How could burning high-sulfur coal in a power plant harm a forest hundreds of kilometers away?
Burning high-sulfur coal in a power plant can release sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, where it reacts with water vapor to form sulfuric acid. This can then be carried by winds over long distances before being deposited onto the forest as acid rain, which can harm the vegetation, soil, and water quality over time.
Can cat urine fumes release carbon monoxide fumes?
No, cat urine fumes do not release carbon monoxide fumes. Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete burning of carbon-based fuels. Cat urine may produce ammonia fumes, but not carbon monoxide.
How does the amount of air pollution affect the amount of p.h. in air?
Usually, it lowers it as CO2 is converted to HCO2 and SO4 is converted to H2SO4 (carbon dioxide to carbonic acid and sulfate to sulfuric acid). Nitric acids can also form from nitric oxide. That's the general composition of acid rain. (low pH = more acid)
What is the best use in world for solar energy?
Germany is presently a large developer of solar energy along with Australia, Algeria, the US, Canada, the United Kingdom and many other countries. Read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Solar_power_stations_by_country
How would a volcano erupting cause global climate changes?
A volcano erupting can have a cooling effect. By putting a lot of dust in the upper atmosphere and reflecting sunlight. This happened fairly recently. Krakatoa blew up in the 1880s and some of the coldest winters on record are 1888-89. A lot of those records still stand today. There are many variables involved with the climate on our planet.
A volcanic eruption can have only a very slight, imperceptible effect on the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide and consequently on global warming. For example, the volcano that erupted in Iceland in 2010 vented between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per day. This is minuscule compared to emissions from burning fossil fuels, of around 30 billion tonnes per year.
Why is glucose consider as an reducer agent?
Reducing agents are substances that bring about 'reduction', or chemical combination with hydrogen. Glucose, like any straight-chain monosaccharide, is capable of acting as a mild reducing agent.
Address of water treatment plant in akola?
I'm unable to provide real-time or specific address information. I recommend contacting the municipal office or searching online for accurate details about the water treatment plant in Akola.
How do you empty chemical toilets in caravans?
1. Park caravan no less than 10M away from a river/dam or other water source.
2. Plug pipe into chemical storage unit and throw other end into river.
3. pump out.
4. drive away in happiness
5. do it again
What are some ways a traffic jam affects the society and environment?
TRAFFIC JAM AFFECTS SOCIETY AND ENVIRONMENT Traffic jam affects the society in some of the ways below: * creates mental stress in the motorists * paves way for wastage of fuel and wear & tear of vehicle parts which ultimately waste the money of the motorists * becomes a cause for rash driving and road accidents involving loss of lives * makes the motorists to inhale lot of vehicular smoke emissions in a short period of time causing many diseases Traffic jam affects the environment in some of the ways below: * efficiency of fuel usage by idle running of vehicle engines in low speed is very low leading to wastage of fuel which ultimately results in over exploitation of fossil fuel reserves * vehicles at low speed emit lot amount of carbon monooxide, unburnt fuel particles, suspended particulate matters and other pollutants into atmosphere causing air pollution more grave * when vehicles start to move slowly, noise pollution is created by blowing horns by the motorists
What causes water to become basic?
Water becomes basic when there is an increase in the concentration of hydroxide ions (OH-) relative to hydrogen ions (H+). This can happen by dissolving bases, substances that release hydroxide ions in water, or by chemical reactions that produce hydroxide ions.
Yes, they are white.
Answer:
A studious observer of clouds will have seen white and grey to almost black clouds in the sky depending on weather and at sunset or sunrise will have seen many other colours.
A cloud is however made up of clear droplets of water which are colourless. The reflected and refracted light gives them the appearance of being white in full daylight, dark when they block the light, bluish when they reflect the sky colour and different spectral colour when lit by sun rise and sun st light.
Yes, glucose is biodegradable. It can be broken down by bacteria and other microorganisms in the environment into simpler compounds such as carbon dioxide and water through the process of biodegradation.
The above are just the basics. The earth is a complex system so many other changes occur. Alpine regions become isolated from each other, thus certain species become "trapped" on a particular mountain because it is too warm for them to migrate to other mountains. Sea streams become effected, thus leading to greater rainfall in some areas and lesser rainfall in others and as well as increased temperatures in some areas and lesser temperatures in others.
A:Global warming from Carbon Dioxide, would increase the moisture content in the air, producing a carbon enriched moist tropical climate, this would result in a massive explosion in plant growth which would remove CO2 from the atmosphere and replace it with O2 (oxygen) the forests would benefit from the humidity and higher atmospheric pressure and collect more sunlight into the leaves, this would cool the land masses and then the air, the cooler air would release moisture as rain, cooling the climate, in turn lowering the temperature. The trees would slow in growth, and some would die, releasing Co2 back into the atmosphere and the cycle would begin again. Given the lack of current growth of planets, many botanists (e.g. David Bellamy) remain skeptics against Carbon Dioxide being a serious factor in Global Warming. In fact the most likely greenhouse gas is Water Vapor, but for now Governments seem unwilling to ban water. A:It depends on who you choose to believe. The main body for the science is the IPPC, Which is a political UN body, with very few scientists on-board, what they do however is pay for research by scientists on topics they want answers to. Findings are published very often, and change quickly, so by the time this answer is finished the figures could have changed again. As a result of this fluid reporting, their credibility with governments is not great, and many other bodies with differing views are also in existence, or are being created. The possible effects are now identifed as three main outcomes.
1. Sea Level Variations: These originally were increases (up to 10 metres), (Al Gore used this figure for his "convenient truth" movie, but contrary to what he stated, New Zealand is not being overun by climate refugees. (an aside fact A New Zealand court declined the first climate change refugee application in 2013, on the basis that there was no evidence of land loss due to rising sea levels on his home atol) As frozen water (ice) occupies greater volumes than water in a liquid state, and most water is locked at the poles and in the ocean, not on land) these numbers have been reduced down. Some figures show reductions of up to 4 feet, others increases of up to 2 metres, however the current IPPC values are now an increase of well less than 1 metre (in fact it is measured in inches).
2. Climate Change: Weather patterns would alter, and these could cause increased food production in northern and southern climates, but at the cost of a more arid situation nearer the equator, However, modeling has not matched the trends over the last ten years, The UK for example should be warmer and weather patterns calmer as it was following the last Mini Ice age (a period known as the renaissance) but in fact it has been colder and more extreme. As a result, predictions now only state chage, and not what the change will be, as these predictions are about as accurate as next week's weather forecast. So it would change, but no-one can agree on how it will change. Some predict more hurricanes, other show the numbers are falling off, but some are more severe. Some data shows ocean temperature increase, other data shows it falling. There is very little agreement among climatologists, and even less with paleo-climatologists.
3. Changes to Flora and Fauna. Plants and animals can be very sensitive to climatic changes (see 2 above), or changes to the food chain. Fewer rabbits = fewer predators... etc. If the climate changes, then animals may not be able to adapt, and will die off. (e.g. Mammoth extinction, as grasslands did not recover in the last Ice Age. Ironically, Increased CO2 or increased atmospheric pressure would actually increase plant growth, but temperatures or water table changes may slow it down. So again Predicting what is not done, only that it may change.
As is clearly stated: The earth's systems are incredibly complex, and not one modelled prediction has yet come to pass, This is because there are not yet any models that can account for all of the complexity of such a complex system. This does not means models are not worth trying, only that none are yet good enough to make accurate predictions. The earth will find a new equilibrium (it always has, and always will.) The question is will we like living here in the new equilibrium if Global warming is real, and some of the above predictions occur? To know that we will have to wait and see, or identify what is really happening, and finds ways to negate the effects, and scientifically, we are still in the early stages of this study (prior to the 1980's no-one had even considered greenhouse possibilities seriously).
Agitation prevents a what from settling?
Agitation prevents sediment or particles from settling at the bottom of a container or solution.
Why is water rising in Florida due to global warming?
Sea levels rose by 20 centimetres during the twentieth century and are predicted to rise by between 90 and 150 centimetres during the present century. From that point onwards, we are in uncharted territory: if no serious action has been taken during the early part of this century, sea levels will continue to rise at a quite rapid rate within a hundred years from now. There is almost no meaningful limit to how high sea levels could rise in the long term.
Pure air is air that is free from pollutants or contaminants such as smoke, dust, or chemicals. It contains a balanced composition of oxygen, nitrogen, and other gases, making it safe and healthy for breathing. Pure air is important for maintaining good health and well-being.
Why does sulfur have a 1 charge in sulfur dioxide?
I don't think sulfur has a charge since sulfur dioxide is a covalent bond. In covalent bonding no charge is produced because its between two nonmetals which share electrons. Since neither atom gains or loses electrons, the protons and electrons are balanced, producing no charge. In response to the answer above, I would first as a question. First by "charge" I assume you are referring to the oxidation number? If so, then you have to look at the charges on each of the atoms present in the molecule! First, oxygen has a -2 charge for each atom. Since Sulfur dioxide has TWO oxygens each oxygen has a -2 charge meaning that there is a total -4 charge for the two oxygens. Since sulfur dioxide doesn't have a charge on the molecule, all the charges for all the atoms must add up to 0. The oxygens already have a -4 charge which means that the sulfur has a +4 charge! Of course all of this is in reference to oxidation numbers. I'm thinking the first person to post might have been confusing the charge on the molecule with the oxidation numbers of each of the atoms?
Are Decca Radar Lobes radiation safe?
There is continuing debates about "Non-Ionising Radiation" and the safety issues; although more particularly for cell phones and urban emitters rather then DECCA RADAR and DECCA Navigation emitters (note DECCA is the Chinese work for RADAR, comes from the British company that pioneered DECCA navigation). Non-Ionising Radiation is the kind of Radiation that does not strip Ions from bio-chemical bonds unlike other more harmful radiations like Gamma, Nuclear Radiation. RF radiation waves are Non-Ionising, however specific frequencies can be more readily absorb by some parts of the body then others. This is to do with resonant frequencies for body tissues and the one quarter wavelength in the RF wave it self. The rate of absorb-ion is known as the SAR (Specific Absorption Rate). The general recommendations are not to stare directly into RF beams or expose soft tissues for very long periods of time and short ranges to the emitters. Some medical practitioners believe that some frequencies have a risk at close ranges for developing cataracts etc. It is also important to understand that RF power lowers as a function of range by a "range squared law", so the power drops off quite quickly with range. Other factors are amount of exposure you receive (long term) and the frequency and power you are being exposed to (the dose). In the RADAR case it is also important to remember that they use high gain antenna, and this means that the radiation is mostly in one direction and much less in others. In the DECCA navigation emitter case the energy level is less power and is more omni directional. The RADAR case's concentrated beams maybe scanned and the RF Power maybe pulsed (not constant). The Radar beams should be arranged to not point directly into inhabitants at close ranges, and the specific range is dependant on the mean power scan rate and range against the frequency. RADARs are arranged in this way. In the DECCA navigation case the RF is Continuous, and given the range of properagation is quite far you would expect the power levels also to be much higher, however the frequency is quite low at 70 - 130 kHz and lower frequency propagate much better then higher ones so the power level can be much less. It is also believed to be much less harmful risk as these frequencies are far away from water and bio-chemical resonates. However, if you work with RF and/or RADAR it is impotent to remember that repeated exposure can harmful and that the Microwave Oven was discovered by a scientist that melted a chocolate bar in is pocket because it was in a radio beam at very close range. I do not now if he suffered as a result of it but I assume the chocolate bar was not consumed.
What causes the geothermal gradient?
The geothermal gradient is caused by the heat emanating from Earth's interior. It increases as you go deeper into the Earth's crust and upper mantle due to the combination of radioactive decay of elements, residual heat from planetary formation, and the insulating effect of Earth's layers trapping heat.
To calculate the amount of fertilizer to add for a 500 to 1 ratio, take the number of ounces of water (128 per gal X 3 = 384) and divide that amount by 500. The answer comes out to approximately three quarters of an ounce, or .768 ounces for three gallons of water.
The emission of greenhouse gases, mostly carbon dioxide, primarily through burning of fossil fuels, enhanced the natural greenhouse effect and began making the earth warmer.
Global warming has already started, as shown by the rise in sea levels and warming in global temperatures.
Is there a way to reduce discharge?
If you have a vaginal discharge you probably have a vaginal infection, particularlly if there is an odor. A yeast infection causes a white thick discharge and may cause itching. Hemophilus vaginitis can cause a greyish discharge with a "fishy" odor. Trichomoniasis is a STD that causes itching and burning. If you have a discharge, see your doctor it is not normal. Do not douche before you see the doctor, he will need to check the discharge to see what is causing it. If you douche too much this can cause a discharge. You actually never have to douche, douching can rinse away the normal vaginal fluids and the body will secrte more to replace them creating a vicious cycle, so stop douching.
How Has Nuclear Power Influenced Society?
That's a very broad question that sounds like an essay question from Junior High.
Nuclear power has offered society the potential to produce essentially unlimited amounts of electricity using a technology that few of the users understand. When the majority of people hear "nuclear power" they immediately think of nuclear weapons, Hiroshima, Chernobyl, TMI, and general holocaust. They do not think "hot water, steam generator, spinning turbine, and radioactive decay" and they do not recognize that every technological advance has advantages and disadvantages.
The advantages of nuclear power to generate electricity compared to coal, is that there is significantly less disturbance to the earth in the mining of the fuel, there are no products of combustion released to the atmosphere, the volume of the waste produced is orders of magnitude less and completely controlled, and the radioactivity of the spent fuel will eventually decay to harmless levels. Further, the spent fuel can be reprocessed to recover the useable material and reuse it in new fuel.
The disadvantages of the present generation of nuclear power plants is the complexity of the design which leads to over engineering of the systems and components. More components in the design means that there are more components to fail. The redundancy of separate trains of safety systems assures tht the fuel remains cooled however the numbers of failures fosters the image that the design isn't safe.
The media that discusses nuclear power tends to speak in absolutist terms such as "could there be a reactor fuel melt down?" The answer is "yes" with a probability that can be calculated based on the probability of failure of different pieces of equipment. That failure probability tends to be in the 10E-6 range or less, meaning that the string of failures needed to arrive at a fuel melt will happen once every 10E6 years (that's 1,000,000 years). This is not an easy concept to grasp, so the path of least resistance for the media is to not explain it. It's easier to ask an open-ended question and cut to commercial.
It could be argued that nuclear power really hasn't influenced society much at all in that most of the population doesn't know or care where their electricy comes from so long as the lights come on when the switch is thrown. People who live far from a nuclear plant can afford to oppose the technology since they don't have to think about it beyond the abstract. Those people who live close to a plant frequently learn to appreciate it for the good jobs that the site provides and the clean and generally reliable electricity it delivers.
There are a few pro-nuclear web sites which can provide that point of view. Nuclear Is Our Future (NIOF) has links to other sites which can provide additional information. Pay particular attention to John Cameron and his theories on radiation exposure.
same happend to my 91. u gota take off the shifter nob and take off the plastic stuff and then there should be some rubber things u need to replace shouldn't cost more then 10 bucks or so. or u can rig it and drill threw the 2 mettal peices and stick a blot in there