Unit 6
Keys for 1.3.1
Keys for 1.3.2
2.1.1
Cause: iron
Effect: carcinogenesis
2.1.3
1. Firstly; 2.Furthermore; 3. because of; 4. can lead to; 5. causing; 6. cause; 7. due to
2.1.4 Notes into a Causal Paragraph
There are several factors to be taken into account when studying why some plants become weak or die. One reason is lack of water. Dryness in the soil causes the leaves to wilt, and may give rise to the death of the plant. On the other hand, too much water may result in the leaves drooping, or becoming yellow. While sunshine is necessary for plants, if it is too strong, the soil may be baked and the roots killed. However, if there is no light, the leaves will become pale and the stems thin. Consequently the plant may die.
Keys for 2.2.1
Examples of strengthening a claim: …
…
… and liver,…
processed meats in a case-control study.
Examples of weakening a claim: a threshold effect for red meat intake on esophageal cancer risk,…
specifically addressed advanced prostate cancer.
study, we had very few premenopausal cases (n = 94) and lacked information on hormone receptor status for a large number of cases.
whereas iron is thought to contribute to carcinogenesis specifically by generating free radicals and inducing oxidative stress.
A decrease in the consumption of red and processed meat reduce the incidence of cancer at multiple sites.
Keys for 2.3
In our study, zinc supplementation did not result in a significant reduction in overall mortality in children aged 1–48 months in a population with high malaria transmission. However, there was a suggestion that the effect varied by age, with no effect on mortality in infants, and a marginally significant 18% reduction of mortality in children 12–48 months of age (p=0·045). This effect was
mainly a consequence of fewer deaths from malaria and other infections. Any effect on mortality in this trial was in addition to a possible effect of vitamin A supplementation
Keys for 3.2
Even though Arizona and Rhode Island are both states of the U.S., they are strikingly different in many ways. For example, the physical size of each state is different. Arizona is large, having an area of 114,000 square miles, whereas Rhode Island is only about a tenth of the size, having an area of only 1,214 square miles. Another difference is in the size of the population of each state. Arizona has about four million people living in it, but Rhode Island has less than one million. The two states also differ in the kinds of natural environment that each has. For example, Arizona is a very dry state, consisting of large desert areas that do not receive much rainfall every year. However, Rhode Island is located in a temperate zone and receives an average of 44 inches of rain per year. In addition, while Arizona is a landlocked state and thus has no seashore, Rhode Island lies on the Atlantic Ocean and does have a significant coastline.
Keys for 3.3
The following is taken from a discussion section of a research paper.
Discussion
A thorough analysis of both ‘worst’ and ‘best’ rankings shows that the onsite containment technique leads to the best LCA result in the light of the taken hypotheses. Unlike other treatment techniques, onsite containment requires not only few materials (geosynthetics only) but also small-scale excavation works. Actually the more a technique includes heavy technical operations involving
materials and equipment, the worse the result of LCA is. This is the case for bio-leaching and offsite landfilling, which include, on the one hand, setting up the bio-leaching device, the treatment of
leachates with lime, disposal of waste and cleaning of the site, and on the other hand, removal of soil and the transportation of huge quantities of materials over large distances.
As mentioned above, besides the LCA, it is necessary to take into account the ability of techniques to substitute for each other as well as the environmental burdens which may be associated with them. Viewed in this light, it is worth noticing that bio-leaching and offsite landfilling provide complete remediation of the site, contrary to other treatment techniques. Bio-leaching consists of a real onsite decontamination of the polluted soil, which enables bequeathing of a clean site to coming generations. Nevertheless, in addition to a bad LCA result, this emergent technique is still poorly known and its efficiency is not quite proven for large-scale applications as yet. As regards offsite landfilling, if the site is left usable without any risk, the huge quantities of non-stabilized waste, which have to be disposed of in landfill, may disturb the organization of local waste management. This point emphasizes the bad result of LCA.
In return, if the favorable LCA result of onsite containment is due to light treatment operations, this very thing brings environmental issues up into the long term. Indeed, only setting-up of a
water-resistance device entails onsite storage of huge quantities of non-stabilized soil, meaning that the initial problem is actually postponed, but not solved.
As regards liming, which gives intermediate LCA results, an embankment of stabilized soil plays an important part in site rehabilitation. Indeed, in the absence of embankment, liming offers no chance of reuse for the whole site, whereas the site becomes partly reusable when an embankment of limed soil is achieved. However, stabilization provided by the liming technique is not reliable in the long term and it cannot be assured that the site will be safe for coming generations.
To conclude, with the view to treating the site contaminated by sulfur in the short-term, the LCA has been a useful tool in determining the most environmentally friendly technique: onsite containment has been revealed to offer the best resource productivity.
On the basis of these interesting results, it would be useful to take into account a wider range of environmental flows in order to get a more exhaustive inventory. And furthermore, a more conventional LCA format could be achieved by using impact categories (global warming, acidification…) as inputs in the multicriteria analysis, instead of environmental flows.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Unit 6
Keys for 1.3.1
Keys for 1.3.2
2.1.1
Cause: iron
Effect: carcinogenesis
2.1.3
1. Firstly; 2.Furthermore; 3. because of; 4. can lead to; 5. causing; 6. cause; 7. due to
2.1.4 Notes into a Causal Paragraph
There are several factors to be taken into account when studying why some plants become weak or die. One reason is lack of water. Dryness in the soil causes the leaves to wilt, and may give rise to the death of the plant. On the other hand, too much water may result in the leaves drooping, or becoming yellow. While sunshine is necessary for plants, if it is too strong, the soil may be baked and the roots killed. However, if there is no light, the leaves will become pale and the stems thin. Consequently the plant may die.
Keys for 2.2.1
Examples of strengthening a claim: …
…
… and liver,…
processed meats in a case-control study.
Examples of weakening a claim: a threshold effect for red meat intake on esophageal cancer risk,…
specifically addressed advanced prostate cancer.
study, we had very few premenopausal cases (n = 94) and lacked information on hormone receptor status for a large number of cases.
whereas iron is thought to contribute to carcinogenesis specifically by generating free radicals and inducing oxidative stress.
A decrease in the consumption of red and processed meat reduce the incidence of cancer at multiple sites.
Keys for 2.3
In our study, zinc supplementation did not result in a significant reduction in overall mortality in children aged 1–48 months in a population with high malaria transmission. However, there was a suggestion that the effect varied by age, with no effect on mortality in infants, and a marginally significant 18% reduction of mortality in children 12–48 months of age (p=0·045). This effect was
mainly a consequence of fewer deaths from malaria and other infections. Any effect on mortality in this trial was in addition to a possible effect of vitamin A supplementation
Keys for 3.2
Even though Arizona and Rhode Island are both states of the U.S., they are strikingly different in many ways. For example, the physical size of each state is different. Arizona is large, having an area of 114,000 square miles, whereas Rhode Island is only about a tenth of the size, having an area of only 1,214 square miles. Another difference is in the size of the population of each state. Arizona has about four million people living in it, but Rhode Island has less than one million. The two states also differ in the kinds of natural environment that each has. For example, Arizona is a very dry state, consisting of large desert areas that do not receive much rainfall every year. However, Rhode Island is located in a temperate zone and receives an average of 44 inches of rain per year. In addition, while Arizona is a landlocked state and thus has no seashore, Rhode Island lies on the Atlantic Ocean and does have a significant coastline.
Keys for 3.3
The following is taken from a discussion section of a research paper.
Discussion
A thorough analysis of both ‘worst’ and ‘best’ rankings shows that the onsite containment technique leads to the best LCA result in the light of the taken hypotheses. Unlike other treatment techniques, onsite containment requires not only few materials (geosynthetics only) but also small-scale excavation works. Actually the more a technique includes heavy technical operations involving
materials and equipment, the worse the result of LCA is. This is the case for bio-leaching and offsite landfilling, which include, on the one hand, setting up the bio-leaching device, the treatment of
leachates with lime, disposal of waste and cleaning of the site, and on the other hand, removal of soil and the transportation of huge quantities of materials over large distances.
As mentioned above, besides the LCA, it is necessary to take into account the ability of techniques to substitute for each other as well as the environmental burdens which may be associated with them. Viewed in this light, it is worth noticing that bio-leaching and offsite landfilling provide complete remediation of the site, contrary to other treatment techniques. Bio-leaching consists of a real onsite decontamination of the polluted soil, which enables bequeathing of a clean site to coming generations. Nevertheless, in addition to a bad LCA result, this emergent technique is still poorly known and its efficiency is not quite proven for large-scale applications as yet. As regards offsite landfilling, if the site is left usable without any risk, the huge quantities of non-stabilized waste, which have to be disposed of in landfill, may disturb the organization of local waste management. This point emphasizes the bad result of LCA.
In return, if the favorable LCA result of onsite containment is due to light treatment operations, this very thing brings environmental issues up into the long term. Indeed, only setting-up of a
water-resistance device entails onsite storage of huge quantities of non-stabilized soil, meaning that the initial problem is actually postponed, but not solved.
As regards liming, which gives intermediate LCA results, an embankment of stabilized soil plays an important part in site rehabilitation. Indeed, in the absence of embankment, liming offers no chance of reuse for the whole site, whereas the site becomes partly reusable when an embankment of limed soil is achieved. However, stabilization provided by the liming technique is not reliable in the long term and it cannot be assured that the site will be safe for coming generations.
To conclude, with the view to treating the site contaminated by sulfur in the short-term, the LCA has been a useful tool in determining the most environmentally friendly technique: onsite containment has been revealed to offer the best resource productivity.
On the basis of these interesting results, it would be useful to take into account a wider range of environmental flows in order to get a more exhaustive inventory. And furthermore, a more conventional LCA format could be achieved by using impact categories (global warming, acidification…) as inputs in the multicriteria analysis, instead of environmental flows.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)