忍者ブログ
Informative and Instructive Science News
[30]  [31]  [32]  [33]  [34]  [35]  [36]  [37
×

[PR]上記の広告は3ヶ月以上新規記事投稿のないブログに表示されています。新しい記事を書く事で広告が消えます。

Repair or Replace?

Filed under: Appliances, Energy efficiency, Recycling, reuse, reduction

As long as you've got electronics and appliances in your home, you're inevitably going to be faced with a choice: Something breaks. Now what?

According to a 2005 Consumer Reports survey, Americans are repairing 16 percent fewer products—including high-cost items like television sets and refrigerators—than in 1997. The number of appliance-repairs shops has declined roughly 37 percent in 15 years while the number of electronics-repair shops has plummeted by 64 percent. So-called "e-waste"--computer monitors, televisions and other electronic waste—is the fastest growing portion of the U.S. waste stream. In 2005, electronics accounted for 2.63 million tons of waste—only 12.5 percent of which was recycled.

If you're lucky enough to find a repair shop, it may seem that the best environmental option would be to hang on to old appliances and electronics for as long as possible. Along with the environmental impact of new-product production, there's another concern: Many electronics contain heavy metals (such as lead and mercury), flame retardants and other toxic chemicals that can wash into waterways and pollute groundwater if sent to a landfill. But older products can be a big drain of household energy. "You need to consider buying a new product—which must be manufactured—or fixing your existing product, which may not be up to the latest energy standards," says Greg Keoleian, Ph.D., co-director of the Center for Sustainable Systems at the University of Michigan.

From a price perspective, if the cost to repair a household appliance is more than half the price of a new product, advances in energy efficiency will generally make buying a newer model the cheaper choice. Based on these numbers and considering today's more environmentally friendly technologies, here's a guide to when you should repair or replace.

Washers

* Replace all top loaders.

When Keoleian and his colleagues compared the average lifecycle of a washing machine (14 years) with the amount of water and emissions that could be saved by a newer model, they determined that even replacing a 2005 machine could have water-saving benefits. The reason: Water- and energy-saving technology continues to evolve as companies push beyond standards. It's most important to replace top loaders with Energy Star-labeled new front loaders as soon as possible; although they're generally more expensive, these models circulate clothes in a shallower pool of water, using less water and heat, and saving money in the long run. (Getting rid of a pre-1994 washer, for example, can save a family $110 a year on utility bills.) For models, see our Washing Machine Product Report.

Clothes Dryer

* Repair if possible, but line dry clothing whenever you can.

As long as your dryer has a moisture sensor (nearly all models in operation today should), it functions at about the same efficiency as current models, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. A dryer's average life cycle is about 13 years, so if it's possible to fix it during this time, try that first. When it is time to buy a new dryer, look for one with the sensor in the drum, as opposed to in the exhaust vent; it will shut off a little sooner and save slightly more energy. However, since dryers consume large amounts of energy, line drying or hanging your clothes on a rack is a better option. For dryers and drying racks, see Virtuous Cycles.

Refrigerators

* Replace all models manufactured before 2001.

New refrigerators consume 75 percent less energy than those produced in the late 1970s, and are even more efficient than models just six years old, Keoleian's research has found. The newest federal standards went into effect in 2001—so if you need to make repairs on an older fridge, it's worth getting a new one instead. When replacing your refrigerator, opt for a top-freezer configuration rather than a side-by-side, and make sure it's Energy Star-certified. A new refrigerator should then last you about 14 years. And resist the urge to hold on to your old fridge or give it away, since inefficient old models can cost over $100 a year to run. Most communities have specific requirements for disposing of refrigerators and other large appliances; visit www.earth911.org for information in your area. For models, see our Refrigerator Product Report.

Dishwasher

* Replace non-Energy Star models.

Newer, more efficient dishwashers use less hot water, have energy-efficient motors and use sensors to determine the length of the wash cycle—making Energy Star models 25 percent more efficient than the minimum federal standards. This can mean a savings of $25 a year if you replace a pre-1994 machine. When shopping for a new dishwasher, choose one with a "light wash" or "energy saving" cycle—and expect to hang onto it for about 9 years, suggests the National Association of Home Builders. And remember that handwashing dishes is an inefficient alternative, generally wasting more water than dishwashers. For models, see our Dishwasher Product Report.

Air conditioners

* Replace window units older than 10 years and central-air systems older than 10, but consider alternative cooling methods.

Upgrading your window units to a more efficient model can cut energy bills by an average of $14 a year, estimates the Energy Star program. The most efficient room air conditioners have higher-efficiency compressors, fan motors and heat-transfer surfaces than previous models. Central ACs are rated according to their seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER)—for which most 1992 to 2005 models score about a 10; older ACs have ratings of only 6 or 7. New minimum standards set in 2006 require current central-air units to have a SEER of at least 13. Because of the coolants used, old room-AC units need to be disposed of in hazardous waste facilities; old central units are usually disposed of by the contractor hired to install the new unit, but always ask ahead of time to ensure proper disposal.

Before you buy, however, consider alternatives such as ceiling fans, evaporative coolers (if you live in a dry climate), whole-house fans and landscaping or decorating changes, all of which can keep your home comfortable for a fraction of the cost (see Keep Your Cool With Less AC). For models, see our Air Conditioner Product Report.

Water heaters

* Replace all electric heaters, and any gas heaters older than 10 years.

If you have an electric heating system, you can achieve a 50 percent energy savings used by switching to a high-efficiency gas model. Gas heating systems can last for about 25 years but will operate for years at very low efficiency before they finally fail [but do they operate at low efficiency because of something that can be repaired?] ; if yours is more than 10 years old, it probably operates at less than 50 percent efficiency and deserves to be replaced. Consider a "demand," or tankless, system, in which water is circulated through a large coil and heated only when needed. Although EnergyStar doesn't certify these models, the government estimates that they can save between 45 and 60 percent of water heating energy and up to $1,800 a year when compared to standard, minimum-efficiency heaters.

Computers

* Repair as long as you can.

"The manufacture of brand new computer models uses more than four times the energy and resources it would take to extend the life of an older machine for another few years, says Sheila Davis, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition—so it's best to always repair it yours if possible. Memory can be added to slow computers (1-gig will run about $100 and you can install it yourself). But it's important to consider the repair process, says Davis: Name brand computers often have proprietary parts and need to be shipped back to the manufacturer—or sometimes even overseas—to be fixed. "White box" computers, that is, generic models without name brand parts, can easily be upgraded at local computer stores, but warranties for them can be tricky. They come without software, and finding technical support may be difficult. White box models are available online or at large computer chains.

If you prefer a name-brand item, choose one with a strong takeback program that will guarantee your computer won't end up in a landfill. Dell takes back all branded products for free; others accept new models or charge a small fee. Visit www.computertakeback.com/docUploads/Using_takeback_programsv7a.pdf for a comparison of most popular brands. As far as desktops versus laptops, it's a toss-up: "Even though laptops are smaller, they often have just as many chemicals to dispose of," says Davis. If you still have a large cathode-ray tube (CRT) monitor, replace it with a flat-panel liquid crystal display: A 15-inch LCD screen uses about 18 watts of energy, as opposed to about 200 for CRT's. For models, see our Computers Product Report.

Smaller electronics

* Replace, but recycle.

It's probably not financially practical to repair electronics such as printers, televisions, and digital cameras, but it's best to keep them out of landfills. Before ditching them, always consult the instruction manual and consider contacting the manufacturer; sometimes they'll provide repairs for a small fee. When they do need to be disposed of, visit www.greenerchoices.org for recycling options that won't put toxic chemicals back into the environment. Cell phones, for example, are often reprogrammed and donated to women facing domestic violence (as a 911 lifeline), and chains such as Best Buy and Staples often sponsor collection drives for other broken electronics (see also www.eco-cell.org). Apple will take back iPods (as well as cellphones), offering a 10 percent discount towards your next purchase. 

Resources

To recycling appliances, check with your local sanitation department or visit www.Earth911.org.

Repair Clinic: www.repairclinic.com

Point and Click Appliance Repair: www.pcappliancerepair.com 

PR

Incan Kids Fattened Before Sacrifice

Incan children as young as 6 were “fattened up” prior to their sacrificial deaths, a new study shows.

Researchers made the startling discovery by sampling the hair of frozen child mummies found high in the Andes mountains, near the summit of Mount Llullaillaco—a 22,100-foot (6,739-meter) active volcano on the border of Argentina and Chile.

"By examining hair samples from these unfortunate children, a chilling story has started to emerge of how the children were 'fattened up' for sacrifice," says Andrew Wilson, an archaeologist at the University of Bradford in the U.K.

Wilson and his colleagues analyzed hair samples from four child mummies, including a 15-year-old girl known as the "Llullaillaco Maiden" and 7-year-old known as the "Llullaillaco Boy."

Based on measuring natural radioactive isotopes in the hair samples, the archaeologists found that the kids were normally fed diets of "common" vegetables such as potatoes, suggesting that they came from a peasant background. A year before their intentional demise, however, the isotopes showed that their diets were enriched with "elite" food like maize and dried llama meat.

"Given the surprising change in their diets, and the symbolic cutting of their hair, it appears that various events were staged in which the status of the children was raised," Wilson said. "In effect, their countdown to sacrifice had begun some considerable time prior to death."

How the children perished remains a mystery, but Wilson and his team think they were led into the mountains about three to four months before dying. During this time, the researchers found maize beer and coca leaf molecules in the mummies' hair samples. 

"It looks to us as though the children were led up to the summit shrine in the culmination of a year-long rite, drugged and then left to succumb to exposure," said Timothy Taylor, also an archaeologist at the University of Bradford. He noted that while the deaths may seem grim, they occurred more than 500 years ago when Incan rulers controlled small mountain communities.

The Llullaillaco Boy, however, probably met the most terrifying end: His clothes were covered in diarrhea and vomit, in which archeologists found traces of a hallucinogenic drug called achiote. But he probably didn't perish from the drug—he was bound in a cloth wrapping drawn so tight that his ribs were crushed and his pelvis dislocated, indicating he may have suffocated to death. 

Don't Forget: Drink a Beer—Or Two—Daily!

Study in rats suggests long-term, moderate consumption of alcohol improves recall of both visual and emotional stimuli 


Science Image: two beers being toasted
 
CHEERS TO REMEMBERING!: 
A new study in rats shows that moderate alcohol consumption (no more than two or three beers a day, folks) can improve memory. 
You may be hard-pressed to recall events after a night of binge drinking, but a new report suggests that low to moderate alcohol consumption may actually enhance memory.

"There are human epidemiological data of others indicating that mild [to] moderate drinking may paradoxically improve cognition in people compared to abstention," says Maggie Kalev, a research fellow in molecular medicine and pathology at the University of Auckland in New Zealand and a co-author of an article in The Journal of Neuroscience describing results of a study she and other researchers performed on rats. "This is similar to a glass of wine protecting against heart disease, however the mechanism is different."  Kalev and Matthew During, a professor of molecular virology, immunology and medical genetics at  he Ohio State University College of Medicine and a principal investigator of gene therapy at Auckland, initially set out to study the role of N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptors in the neuronal processes of normal and diseased animals. (NMDA receptors are critical to memory, because they regulate the strength of synapses (spaces) between nerve cells through which the cells communicate.) But during their research, they discovered that memory was enhanced when one of its subunits, known as NR1, was strengthened in the hippocampus (a central brain region implicated in episodic memory). They then reviewed previous experiments, which had turned up a link between alcohol consumption and NR1 activity.

"We decided to study if beneficial effects of low-dose alcohol drinking already shown by others," Kalev says, "could be mediated through the mechanism of increasing NR1 expression. We thought it was worth pursuing, since ethanol drinking is such a common pattern of human behavior."

The researchers created two strains of transgenic rats, one that had an abundance of NR1 subunits in their hippocampi and one in which it was suppressed. A group of normal rats and those with the suppressed NR1 action were fed a diet consisting of 0, 2.5 or 5 percent ethanol.

According to Kalev, it is hard to relate the alcohol the rats consumed to human quantities, but "based on their blood alcohol levels, the 2.5 percent ethanol diet was equivalent to a level of consumption that does not exceed [the] legal driving limit. This may be approximately one to two drinks per day for some people or two to three for others, depending upon their size, metabolism or genetic background."

The rats stayed on these diets for eight weeks; behavioral testing to assess cognitive function began after four weeks. One test involved novel object recognition, where rats were placed in a cage with two small objects inside multiple times over a two-day period. Then, one object was swapped for a new toy and rats were scored based on how quickly they explored the unfamiliar piece. In a second paradigm, rats were trained to expect a shock when they crossed from a white compartment to a black one inside a cage; a day after training, the rats were put back in the cage to see if they remembered that the black side was dangerous.

Among the normal rats, the animals that consumed moderate amounts of alcohol fared better on both tests compared with the teetotalers. Rats on a heavy alcohol diet did not do well on object recognition (and, in fact, showed signs of neurotoxicity), but they performed better than their normal brethren on the emotional memory task.

"People often drink to 'drown sorrows,'" Kalev says. "Our results suggest that this could actually paradoxically promote traumatic memories and lead to further drinking, contributing to the development of alcoholism." 

Overstimulating the NR1 subunits of the NMDA receptor showed effects similar to those from moderate drinking, whereas suppressing the NR1 subunits canceled out the effect of low, but steady consumption. These findings indicate that the NMDA receptor must be intact for the positive effects of alcohol to manifest, Kalev says. They speculate that the NMDA receptor is initially blocked by alcohol, causing the activity of the NR1 subunit to elevate as a compensatory response (thereby conferring heightened cognition).

Meir Stampfer, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, says that the new work provides a stronger biological basis for studies that he and others have undertaken linking improved memory to moderate alcohol intake. "[This study] provides interesting evidence for a mechanism that may be operating at the NMDA receptor," he says, but quickly cautions: "It's better not to drink at all than to drink too much," as is also demonstrated by this study. 

Calendar
12 2025/01 02
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Timepiece
タグホイヤー フォーミュラー1 ドリームキャンペーン
Blog Plus
SEO / RSS
Podcast
by PODCAST-BP
New TB
Bar Code
Data Retrieval
Oldest Articles
(09/30)
(09/30)
(09/30)
(09/30)
(09/30)
Photo Index
Reference
Latina




RSS Reader
無料RSSブログパーツ
Misc.
◆BBS


◆Chat


◆Micro TV


Maps



顔文字教室




Copyright © Info All Rights Reserved.
Powered by NinjaBlog
Graphics by 写真素材Kun * Material by Gingham * Template by Kaie
忍者ブログ [PR]