548-2220] for $3.

By the Berkeley Ecology Center

"WHY WE WON'T RECYCLE PLASTICS"

The growing substitution of plastics for glass and paper containers has been accompanied by the promotion of plastics recycling programs. With the use of plastic packaging on the rise, the conflict between personal convenience and public responsibility has shifted attention to the false hope of plastic recycling.

Plastic recycling only provides a temporary diversion from landfills, as the recovered resin is not used to make new plastic containers, but is reused to make disposable, nonrecyclable products. The plastics industry has responded by endorsing plastic recyclability -- while continuing to promote the consumption of single-use plastics.

Production of plastics uses fossil resources, pollutes the air and water and consumes large amounts of energy. Significant toxic emissions into air and water have been associated with plastics plants, and chemicals used to produce plastic resins pose serious health risks. Benzene and vinyl chloride are carcinogens, and dioxin is one of the most toxic substances known. All are associated with polyvinylchloride (PVC) production. Plastics production produces 14 percent of toxic air emissions in the US, while each plant emits an average of 300-500 gallons of contaminated wastewater per minute.

The EPA found that, between 1980 and 1987, 16 percent of all US industrial accidents -- explosions, toxic cloud releases, chemical spills and fires-- involved plastic production.

Most plastic packaging is used only once. Much of the plastic collected for recycling is shipped overseas and processed under dubious conditions, at best. Soda bottles shipped to China's factories are processed into polyester jackets that will not biodegrade.

Adding plastic to recycling programs only promotes its use. This is demonstrated by the fact that the growth in "plastic recycling" programs has been accompanied by a six-fold rise in production of new plastic containers from virgin feed stocks. In 1993, 15 billion pounds of plastics were produced: Only 1 billion pounds were recycled.

~~~~~~~~

By Karen Pickett

Copyright of Earth Island Journal is the property of Earth Island Institute. The copyright in an individual article may be maintained by the author in certain cases. Content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.Source: Earth Island Journal, Fall96, Vol. 11 Issue 4, p26, 1pItem: 9610314202

Title: RECYCLING PLASTIC WITHOUT SORTING ,  By: Paula, Greg, Mechanical Engineering, 00256501, Mar97, Vol. 119, Issue 3Database: Academic Search Premier

Environmental organizations have tried to encourage plastic recycling by placing a code on products to differentiate plastic types, but with seven different types of plastics for consumers to sort, the system has not proved very successful. In addition, plastic items such as a soda bottle, with at least four types of plastic, would have to be broken apart for recycling to be complete. Now, a process developed at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) in Troy, N.Y., recycles plastic without the need for conventional sorting.

RPI's process works for all plastics that aren't cross-linked, which is most of the plastic present in typical residential waste. Examples of cross-linked polymers are rubber and epoxies, so refuse such as tires would have to be dealt with separately.

The process starts with unsorted plastic, which has been coarse-shredded, delivered to the recycling plant via truck or rail. At the plant, the plastic--and whatever nonplastic materials are still mixed in--is given a cursory wash to get rid of easily removable dirt. The mixture is then put into a large vessel, where xylene is added. The xylene, a commercially available solvent, dissolves whatever polystyrene is present in the mixture. The entire xylene/polystyrene liquid is then drained from the vessel, during which time any contaminants are filtered out. Using a process called flash devolatization, in which an electric arc serves as a catalyst, the solvent and the plastic are separated. Useable, sellable polystyrene pellets remain.

The same xylene used to dissolve the polystyrene is heated, then reintroduced into the plastic mixture. At this slightly higher temperature, it then dissolves the low-density polyethylene, which is removed the same way the polystyrene was.

The process is repeated several more times. Each time the xylene is reintroduced into the plastic mixture, it is at a higher temperature, and it dissolves a new type of plastic. By the time the cycle is completed, the entire batch has been separated and recycled into pure, useful plastics.

The energy in 3 pounds of oil makes 1 pound of virgin plastic. The recycling process can yield an equivalent amount of recycled plastic for 37 percent less energy.

A. De Vera Corp. in Makati City, the Philippines, has signed a licensing agreement to build plants in the Philippines that use this recycling technology. With no native oil supply, the Philippines is an ideal country to benefit from this technology because plastics are expensive. The developers of the process see European nations as the next to adopt it.

~~~~~~~~

By GREG PAULA