#chemical processing sector

[little-p-eng-engineering]

Little P.Eng.: Pioneering Engineering Excellence in Pipe Support and Flexibility Analysis

In the ever-evolving landscape of industrial engineering, the need for specialized expertise in piping infrastructure has never been more critical. Little P.Eng. emerges as a beacon of innovation and reliability, offering comprehensive engineering and consulting services that cater specifically to the intricacies of pipe support engineering/design and pipe flexibility analysis. This article delves into the core offerings of Little P.Eng., highlighting its pivotal role in optimizing the performance and safety of major piping installations across various sectors.

Expertise in Pipe Support Engineering and Design:

At the heart of Little P.Eng.'s services lies its proficiency in pipe support engineering and design. Recognizing the vital importance of stable and reliable pipe supports in industrial installations, Little P.Eng. employs cutting-edge techniques and materials to design supports that ensure operational efficiency and longevity. The company's engineering solutions are tailored to meet the unique requirements of each project, taking into account factors such as load distribution, thermal expansion, and environmental conditions. Through meticulous planning and design, Little P.Eng. guarantees pipe supports that not only meet but exceed industry standards.

Advanced Pipe Flexibility Analysis:

Another cornerstone of Little P.Eng.'s service portfolio is its advanced pipe flexibility analysis. Understanding that thermal expansion, vibration, and other dynamic forces can significantly impact piping systems, Little P.Eng. leverages sophisticated analytical tools to assess and mitigate potential risks. This proactive approach enables the identification of stress points and flexibility issues before they escalate into costly repairs or operational downtime. By prioritizing the integrity and resilience of piping systems, Little P.Eng. plays a crucial role in ensuring the seamless functionality of major installations.

Collaborative Approach to Project Success:

What sets Little P.Eng. apart is not just its technical acumen but also its collaborative approach to project execution. The firm works closely with clients, contractors, and other stakeholders to ensure that every aspect of the piping design and analysis aligns with the project's overall objectives. This synergy between expertise and client engagement fosters an environment of trust and transparency, leading to solutions that are both innovative and aligned with the client's vision.

Industry-Specific Solutions:

Conclusion:

In conclusion, Little P.Eng. stands at the forefront of engineering excellence, providing unmatched services in pipe support engineering/design and pipe flexibility analysis. Through its dedication to innovation, reliability, and client collaboration, the firm not only enhances the safety and efficiency of major piping installations but also contributes to the advancement of the industrial engineering field. As industries continue to evolve and face new challenges, Little P.Eng. remains committed to delivering solutions that pave the way for a safer, more efficient future.

Tags:

Little P.Eng.

operational efficiency

industry standards

industrial engineering

innovative solutions

engineering services

thermal expansion

environmental conditions consideration

safety enhancement

cutting-edge techniques

stress points mitigation

resilience improvement

efficiency optimization

power generation

project-specific solutions

pipe flexibility analysis

technical acumen

client engagement

chemical processing sector

pipe support engineering

major piping installations

pipe support design

consulting services

oil and gas industry

collaborative approach

sophisticated analytical tools

vibration analysis

load distribution analysis

project execution

operational environments

Engineering Services

Located in Calgary, Alberta; Vancouver, BC; Toronto, Ontario; Edmonton, Alberta; Houston Texas; Torrance, California; El Segundo, CA; Manhattan Beach, CA; Concord, CA; We offer our engineering consultancy services across Canada and United States. Meena Rezkallah.

[electronalytics]

Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market Share, Size, Type, Demand, Overview Analysis, Trends, Opportunities, Key Growth, key points, Development and Forecasts by 2032

Market Overview:

The explosion-proof circuit breaker market refers to the segment of the circuit breaker market that caters to hazardous or potentially explosive environments. Explosion-proof circuit breakers are designed to prevent the ignition of flammable gases, dust, or other hazardous substances in order to ensure the safety of personnel and equipment in such environments.

The global Circuit Breaker market size was valued at USD 5427.73 million in 2021-2022 and is expected to expand at a CAGR of 6.91% during the forecast period, reaching USD 8105.33 million by 2030.

Key Factors: Several key factors are driving the growth of the explosion-proof circuit breaker market:

severe safety laws: Businesses operating in risky areas, such as those in the oil and gas, chemical, mining, and manufacturing sectors, must adhere to severe safety laws. To reduce the risk of explosions and guarantee worker safety, these standards require the use of explosion-proof circuit breakers.

Industrialization and infrastructure development are progressing at an accelerated rate, which is driving up demand for explosion-proof circuit breakers. Businesses in hazardous environments including oil refineries, power plants, chemical plants, and mining activities need effective circuit protection solutions.

Technological developments: The market for explosion-proof circuit breakers has grown as a result of the development of sophisticated technologies in circuit protection, such as improved arc quenching mechanisms and improved insulating materials.These technical developments provide improved performance and dependability in risky circumstances.

Demand: The increased focus on safety in dangerous areas is predicted to drive up demand for explosion-proof circuit breakers. Explosion-proof circuit breakers are being adopted by industries across all sectors, including oil and gas, chemical, mining, and manufacturing, in order to adhere to safety laws and safeguard their operations.

Explosion-proof circuit breakers that meet the strict safety standards and regulations of diverse industries should be the primary focus of manufacturers and suppliers in this industry. To meet the changing needs of the market, they should also emphasise the strength, dependability, and simplicity of maintenance of their products.

Referrals to our Stringent datalytics, trade journals, and websites that focus on market reports are encouraged. These sources frequently include thorough research, market trends, growth projections, competition analysis, and other insightful information about this market.

You can investigate the availability of particular reports linked to this market by going to our website or getting in touch with us directly. We offer thorough and in-depth information that might be helpful for firms, investors, and individuals interested in this industry, but these reports frequently need to be purchased or subscribed to.

“Remember to look for recent reports to ensure you have the most current and relevant information.”

Click Here, To Get Free Sample Report: https://stringentdatalytics.com/sample-request/explosion-proof-circuit-breaker-market/10057/

Market Segmentations:

Global Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market: By Company

• Phoenix Contract

• Connecticut Electric

• Murrelektronik

• Eaton

• Siemens

• ABB

• Culter-Hanmmer

• Westinghouse

• Schneider

• Blue Sea Systems

• IDEC

• Carling Technologies

• Bussman

• AudioPipe

• Buyers Products

• ITE

• Panduit

• Powerwerx

• Stinger

• Federal Pacific

• Murray Feiss

Global Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market: By Type

• High Voltage

• Medium Voltage

• Low Voltage

Global Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market: By Application

• Petrochemical

• Military Industry

• Others

Global Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market: Regional Analysis

The regional analysis of the global Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker market provides insights into the market's performance across different regions of the world. The analysis is based on recent and future trends and includes market forecast for the prediction period. The countries covered in the regional analysis of the Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker market report are as follows:

North America: The North America region includes the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The U.S. is the largest market for Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker in this region, followed by Canada and Mexico. The market growth in this region is primarily driven by the presence of key market players and the increasing demand for the product.

Europe: The Europe region includes Germany, France, U.K., Russia, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, and Rest of Europe. Germany is the largest market for Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker in this region, followed by the U.K. and France. The market growth in this region is driven by the increasing demand for the product in the automotive and aerospace sectors.

Asia-Pacific: The Asia-Pacific region includes Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, China, Japan, India, South Korea, and Rest of Asia-Pacific. China is the largest market for Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker in this region, followed by Japan and India. The market growth in this region is driven by the increasing adoption of the product in various end-use industries, such as automotive, aerospace, and construction.

Middle East and Africa: The Middle East and Africa region includes Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, South Africa, Egypt, Israel, and Rest of Middle East and Africa. The market growth in this region is driven by the increasing demand for the product in the aerospace and defense sectors.

South America: The South America region includes Argentina, Brazil, and Rest of South America. Brazil is the largest market for Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker in this region, followed by Argentina. The market growth in this region is primarily driven by the increasing demand for the product in the automotive sector.

Visit Report Page for More Details: https://stringentdatalytics.com/reports/explosion-proof-circuit-breaker-market/10057/

Reasons to Purchase Explosion-proof Circuit Breaker Market Report:

• To obtain insights into industry trends and dynamics, including market size, growth rates, and important factors and difficulties. This study offers insightful information on these topics.

• To identify important participants and rivals: This research studies can assist companies in identifying key participants and rivals in their sector, along with their market share, business plans, and strengths and weaknesses.

• To comprehend consumer behaviour: these research studies can offer insightful information about customer behaviour, including preferences, spending patterns, and demographics.

• To assess market opportunities: These research studies can assist companies in assessing market opportunities, such as those presented by possible new goods or services, emerging markets, and trends..

About US:

Stringent Datalytics offers both custom and syndicated market research reports. Custom market research reports are tailored to a specific client's needs and requirements. These reports provide unique insights into a particular industry or market segment and can help businesses make informed decisions about their strategies and operations.

Syndicated market research reports, on the other hand, are pre-existing reports that are available for purchase by multiple clients. These reports are often produced on a regular basis, such as annually or quarterly, and cover a broad range of industries and market segments. Syndicated reports provide clients with insights into industry trends, market sizes, and competitive landscapes. By offering both custom and syndicated reports, Stringent Datalytics can provide clients with a range of market research solutions that can be customized to their specific needs

Contact US:

Stringent Datalytics

Contact No -  +1 346 666 6655

Email Id -  sales@stringentdatalytics.com  

Web - https://stringentdatalytics.com/

[reasonsforhope]

"The sleeping giant of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stirred.

In the past month, an avalanche of anti-pollution rules, targeting everything from toxic drinking water to planet-heating gases in the atmosphere, have been issued by the agency. Belatedly, the sizable weight of the US federal government is being thrown at longstanding environmental crises, including the climate emergency.

On Thursday [May 18, 2023], the EPA’s month of frenzied activity was crowned by the toughest ever limits upon carbon pollution from America’s power sector, with large, existing coal and gas plants told they must slash their emissions by 90% or face being shut down.

The measure will, the EPA says, wipe out more than 600m tons of carbon emissions over the next two decades, about double what the entire UK emits each year. But even this wasn’t the biggest pollution reduction announced in recent weeks.

In April, new emissions standards for cars and trucks will eliminate an expected 9bn tons of CO2 by the mid-point of the century, while separate rules issued late last year aim to slash hydrofluorocarbons, planet-heating gases used widely in refrigeration and air conditioning, by 4.6bn tons in the same timeframe. Methane, another highly potent greenhouse gas, will be curtailed by 810m tons over the next decade in another EPA edict.

In just a few short months the EPA, diminished and demoralized under Donald Trump, has flexed its regulatory muscles to the extent that 15bn tons of greenhouse gases – equivalent to about three times the US’s carbon pollution, or nearly half of the entire world’s annual fossil fuel emissions – are set to be prevented, transforming the power basis of Americans’ cars and homes in the process...

If last year’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), with its $370bn in clean energy subsidies and enticements for electric car buyers, was the carrot to reducing emissions, the EPA now appears to be bringing a hefty stick.

The IRA should help reduce US emissions by about 40% this decade but the cut needs to be deeper, up to half of 2005 levels, to give the world a chance of avoiding catastrophic heatwaves, wildfires, drought and other climate calamities. The new rules suddenly put America, after years of delay and political rancor, tantalizingly within reach of this...

“It’s clear we’ve reached a pivotal point in human history and it’s on all of us to act right now to protect our future,” said Michael Regan, the administrator of the EPA, in a speech last week at the University of Maryland. The venue was chosen in a nod to the young, climate-concerned voters Joe Biden hopes to court in next year’s presidential election, and who have been dismayed by Biden’s acquiescence to large-scale oil and gas drilling.

“Folks, this is our future we are talking about, and we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity for real climate action,” [Michael Regan, the administrator of the EPA], added. “Failure is not an option, indifference is not an option, inaction is not an option.” ...

It’s not just climate the EPA has acted upon in recent months. There are new standards for chemical plants, such as those that blight the so-called "Cancer Alley" the US, from emitting cancer-causing toxins such as benzene, ethylene oxide and vinyl chloride. New rules curbing mercury, arsenic and lead from industrial facilities have been released, as have tighter limits on emissions of soot and the first ever regulations targeting the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkylsubstances (or PFAS) in drinking water.” ...

For those inside the agency, the breakneck pace has been enervating. “It’s definitely a race against time,” said one senior EPA official, who asked not to be named. “The clock is ticking. It is a sprint through a marathon and it is exhausting.” ...

“We know the work to confront the climate crisis doesn’t stop at strong carbon pollution standards,” said Ben Jealous, the executive director of the Sierra Club.

“The continued use or expansion of fossil power plants is incompatible with a livable future. Simply put, we must not merely limit the use of fossil fuel electricity – we must end it entirely.”"

-via The Guardian (US), 5/16/23

[themirokai]

now I wanna know- why isn't drinking water free in the US?

Hi there friend! Thanks very much for taking the bait from this post. Buckle up, this is a long one.

If you want to put out a cistern and collect rainwater and use that, congratulations! Your water is free! Plus the cost of maintaining your cistern and keeping it clean. If you’re lucky enough to live somewhere with a high enough water table to have a well, then your water is also free + the cost of the well and well maintenance.

But if you want water to come out of your tap on demand and you can’t or don’t want to maintain a cistern and you can’t or don’t want to have a well… you need public water!

How do we get public water? Well, a government entity (usually. there are some private utilities, but that’s a different post. I have strong feelings) has rights to take water out of a river or a lake, or they have a reservoir, or they have access to an aquifer. Then they have to transport the water out of the source. This generally requires aqueducts or massive pipes, which are expensive and need to be maintained, which is also expensive. The pipe leading out of one of my utility’s reservoirs is 12 feet in diameter.

Does the water go directly from the source to your home? Nope! It gets piped to a water filtration plant! The process of modern water filtration is complicated but it involves both physical and chemical treatment to make sure the water isn’t carrying any parasites, harmful bacteria, or pollutants and it has the right pH. Not only are these filtration plants extremely expensive to build and maintain but the process of operating them is extremely expensive, both in terms of hiring skilled staff and having appropriate materials for the filters and chemical treatment.

After the treated water (called “finished water” in the biz) is ready it does get piped to your house.

If you use public water, do you know where your local water filtration plant is? No? That probably means it’s not in your immediate neighborhood, which probably means it’s several miles or more away. To get to your house, the water needs to travel through an extensive pipe network. These pipes are smaller but they have to remain pressurized so that no contaminants can get into the water on its way to your house. But pipes break! Especially if you live somewhere with a freeze/thaw cycle. Maintaining this pipe network is, you guessed it, expensive! It requires materials and extremely skilled workers who perform in very very difficult conditions. Plus lots of engineering to keep the whole system pressurized even when one part of it breaks. Oh, and you know what lots of pipes were made out of in the early 20th century? Lead! So all around the country utilities need to make extensive and costly infrastructure upgrades because now we know lead pipes are really freaking bad.

Okay, so you get the basic picture. And I haven’t even gotten into Safe Drinking Water Act compliance, but most of that happens at the filtration plant. Oo! Or desalinization because some utilities pull their water from the sea and need to take the salt out. I know basically nothing about this except that it is likely complicated and expensive to do at scale.

This is essentially why I get frustrated by people who argue “why should we pay for something that falls out of the sky?” Because finished water doesn’t fall from the sky and it sure as hell doesn’t fall from the sky into your faucet. (Side note: as a public utility official I have been screamed at by the “it falls from the sky” people. A thing I like about the private sector is that people scream at me a lot less.)

Now, there is a very strong argument to be made that because water is necessary for human life, it should be provided by the government for free to everyone. And just like the costs of roads or public education, this should be part of the public budget and paid for by taxes and no one should have a water bill. I don’t disagree with this. I’m sure that’s how it’s done in some countries.

I don’t have a well-researched answer on the history of water utilities but I do have some facts and some (very) educated conjectures. Water rights in the US are complicated (another separate post!) but they’re based on private ownership. Ever since white people came to this country people have been claiming ownership over water and charging each other money for taking water out of rivers or lakes or the ground. You can measure how much of it someone uses and charge them for it. Water is treated like a commodity because unlike other public goods, it *can* be treated like a commodity and then, you know, capitalism. Again, I’m not saying that’s right.

But as a society, if we believe that no one should have a water bill, then we need to figure out how to pay for all the very expensive steps in the process I outlined at the top. Could that just be taxes? Sure, if you have a system that supports taxes at that level. Do I believe that public funding of water infrastructure would be a fuckton better than a lot of things we use taxes for now? Absolutely! But that requires massive institutional change and this isn’t generally an issue that people know enough about to demand change.

If you read this far, congratulations! You now know more stuff about drinking water!

[materialsscienceandengineering]

Getting dirty to clean up the chemical industry's environmental impact

The global chemical industry is a major fossil fuel consumer and climate change contributor; however, new Curtin University research has identified how the sector could clean up its green credentials by getting dirty. The article, "Insulator-on-Conductor Fouling Amplifies Aqueous Electrolysis Rates," was published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Most chemical reactions involving electricity and organic materials can't be done efficiently using water because the organic materials don't dissolve well, forcing industry to use fossil fuels to provide heat rather than electricity or use alternative substances to water, which add environmental and safety risks. However, a team of researchers led by Associate Professor Simone Ciampi, from Curtin's School of Molecular and Life Sciences, has found chemical reactions in water can be dramatically sped up by adding a water-resistant material to an electrode—a process known as "fouling."

Read more.

[forgetmenautical]

Iterator ideas for a rain world x stray crossover!

Text under cut!

1. Instead of using their superstructures processing power to ponder solutions to the great question, Iterators now border the edges and fill the underbelly of the dome. Each one of them is individually in charge of regulating things like electricity and water in their designated area.

2. In order to check the waters chemical levels, it’s drawn directly to the iterators inner chambers for closer assessment before being re-filtered (if necessary) and moved back into piping towards their designated area.

3. Iterators can only filter water up to a certain point. if they don’t draw out enough water, their systems will slowly begin to shut down until they are completely inoperable and need reactivation. With humans now out of the picture, and there being no existing robots who can access their respective gates to fix them, being completely shut down now means death.

4. In a very rare and extremely lethal glitch, an iterators structures can have a higher water intake than intended—eventually resulting in rupture and flooding the general area. This most usually happens to older iterators, and a common aftereffect is the water in the area becoming toxic.

5. While the structure as a whole was being divided into each iterators sector, construction errors were still made, and thus there ended up being a handful of sectors that were too large for a single iterator to handle.

6. This resulted in areas where two iterators had been built in far closer proximity than regulations would normally allow, along with both of their structures being used to regulate the same water source.

7. Both iterators in their area must work together to distribute the water, and often end in arguments and shortages of power throughout their sector.

8. Almost all robots living in the cities don’t know the iterators are there, as their existence only benefitted humans, which mostly kept it to themselves as it was irrelevant information for them.

9. The few who do know they exist cannot open the iterator gates, which allow access into the iterators inner structure.

10. There was a brief effort by an iterator (sliver of straw) who wanted to be permanently disconnected from their structure to be free alongside the robots in the city. They managed to compel a human, and diverted a some of their resources into giving the human all that they needed to create an organism small enough to go into the iterators chambers undetected and disconnect them from the grid.

11. While this succeeded, the organism that was created, now called Zurks, quickly became rampant and its population had an unstable explosion in growth. They fed off of flesh, and resulted in the humans extinction in the dome. No other iterators know where the zurks came from, or how sliver of straw escaped.

and here’s all the stamps I used for the drawing as a treat!

[imperialchem]

Preserving Assets:  The Role of Corrosion Inhibitors in Industrial Maintenance

Corrosion is a persistent threat to industrial assets, causing billions of dollars in damages annually across various sectors.  From oil and gas facilities to manufacturing plants, the impact of corrosion can be devastating, leading to equipment failures, production downtime, and costly repairs.  However, with the right preventive measures in place, such as corrosion inhibitors, industrial facilities can effectively mitigate the risk of corrosion and prolong the lifespan of their assets.  As a leading chemical company in Vadodara, Imperial Oilfield Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (ICPL) understands the critical role of corrosion inhibitors in industrial maintenance.  In this blog post, we'll explore the importance of corrosion inhibitors, their applications, and the expertise of ICPL as a corrosion inhibitor manufacturer and exporter in India.

Understanding Corrosion Inhibitors

Corrosion inhibitors are chemical compounds designed to protect metal surfaces from the damaging effects of corrosion.  By forming a protective barrier on the metal surface or altering the corrosion process, inhibitors prevent or slow down the oxidation and deterioration of metals in corrosive environments.  Corrosion inhibitors are widely used in various industries, including oil and gas, petrochemicals, power generation, water treatment, and manufacturing, to safeguard critical assets and infrastructure from corrosion-related failures.

The Importance of Corrosion Inhibitors in Industrial Maintenance

1.   Asset Protection:  Industrial facilities rely heavily on equipment and infrastructure made of metal, such as pipelines, tanks, vessels, and machinery.  Corrosion inhibitors play a crucial role in protecting these assets from corrosion, extending their service life and reducing the need for frequent repairs or replacements.

2.   Cost Savings:  Corrosion-related failures can result in significant financial losses due to equipment downtime, production disruptions, and repair expenses.  By incorporating corrosion inhibitors into maintenance programs, industries can minimize the risk of corrosion-related failures and realize substantial cost savings in the long run.

3.   Safety and Reliability:  Corrosion compromises the structural integrity of industrial assets, posing safety hazards to personnel and the surrounding environment.  Corrosion inhibitors help maintain the reliability and safety of critical infrastructure, reducing the likelihood of accidents, spills, and environmental contamination.

4.   Environmental Protection:  Corrosion-related leaks and spills can have detrimental environmental consequences, polluting soil, water bodies, and ecosystems.  By preventing corrosion and minimizing the risk of leaks and spills, corrosion inhibitors contribute to environmental protection and sustainability efforts.

Applications of Corrosion Inhibitors

Corrosion inhibitors find applications across various industrial sectors, where metal components are exposed to corrosive environments.  Some common applications of corrosion inhibitors include:

Oil and Gas Production:  In the oil and gas industry, corrosion inhibitors are used to protect pipelines, well casings, and production equipment from corrosion caused by corrosive fluids, gases, and environmental conditions.

Water Treatment:  Corrosion inhibitors are added to cooling water systems, boilers, and wastewater treatment facilities to prevent metal corrosion caused by dissolved oxygen, scale formation, and aggressive ions.

Manufacturing:  In manufacturing processes involving metal components, such as automotive, aerospace, and electronics manufacturing, corrosion inhibitors are used to protect parts, components, and machinery from corrosion during production, storage, and transportation.

Marine and Offshore Structures:  Corrosion inhibitors are applied to marine vessels, offshore platforms, and coastal structures to protect against corrosion in seawater environments.

ICPL:  Your Trusted Corrosion Inhibitor Manufacturer and Exporter in India

As the best chemical company in Vadodara, ICPL is dedicated to delivering high-quality corrosion inhibitors tailored to the specific needs of industrial clients.  Here's why ICPL is the preferred choice for corrosion inhibitors in India:

Expertise and Experience:  With decades of experience in the chemical industry, ICPL possesses the expertise and technical know-how to develop and manufacture corrosion inhibitors that meet the highest quality standards and regulatory requirements.

State-of-the-Art Facilities:  ICPL operates state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities equipped with advanced technologies and production processes to ensure the consistent quality and performance of its corrosion inhibitors.

Customized Solutions:  ICPL offers customized corrosion inhibitor formulations tailored to the unique requirements and operating conditions of industrial applications.  Our team of experts works closely with clients to develop solutions that address specific corrosion challenges and performance objectives.

Global Reach:  As a corrosion inhibitor exporter in India, ICPL serves clients worldwide, exporting its products to diverse markets across Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and beyond.  With a strong global presence and distribution network, ICPL delivers reliable corrosion protection solutions to industries around the globe.

Conclusion

In conclusion, corrosion inhibitors play a crucial role in industrial maintenance by protecting metal assets from the damaging effects of corrosion.  As a leading corrosion inhibitor manufacturer and exporter in India, ICPL is committed to providing high-quality corrosion inhibitors that safeguard critical infrastructure, ensure operational reliability, and promote cost-effective maintenance practices.  With ICPL's expertise, customized solutions, and global reach, industries can effectively mitigate the risk of corrosion and preserve the integrity of their assets for years to come.  Contact ICPL today to learn more about our corrosion inhibitor products and solutions.

[streets-of-vale]

Streets of Vale - Info Dump - "Dolls"

"Dolls" is a generic and derogatory term used to refer to both men and women who have at least all four limbs replaced by cybernetic prosthetics. This term also used for those individuals who have nearly full body replacement. 

“Dolls” make up less than 0.25% of the total population of Remnant, as unfortunately many who undergo the required procedures perish on the table, succumbing to shock, rejection, or infection. The process is extremely invasive, time-consuming and expensive.

For the majority of those who survive this surgery, the only recourse for employment, capable of providing enough funds to repay the loans, required to pay the costs for the procedures, is via the sex trade. While there are those that find gainful employment in other sectors, or even as “Street Samurai”... for the majority that is not the case.

(Images generated using perchance AI text-to-image)

WARNING: Unless a “Doll” is a registered member of the Military, Police Force or a PMC, it is HIGHLY ILLEGAL for them to have combat rated upgraded/modifications. Identification/Capture of such “Combat Dolls” of CDs is punishable by 50 years incarceration, with removal and replacement of the affected limbs with generic base models.

/===/ Legal Modifications (No an Exhaustive List) /===/

Synthetic skin - Comprised of a plastic polymer, this flexible overlay is used to cover the mechanical look of prosthetic limbs, to give a more natural look. Some installations include a transitional color system, that allows the user to change skin color at will. Color range is anything with in the visual spectrum.

Limb Illumination - Inspired by the undercarriage LED lighting systems of street racers, enterprising “Dolls” had LED strings wired into their limbs, to give an illuminated look to those that chose to forgo the use of synthetic skin. This illumination also included just the placing of LED lights in the finger tops, and or toes.

Blood / Air Filtration Systems - A modification, many individuals, not just those with extensive cybernetic alterations, chose to have installed. Enhances the removal of toxic and poisonous chemicals and additives from the air and blood stream. A favored modification for those who like to drink in excess, or smoke.

/===/ Illegal Modifications (Not an Exhaustive List) /===/

Strength Enhancements / Speed Enhancements Retractable Blades of any type / Taser (Shocking Grasp) Implant Chemical Injection or Vapor Dispersal Systems Integrated firearms / Smart-Link Targeting System

[pearlsmith25]

Osmium Market Explained: The World's Most Densely Valuable Metal

The Osmium market is a niche sector within the broader precious metals industry, often overshadowed by its more well-known counterparts like gold and silver. Osmium is a remarkable element with unique properties that make it a valuable asset for various industries, especially in cutting-edge technologies and scientific applications. In this article, we will explore the Osmium market, its uses, sources, and its potential for growth and investment.

Understanding Osmium

Osmium market is a chemical element with the symbol Os and atomic number 76. It is one of the densest naturally occurring elements and belongs to the platinum group metals (PGMs), which also includes platinum, palladium, rhodium, ruthenium, and iridium. Osmium is characterized by its bluish-white color and extreme density, making it twice as dense as lead.

Historically, osmium was used in various applications, such as fountain pen tips and electrical contacts, due to its hardness and corrosion resistance. However, modern applications for osmium have evolved, and its market dynamics have changed significantly.

Osmium in Modern Applications

Osmium Alloys in Industry Osmium is often alloyed with other metals, like iridium, to create exceptionally hard and durable materials. These alloys find applications in the aerospace and automotive industries, where they are used for electrical contacts, spark plug tips, and turbine engine components. The extreme heat resistance of osmium alloys makes them invaluable in these high-temperature environments.

Scientific Applications In scientific research, osmium tetroxide (OsO4) is a widely used staining agent for electron microscopy and other microscopic imaging techniques. It can highlight cellular structures and biological tissues, aiding researchers in understanding complex biological processes.

Investment Potential The rarity of osmium and its diverse applications make it an attractive option for investors looking to diversify their portfolios. As a tangible asset, osmium can act as a hedge against economic instability and currency devaluation. However, investing in osmium requires careful consideration and knowledge of the market, as it is less liquid than more common precious metals.

Sources of Osmium

Osmium is a rare element found in trace amounts in various ores, with primary sources being platinum and nickel ores. The largest producers of osmium are countries with significant platinum mining operations, such as South Africa and Russia. Extraction of osmium from these ores is a complex and expensive process, which contributes to its scarcity.

Osmium Market Trends

The Osmium market is characterized by its limited supply and steady demand. Over the past decade, the market has experienced modest growth, driven by technological advancements and increasing demand for its unique properties. Some notable trends in the Osmium market include:

Growing Demand in Aerospace and Automotive Sectors The use of osmium alloys in aerospace and automotive applications is expected to increase as manufacturers seek materials that can withstand extreme conditions. Osmium's remarkable hardness and resistance to high temperatures make it a preferred choice in these industries.

Expanding Scientific Research Advancements in scientific research and the increasing need for advanced microscopy techniques are expected to drive the demand for osmium tetroxide, a key component in staining and imaging. This is particularly relevant in the fields of biology, medicine, and materials science.

Investment Opportunities While osmium is not as commonly traded as other precious metals, its investment potential has piqued the interest of collectors and investors. Some institutions and individuals are exploring the possibility of adding osmium to their investment portfolios as a store of value and a hedge against economic volatility.

Challenges in the Osmium Market

Despite its unique properties and applications, the Osmium market faces several challenges:

Limited Supply Osmium's scarcity poses a significant challenge for both industrial users and investors. The small quantities of osmium available and the complex extraction process contribute to its high cost.

Market Awareness The general public and even some investors remain relatively unaware of osmium as an investment option. Increasing awareness and education about the metal's unique characteristics and market dynamics is essential to foster growth.

Conclusion

The Osmium market may be small compared to other precious metals, but its unique properties and applications make it a valuable and intriguing element within the world of commodities and investments. As technology continues to advance and scientific research expands, the demand for osmium is likely to grow, offering opportunities for those willing to explore this less-known sector of the precious metals industry. While challenges such as limited supply and market awareness persist, the Osmium market's potential for growth and investment remains an exciting prospect for those who see beyond the bluish-white surface of this remarkable element.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

How tech does regulatory capture

If you want to know which industries have the most influence in DC, study the trade deals struck by the US Trade Representative, whose activities are the most obvious manifestation of American corporate power over state. Take the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). As David Dayen notes, this treaty is a kind of Big Tech wishlist:

https://prospect.org/power/2023-04-18-big-tech-lobbyists-took-over-washington/

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/18/cursed-are-the-sausagemakers/#how-the-parties-get-to-yes

The USTR’s playbook has changed over the years, reflecting the degree of control over the US government exerted by different sectors of the US economy. Today, with Big Tech in the driver’s seat, US trade deals embody something called the “digital trade agenda,” a mix of policies ranging from limiting liability, privacy protection, competition law, and data locatization.

The Digital Trade Agenda is a relatively new phenomenon. A decade ago, when the USTR went abroad to twist the arms of America’s trading partners, the only “digital” part of the agenda was obligations to spy on users and to swiftly remove materials claimed to have violated US media monopolies’ copyright. But as the tech sector grew more concentrated, they were able to seize a greater share America’s trade priorities.

One person who had a front-row seat for this transformation was Wendy Li, a PhD candidate in sociology at the University of Wisconsin, who served in the USTR’s office from 2015–17, and who leveraged her contacts among officials and lobbyists (and ex-lobbyists turned officials and vice-versa) to produce a fascinating, ethnographic account of a very specific form of regulatory capture. That account appears in “Regulatory Capture’s Third Face of Power,” in Socio-Economic Review. The article is paywalled, but if you access it via this link, you can bypass the paywall:

https://pluralistic.net/wendi-li-reg-capture

Li’s paper starts with a taxonomy of types of regulatory capture, drawn from the literature. The first kind — the “first face of power” — is when an industry wins some battle over a given policy, triumphing over the public interest. Li notes that defining “public interest” is sometimes tricky, which is true, but still, there are some obvious examples of this kind of capture.

My “favorite” example of horrible regulatory capture is from 2019, when Dow Chemical — working through the West Virginia Manufacturers Association — convinced the state of West Virginia to relax the limits on how much toxic runoff from chemical processing could be present in the state’s drinking water. Dow argued that the national safe levels reflected a different kind of person from the typical West Virginian. Specifically, Dow argued, the people of West Virginia were much fatter than other Americans, so their bodies could absorb more poison without sickening. And besides, Dow concluded, West Virginians drink beer, not water, so poisoning their drinking water wouldn’t affect them:

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/03/14/the-real-elitists-looking-down-on-trump-voters/

This isn’t even a little ambiguous. Dow’s pleading wasn’t just absurd on its face — it was also scientifically bankrupt — there’s no evidence that being overweight makes you less susceptible to carcinogens. And yet, the state regulator bought it. Why? Well, maybe because chemical processing is WV’s largest industry, and Dow is the largest chemical company in the state. Regulatory capture, in other words.

The second kind of regulatory capture is the “revolving door”: when an executive from industry rotates into a role in government, where they are expected to guard the public interest from their former employers. There’s some of this in every presidential administration — think of Obama’s ex-Morganstanley and ex-Goldmansachs finance officials.

But while Obama and other “normal” pols sketched their corruption with a fine-tipped pen, making the overall shape hard to discern, Trump scrawled large, crude, unmissable figures with a fisted Sharpie. Remember Scott Pruitt, the disgraced Trump EPA who wanted to abolish the EPA? Pruitt was was such a colossal asshole that even the lobbyists who’d been bribing him with free housing actually evicted him:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/06/politics/pruitt-trump/index.html

After Pruitt resigned in the midst of chaotic scandal, he was succeeded by his deputy, Andrew Wheeler — a former coal lobbyist:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/climate/scott-pruitt-epa-trump.html

That’s the “second face of power.” What’s the third? It’s taking over the shape of the debate, getting to define its axioms. Think of the reflexive idea that government projects are “wasteful” and “inefficient.” Once all players internalize this idea, the debate shifts from “what should the public sector do?” to “which private-sector entity should the government pay to do this?” Anyone who says, “Wait, why doesn’t the government just do this?” just gets blank stares.

We can see this in the cramped and inadequate debate over the SVB bailout; apologists for the bailout insist that it was necessary because if SVB’s depositors had been forced to take a haircut, every large depositor in America would pile into Morganstanley, making it so “too big to fail” that it could tank the nation.

This is probably true — but only if you discount the possibility of establishing a public bank. Public banks are hardly a radical idea: America had nationwide public banking through the postal service until 1966:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/15/socialism-for-the-rich/#rugged-individualism-for-the-poor

Li summarizes: “the first face of power is measured through the winner of the game, and the second face of power can be understood as the referee. The third face of power is the field, the rulebook, and agreement that there is even a game at all.”

It’s the creation of this third face that Li’s paper dissects — the creation of “Type I” ideas that form the unquestioned assumptions for all other debate. Sociologist call these ideas “schemas.” Li describes two ways that the tech industry changed the schemas used in trade negotiations. First, schemas are changed through “knowledge production” — creating reports and data.

Second, schemas are embedded through “recursive institutional reproduction” — a bit of unfortunately opaque academic jargon that is roughly equivalent to what activists call “policy laundering.” That’s when an industry can’t get its way in its home country, so it leans on trade reps to include that policy in a treaty or trade deal, which transforms it into an obligation at home.

In tech policy, the Ur-example of this is the DMCA, a 1998 digital copyright law that has profoundly changed the way we relate to everything from online services to our coffee makers. The origins of the DMCA are wild. In 1991, Al Gore kicked off the National Information Infrastructure hearings — AKA the “Information Superhighway” project. One of the most prominent proposals for the future of the internet came from Bruce Lehman, Bill Clinton’s Copyrigh tCzar. Lehman had been the head of IP enforcement for Microsoft, and he had some genuinely batshit ideas for the internet, like requiring a separate, negotiated copyright license for every transitory copy made by RAM, or a network buffer, or drive cache:

https://www.wired.com/1996/01/white-paper/

Gore laughed Lehman out of the room and told him to hit the road. So Lehman did, scurrying over to Geneva, where he turned his batshit ideas into the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). Then he raced back to DC where he told Congress that they had to get on board with those UN treaties. In 1998, Congress passed the DMCA, turning a failed regulatory policy into a federal law that endures to this day.

That’s “policy laundering.” Lehman couldn’t get his ideas though the US government, so he rammed them through a UN agency, converting his proposal into an obligation, which Congress duly assumed.

The Digital Trade Agenda triumphed by both knowledge production and recursive institutional reproduction (AKA policy laundering). Under Obama, trade officials created the Digital Trade Working Group in consultation with industry, through the US Chamber of Commerce. This group worked with the US International Trade Commission (USITC) — a quasi-governmental research body — to produce copious reports, testimony and data in support of a focus on “digital trade.”

In particular, they inflated the value of digital trade to US officials, convincing them that getting wins for the digital industry would have an outsized impact on the US economy. This is reflected in the terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal that was negotiated in the utmost secrecy, in hotels all over the world surrounded by armed guards, where neither the press nor activists were welcome.

TPP represented a kind of farcical wishlist for America’s corporate giants, including the tech sector, and it looked like a done deal — until Trump. Trump unilaterally withdrew from TPP, so the tech industry’s reps simply tacked around TPP. They took everything they’d wanted to get out of TPP and crammed it into the USMCA, Trump’s rewrite of NAFTA. This makes perfect sense — corporate America’s priority was TPP’s policies, not TPP itself.

Li’s paper doesn’t just document this shift, she also gives us interviews with (anonymized) officials and lobbyists who speak frankly about how this happened behind the scenes. For example, a former Commerce official turned tech lobbyist describes how he lobbies his former coworkers: “Sometimes, [meetings are like] hey, let’s grab lunch, let’s grab coffee, and catch up. And half of it is about our kids, and half of it is about this [work related issue]. We’ll have a formal meeting [with government officials], but obviously we chitchat before and after. Because we’re human. So, a lot of it is just normal human interaction, right?”

This social coziness lets lobbyists position themselves as “stakeholders,” which legitimizes — and even requires — their participation in policymaking. As a trade negotiator says, “So to get your handle on a problem, you’ve got to pull the right people together, and you’ve got to sift through all the various ideas, so we obviously have a lot of regular interaction with companies [. . .] I spend a lot of time with the companies trying to understand their business model, try ing to understand how they interact with the governments in different countries, and then of course, socializing it within the building.”

Once lobbyists are “stakeholders,” they get to define not just what position the US takes — they get to define which positions can even be considered. As a trade negotiator says, “[Lobbyists aren’t] coming in and spouting talking points. They’re not giving us draft text because we haven’t gotten to the text phase yet. The way these meetings go is, generally we provide an update on what is happening and what approach we’re taking. The remainder is usually devoted to companies talking about their particular interests, and inquiring as to whether and how their issues are being addressed in that forum.”

That’s not just winning the game — it’s defining the rules.

Li’s paper is a fascinating tour of the sausage-factory and a close examination of the gunk that litters the factory floor. That said, I think there are areas where she drops policies and fights into neat categories that are much messier. For example, Li contrasts the rules in TPP with the rules in ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a failed international treaty from 2010.

Li characterizes ACTA as being an anti-tech proposal because it imposed copyright liability on tech companies, which would have raised their costs by forcing them to police their users’ speech, items for sale and uploads for copyright infringement. But that’s not quite right: ACTA was much broader. First, because “counterfeiting” doesn’t mean what you think it does: in an international trade agreement, counterfeiting concerns itself with all kinds of totally legitimate activities.

For example, Apple engraves microscopic Apple logos on every part in an iPhone; no user ever sees these parts. But Apple uses the presence of an Apple trademark on these tiny components to lodge trademark claims with US border officials in order to block the importation of parts harvested from dead iPhones, as part of the company’s war on repair:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/30/80-lbs/#malicious-compliance

Likewise, companies like Rolex and Cartier have national subsidiaries in countries all over the world with the exclusive license to sell their goods in each country. These companies then claim that, say, an official Mexican Rolex watch becomes a counterfeit Rolex the minute it crosses the US border, because Rolex Mexico doesn’t have the right to use Rolex International’s trademarks outside of Mexico.

Asking tech companies to police “counterfeits” isn’t just about stopping knockoffs — it’s about letting multinational corporations control all secondary markets for their goods, giving them total control over repair and used goods.

Beyond that: creating an affirmative duty for platforms to police their users’ uploads and speech for copyright infringement is one of those things that not only won’t prevent copyright infringement (beating filters is easy for dedicated copyright infringers), but it will also compromise users’ speech (because filters are rife with false positives) — and it will hand eternal dominance to the largest tech firms (both Youtube and Facebook support mandatory filters, because they’ve spent hundreds of millions on them, and know that their small rivals can’t).

ACTA wasn’t a way to “punish” tech to make life better for media companies — it was a way to shift some of the oligarchic control of both tech and media around, while shoring up its dominance. Yes, parts of the tech sector hated ACTA, but it died because millions of people campaigned against it.

And of course, ACTA got policy-laundered into law in 2019, when the EU adopted the Digital Single Market Directive and created a filtering mandate, ignoring the largest petition in EU history and the people who marched in 50 cities. That was recursive institutional reproduction in action all right.

Likewise, TPP can’t be understood as the tech sector sidelining the entertainment companies — because both of them rallied for the parts of TPP that feathered all their nests. For example, the entertainment sector and the tech sector both love rules against reverse-engineers (like Section 1201 of the DMCA), which make it a felony to unlock your books, music, games and videos from the store that sold them to you and take them with you to another player.

Tech loves this because it gets them lock-in — if you break up with Amazon, you have to kiss your Kindle and Audible books goodbye. Media loves it because it gives them control — DRM stops you from recording Christmas movies between Feb and Dec, when they come free with your streaming service, and that means you have to pay-per-view them in December, when you want to watch them.

In other words, the Big Tech and Big Content’s policy fights aren’t so much about which policies we get — they’re about who gets to profit from them. They both want the same stuff — no taxes, no unions, no minimum wage, no consumer rights, no privacy — but they each want to hoard the benefits from that stuff.

Both tech and media love “IP” — not in the sense of “copyright” or “trademark,” but in the sense of “any law that lets me control the conduct of my competitors, critics and customers”:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

In USMCA, it wasn’t just the “Digital Trade Agenda” that made it into the final agreement — it was mandatory DRM laws, massive copyright extensions, and the evisceration of fair use and its equivalents in Mexico and Canada:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/08/01/set-healthy-boundaries/#la-ley

There’s another important factor missing from Li’s analysis of the rise of the Digital Trade Agenda: monopoly. Tech used to be composed of hundreds of competing firms that hated each other’s guts and were incapable of working together. The entertainment industry, by contrast, was already hugely consolidated and able to lobby effectively as a body.

That was hugely important in the Napster Wars, when international copyright proposals like the Database Right and the Broadcast Treaty were popping up at the UN and in country-to-country trade deals. While the tech industry was competing to give users a better deal, Big Content was able to solve the collective action problem and come up with a common lobbying position, getting nearly identical (and absolutely ghastly) tech bills introduced in dozens of state legislatures at once:

https://web.archive.org/web/20030425210736/https://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/states/200304_sdmca_eff_analysis.php

The rise of the Digital Trade Agenda is downstream of tech industry consolidation, the orgy of mergers that saw the internet transformed into “five giant websites, each filled with screenshots of text from the other four”:

https://twitter.com/tveastman/status/1069674780826071040

Li’s taxonomy of regulatory capture is useful and important, and it’s complimented by an analysis of failures in antitrust enforcement. Market consolidation has produced firms that are more powerful than the governments that are supposed to keep them honest. When the teams have more power than the ref, the game will never be fair:

https://doctorow.medium.com/small-government-fd5870a9462e

The tech industry aren’t really adverse to the entertainment industry, at least not where it counts. They are all part of the business lobby, whose regulatory priorities are broadly shared, even if they disagree at the margins. Dayen describes how the Digital Trade Agenda is playing out in IPEF, the treaty with more than a dozen Pacific Rim countries: “It would prohibit governments from reviewing or prescreening algorithms for violations of labor law, competition policy, or nondiscrimination statutes. It would bar limitations on data flows or storage. And it would treat policies that have greater impacts on the large tech firms as illegal trade barriers. These terms could block signatory countries from writing laws that take on any of these issues.”

Those aren’t tech priorities — those are corporate priorities. The success of the “Digital Trade Agenda” isn’t just because tech grew up and started lobbying — it’s because the things they lobby for are the things every business wants: no labor protection, no antitrust, no privacy.

That’s the “schema” that matters: the bedrock assumption that job of US trade policy is to make sure that workers and residents abroad have no rights, with the obligation on America to dismantle the few rights that remain intact in its borders to satisfy the “obligation” it actually insisted on.

Later this week (Apr 20/21), I’m speaking in Chicago at the Stigler Center’s Antitrust and Competition Conference.

This weekend (Apr 22/23), I’m at the LA Times Festival of Books.

[Image ID: The Milky Way. Standing to the left of the frame is a giant ogrish figure, a top-hatted, cigar-chomping caricature of a capitalist. He emerges from behind a silhouetted tree, towering over it. With one white-gloved hand, he is yanking a golden, dollar-sign-shaped lever at a control box. With the other hand, he disdainfully dangles a 'big blue marble' image of Earth from space. The starry sky is partially blended with a green-on-black 'code waterfall' effect in the style of the Matrix movie open credits. The ogre's eyes have been replaced with the glaring red eyes of HAL9000 from Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey.']

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

 — 

Andy (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Milky_Way_and_Andromeda_Galaxies.jpg

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Canary Media:

The U.S. industrial sector could claim an especially undesirable title in the coming years: It’s set to become the country’s number one source of planet-warming pollution.

The designation currently belongs to the U.S. transportation sector. Heavy industry overtook electricity as the second-highest emitter in 2023. But whereas battery-powered vehicles and renewable energy projects are proliferating nationwide, and starting to edge out fossil fuels, the nation’s factories are making only plodding progress toward slashing greenhouse gas emissions, a new report says.

On Thursday, the research firm Rhodium Group released its latest decarbonization outlook for industrial activities, including chemical refining, food processing, oil and gas production, steelmaking, and cement manufacturing.

It estimated that, under current policies, industrial emissions could decline by just 5 to 10 percent by 2040, with a reduction of 81 million to 132 million metric tons of net greenhouse gas emissions.

“It’s not nothing — but it’s also not putting us on a path toward deep decarbonization of that sector by any stretch of the imagination,” said Ben King, the report’s lead author and an associate director with Rhodium Group’s energy and climate practice.

Even those modest reductions are far from guaranteed. If companies don’t act soon to begin curbing emissions, then the sector’s total footprint could increase by as much as 12 percent from 2022 levels over the next decade, the report said.

Recently, the Biden administration has ramped up federal support for industrial decarbonization, primarily using funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. In March, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced $6 billion in awards for commercial demonstration projects that can sharply reduce emissions from steel, aluminum, cement, and other areas. Another $135 million in federal awards are geared at boosting energy efficiency and curbing carbon emissions from industrial operations.

[mullenequipment3]

https://mullenequipment.com/

[reasonsforhope]

hey, how do you cope with people saying we only have a small amount of time left to stop the worst effects of climate change? no matter how hopeful and ok i am, that always sends me back into a spiral :(

A few different ways

1. The biggest one is that I do math. Because renewable energy is growing exponentially

Up until basically 2021 to now, all of the climate change models were based on the idea that our ability to handle climate change will grow linearly. But that's wrong: it's growing exponentially, most of all in the green energy sector. And we're finally starting to see proof of this - and that it's going to keep going.

And many types of climate change mitigation serve as multipliers for other types. Like building a big combo in a video game.

Change has been rapidly accelerating and I genuinely believe that it's going to happen much faster than anyone is currently predicting

2. A lot of the most exciting and groundbreaking things happening around climate change are happening in developing nations, so they're not on most people's radars.

But they will expand, as developing nations are widely undergoing a massive boom in infrastructure, development, and quality of life - and as they collaborate and communicate with each other in doing so

3. Every country, state, city, province, town, nonprofit, community, and movement is basically its own test case

We're going to figure out the best ways to handle things in a remarkably quick amount of time, because everyone is trying out solutions at once. Instead of doing 100 different studies on solutions in order, we get try out 100 (more like 10,000) different versions of different solutions simultaneously, and then figure out which ones worked best and why. The spread of solutions becomes infinitely faster, especially as more and more of the world gets access to the internet and other key infrastructure

4. There's a very real chance that many of the impacts of climate change will be reversible

Yeah, you read that right.

Will it take a while? Yes. But we're mostly talking a few decades to a few centuries, which is NOTHING in geological history terms.

We have more proof than ever of just how resilient nature is. Major rivers are being restored from dried up or dead to thriving ecosystems in under a decade. Life bounces back so fast when we let it.

I know there's a lot of skepticism about carbon capture and carbon removal. That's reasonable, some of those projects are definitely bs (mostly the ones run by gas companies, involving carbon credits, and/or trying to pump CO2 thousands of feet underground)

But there's very real potential for carbon removal through restoring ecosystems and regenerative agriculture

The research into carbon removal has also just exploded in the past three years, so there are almost certainly more and better technologies to come

There's also some promising developments in industrial carbon removal, especially this process of harvesting atmospheric CO2 and other air pollution to make baking soda and other industrially useful chemicals

As we take carbon out of the air in larger amounts, less heat will be trapped in the atmosphere

If less heat is trapped in the atmosphere, then the planet will start to cool down

If the planet starts to cool down, a lot of things will stabilize again. And they'll probably start to stabilize pretty quickly

[ssdsolution2003]

CHEMICAL FOR CLEANING WHITE DOLLARS

WE WORK WITH PRIVATE SECTOR ACTORS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO HELP CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL DEAR CUSTOMERS OUR SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE: The principle of good performance of the analysis of secure tickets requires the chemist to carry out a conformity check, with regard to the washers, our laboratory has developed a unique technique which consists in a direct debit in accordance with the criteria of the profession, defined by each case, and the existence of a support and assistance commission, from your engagement with us guarantees an efficient processing of your tickets. The tests are possible by taking a sample at home by a laboratory agent (technician) qualified to confirm the type, BiRD's International Monetary Chemistry Laboratory is a major global development aid company focused exclusively on the private sector in developing countries. our Laboratory uses and mobilizes its products and services, in order to provide development solutions adapted to the needs of its customers. Its financial resources, technical expertise, global experience and culture of innovation enable it to help its partners overcome their financial and operational difficulties. OUR LABORATORY PUT AT YOUR SERVICE OUR KNOW-HOW AND A RANGE OF EFFECTIVE PRODUCTS, TESTED FOR A SAFE AND GUARANTEED RESULT. THE AUTOMATIC SSD LEADER SOLUTION, VECTROL COLLER, TTZ UNIVERSAL SOLUTION, ZUTA S4, CASTROX OXYDE HQ45, SSD SOLUTION, PK 58, DISTRIBUTOR AND MANUFACTURES SSD SOLUTIONS IN ITS FULL RANGE AND THE BEST ON THE MARKET OR

Contact us.

WhatsApp : +49 1521 0327184

Mr Abdalah

[materialsscienceandengineering]

Scientists discover new method for generating metal nanoparticles to use as catalysts

A team of researchers from the ITACA Institute of the Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV) and the Research Institute of Chemical Technology, a joint center of the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) and the UPV, has discovered a new method for the manufacture of metal nanocatalysts that is more sustainable and economical. With great potential in the industrial sector, the method would contribute to the decarbonization of industry. The work has been published in the journal ACS Nano. This new method is based on the exsolution process activated by microwave radiation. Exsolution is a method of generating metallic nanoparticles on the surface of ceramic materials. "At elevated temperatures and in a reducing atmosphere (usually hydrogen), metal atoms migrate from the structure of the material to its surface, forming metal nanoparticles anchored to the surface. This anchoring significantly increases the strength and stability of these nanoparticles, which positively impacts the efficiency of these catalysts," explains Beatriz García Baños, a researcher in the Microwave Area of the ITACA Institute at the UPV.

Read more.