nearingzero (work023.jpg)

1. http://www.nearingzero.net (work023.jpg)

2. Global Dumping Ground Your comments on this video? Who made it? Do they have an agenda? The Center for Investigative Reporting. Investigative reporters live to investigate. • Sometimes you “approve” of their investigation. • Sometimes you “disapprove.” • Think carefully before getting involved with one!

3. Public TV. *#!% tree-huggers. (?) Distributor: Films and Videos for a Safe & Sustainable World, 1-800-4-PLANET. I believe those involved in making and distributing this video have an “agenda.” • That’s not necessarily bad. • I would rather they be open about who they are and what they believe. • I would be extremely disturbed by a group that tries to conceal their identity, or hide it behind a name like “Motherhood and Apple Pie Citizens for the US.”

4. The video itself… What got the Colbert brothers in trouble? • “Waste dumping.” (In quotes because they would disagree.) • But it was mail fraud that sent them to prison. Not dumping. • Do you think it is possible the brothers really believed that the Zimbabwe barrels contained solvents, and not hazardous wastes?

5. News flash… Colbert brothers in trouble again! • According to the Bend (Oregon) Bulletin, while the Colbert brothers were in jail awaiting trial, they ordered bulk cancelled US postage stamps. • They washed the cancellations off the stamps and ran a business out of their jail cells selling “mint” and “ungummed” stamps at a 75% discount. • This could be worth 39 years in prison! • Source (Google colbert brothers waste dumping mail fraud): http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1243&dat=19890903&id=BZFTAAAAIBAJ&sjid=yYYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4854,5736267 • 1991 EPA summary of prosecutions here. (URL is 6 lines of 12 pt font).

6. The garbage barge. • Was really big news when I was a kid (yeah, right—the “kid” part, that is). • You liked the part where that guy ate a bit of the garbage? Good—we’ll see something like that again. • They never showed whether he swallowed the garbage, did they?

7. Did anybody notice the skulls and crossbones they placed on the map? • Were they trying to influence you? Or was it just a clever graphic gimmick? Please don’t tell me “chemicals” are bad. I am made of “chemicals.” Coconut oil? On the other hand, the video mentioned specific elements and compounds which are “bad,” which you may not have noticed (or understood the significance): lead, heavy metals, solvents (toluene), PCB’s, dioxin.

8. What do you think of exporting hazardous materials to other countries? • Would it affect your opinion if you knew the other country wanted to import the materials? • Would it affect your opinion if you knew that people in the importing country needed the jobs created by the imports? • Would it affect your opinion if you worked for the exporting company? • Is it OK to export pesticides that are banned in the US? • Have you heard of Adam Smith? • Do you know where YOUR trash goes?

9. Taiwan Clearly, 2000 has come and gone, and people are still living in Taiwan. A good term paper would be to examine any changes in environmental policy in Taiwan in the time since this video was produced. Would you like to have a battery recycling plant in your back yard?

10. Mr. Kim (If that was his name.) What did you think of him? • Was he a “good guy” or a “bad guy?” • Evidence for your belief?

11. 1990—present Have US government policies changed? • Another good term paper topic.

12. The more things change… (most of these links are now dead) Electronic wastes (2002). You can find many more links on Google. As always, be aware of who is writing and what axe they have to grind. Working conditions. 2006 information on working conditions overseas that keep our computer prices low (links for those who wish to explore): Help! I can’t find the article that originally alerted me to this news. (Late January 2004.) It’s worth a homework assignment if you can find it for me. I think I got it from a link on a computer hardware enthusiast site. It was a link to a technical web site. I can tell if you find the link I am thinking of because it gives some reasons why the situation is justifiable. “clean up your computer” “working conditions” “trade justice campaign” Links from prior years are dead, but illustrate the point that reform was slow in coming.

13. The more things change… (a ton of links; some may be dead) Shipping excessive quantities to Canada, 1976 law is still the operative one. http://www.epa.gov/region5/news/news02/02opa087.htm Computer waste, starting place (advocacy). August 2005 China problems http://www.svtc.org/cleancc/ Basel action network (up to date). http://www.ban.org/ Global dumping ground review. http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1990/10/review.html Canada exporting pcb's to US. http://www.ec.gc.ca/press/pcb_b_e.htm What you have to do to export hazardous waste, see here: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00006938----000-.html Good source: http://www.choike.org/nuevo_eng/informes/1157.html

14. The more things change… (cut and paste into browser) The Basel convention: http://www.basel.int/; in force 1992 (so far 167 countries have signed it). US has signed it (the first Bush) but it has not been ratified by congress (US is one of 3 to sign but not ratify). Excluded Antarctica as a destination for hazardous waste; otherwise hazardous waste can be exported if receiving country can handle it safely. 1995 amendment to prohibit all exports of "contaminating material;“ must be ratified by 62 countries to be part of the convention; so far 61 countries have ratified it (over 10 years later) and the US is not one. If we don't ratify it we are not bound by it, although it could cause problems for US companies. Why the us should not ratify the Basel convention: http://www.nationalcenter.org/tp17.html. EPA in US: universal waste rule. Read and formulate your own opinions: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/quick_topics/publications/shw/batteries/UWRsummmary.pdf Waste Export and Import Prohibition Act; introduced 1991: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:H.R.2580.IH (dead link 2010) Again introduced in 1997: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.360.IH (dead link 2010) http://www.docstoc.com/docs/21233864/HR-360-%28ih%29-To-amend-the-Solid-Waste-Disposal-Act-to-prohibit-the-international-export-and-import-of-certain-solid-wa introduced again 2010 These seem not to have been passed.

15. The more things change… (cut and paste into browser) Michigan, 2004: Toronto sending 100% of its Municipal Solid Waste to Michigan (1.1 million tons annually) and there seems not much Michigan can do about it. http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Publications/Issues/SolidWaste/SolidWasteDisposal.pdf IT waste going to Africa; 64% of 2nd hand computers don't get used: http://www.pcw.co.uk/vnunet/news/2144571/economic-computer-aid 2002 US e-waste: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/59672_ewaste25.shtml E-waste january 2006: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Technology/story?id=1479506 Your discarded mobile phone is toxic waste: http://www.ban.org/ban_news/mobilepr.html

16. The more things change… (late 2007 update) *E-waste lays siege to Chinese town: http://www.news.com/E-waste-lays-siege-to-Chinese-town/2100-11395_3-6190150.html?tag=nefd.top *Destination of recycled waste may surprise you (Asia!): http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/11/18/electronics.trash.ap/ China not fighting off e-waste nightmare : http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071119/electronics_China_071119/20071119 America ships electronic waste overseas: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=3883047 *These articles have been taken down (as a normal part of doing business, not due to censorship) but I have downloaded copies if you want to see them. Also try http://www.archive.org

17. The more things change? (2010 update) Shipment of 1400 tonnes of hazardous waste to Brazil (August 2009): http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6804601.ece Dell bans e-waste export to developing countries: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/corporatenews/2009-05-12-dell-ewaste_N.htm Enemalta €12 million/yr. (not 2.5) for hazardous waste export (power plant fly ash): http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100127/local/enemalta-had-quoted-euro-12-million-for-hazardous-waste-export 60 Minutes Follows America's Toxic Electronic Waste As It Is Illegally Shipped To Become China's Dirty Secret: 60 Minutes, November 9, 2008; updated August 27, 2009 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/06/60minutes/main4579229.shtml E-Waste Not (January 8, 2009): http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1870485,00.html China's Electronic Waste Village (pictures to go with above article): http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1870162_1822148,00.html

18. The more things change? (2010 update) E-waste showdown unearths deeper questions (January 2010): http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10435193-54.html Companies oppose mandatory waste recycling (“unconstitutional”). You (the consumer) would pay more! Currently you (the taxpayer) pay to clean up. http://www.simplesteps.org/home-garden/stuff/e-waste-saving-developing-communities-our-electronic-junk Study: E-waste build-up will plateau by 2015 (May 2009): http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10234442-54.html

19. The more things change? (2012 update) Why we should ship our electronic “waste” to China and Africa http://motherboard.vice.com/2011/3/26/e-waste-recycling-exports-are-good A very different point of view than the video. Report: Battery Plant Poisons 100s of Children in China (January 2011): http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-06/world/china.lead.poisoning_1_battery-plant-poisons-hospital?_s=PM:WORLD Apple may be poisoning Chinese workers and doesn't seem to care. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/government/apple-may-be-poisoning-chinese-workers-and-doesnt-seem-to-care-should-we/9908 Note 1: This is not just about electronic waste. Note 2: This is not just about Apple. Everest’s snow and soil contains deadly heavy metals. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/mount-everest-pollution-t_n_791897.html Again, this is not about electronic waste. Or is it? 2011 list of top EU countries sending toxic waste to South Asia: http://www.ban.org/2012/01/16/ngo-releases-2011-list-of-top-eu-companies-sending-toxic-ships-to-south-asia/

20. Physical Science: Energy (Part I) Homework Assignment #5.* Find out about the Energy Patrol. I am thinking specifically of activities at a California school (its name starts with D). Next class meeting turn in a brief report on what you have found. You may print out and turn in a single page from a web site, along with a paragraph of your comments. Be prepared to share what you have found with the rest of the class. *For the bean-counters in this class, homework #3 was the first video report and homework #4 the second video report.

21. I learned about this activity from a teacher who showed me link on a California power company's web page, but there are many other ways to get there. In fact, the idea has become popular enough that you may have difficulty finding anything by the original inventors of the Energy Patrol. “Available energy is the main object at stake in the struggle for existence and the evolution of the world.”—Ludwig Boltzmann

22. Definition of Work When something has energy, it has the ability to do work. We start our discussion of energy with the concept of work. I am going to ask for several daring volunteers to do some work for me (hold, push, and lift).

23. While these volunteers are busy working away, here’s my question of the day: Define “work.” Do your best to come up with a “scientific” definition. Only one sentence, please. No peeking at later slides! You working volunteers, please think of a definition, and write it down when I … finish … with you. The definition serves as today’s class roll, so please write your name on a piece of paper and turn it in, even if you can’t think of a definition. Use a separate sheet from your video report. I find your answers to questions like this extremely useful for understanding your backgrounds, strengths, and weaknesses. It’s not just busywork!

24. Work is done on an object by a force when the force moves the object through some distance. Suppose I lift a 100 pound chunk of lead, put it on your shoulder, and make you stand there for 10 minutes. Do you do any work in the process? You don’t! Not “physics” work. What a stupid way to define work! No, the physics definition of work is consistent with the known laws of physics.

25. You'll probably object that your muscles say they did work, and you are correct. In order to maintain a steady position, your muscles must continually contract and expand, and in the process they certainly do work on the tissues of your body. Go to howstuffworks to see this in action.

26. So I lift a 100 pound chunk of lead, put it on your shoulder, and make you stand there for 10 minutes. I claim you do no work. Strictly speaking, I should say you did no work on the chunk of lead (in this simple example where you did not move the chunk of lead). Did anybody do work in this example? When I lifted the chunk of lead from the floor to your shoulder, I had to exert a force. The force moved the mass of lead some distance; therefore I did work.

27. If you tire and let the chunk of lead fall, do you do any work? No. As the lead falls, does it do any work? No (if you ignore the air it pushes aside, and assuming the earth does not move “up” to meet the lead). However, the force of gravity causes the lead to fall, so gravity does work on the lead as it falls. Work is done when a force moves a mass through some distance. Work is simply W=FD, where F is the force that moves the mass and D the distance. In the SI (meters kilograms seconds) system of units that scientists prefer, the units of work are joules, where 1 joule equals 1 newton-meter.

28. We have seen how physicists define work… …let’s talk about energy.

29. Work and Energy: Kinetic Energy Think of work and energy as two sides of the same coin. A very important theory of physics says that work and energy can be converted back and forth into each other. In grade school, you probably learned about two of the main kinds of energy: kinetic energy and potential energy. An object has kinetic energy whenever it is moving. If I push a toy car across the table, I do work on the car (I exert a force on the car and make it move). That work is converted into kinetic energy of the car. If there are no losses of energy (e.g. due to friction), then all of the work I did gets converted into kinetic energy of the car.

30. You can start with Newton's laws and use a little algebra to show that an object of mass m moving with a speed v has a kinetic energy K=mv2/2. Here's something interesting to think about. If two objects having masses M and 2M are both moving with a speed V, 2M has twice the kinetic energy of M. On the other hand, if two objects have identical masses M, object 1 is moving with a speed V, and object 2 is moving with a speed 2V, then object 2 does not have twice the kinetic energy of object 1.

31. In fact, the object moving twice as fast has four times the kinetic energy. A car going 45 mph in a 30 mph speed zone has more than twice the kinetic energy as an identical car going 30 mph. That's twice as much energy that must be dissipated by the brakes to stop the car, and twice as much energy for crushing metal, bones, etc. That extra 15 mph makes a big difference. Sorry, it’s hard to find nice pictures of wrecked cars. You won’t believe me because you’re young and I’m just a cranky old coot, but a collision at 30 mph is very serious, potentially fatal. 45 mph is far worse.

32. Can you think of other things besides speeding cars that have kinetic energy? Here's a few examples that pop into my head: the earth moving around the sun, the wind (moving air molecules), ocean currents, blood flowing in our veins. Anything that is moving has kinetic energy. Work and Energy: Potential Energy In grade school, you probably learned that if an object has potential energy, it has the ability to do work. It has the "potential" to do work; hence the name. Potential energy is stored energy. Potential energy does not involve motion (that would be kinetic energy). 2008 & 2012: got to here