English has always been my weakness. This may be due to the fact that I am born in a Chinese-speaking environment and thus I spend very little effort and time on improving it. For this post, I will be writing about the foundation of English, the grammar.
Incorrect: The biggest advantage of nuclear power plant is that……of time without the production of pollution such as carbon dioxide.
Correct: pollutions such as carbon dioxide
The above mistake was a common grammar problem which is the singular and plural form. In this case the plural form should be used since the pollution is not only referring to a singular subject.
Incorrect: Nuclear power plant is one of such example.
Correct: one such example.
In this case, the word “of” is reluctant since the correct statement will fully expressed the same meaning as the incorrect one.
Incorrect: throughout the day and it’s more..
Correct: its more
This is a common mistake make by many. “Its” is the short form of it is but it’s is normally referring to something that belongs to the subject. One such example is “it’s fur”.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
eportfolio 5
The group I have chosen to summarize for this e-portfolio post is Alvin’s group and the question they have chosen is whether their home country support Kirchhoff’s claim that collaborative effort by industry, academia, and government will promote the use of green chemistry technologies that are necessary to achieve a sustainable society and why.
I think the way they use to approach the problem was very unique. Instead of assigning different roles of perspective and look at the issues from different point of view, they split up the question into little parts and have each speaker talk about the definition and their perspective. I find it to be extremely interesting and useful as it tends to explain very clearly to the audience the questions and their point of view.
First up, we have Alvin as the moderator, introducing the questions, members and their way of approach. Soon after, we have Shao Yi explaining to us about the term green chemistry. He gave the definition of green chemistry as a sustainable chemistry in which the design and production reduces the use of dangerous material or chemical. He soon gave some examples of the hazardous chemical such as CFCs and fossil fuel. Also, difference between green chemistry and green technology was pointed out by him. Thereafter, he went on introducing biocatalyst, an example of green chemistry, and he explain how it help the environment, for example, replacing organic solvent, lowering temperature needed for certain processes.
Up next, we have EE Ming to explain to us what a sustainable society is. A sustainable society in his term is to maintain the state of high quality of life while working within the limits of Mother Nature, a society of just and equality and where everyone gets opportunity to reach to their potential. He went on to talk about Singapore and compare and contrast with his ideal sustainable society. Some of the similarities are that Singapore has a high quality of living, multi-racial, just and equal and plenty of chances for people to strive for the best. However, in his view, Singapore has not reach the standard of a sustainable society due to its lack of natural resources, lack of usage of green chemistry and there is more work to be done for Singapore.
Lastly, we have Sean to talk about how the three different parties (the government, industry and the academia) can work together in achieving a sustainable society. In his view, the government should act like a middle man, they should send talents and scouts to learn more knowledge and technology and transfer the knowledge to the academia to let them research and develop on it. Once research is done, the academia will feedback to the government and the government will pass down the policy to the industry, lastly the industry should feedback to the government and in a way, this act like a cycle until sustainable society is achieved. However, this method has a few disadvantages as there are too much government control, the industry will not be able to carry out their own research and development which will slow the progress towards sustainable society. Also, the government will tend to focus on immediate issues such as financial crisis and in turn will again slow the whole progress.
Alvin went ahead to conclude their group discussion and agree that collaborative effort by industry, academia, and government will promote the use of green chemistry and go towards a sustainable society. However, the process would be slow and enduring ones. One day, I would hope to see that my country reach the stage of sustainable society through the use of green chemistry. Till then, we should do our part in achieving this.
I think the way they use to approach the problem was very unique. Instead of assigning different roles of perspective and look at the issues from different point of view, they split up the question into little parts and have each speaker talk about the definition and their perspective. I find it to be extremely interesting and useful as it tends to explain very clearly to the audience the questions and their point of view.
First up, we have Alvin as the moderator, introducing the questions, members and their way of approach. Soon after, we have Shao Yi explaining to us about the term green chemistry. He gave the definition of green chemistry as a sustainable chemistry in which the design and production reduces the use of dangerous material or chemical. He soon gave some examples of the hazardous chemical such as CFCs and fossil fuel. Also, difference between green chemistry and green technology was pointed out by him. Thereafter, he went on introducing biocatalyst, an example of green chemistry, and he explain how it help the environment, for example, replacing organic solvent, lowering temperature needed for certain processes.
Up next, we have EE Ming to explain to us what a sustainable society is. A sustainable society in his term is to maintain the state of high quality of life while working within the limits of Mother Nature, a society of just and equality and where everyone gets opportunity to reach to their potential. He went on to talk about Singapore and compare and contrast with his ideal sustainable society. Some of the similarities are that Singapore has a high quality of living, multi-racial, just and equal and plenty of chances for people to strive for the best. However, in his view, Singapore has not reach the standard of a sustainable society due to its lack of natural resources, lack of usage of green chemistry and there is more work to be done for Singapore.
Lastly, we have Sean to talk about how the three different parties (the government, industry and the academia) can work together in achieving a sustainable society. In his view, the government should act like a middle man, they should send talents and scouts to learn more knowledge and technology and transfer the knowledge to the academia to let them research and develop on it. Once research is done, the academia will feedback to the government and the government will pass down the policy to the industry, lastly the industry should feedback to the government and in a way, this act like a cycle until sustainable society is achieved. However, this method has a few disadvantages as there are too much government control, the industry will not be able to carry out their own research and development which will slow the progress towards sustainable society. Also, the government will tend to focus on immediate issues such as financial crisis and in turn will again slow the whole progress.
Alvin went ahead to conclude their group discussion and agree that collaborative effort by industry, academia, and government will promote the use of green chemistry and go towards a sustainable society. However, the process would be slow and enduring ones. One day, I would hope to see that my country reach the stage of sustainable society through the use of green chemistry. Till then, we should do our part in achieving this.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
e portfollio 4 (rush work)..
Thanks to Qi wen for reminding me to do this blog entry. I have completely forgotten about this due to preparation for mid-term. I apologies for doing this entry too late and too rush.
Our group have chosen genetic engineering as our round-table discussion and I would be in charge of handling the public or government point of view as to why they would reject or only apply it to a certain extend.
The first article I have chosen is from The Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy, titled genetic engineering: A caution approach (http://istpp.org/genetic_engineering.html). In this article, the author is telling us that little is known about genetic engineering such as genetic surgery. The danger post by these surgeries and how our genes in the body might react of foreign genes is too profound and unknown to us. It went on to urge us to be wary against the dangers of irreversible gene pollution and we should be monitoring such development closely. Some problems and scientists views were written and the author wrote about what the government has failed to do and proceed on with a case study. Some environment concerns caused by the usage of genetic engineering such as the imbalances in our environment and ecosystem caused by herbicides are also discussed. He ended off by encouraging us to put our safety first and to build a society that upholds the integrity and dignity of life for us all. I feel that the article is useful in spreading the message of safety to us, we should be wary of what we do with our body, food and the environment.
1)mandatory-required, necessary
2)radical-fundamental, basic
3)frailties-weakness, flaw
4)Touted-generally agreed upon
5)assert-insist, declare, maintain
The second article I have chosen is an article about The New Zealand government stand towards genetic modified (GM) food. Title of the article is GM debate will continue (http://www.terranature.org/gm.htm) and the article mainly speak about the government and the world public reaction towards GM. New Zealand went ahead with GM believing that going towards GM could help them stay competitive in the world markets although a large percentage of New Zealander’s want the ban on GMOs to continue. The public feel that the government is going against the well-known “clean and green” New Zealand brand; some statistics is shown by the author to show how the world will react to New Zealand’s decision. The article went on to talk about the reason for opposition to GM and talk about how severely the ecosystems will be affected and ended off accusing that the government went on blindly ahead with GM. I feel that the article is much related to the topic we are discussing, it shows how at times government went on with certain decision to maintain competitive and ignored the public feelings and views.
1)moratorium-suspension
2)sterile-unproductive, clean
3)acutely-sharply
4)pollination-the enrichment of land
In conclusion, after reading these two articles, I feel that different groups of people might take a different stand towards GM and this is very much dependant on their area of focus at the certain point.
Our group have chosen genetic engineering as our round-table discussion and I would be in charge of handling the public or government point of view as to why they would reject or only apply it to a certain extend.
The first article I have chosen is from The Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy, titled genetic engineering: A caution approach (http://istpp.org/genetic_engineering.html). In this article, the author is telling us that little is known about genetic engineering such as genetic surgery. The danger post by these surgeries and how our genes in the body might react of foreign genes is too profound and unknown to us. It went on to urge us to be wary against the dangers of irreversible gene pollution and we should be monitoring such development closely. Some problems and scientists views were written and the author wrote about what the government has failed to do and proceed on with a case study. Some environment concerns caused by the usage of genetic engineering such as the imbalances in our environment and ecosystem caused by herbicides are also discussed. He ended off by encouraging us to put our safety first and to build a society that upholds the integrity and dignity of life for us all. I feel that the article is useful in spreading the message of safety to us, we should be wary of what we do with our body, food and the environment.
1)mandatory-required, necessary
2)radical-fundamental, basic
3)frailties-weakness, flaw
4)Touted-generally agreed upon
5)assert-insist, declare, maintain
The second article I have chosen is an article about The New Zealand government stand towards genetic modified (GM) food. Title of the article is GM debate will continue (http://www.terranature.org/gm.htm) and the article mainly speak about the government and the world public reaction towards GM. New Zealand went ahead with GM believing that going towards GM could help them stay competitive in the world markets although a large percentage of New Zealander’s want the ban on GMOs to continue. The public feel that the government is going against the well-known “clean and green” New Zealand brand; some statistics is shown by the author to show how the world will react to New Zealand’s decision. The article went on to talk about the reason for opposition to GM and talk about how severely the ecosystems will be affected and ended off accusing that the government went on blindly ahead with GM. I feel that the article is much related to the topic we are discussing, it shows how at times government went on with certain decision to maintain competitive and ignored the public feelings and views.
1)moratorium-suspension
2)sterile-unproductive, clean
3)acutely-sharply
4)pollination-the enrichment of land
In conclusion, after reading these two articles, I feel that different groups of people might take a different stand towards GM and this is very much dependant on their area of focus at the certain point.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Review of lecture on 30th Jan
We are proud to have three honorable guests (Professor Andrew Palmer, Assistant Professor Benjamin. K sovacool and Professor Rajasekhar Bala) to give a talk about climate change at LT 7 on the 30th Jan 2008. All of them provided us their specialize view regarding climate change, some statistics and their suggested solutions to climate change.
Firstly, we have Professor Andrew Palmer to talk to us about major climate change over the years and some carbon dioxide emission statistics. He also mention about the ways and technology to store the carbon dioxide. In addition, he briefly talks about the political issues and suggested what government should do. Of all, I feel that the most interesting part is how we are able to utilize used oil field and the ocean to store our carbon dioxide. This is because I think that although governments and organizations around the world are trying to reduce carbon dioxide emission, but limited can be achieved in a short time. This storage idea will be a temporary and efficient way to contain the carbon dioxide. However, we should not be relying on the storage idea, we should be trying to come out with new ways and technology to reduce our carbon dioxide emission significantly.
Next, we have Assistant Professor Benjamin.K sovacool who came from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy telling us about using Science and technology studies (STS) to address energy (and technological) problems. He gave us a quick introduction of what STS is and also gave us two case studies which are renewable power and electric vehicles. What I find interesting about his talk is that how public policy can be so intertwine with new technology, this makes me realize how powerful is the social factor.
Lastly, we have Professor Rajasekhar Bala talks to us about more of what we as individuals can do to save the earth. He firstly showed us some statistics about the temperature of the earth and also he think of some consequences such as the sea level rising causing flooding and more hurricanes and typhoons that might occur due to global warming. In addition, he told us what we as individuals or small groups can do to help save the earth. I find this to be the most interesting as most speaker would talk about solutions to global warming with regards to the government and large organization but often forgotten about the individuals who actually is the building block of the problem.
From this lecture, I feel that I learnt more about global warming and we should do our part in saving the earth. If each individuals just contribute or sacrifice a bit for our mother earth, it would be a better place to live in.
Firstly, we have Professor Andrew Palmer to talk to us about major climate change over the years and some carbon dioxide emission statistics. He also mention about the ways and technology to store the carbon dioxide. In addition, he briefly talks about the political issues and suggested what government should do. Of all, I feel that the most interesting part is how we are able to utilize used oil field and the ocean to store our carbon dioxide. This is because I think that although governments and organizations around the world are trying to reduce carbon dioxide emission, but limited can be achieved in a short time. This storage idea will be a temporary and efficient way to contain the carbon dioxide. However, we should not be relying on the storage idea, we should be trying to come out with new ways and technology to reduce our carbon dioxide emission significantly.
Next, we have Assistant Professor Benjamin.K sovacool who came from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy telling us about using Science and technology studies (STS) to address energy (and technological) problems. He gave us a quick introduction of what STS is and also gave us two case studies which are renewable power and electric vehicles. What I find interesting about his talk is that how public policy can be so intertwine with new technology, this makes me realize how powerful is the social factor.
Lastly, we have Professor Rajasekhar Bala talks to us about more of what we as individuals can do to save the earth. He firstly showed us some statistics about the temperature of the earth and also he think of some consequences such as the sea level rising causing flooding and more hurricanes and typhoons that might occur due to global warming. In addition, he told us what we as individuals or small groups can do to help save the earth. I find this to be the most interesting as most speaker would talk about solutions to global warming with regards to the government and large organization but often forgotten about the individuals who actually is the building block of the problem.
From this lecture, I feel that I learnt more about global warming and we should do our part in saving the earth. If each individuals just contribute or sacrifice a bit for our mother earth, it would be a better place to live in.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
An Inconvenient Truth question a)
In the video ,an inconvenient truth, the speaker, former Vice President Al Gore, mentions a lot about government effort to reduce problems of global warming and they even come out with policies and rules to reduce the emission of green house gases. Policies of my government in Singapore has contributed greatly in reducing the problem of global warming in a lot of ways.
Firstly, since the early 1990s, Singapore has been participating actively in world environment project such as Global Ministerial Environment Forum (GMEF), the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development (MCED) and the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on the Environment. This shows that our government realise the importance of reducing environmental problem. This is extremely important because they feel a felt need for the change, without this felt need, government bodies may not treat environment problem seriously and they might spend their expenses on other areas such as development, education and neglecting environmental issues.
Due to this felt need created, Singapore actively participate in environmental project and also focus on educating the public about the environmental problem. In 1997, Singapore adopted the Kyoto Protocol. This is a huge spend by Singapore in reducing problems of global warming. In this Kyoto protocol, government pledge to decrease their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by an average of five percent against 1990 level over a five-year period 2008-2012 (http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php). Singapore since then employs policies that encourages companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One such example is the tuas power station, it has consistently exceeds the environmental regulatory standards set out by the national environment agency and has turn towards natural gas as their main fuel source (http://www.tuaspower.com.sg/tuas3.asp ).
Lastly, government has employ heavy fines on excessively use of household electricity, water and amount of cars is controlled by the government. By employing heavy fines on excessively use of household electricity, people will tend to cut down on their electricity usage to avoid getting fine and this in turns lead to less energy being used thus it helps reducing the greenhouse gases emission by reducing the amount of fuel needed to be burn. Also, amount of cars are controlled by the government, this will reduce the amount of GHG produced by the cars and this in turns help reduce problems of global warming.
Overall, I think that our government has done a great job in handling our environmental problems and I trust in it that it help reduce our environmental problems and make our earth a better place.
Firstly, since the early 1990s, Singapore has been participating actively in world environment project such as Global Ministerial Environment Forum (GMEF), the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development (MCED) and the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on the Environment. This shows that our government realise the importance of reducing environmental problem. This is extremely important because they feel a felt need for the change, without this felt need, government bodies may not treat environment problem seriously and they might spend their expenses on other areas such as development, education and neglecting environmental issues.
Due to this felt need created, Singapore actively participate in environmental project and also focus on educating the public about the environmental problem. In 1997, Singapore adopted the Kyoto Protocol. This is a huge spend by Singapore in reducing problems of global warming. In this Kyoto protocol, government pledge to decrease their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by an average of five percent against 1990 level over a five-year period 2008-2012 (http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php). Singapore since then employs policies that encourages companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One such example is the tuas power station, it has consistently exceeds the environmental regulatory standards set out by the national environment agency and has turn towards natural gas as their main fuel source (http://www.tuaspower.com.sg/tuas3.asp ).
Lastly, government has employ heavy fines on excessively use of household electricity, water and amount of cars is controlled by the government. By employing heavy fines on excessively use of household electricity, people will tend to cut down on their electricity usage to avoid getting fine and this in turns lead to less energy being used thus it helps reducing the greenhouse gases emission by reducing the amount of fuel needed to be burn. Also, amount of cars are controlled by the government, this will reduce the amount of GHG produced by the cars and this in turns help reduce problems of global warming.
Overall, I think that our government has done a great job in handling our environmental problems and I trust in it that it help reduce our environmental problems and make our earth a better place.
Friday, January 23, 2009
EG 1471
Engineers are so versatile in the world today. A lot of engineers have turned into areas such as banking, marketing, sales and many other more. Engineers are able to do because of their strong systematic way of thinking and their analyzing skills.
With regards to Prof. Ramakrishna’s article, “The Expanding World of Engineers” where he states that “an engineer’s training helps to systematically analyze complex information and apply a holistic (systematic) approach in designing solutions.”
The reason why engineers are able to do so is due to the tedious and tough education that they have been through. An engineer achieve such analytic skills from long years of practicing analysis questions. However, to analyze something, one must have prior knowledge of it. Tertiary education prepares engineers with the required knowledge in their respective fields and required solution. Also, engineers in today's world are now required to take subjects outside their faculty and this would allow them to better understand how other areas out of engineering works. Thus, it would allow them to come out with a more effective solution to solve the problems faced by other sector.
Engineering students are also given chances to gain working experience even before they graduate. Programmes such as the industrial attachment, work and travel gives engineering students a chance to experience work life and better understand the problems faced. This will help them to analyze and provide solutions better when they graduate. Lastly, engineering students are also trained to build up their communicative skills. This is done so by having students doing research, lab experiments and other activities in a group. This would train them to better communicate with each other, and this would help them in their future working environment.
In conclusion, I believed that it is the education that engineers been through that allow them to analyze complex information and provide clear and orderly solutions.
With regards to Prof. Ramakrishna’s article, “The Expanding World of Engineers” where he states that “an engineer’s training helps to systematically analyze complex information and apply a holistic (systematic) approach in designing solutions.”
The reason why engineers are able to do so is due to the tedious and tough education that they have been through. An engineer achieve such analytic skills from long years of practicing analysis questions. However, to analyze something, one must have prior knowledge of it. Tertiary education prepares engineers with the required knowledge in their respective fields and required solution. Also, engineers in today's world are now required to take subjects outside their faculty and this would allow them to better understand how other areas out of engineering works. Thus, it would allow them to come out with a more effective solution to solve the problems faced by other sector.
Engineering students are also given chances to gain working experience even before they graduate. Programmes such as the industrial attachment, work and travel gives engineering students a chance to experience work life and better understand the problems faced. This will help them to analyze and provide solutions better when they graduate. Lastly, engineering students are also trained to build up their communicative skills. This is done so by having students doing research, lab experiments and other activities in a group. This would train them to better communicate with each other, and this would help them in their future working environment.
In conclusion, I believed that it is the education that engineers been through that allow them to analyze complex information and provide clear and orderly solutions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)