The Biochar Blog

Archive for July, 2010

Pollution may be a hazardous threat for us. Pollution can be classified into water, air, and soil pollution. Air is the most essential thing for our lives. Everyday we need air to breath. You can imagine how air pollution can affect our health if we breathe polluted air too much.

Air pollution is a condition in which there are a lot of contaminants in it including particulate matter, biological materials, or chemicals. Those contaminants can lead to health problem for us. Also, it is able to damage the environment and the atmosphere.

What are the effects of air pollution for our health?

The effect of the air pollution for our health can comes in some ways including long-term effects and short-term effects. Different individuals may experience different effects since they have different level of immune system. Some are more sensitive to any pollutants such as young children and older people. However, the effects depend mostly on the exposure to the pollutants. The exposure includes the concentration of the chemicals as well as the exposure duration. It will be more risky for those who suffer from asthma, lung and heart disease.

Short-term effects comprise the throat and nose, eye irritation, infections of upper respiratory such as pneumonia and bronchitis. Other symptoms of short-term effect include allergic, nausea, and headaches.

Long-term health effects comprise lung cancer, chronic respiratory disease, heart disease, brain damage, and other damage to the nerves, kidneys, and liver. Constant exposure to this pollution can cause serious effects. The children who are exposed to this condition can cause the complicated medical condition in the elderly. Smoking cigarette is one of the examples of constant exposure to the air pollution.

GLOBALISATION OF BUSINESS

Meaning and Dimensions

            Globalisation in its true sense is a way of corporate life necessitated, facilitated and nourished by the transnationalisation of the World economy and developed by corporate strategies. Globalisation is an attitude of mind – it is a mind-set which views the entire world as a single market so that the corporate strategy is based on the dynamics of the global business environment. International marketing or international investment does not amount to globalisation unless it is the result of such a global orientation.

            Globalisation encompasses the following:

Doing, or planning to expand, business globally. Giving up the distinction between the domestic market and foreign market and developing a global outlook of the business. Locating the production and other physical facilities on a consideration of the global
business dynamics, irrespective of national considerations. Basing product development and production planning on the global market considerations. Global sourcing of factors of production, i.e., raw materials, components, machinery/
technology, Finance etc., are obtained from the best source   anywhere in the world. Global orientation of organisational structure and management culture.

            Companies which have adopted a global outlook stop “thinking of themselves as national marketers who venture abroad and start thinking of themselves as global marketers. The top management and staff are involved in the planning of world-wide manufacturing facilities, marketing policies, financial flows and logistical systems. The global operating units report directly to the chief executive or executive committee, not to the head of an international division. Executives are trained in worldwide operations, not just domestic or international. Management is recruited from many countries, components and supplies are purchased where they can be obtained at the least cost, and investments are made where the anticipated returns are the greatest.”

            A truly global corporation views the entire world as a single market – it does not differentiate between domestic market and foreign markets. In other words, there is nothing like a home market and foreign market – there is only one market, the global market.

                        Multinationals develop integrated international production logistics and marketing system-The production sharing between various units in different countries. For example, about two thirds of Toyota’s total business is- outside Japan. More than half of its vehicles sold overseas is manufactured overseas and the remaining exported from Japan. Toyota has established integrated manufacturing systems in all three of its main markets- North America, Europe and Asia. Plants in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Taiwan and Thailand turned out nearly a third of the company’s overseas production. These manufacturing units are inter-linked by flows of components / parts, production planning etc. To cite a different example, Mazda’s sports car, MX-5 Miata, was designed in California, had its prototype created in England, was assembled in Michigan and Mexico, using advanced electronic components invented in New Jersey and fabricated in Japan, financed from Tokyo and New York, and marketed globally.

C.Pavithira

M.Phil Scholar

Department of Commerce

Periyar University, Salem-11

Incoming search terms:

• BUSINESS AND GLOBALISATION

Biofuels are moving fuels like ethanol and biodiesel is a diesel that is finished from biomass resources. These fuels are generally merged with the petroleum fuels – gasoline and diesel fuel. They can also be used individually as well. Using ethanol or biodiesel facilitates lesser burning than fossil fuel. However, ethanol and biodiesel are unfortunately, more expensive than the fossil fuels. Nevertheless, they are uncontaminated fuels, producing smaller quantity of air pollutants and are safer and greener to the environment.

Ethanol is an alcoholic fuel prepared from the sugars found in grains, such as corn, sorghum, and wheat, along with potato skins, rice, sugarcane, sugar beets, and yard clippings. Biodiesel is prepared from vegetable oils, fats, or greases. Biodiesel fuels can be used in diesel engines not including any changes in them. It is the best ever budding substitute petroleum in countries such as United States. Biodiesel is a renewable source of energy and thus is safe, recyclable, and decreases the release of the majority air toxins. It is no doubt an eco-friendly version of diesel.

It is frequently asserted that biofuels are carbon-neutral as they release CO2 when burnt that was previously present in the atmosphere. There is a considerable CO2 discharge from the refinery and distillery processes required to make biodiesel or bioethanol, as well as for transport, the use of ranch machinery, and manure production. Biodiesel, in particular, is connected to high releases of the powerful and long-term greenhouse gas nitrous oxide, released by microbes when nitrogen fertilizers are applied to soils, and also throughout the manufacture of nitrogen fertilizers.

There are two main types of biofuels for transport:

Bioethanol, which is an alcohol derivative of sugar or starch, for example from sugar beet, cane or from corn, and

Biodiesel, derivative of vegetable oils, for example from rapeseed oil, jatropha, soy or palm oil.

United States is the world’s biggest bioethanol manufacturer, and this books for 99% of their biofuel for road transport. The region is, as of yet, the world’s chief biodiesel creator, and prefer biodiesel than bioethanol. It is discovered that ethanol has preferably less greenhouse gas releases than petrol.

Among the biofuel crops grown in Europe and the US, biodiesel is usually measured to be more energy competent than bioethanol. A few biodiesel crops, such as oilseed rape are developed with huge magnitude of fertilizers, which compensate for a lot of the greenhouse gas reserves.

To learn much more about the different types of renewable energy sources, visit http://renewable-energy-sources-info.blogspot.com/ where you’ll find this and mucho more, including biodiesel, biofuel, Bioethanol, biomass,geothermal and many more renewable energy sources

Energy Sprint, Thanks to Facebook, everyone will know

Energy Sprint.

Sometimes, we have during the day  moments when we are in splendid form, and after a few minutes to feel his energy down,

to have no desire to do nothing at all happens this experience, surely you too.

Why? Simple is a natural day and night, seasons, tides and all other events are just some examples

of these rhythms and their succession.

You can change all this?

And being in shape always.

Yes, you can change all that, thanks to

Energy Sprint Card

Energy Sprint helps you has to be fit.

Energy Sprint improves your physical wellbeing.

The company Energy Sprint has decided to promote

the Energy Sprint, through Facebook.

Soon there will come a Facebook application

which will explore Energy Sprint.

Facebook is an extraordinary method

to promote a brand.

Thanks to viral marketing

in a few days all will know

Energy sprint card

Who will become fans of Energy Sprint

Energy can earn through Energy Sprint.

Energy sprint Facebook application

will become a Fan of Energy Sprint

Energy sprint Facebook application

will make a virtual gift

Energy Sprint to friends.

Fans of Energy Sprint, they will invite

most friends will win.

Fans of Energy Sprint win

will have the opportunity to earn

with Energy Sprint.

Thanks to Facebook, everyone will know

Energy Sprint

http://www.energysprint.net/

ENERGY SPRINT is produced highly innovative, thanks to its technology ENERGY SPRINT assures you force, physical energy and lies them every time that you want. ENERGY SPRINT is a Card, that you just need to carry it with you, when you want to be in full form and of energy, and put it in your drawer, when you want take a rest.

ENERGY SPRINT acts immediately, in fact you need to have it with you and to feel its benefits. In order to discover its effects you have to do physical exercises, like the test of equilibrium, and to remain surprises of the effects of ENERGY SPRINT.

The lucky people who had the possibility to try it said: “To have between the hands the Card Energy Sprint it is an unique experience, that leave you amazed because you can feel its effects immediately, in order to appreciate its effects only thing is to try it.” Also the strategy of commercialization of ENERGY SPRINT CARD is completely innovative, you can have ENERGY SPRINT CARD exclusively on invitation. They have been selected, a few number of persons “Founder “and exclusively they had the possibility to promote ENERGY SPRINT CARD. To the question of because it has been chosen this strategy the answer was” ENERGY SPRINT CARD is a so innovative and effective product, that  company were unable  to accept requests of the market ,in this way can be managed the production at best.” The only way for having ENERGY SPRINT CARD is to be lucky to know a “Founder” meantime  company advises to discover to all the innovationes becoming Fan of ENERGY SPRINT CARD on Facebook.

http://www.energysprint.net/

A new study has demonstrated the strong correlation between air pollution and air quality and the level of costs incurred in by elderly patients seeking medical attention. The study took in millions of Medicare records of both in- and out-patients between 1989 and 1991 all the patients were white and aged between 65 and 84 years.

The study was conducted by Professor Victor Fuchs, professor emeritus at Stanford University and assisted by Sarah Franks, a doctoral student at Berkeley, University of California. The study results were published in the November/December issue of Health Affairs, and the conclusive results demonstrate a direct linkage between air pollution and the level of health, particularly respiratory health in elderly patients. More than this, the study demonstrates that investment in improving air quality and reducing pollution leads to direct cost savings which are substantial.

At a time when there is a great debate centered around healthcare, and especially who will be footing the bill, the report clearly demonstrates that pollution control provides an excellent opportunity for improving the nation’s health, reducing the cost of healthcare and provides opportunities to improve the quality of life for the elderly.

Factors taken into consideration in the study, which took in 183 metropolitan areas, included regional geographical variations, per capita income, educational achievement, ethnic breakdown of the sample location, weight levels (particularly obesity levels) and cigarette usage.

There are clear differences between urban and rural areas within the study samples; metropolitan areas also varied widely in the quality of the air and pollution levels the study demonstrates that there is only a small difference in rates of surgery between high and low pollution sample locations, however this picture radically changes when medical intervention short of surgery is assessed.

Outpatient care has a 7% difference between high and low air pollution locations, but when we look at inpatient care the difference increases dramatically to 19% more people seeking treatment in the more highly polluted sample locations.

Population size and density has a very significant impact on air quality Florida and Blue Sky country (centered upon Montana) has the cleanest air but Florida had twice the outpatient treatment rate (this being a factor of the higher population size and density). Hospital admissions were found to be at their highest in the Deep South and South Western areas of the country.

Overall, differences in admissions to hospital for respiratory conditions between low and high air pollution locations are relatively low; the data must be interpreted with care because of the small difference. Nevertheless, there is a clear relationship between air pollution and the need for increased medical intervention for the elderly. As the authors state in the conclusion of the report, the results do not provide, “absolute proof” that high pollution areas result in higher spending on medical care, however the data results are highly persuasive.

Irrespective of whether the study constitutes “absolute proof” or not, there is a clear need for greater outpatient medical treatment for those living in highly populated and highly polluted areas. The correlation between high pollution levels and population levels also demonstrates just who is actually responsible for creating the problem with air quality in the first instance.

Marx predicted globalisation of world capital over a century and a half ago. He pointed out that capital had an inherent tendency to expand, to seek areas of higher profit. Once it exhausts opportunities in one particular ‘market,’ it moves on to encompass other markets. Today the dominant view holds that globalisation, or spread of global capital and capitalism to far corners of the world, is inevitable. The process tends to link up the nation-states’ economies into an integrated world economy. But it is a multidimensional phenomenon. It impinges not only on the world economy but also on the environment, public health and culture, indeed almost every facet of life.

However, the economic integration of the world is not accompanied by matching political integration. The process of creation of supranational bodies able to enforce agreed system of rules and laws on all states is, in comparison, slow. The international system remains an anarchic one, composed of nominally sovereign states. The leading advanced capitalist countries seek free movement of capital and goods. The movement of labour continues to be hampered by a plethora of rules, regulations and laws.

The form of capitalism that the advanced, capitalist world, led by its corporate sector, is trying to impose on the rest of the world—in essence, the neoliberal mantra of liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation—is not conducive to the economic development of developing countries such as Pakistan, which are yet to establish a sound infrastructure and industrial base. Besides, it is certain to lead to tensions and conflict in inter-state relations and/or periodic global economic crises. A financial crisis hit the advanced capitalist world in 2008, sooner than expected.

The global crisis notwithstanding, Pakistan’s economic problems are worsening by the day, due to reliance on the neoliberal paradigm, further confounded by its ruling elite’s aimless policies, corruption, lavish lifestyle, resistance to positive change, and lopsided priorities.

Capitalism’s survival and growth depends, in any case, on the patronage and protection of governments. Judicious regulation of the activities of big market players by governments is essential for the system to work, as is clear from the failure of the ‘deregulation’ experiment of the past few decades. Unbridled ‘deregulation’ in accordance with neoliberal thinking, particularly in banking and finance, were bound to lead to problems. That moment arrived in a big way in 2008 when financial systems in the advanced capitalist world faced a meltdown. Capitalism is in its worst crisis since the Great Depression of 1929. The economies of the advanced capitalist world are in particular distress! Economies of those developing countries dependent on exports to those countries are also affected badly. The IMF forecast contraction of the developed world’s economies, and a reduction in the growth rate elsewhere.[1] The creed of market economy, which metamorphosed into greed economy, has received a big jolt. The huge inter-state and intra-state inequality that it promoted is pushing an increasing number of people across the globe below the poverty line. However, an organised effort is being made by governments in the advanced capitalist world to save capitalism. Nevertheless, a contradiction exists in the claims of the proponents of the market, who decry government intervention whilst the going is good, but call upon the government to save the market when things go awry, as they are bound to, from time to time.

Apart from this, the neoliberal paradigm has made the whole edifice topsy-turvy. It emphasises trade and finance, rather than production and manufacturing industry. This amounts to putting the cart before the horse. Trade follows production of goods, and finance has an important role in industry, but auxiliary, not primary. The rigmarole of financial instruments, hedging and risk management devices, not to speak of speculation and non-productive re-shuffling of financial investments that has taken centre-stage during the last few decades of the ascendancy of neoliberalism, has done more harm than good.

Besides, the developing states’ economies have been severely harmed by premature liberalisation and deregulation, mindless privatisation of state entities and strategic assets. The ‘integration’ of their economies with the world economy has been a mixed blessing, good for some countries, devastating for others. The industry of many developing countries—Pakistan, for example—has got stunted as a result of unthinking patronisation of neoliberal policies. Many economists in the developing countries have merely been parroting the neoliberal mantra, and the presumed blessings of ‘globalisation’ under the neoliberal paradigm—without understanding, and in some cases denying outright, its highly detrimental effects. Many of them have allowed their economies to become suppliers of raw materials, low value-added manufactures and low-skill jobs or merely markets for more developed countries. What they really need is to upgrade the skills of their people, establish industry, initially to substitute imports and at a later stage to export higher value-added products. Foreign Direct Investment is a good thing if it serves the needs of their economies, and worse than useless if it promotes the exploitation of their resources without adequate compensation or transfer of technology. What they need is to upgrade the knowledge and skill of their workforce, and open up avenues to utilise that knowledge and skill. The knowledge and skill gap with the developed world must be bridged in the quickest possible time. In this lies their only chance of meaningful survival, which means survival with dignity. Instead, most of them are turning their economies, partly under pressure, partly on the urging of the IFIs and the developed world, into consumption-oriented economies, markets for the industrialised world’s surplus production.

Many things that otherwise would have been perceived merely as claims, have been upheld by events around the world. Here is a crisis of global proportions, in essence a systemic crisis of world capitalism, hastened and aggravated by the misdeeds of greedy ‘investors,’ speculators and middlemen of the financial system, especially in the industrialised world, where the financial systems are the least regulated. In the US, the Congress passed a $700 bailout plan in late 2008 to save the system from collapse.

After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and especially since the terrorist attacks in America in September 2001, the sole superpower has tried to sustain its hegemony through military adventurism. It launched an open-ended ‘war on terror’ and invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of people have fallen victim to this gigantic folly, to which there is no end in sight. Finally it has contributed to the financial meltdown that we witness today. While the Western governments and media focus on ‘extremists’ and ‘terrorists,’ they do not tell their people that they were promoted by western governments and their surrogates in the Islamic world, during the jihad against the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan. After 9/11, a wrong strategy has only served to keep them in business longer than might otherwise have been the case. They are now fighting against their own creators rather than doing there bidding!

Unfortunately, Pakistani leaders, past and present, cannot escape the blame for helping unbottle the genii—an action that led to the current unenviable situation for Pakistan. Since 1979, almost all Pakistani regimes have gone along with Washington’s strategic aims in the region, with the consequences that we witness today. The ‘war on terror’ has had highly detrimental consequences for its people! It has become an albatross hung around the nation’s neck. The financial costs of this war in FY 2008-2009 were Rs. 678 billion, up from 484 billion the previous year! The much-touted ‘financial assistance’ received from Washington and its allies is not even a fraction of the financial costs of this war. The political and human costs are in addition.

To return to our main subject, the world system theories give a good insight into understanding the contemporary world. Immanuel Wallerstein’s world systems theory analyses the world holistically. It considers ‘historical ‘systems’ in place of what is called ‘society’ in traditional social science. Systems are classified on the basis of economic production relations. Today’s system is the capitalist world economy, in which capitalist production relations prevail. In the past there have been other systems, which he names localised ‘mini systems’ of pre-agricultural period and later ‘world empires’ based on the ‘redistributive tributary’ mode of production. In today’s ‘world economy’ both state and non-state actors have a role in determining the course of events. The proper field of discourse that considers all these issues is political economy.

Some political economists divide the approaches to the study of international political economy into three different categories: Realist, Liberal and Marxist. According to Frieden and Lake, these three approaches differ in that they regard, respectively, nation-states, the individual, and classes (in society), as the units of analysis. The proponents of the liberal approach claim that economic relations, both at the international and domestic levels, are essentially harmonious, while the Marxist and the Realist approaches consider them to be conflictual. In the Marxist view, based on dialectic materialism, economics determines politics. Economics divorced from politics has no meaning. In the realist view, politics and power relations determine economics. The liberals regard economics and politics as independent of each other.

The liberal view is oversimplified and a little misleading, though useful as a starting point. It obscures reality, which is that political and economic conflict exists within, as well as among, nation-states. Such conflict in international political economy ought to be minimised. The realist view focuses excessively on power relations, views everything from the power standpoint, and ignores ethics altogether. The liberal view in economics that allows for government intervention, at least to provide public goods and bring about redistribution of resources to reduce inequality, has been superseded by the neoliberal view, the so-called ‘mainstream’ thinking today, which ignores social concerns almost completely, with the devastating results witnessed today.

All three approaches have to be used, in varying degree, to study and comprehend contemporary international political economy. Only the Marxist approach, however, provides the insight to comprehend and address the problems inherent in capitalism. But the Marxist socialist view need neither be feared nor turned into dogma. It should be used to understand and explain the many problems political economy is faced with and to help resolve those problems. This is being done now, as the fear of Marxism, and Communism, that formerly clouded thinking in the capitalist world, has been mitigated somewhat. In a recent issue of Foreign Policy, Leo Panitch says: “Marx identified how disastrous speculation could trigger and exacerbate crises in the whole economy. And he saw through the political illusions of those who would argue that such crises could be permanently prevented through incremental reform.” Any system that endeavours to minimise socio-economic inequality must have an in-built mechanism to redistribute incomes and resources in such a way as to benefit the maximum number of people. Complete equality cannot be attained, but there should be an endeavour to create a society where the basic essentials of life—food, health and education—are ensured to the individual, so that we can come as close as possible to an environment of equality of opportunity. In current milieu, the utilities and banking should not be privatised. They should instead be regarded as semi-public, if not public, goods. They should be put firmly in the public sector. A lesson should be learnt from the miserable performance of privatised utility companies such as the KESC! [6]

Huge multinational corporations and the powerful governments that back them determine many outcomes under globalisation. One of the foremost issues is to prevent monopolies, oligopolies and cartels from coming into existence. Cartels such as OPEC came into being mainly to counter the monopolies and cartels of the industrial world that supply capital goods and sophisticated manufactured products. A great gap has existed for a long time in the prices of industrial goods and finished products on the one hand and raw materials on the other, leading to highly unfavourable terms of trade for producers of the latter. Any readjustment in the prices of commodities and finished products leads to a major shift in the distribution of wealth among nations! In the case of food, an important role in the process is that of the multinational firms which have a stake in developing bio-engineered foods and other crops, agrochemicals, fertilisers, pesticides, and so on. Not the least sinister is the role of smugglers, hoarders and exporters who stand to profit at the expense of people when they smuggle or export essential items from regions where they are needed most. But if you go by the market economy approach, smuggling, strictly speaking, should be welcome because, fundamentally, it is dictated by the ‘market.‘ It is a kind of unofficial ‘free trade!’

An important but difficult issue is that of ‘Intellectual Property Rights’ or IPRs. Some people in the industrialised countries try, through IPRs, to create monopolies not only in manufactured products, but also in natural products like seeds and plants or indigenous knowledge that has existed for hundreds or thousands of years. An attempt has been made to study this complex issue from the perspective of the ‘Global South.’

For developing countries such as Pakistan, the impact of globalisation much depends on the course followed by their leaders in the economic and political realms. The approach and policies of the Pakistani leadership, present and that of the near past, some main characters of which have already left the country for greener pastures, leave much to be desired. Some of them were imported from abroad, and as soon as their ‘task’ was finished, they hastened to return to their hideouts abroad. This alone speaks volumes for the stake they had in this country’s development and its future!

Would they change the culture of living beyond means? Or of pampering the dominant elite? Will a much-needed culture of hard work, learning, acquisition of knowledge and technological skills, innovation and creativity, be promoted? Pakistan’s dominant elite constantly talks of Foreign Direct Investment, trying to make it appear as a panacea for all economic ills, but transfers and helps transfer capital abroad! This was brought out most clearly in 2008, when the rupee suddenly lost value massively due to capital flight.

Can economic development be achieved simply through foreign aid, through periodic begging of a few billion dollars in loans at great political cost? If corruption continues unabated, the loans obtained are not spent for productive ends, are used to finance unproductive ventures and the exorbitant lifestyle of the ruling classes, they would only add to Pakistan’s debt burden. How do ‘friends’ react when they find that the people begging for ‘loans’ on behalf of their state are also engaged in shopping for property and investing their own money in foreign lands? How long would they keep depending on so-called ‘friends’ that merely facilitate the government of Pakistan to secure loans from the IFIs in return for fighting the West’s strategic wars?

There is no shortcut to economic development. It can only be achieved through proper planning, laying down the right priorities, establishing indigenous industry, and above all, by encouraging creativity, innovation and hard work. It demands that we develop our human and physical resources and infrastructure, maintain and enhance our agricultural potential through introduction of new techniques, and carry out mineral prospecting for hidden wealth. Above all, it requires that the ruling elite put on hold for some time their acquisitive instincts, and propensity to indulge in lavish living and waste. The aim should be self-reliance in basic factors in the shortest possible time. Loans must be used only to finance productive ventures, such as establishing basic industry and laying down essential infrastructure. [].

[

Carbon is located in Group 4 of the periodic table of elements (Group 14 in the IUPAC system), carbon has a valence electron configuration of 2s22p2; likewise, all the members of Group 4, sometimes known as the “carbon family”, have configurations of ns2np2, where n stands for the number of the period or row that the element occupies on the table. There are two elements carbon, and silicon that are noted for their ability to form long strings of atoms and seemingly endless varieties of molecules. Interestingly silicon is directly below carbon on the periodic table. Silicon, found in virtually all types of rocks except the calcium carbonates, is to the inorganic world what carbon is to the organic. Yet silicon atoms are about one and a half times as large as those of carbon; thus not even silicon can compete with carbon’s ability to form a seemingly limitless array of molecules in various shapes and sizes, and having various chemical properties.

Carbon is further distinguished by its high value of electronegativity, the relative ability of an atom to attract valence electrons. Electronegativity increases with an increase in group number, and decreases with an increase in period number. In other words, the elements with the highest electronegativity values lie in the upper right-hand corner of the periodic table. Actually, this statement requires one significant qualification: the extreme right-hand side of the periodic table is occupied by elements with negligible electronegativity values. These are the noble gases, which have eight valence electrons each. Eight, as it turns out, is the “magic number” for chemical bonding: most elements follow what is known as the octet rule, meaning that when one element bonds to another, the two atoms do so to have eight valence electrons for historical, symmetry and stability related reasons.

If the two atoms have an electric charge and thus are ions, they form strong ionic bonds. Ionic bonding occurs when a metal bonds with a nonmetal. The other principal type of bond is a covalent bond, in which two uncharged atoms make sharing of electros to have eight valence electrons. If the electronegativity values of the two elements involved are equal, the shared electrons belong to both of them equally; but if one element has a higher electronegativity value than its partner then the electrons will be more drawn to that element.

While discussing electronegativity and the periodic table, we should ignore the noble gases, which are the chemical equivalent of snobs due to which the term “noble,” has been used for them meaning that they are set apart analogous to the then nobles of the society. To the left of the noble gases are the halogens, a wildly gregarious bunch, none more so than the element that occupies the top of the column, fluorine. With an electronegativity value of 4.0, fluorine is the most reactive of all elements, and the only one capable of bonding even to a few of the noble gases.

So question arises ‘why is it so that fluorine which is capable of forming multitudinous bonds is not as chemically significant as carbon’? while there may be a number of answers, a simple one is that because fluorine is too strong, and tends to “overwhelm” other elements, precluding the possibility of forming long chains, it is less chemically significant than carbon. Carbon, on the other hand, has an electronegativity value of 2.5, which places it well behind fluorine. Yet it is still at sixth place (in a tie with iodine and sulfur) on the periodic table, behind only fluorine; oxygen (3.5); nitrogen and chlorine (3.0); and bromine (2.8). In addition, with four valence electrons, carbon is ideally suited to find other elements (or other carbon atoms) for forming covalent bonds according to the octet rule.

Normally, an element does not necessarily have the ability to bond with as many other elements as it has valence electrons, but carbon, with its four valence electrons, happens to be tetravalent, or capable of bonding to four other atoms at once. Additionally, carbon is capable of forming not only a single bond, but also a double bond, or even a triple bond, with other elements including itself. Suppose a carbon atom bonds to two oxygen atoms to form carbon dioxide. Let us imagine that these three atoms are side by side, with the oxygen in the middle. We know that the carbon has four valence electrons, that the oxygens have six, and that the goal is for each atom to have eight valence electrons, some of which it will share covalently.

Two of the valence electrons from the carbon bond with two valence electrons each from the oxygen atoms on either side. This means that the carbon is doubly bonded to each of the oxygen atoms. Therefore, the two oxygens each have four other unbonded valence electrons, which might bond to another atom. It is theoretically possible, also, for the carbon to form a triple bond with one of the oxygens by sharing three of its valence electrons. It would then have one electron free to share with the other oxygen.

Incoming search terms:

• ns2np2 carbon valence

E85 has been classified as an alternate fuel by the US Department of Energy to be used in your Flex Fuel Vehicle. Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV) can run on normal gasoline or E85 Ethanol. E85 is the name designated for fuel that is 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline and you may also hear it referred to as biofuel. It can be produced from many sources but mainly corn, potatoes, barley, and byproducts from the production of paper and food. Any one of these products can be distilled or fermented into a non-consumable alcohol called ethanol.

Proponents of E85 state that it’s an excellent performing fuel that burns cleaner than gasoline and supports our very own domestic economy. In addition it’s a completely renewable source of energy for your vehicle, all things this country needs at this time. Sounds pretty good, but let us not forget that there are two sides to every story. Opponents would argue that the amount of land needed to produce more sugar/starch/cellulose would be much greater than we use for those products today hence causing many other environmental problems such as soil erosion and water pollution. Also, since crops are being used for fuel it may drive prices up for our food. Some interesting arguments here but are they correct?

The Pros

We are looking at lessening our dependence on foreign oil by using ethanol. There are base sources all over the world that could be made available for the production of E85. At this time in the U.S., we use more than half the oil we import for our cars. There would be CO2 emissions (amounts still up for debate) during producing and consuming ethanol. During production those emitted gases could be reused in the growing of more crops as a nutrient. The amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere while using biofuel would be equal to the amount that plants consume to grow and produce ethanol. When introduced into water ethanol degrades at a quick pace, which in the event of an accident, such as a spill, would eliminate the hazard to the environment much faster than a similar spill with gasoline or oil. The amount of damage and cost of cleanup from a catastrophic spill of Valdez caliber would be far less than we have grown accustomed to in the past. You might read that due to production equipment to harvest and create ethanol that the emissions from that equipment outweigh the “green” effect of ethanol. A study by UC Berkeley states that even after all involved with production ethanol nets a “positive net energy balance”. We can also consider the option of biofuels going full circle. With the implementation of E85, the equipment used to harvest and produce biofuels could themselves be powered by biofuels. After an adjustment period the whole process from harvesting to burning ethanol would become much greener than what is in place now for the production of gasoline, from welling to processing. This source of energy for automobiles would be renewable, meaning after you harvest a field of corn to prepare and produce ethanol you could replant the same field to create more ethanol, the polar opposite to drying out an existing oil field.

The Cons

We must remember supply and demand. If we can use our farm land to create fuel for our cars, available farm land would disappear quickly and we would experience environmental issues such as erosion from growing crops. Currently we have regulations on what fertilizers and hormones can be used to grow the crops we eat, but will the same regulations be in place if they aren’t being ingested by the consumer? The problem is that great amounts these chemicals would be harmful to our environment by polluting our air and water. I’m sure we all remember some of the pesticide/herbicide scares we have had in previous years. Now let’s consider what your average farmer would think, what will make more money for him/her? What would be in higher demand, crops for food or crops for fuel? If it’s fuel then what would happen to our food prices? Would they go through the roof if a farmer could make more money producing fuel? The possibility is that food prices for farm grown products could raise drastically. Now we are faced with looking at being able to efficiently use ethanol. Ethanol can’t be stored or pumped the same way gasoline is. So in order to make it available to the general public your local service stations would have to install new tanks and pumps. The cost of this would be astronomical, and likely take many years to fully integrate. Remember what happened to electric vehicle charging stations? I rarely saw them even at the height of the craze when the technology was making a big push, and before you know it, hybrids took over.

In conclusion it really doesn’t matter how you slice it there are some good arguments on both sides concerning the production and use of ethanol/E85/biofuel to power the vehicles we drive every day. As far as I’m concerned people are dedicating themselves one way or the other to quickly to the implementation and use of biofuel. The idea is still up to much study, debate, and research to be able to decide whether E85 will prove advantageous or not. The future holds the answer, but the correct answer is still undetermined.