The environmental issues are attracting more and more concerns recently. More and more pollutants are released to our enviroment without detoxication. The recent university graduates should make some contributions to lessen this problem.
For example, the environmental engineering graduates may devote themselves to devolop some new and efficient ways to monitor air pollutants. Chemical engineers, may concentrate on optimize the chemical processes, in order to minimize pollutants generated. Moreover, electric engineers could develop some good ways to produce electric power in a very large scale, which can be used to replace the traditional energy source, such as oil and coal.
Not only the engineers, politicians also play a very important role in improving our environment. They can accept the experts' advice and make some policies to improve the environment.
All in all, experts from different fields should cooperate to come up with some good ways to create a better environment.
2009年4月21日 星期二
my commom grammer mistakes
Here is the summary about the two grammar mistakes I always make in writing an essay.
First of all, I do not pay enough attention to word forms when I write an essay. For example, 'I should have told him the truth.' indicates that I did not tell him the truth. But sometimes, I used a negative sentence to express this meaning, 'I should not have told him the truth.', which is not correct. Not only the tense of a verb matters, the plural or single form of the word also makes a big difference. For instance, 'wood' means that kind of material; on the contrary, 'woods' means forests. The meaning of the word changes dramatically just by inserting a letter 's'. Moreover, we need to use a noun form rather than a verb form after some verb infinitive. What follows 'look forward to', for example, should be 'seeing' instead of 'see'.
Secondly, I often make a mistake on using parellel structure. The sentense structure will become very confusing if we use several unparellel phrases simutaneously. For example, 'this natural disaster is caused by unaccurate weather prediction and the officials did not take actions in time. Rather, we should change 'the officials did not take actions in time' to 'slow official actions'. Alternatively, the whole sentence could be changed to 'this natural disaster is caused by the facts that the weather prediction was not accurate and the offiicials did not take actions in time'. Both the two ways has successfully avert the problem of confusion.
To sum up, I need to fucus on the word forms and parellel sentence structure in writing essays.
First of all, I do not pay enough attention to word forms when I write an essay. For example, 'I should have told him the truth.' indicates that I did not tell him the truth. But sometimes, I used a negative sentence to express this meaning, 'I should not have told him the truth.', which is not correct. Not only the tense of a verb matters, the plural or single form of the word also makes a big difference. For instance, 'wood' means that kind of material; on the contrary, 'woods' means forests. The meaning of the word changes dramatically just by inserting a letter 's'. Moreover, we need to use a noun form rather than a verb form after some verb infinitive. What follows 'look forward to', for example, should be 'seeing' instead of 'see'.
Secondly, I often make a mistake on using parellel structure. The sentense structure will become very confusing if we use several unparellel phrases simutaneously. For example, 'this natural disaster is caused by unaccurate weather prediction and the officials did not take actions in time. Rather, we should change 'the officials did not take actions in time' to 'slow official actions'. Alternatively, the whole sentence could be changed to 'this natural disaster is caused by the facts that the weather prediction was not accurate and the offiicials did not take actions in time'. Both the two ways has successfully avert the problem of confusion.
To sum up, I need to fucus on the word forms and parellel sentence structure in writing essays.
discussion on green chemistry
The topic of our discussion is whether Singapore should promote development of green chemistry. Both the proponents side and the opponents side believe that green chemistry is a good measure to facilitate sustainable development. The proponents argue that it is very beneficial to development green chemistry in Singapore, by giving some evidence to prove that Singapore has enough manpower, advanced technology and economic basis to develop green chemistry. On the other hand, the opponents claim that the harms of developing green chemistry overweigh its benefits.
The proponents think manpower in Singapore is sufficient to develop green chemistry. Every year, Junior colleges cultivate thousands of outstanding students; NUS, NTU, and SMU recruit lots of students; MOE introduces abundant professors from various famous universities and research agencies. However, the opponents argue that Singapore lacks manpower since a large amount of Singaporeans go abroad for further education after graduation from junior colleges, most of which will not pursue their careers in Singapore afterwards.
Moreover, in the proponents' opinion, Singapore has an advanced technology in green chemistry. The Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) plays a leading role in this area. One of the major topics in A*Star is green chemistry and the development is encouraging. Nevertheless, the opponents advocate that since green chemistry is a complex technology, Singapore cannot finish this task independently.
Last but not least, green chemistry is economically applicable in Singapore, as far as the proponents are concerned. The GDP of Singapore in 2008 is 257,418.5 million, ranking at the top 50 in the world. Singapore’s strong economic power lays the foundation of the development of green chemistry. Whereas, the opponents believe that it is not an appropriate time to promote green chemistry. They reiterate that applying green chemistry technology, which is too costly, may paralyze the whole economic system in Singapore at this stage when the whole world is in financial crisis.
All in all, both sides show sufficient evidence to support their arguments. The main concern is still if Singapore possesses mature prerequisites to develop green chemistry, not only its manpower and technology, but also its economic power.
The proponents think manpower in Singapore is sufficient to develop green chemistry. Every year, Junior colleges cultivate thousands of outstanding students; NUS, NTU, and SMU recruit lots of students; MOE introduces abundant professors from various famous universities and research agencies. However, the opponents argue that Singapore lacks manpower since a large amount of Singaporeans go abroad for further education after graduation from junior colleges, most of which will not pursue their careers in Singapore afterwards.
Moreover, in the proponents' opinion, Singapore has an advanced technology in green chemistry. The Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) plays a leading role in this area. One of the major topics in A*Star is green chemistry and the development is encouraging. Nevertheless, the opponents advocate that since green chemistry is a complex technology, Singapore cannot finish this task independently.
Last but not least, green chemistry is economically applicable in Singapore, as far as the proponents are concerned. The GDP of Singapore in 2008 is 257,418.5 million, ranking at the top 50 in the world. Singapore’s strong economic power lays the foundation of the development of green chemistry. Whereas, the opponents believe that it is not an appropriate time to promote green chemistry. They reiterate that applying green chemistry technology, which is too costly, may paralyze the whole economic system in Singapore at this stage when the whole world is in financial crisis.
All in all, both sides show sufficient evidence to support their arguments. The main concern is still if Singapore possesses mature prerequisites to develop green chemistry, not only its manpower and technology, but also its economic power.
2009年3月1日 星期日
green chemistry --- carbon microspheres
Plastic bottles are irritating environment pollutants since it is hard to biodegenerate them. A large amount of toxic gases will be produced if we burn these bottles. Recently, a new approach to utilize discarded plastic bottles is invented by Vilas Pol from Bar-Ilan University. This approach turns these hazardous pollutants to valuable treasures.
The main content in plastic bottles is PET, which stands for polyethylene terephthalate. In traditional methods, some catalysts and organic solvents are required to deal with them. In contrast, we just need to heat these plastic bottles in a enclosed reactor at 700 degrees in three hours if we adopt the new technology. What's more, a very useful material will be generated. It is the strong carbon microsphere. Diomond is the hardest material known in the world. However, the inventors managed to cut the cross-section of the microsphere by damaging two diamond knives. That means, we can take advantage of its hardness. The microspheres can stand a very high pressure. Thus, they can be used as lubricants.
This example is an application of green chemistry. The reaction temperature is reduced to 700 degrees and the use of catalysts and organic solvents is avoid. It is a save of energy and resource. Moreover, no toxic by-products are produced and the plastic bottles are recycled.
The main content in plastic bottles is PET, which stands for polyethylene terephthalate. In traditional methods, some catalysts and organic solvents are required to deal with them. In contrast, we just need to heat these plastic bottles in a enclosed reactor at 700 degrees in three hours if we adopt the new technology. What's more, a very useful material will be generated. It is the strong carbon microsphere. Diomond is the hardest material known in the world. However, the inventors managed to cut the cross-section of the microsphere by damaging two diamond knives. That means, we can take advantage of its hardness. The microspheres can stand a very high pressure. Thus, they can be used as lubricants.
This example is an application of green chemistry. The reaction temperature is reduced to 700 degrees and the use of catalysts and organic solvents is avoid. It is a save of energy and resource. Moreover, no toxic by-products are produced and the plastic bottles are recycled.
2009年2月1日 星期日
A summary to the lecture
200 tonnes carbon dioxide per second are released to the atmosphere. CO2 is one of the main gases which are responsible for global warming. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is largely due to consumption of fossil fuels. Consumptions of coal exist everywhere in the world. The United States, India, and China are the major countries consuming coal. If the business as usual scenario comes ture, there will be about 1300 ppm carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That will be a severe threaten to our planet. Thus, we need to take some actions to avert the scenario from happening. There are five main ways to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide as the lecturer has mentioned: improving fuel efficiency and conservation, , capture and storage of CO2, mitigation, adaptation, and switching to alternative energy sources, such as solar, nuclear, wind, and biomass. Currently, a popular technology applied is to sink liquid CO2 to the bottom of the ocean. However, one disadvantage of this technology is that exceed CO2 will make the ocean water acidic and cause a serious biological effect. Actually, the political quetions are more difficult than the technological problems. The United States and Austrilia are the only countries that refuse to ratify the Tokyo protocol. But it is not all the United State's fault. It is an excuse for the politician all over the world who do not want to do anything to global warming. In Bratain, the government make some policies to control global warming, such as improve minimum standard for vehicle. It is not all governments' responsibility to take actions, we as individuals also need to something: giving up owning cars, stop wasting light, air-con, heat, and so on.
For us, for our offsprings
Recently, global warming becomes more and more obvious. To protect out habitats, our government must take some actions.
Our government should control the population. As the population keeps increasing, more and more natural resources are needed. The increasing demand causes significant effect to the climate. For example, more food means more farmland. As the currently existing farmlands are insufficient, more forests are likely to be converted to farmlands. Forests are ideal natural appratus to absorb green house gases, such as carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, forest devastation helps green house gases to survive and global warming to flourish. Moreover, a large amount of trees will be cut to build houses as the population increases. Actually, our government has already established some policies to reduce the increasing of our population, such as the one-child policy.
Furthermore, our government ought to emphasize on improving energy-using efficiency and researching on renewable resources. The traditional fuels produce lots of green house gases, like carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide. By improving the efficiency to use them, the amount of green house gases will be reduced to a large extent. What's more fascinating, green house gases will not be produced at all if some advanced technologies are developed. For example, water is the only gas that will be generated if hydrogen is used as fuel. Unfortunately, this kind of technology is not mature enough at this stage. Thus, the government should encourage the development of new technology.
Lastly, the government should balance between economy and environment. Economic benefits should not be the only goal that the government pursues. Some economic growth is at the price of environmental damage. The losses on environmental damage we will endure someday may outweigh the economic benefits we obtain currently. If the temperature continues increasing, the sea level will keep rising. People live in Shanghai and Beijing will become refugees in the near future. More than 60 million of people will be displaced. What a tragedy! To avoid tragedies like this, some strategies need to be considered. For example, the pace to develop heavy industry may be slowed down; some mine exploitations need to be prohibited.
All in all, the government is responsible for lessening the global warming, for us, and for our offsprings.
Our government should control the population. As the population keeps increasing, more and more natural resources are needed. The increasing demand causes significant effect to the climate. For example, more food means more farmland. As the currently existing farmlands are insufficient, more forests are likely to be converted to farmlands. Forests are ideal natural appratus to absorb green house gases, such as carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, forest devastation helps green house gases to survive and global warming to flourish. Moreover, a large amount of trees will be cut to build houses as the population increases. Actually, our government has already established some policies to reduce the increasing of our population, such as the one-child policy.
Furthermore, our government ought to emphasize on improving energy-using efficiency and researching on renewable resources. The traditional fuels produce lots of green house gases, like carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide. By improving the efficiency to use them, the amount of green house gases will be reduced to a large extent. What's more fascinating, green house gases will not be produced at all if some advanced technologies are developed. For example, water is the only gas that will be generated if hydrogen is used as fuel. Unfortunately, this kind of technology is not mature enough at this stage. Thus, the government should encourage the development of new technology.
Lastly, the government should balance between economy and environment. Economic benefits should not be the only goal that the government pursues. Some economic growth is at the price of environmental damage. The losses on environmental damage we will endure someday may outweigh the economic benefits we obtain currently. If the temperature continues increasing, the sea level will keep rising. People live in Shanghai and Beijing will become refugees in the near future. More than 60 million of people will be displaced. What a tragedy! To avoid tragedies like this, some strategies need to be considered. For example, the pace to develop heavy industry may be slowed down; some mine exploitations need to be prohibited.
All in all, the government is responsible for lessening the global warming, for us, and for our offsprings.
2009年1月31日 星期六
In the article, the writer states that an engineer's training helps to systematically analyse complex information and apply a holistic approach in designing solutions. I think the reasons are as following.
Firstly, we will obtain a broad knowledge on mathmatics and physics, or maybe programming as well. We do not need to prove the theories and the formula since that part is not very useful for engineers. Hence, we have sufficient time to learn as much practical mathmatical and physical knowledge as we need. What we need to do is to utilize our knowledge to solve some realistic problems. When we encounter some realistic problems, the ability to apply the theories and formula matters, rather than the ability to prove them. Our broad knowledge in related areas makes it possible for us to analyse a complex problem.
Secondly, we benefit from the various projects we will carry out in our university career. The purposes are to apply and enhance what we have learnt, to develop a creative mind, to co-operate with other engineering students from the same or different department, sometimes even different faculties. The projects we have done may lay the foundation of our future realistic works. In most circumstances, an expert in a specific field is not capable to solve a complicated problem individually. Rather, a variety of experts from different areas are likely to work together. At that time, the skills we obtain to work with different people will be brought into play.
Last but not least, as far as I'm concerned, what we can do in the future is associated with the nature of engineering training. Take my major, chemical engineering as an example, what we do is by controlling the variaties in a process, such as temperature, to acquire optimal output. To achieve this goal, a large amout of problems need to be considered. For example, what type of reactors should be used? What can possibly go wrong with the process? Generally speaking, the whole reaction system must be carefully analysed. The systematic framework grows in our mind as our learning proceeds.
Besides, I have some doubts on a sentence in the article, 'Currently, some engineering courses of study have female student enrolment of nearly 50 percent'. If this statement is true, why are there only 3 female students in our tutorial group?
Firstly, we will obtain a broad knowledge on mathmatics and physics, or maybe programming as well. We do not need to prove the theories and the formula since that part is not very useful for engineers. Hence, we have sufficient time to learn as much practical mathmatical and physical knowledge as we need. What we need to do is to utilize our knowledge to solve some realistic problems. When we encounter some realistic problems, the ability to apply the theories and formula matters, rather than the ability to prove them. Our broad knowledge in related areas makes it possible for us to analyse a complex problem.
Secondly, we benefit from the various projects we will carry out in our university career. The purposes are to apply and enhance what we have learnt, to develop a creative mind, to co-operate with other engineering students from the same or different department, sometimes even different faculties. The projects we have done may lay the foundation of our future realistic works. In most circumstances, an expert in a specific field is not capable to solve a complicated problem individually. Rather, a variety of experts from different areas are likely to work together. At that time, the skills we obtain to work with different people will be brought into play.
Last but not least, as far as I'm concerned, what we can do in the future is associated with the nature of engineering training. Take my major, chemical engineering as an example, what we do is by controlling the variaties in a process, such as temperature, to acquire optimal output. To achieve this goal, a large amout of problems need to be considered. For example, what type of reactors should be used? What can possibly go wrong with the process? Generally speaking, the whole reaction system must be carefully analysed. The systematic framework grows in our mind as our learning proceeds.
Besides, I have some doubts on a sentence in the article, 'Currently, some engineering courses of study have female student enrolment of nearly 50 percent'. If this statement is true, why are there only 3 female students in our tutorial group?
订阅：
帖子 (Atom)
