Search results

This paper aims to present a review carried out under DEFRA‐funded project WRT208, describing: the composition of WEEE, current treatment technologies, emerging technologies and research.

This paper summarises the output from the first part of the project. It provides information on the composition of WEEE and an extensive survey of technologies relevant to materials recycling from WEEE. A series of further papers will be published from this research project.

WEEE has been identified as one of the fastest growing sources of waste in the EU, and is estimated to be increasing by 16‐28 per cent every five years. Within each sector a complex set of heterogeneous secondary wastes is created. Although treatment requirements are complicated, the sources from any one sector possess many common characteristics. However, there exist huge variations in the nature of electronic wastes between sectors, and treatment regimes appropriate for one cannot be readily transferred to another.

A very large number of treatment technologies are available, both established and emerging, that singly and in combination could address the specific needs of each sector. However, no single set of treatment methods can be applied universally.

This paper is the first part of work leading to the development of technical strategies and methodologies for reprocessing WEEE into primary and secondary products, and where possible the recovery of higher added‐value components and materials.

At the Royal Society of Health annual conference, no less a person than the editor of the B.M.A.'s “Family Doctor” publications, speaking of the failure of the anti‐smoking campaign, said we “had to accept that health education did not work”; viewing the difficulties in food hygiene, there are many enthusiasts in public health who must be thinking the same thing. Dr Trevor Weston said people read and believed what the health educationists propounded, but this did not make them change their behaviour. In the early days of its conception, too much was undoubtedly expected from health education. It was one of those plans and schemes, part of the bright, new world which emerged in the heady period which followed the carnage of the Great War; perhaps one form of expressing relief that at long last it was all over. It was a time for rebuilding—housing, nutritional and living standards; as the politicians of the day were saying, you cannot build democracy—hadn't the world just been made “safe for democracy?”—on an empty belly and life in a hovel. People knew little or nothing about health or how to safeguard it; health education seemed right and proper at this time. There were few such conceptions in France which had suffered appalling losses; the poilu who had survived wanted only to return to his fields and womenfolk, satisfied that Marianne would take revenge and exact massive retribution from the Boche!

The products of transgenic technology have captured the attention of enthusiasts and detractors, but transgenics are just one tool of agricultural biotechnology. Other applications enable scientists to understand biodiversity, to track genes through generations in breeding programs, and to move genes among closely related as well as unrelated organisms. These applications all have the potential to lead to substantial productivity gains.

In this chapter we provide an introduction to basic plant genetic concepts, defining molecular markers, transgenic and cisgenic techniques. We briefly summarize the status of commercialized biotechnology applications to agriculture. We consider the likely future commercialization of products like drought tolerant crops, crops designed to improve human nutrition, pharmaceuticals from transgenic plants, biofuels, and crops for environmental remediation. We identify genomic selection as a potentially powerful new technique and conclude with our reflections on the state of agricultural biotechnology.

Research at universities and other public-sector institutions, largely focused on advancing knowledge, has aroused enormous optimism about the promise of these DNA-based technologies. This in turn has led to large private-sector investments on maize, soybean, canola, and cotton, with wide adoption of the research products in about eight countries. Much has been made of the potential of biotechnology to address food needs in the low-income countries, and China, India, and Brazil have large public DNA-based crop variety development efforts. But other lower income developing countries have little capability to use these tools, even the most straightforward marker applications. Ensuring that these and other applications of biotechnology lead to products that are well adapted to local agriculture requires adaptive research capacity that is lacking in the lowest income, most food-insecure nations. We are less optimistic than many others that private research will fund these needs.

IT is known that the Library Association Council has devoted watchful care to the position of libraries in the event of war. As we write, the international situation is as dark as it has been at any time since 1919, and many have that calm, cold feeling that there is nothing to do but to tighten our belts and stand againt the onslaught. Even if that is still avoided, as all who listened to Lord Halifax trust it may be, there should be active protection of the library service which is one of those things which might so easily go under in a time of stress. The Library Association has done well in submitting to Government that experience in the last war proved the value of libraries for information and as a factor in the morale of the people; that their services should, so far as possible, be maintained even during hostilities; that there would be need of library provision for people, and especially for children, “evacuated” to areas where the existing library provision might often be inadequate; and that library buildings should not be used for purposes for which they are unsuitable, seeing that there will be many halls, schools and other buildings that would be better for food‐control, recruiting and so on.

Reports on the OCLC Users’ Council meeting of February 5‐7, 1996. Issues discussed included nominations for the board of trustees, the OCLC president’s report, the Users’ Council executive committee report and reports on users of electronic information. Also under discussion were a number of strategies for the future.