Your search

The global living standard improved significantly in the last decades and China moved 800 million people out of poverty since 1980. However, production and consumption in their current forms are unsustainable in matters of resource and energy use and involved emissions with their significant ecological impact. The global human community committed itself in the COP21 Agreement of Paris 2015 to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions based on National Determined Contributions (NDCs) in order to limit the increase of global average temperature below 2°C or better 1.5°C above pre industrial levels. This commitment entails a comprehensive transformation of the current social and economic system in view of decoupling economic growth from both resource extraction and GHG emissions, in view of fostering a resource sensitive and CO2 neutral Circular Economy (CE) based on Sustainable Development (SD). China submitted its first Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) in 2015 with policies and measures affecting 15 major areas. In 2020, President Xi Jinping announced the commitment to peak China’s carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality before 2060. Proper and Integrated Resource and Waste Management is central on the way to achieve the transformation into a CE. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) released its plan “生活垃圾分类制度实施方案” to promote source separation of household waste on March 30, 2017 aiming at the recycling rate for household waste to reach 35% by 2020 for the selected cities. The first China’s Mandatory Waste Source Separation Law “廣州 市生活垃圾分類管理條例” was enforced by the city of Guangzhou on July 1st, 2018. One of the key strategic plans in China is the development of the Greater Bay Area (GBA) with its comprehensive development plan released on February 18, 2019. Following the INDCs by China, parts of the GBA Development Plan emphasize that the development of the CE systems and the implementation of extended producer responsibility (EPR), are effective principles to provide financial incentives in view of reducing embedded emissions in material and processes. The present research studied, analysed, and compared the MSW treatment strategies, rules, regulations, and retrievable data, which lead to MSW source separation and the reverse logistic of separated waste among 4 selected cities Guangzhou, Zhuhai, and the 2 S.A.R.s of Hong Kong and Macao. The experience and comparison from Guangzhou and Hong Kong revealed that a Top-down approach in environmental policy decision making is more efficient and is able to implement necessary policies faster. However, the experiences from Guangzhou and Zhuhai indicate, that also a more participatory implementation process is crucial, as it enables the involved stakeholders to express their experiences and opinions properly, which can lead to a higher level of policy feasibility and acceptance and a smoother operation accompanied with a higher effectiveness. For the two SARs, to achieve the objective to increase the recycling rate, the local Government must seek approval from China’s Central Government to allow locally generated recyclable material, in their original form, to enter mainland China for further treatment and to be turned into secondary raw material. Without such a proper support by a reverse resource logistic from the mainland, the CE schemes, such as the Mandatory Waste Source Separation, Producer Responsibility Scheme (PRS), Waste Charging Scheme, are not able to be implemented effectively. The current approach of the Local Government purchasing of recycling and exportation services of recyclable materials from private companies, and the sole reliance on existing market forces to handle, process, and export recyclable material out of the S.A.R.s cannot ensure a reliable and continuous operation in view of mitigating involved emissions. By way of a comparative analyses, the present investigation works out and distils suggestions for best practices of implementing the CE to comply with targets of emission reductions

With water being an essential for life on Earth, it is vital to preserve it and regenerate it, in order to be available for a myriad of uses. Though many types of wastewater management and treatment are available, most rely on high energy input and are therefore not ideal for many circumstances. Constructed wetlands (CW) are an alternative nature-based solution to be applied to wastewater treatment. This study undertakes a Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a CW as a means of wastewater treatment and aims to understand how these systems can be an environmentally conscious alternative. The CW under study is located in a rural mountain area in the north of Portugal. Receives wastewater from a tourism unit and operates with horizontal subsurface. The LCA analyses the CW through the construction, operation (treatment), and composting phases. This approach allows the entire scope of the life cycle to be included, of which, the composting phase has been absent in similar LCA previously undertaken. Analysis focuses on the impact categories: Ozone Layer Depletion Potential, Global Warming Potential, Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential and Human Toxicity Potential. Of the five categories, none increase during the treatment phase, and indeed, Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, and Human Toxicity potential all decrease. Ozone Layer Depletion Potential and Global Warming Potential increase significantly during the construction and composting phases respectively. Both can be rationalized, with the former being a result of heavy diesel machinery use in construction and the latter a natural byproduct of composting. The results are net positive and display the ability for CW as a low energy wastewater treatment which can limit environmental impact by choice of construction and composting methodology

Covid-19 has hit the world unprepared, as the deadliest pandemic of the century. Governments and authorities, as leaders and decision makers fighting against the virus, enormously tap on the power of AI and its data analytics models for urgent decision supports at the greatest efforts, ever seen from human history. This book showcases a collection of important data analytics models that were used during the epidemic, and discusses and compares their efficacy and limitations. Readers who from both healthcare industries and academia can gain unique insights on how data analytics models were designed and applied on epidemic data. Taking Covid-19 as a case study, readers especially those who are working in similar fields, would be better prepared in case a new wave of virus epidemic may arise again in the near future.

At the beginning of 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) started a coordinated global effort to counterattack the potential exponential spread of the SARS-Cov2 virus, responsible for the coronavirus disease, officially named COVID-19. This comprehensive initiative included a research roadmap published in March 2020, including nine dimensions, from epidemiological research to diagnostic tools and vaccine development. With an unprecedented case, the areas of study related to the pandemic received funds and strong attention from different research communities (universities, government, industry, etc.), resulting in an exponential increase in the number of publications and results achieved in such a small window of time. Outstanding research cooperation projects were implemented during the outbreak, and innovative technologies were developed and improved significantly. Clinical and laboratory processes were improved, while managerial personnel were supported by a countless number of models and computational tools for the decision-making process. This chapter aims to introduce an overview of this favorable scenario and highlight a necessary discussion about ethical issues in research related to the COVID-19 and the challenge of low-quality research, focusing only on the publication of techniques and approaches with limited scientific evidence or even practical application. A legacy of lessons learned from this unique period of human history should influence and guide the scientific and industrial communities for the future.

In this essay we argue that, based on current scientific data, the most prudential course of future actions that an American conservative can take, is one that assumes what we call climate change alarmism. In order to establish this thesis, we first provide a basic overview of the relevant climate change science, as well as give an analysis of the alarmist and lukewarming dialectic (the two primary interpretations of the data). We then move to develop our environmental wager. Finally, following Roger Scruton, we end this work by proposing what sort of policies conservatives should endorse going further.