text:
Design for the Environment/Dry Cleaning Detergent

Dry cleaning is a process required for cleaning items of clothing, which would otherwise be damaged by water and soap or detergent. The most widely used solvent in dry cleaning is Perchloroethylene (Perc). Although Perc is an extremely aggressive cleaner, it poses a significant risk to the environment as well as human safety. These issues have triggered a response by local government authorities as well as environmental agencies to push for alternative methods of dry cleaning. The two alternatives considered are wet cleaning and GreenEarth® (liquid silicone) cleaning. Although the method for each process may be different, the common function that all alternatives are trying to achieve is an environmentally friendly method to clean ‘dry-clean only’ clothes effectively without damaging the material. The purpose of this article is to study the two alternatives as well as the baseline alternative and analyze their effects in terms of technical performance, economic feasibility, societal merit and environmental impact. Based on the results of these analyses, the ultimate goal is to determine the best possible solution to dry clean clothes effectively without having a negative impact on the environment.

Project Information
Mission: Clean Green [A Comprehensive Report on Alternative Dry Cleaning Methods]

Section 2 - Group 23B
 * Madhur Bapat (Madhur)
 * Alston Castelino (Alston.castelino)
 * Stephen Silva (Steve.silva)
 * Stephen Silva (Steve.silva)

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
Perchloroethylene, or tetrachloroethylene as it is commonly known, was first synthesized in 1821 by Michael Faraday. Perc is synthesized via oxychlorination. 1,2-dichloroethane is heated up with chlorine to produce Perc and hydrogen chloride. . It is used by 90% of the industry, which makes it the most widely used solvent in dry cleaning.

Wet Cleaning
Modern wet cleaning was initially developed by Miele in the early 1990s to provide an environmentally friendly alternative to solvent based systems. They have been successful in implementing the system in over 1,500 locations worldwide. Wet cleaning relies on water, conditioners, degreasers and detergents for cleaning the garments and ensuring that the stains are removed.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
GreenEarth® (silicone based) cleaning is a relatively new technology using liquid silicone (decamethylpentacyclosiloxane or D5) as the cleaning solvent rather than Perc. GreenEarth® Cleaning has partnered with General Electric and Procter & Gamble (P&G) to patent a cleaning process using a D5 solvent and created a new detergent J101 which is reported to be environmentally safe and whose exact composition is confidential.

Functional Analysis
Based on the functional analysis conducted, Perc is considered to be an excellent cleaner since it is extremely aggressive and is able to get rid of the toughest stains. However its strength in its aggressiveness is also its weakness since it can easily damage delicate clothing. Wet cleaning is a process that focuses more on preserving the quality on the clothes; however it lacks the cleaning power that Perc cleaning provides. GreenEarth® cleaning is the most efficient method since it performs as well as Perc cleaning in almost every facet and still has the ability to manage more fragile pieces of clothing.

Cost Analysis
Capital Cost

The majority of capital costs are influenced by machine costs. Perchloroethylene has the most expensive machine costs at approximately $60,000 followed by GreenEarth® cleaning at $58,424. However, the cheapest machine costs were associated with wet cleaning at 46,067. Note that all values are given in 2008 dollars. Perc machines are expensive because they employ control systems to reduce the negative impact on the environment. Opportunity costs are also associated with Perc cleaning machines, which deters potential buyers from purchasing these machines. The paragraph above is nonsense. I just priced (Oct 2010) an 18kg (40lb) BOWE P18 perc and M18 Multisolvent (GreenEarth, Hydrocarbon etc) for a customer. The difference was less than 10% and the Multisolvent machine is the more expensive. And remember that with Wet cleaning you only load to half capacity so you'd need two 18kg machines although the cycle times are shorter as you don't dry in the wet cleaning machine. Dry cleaning is a dry-to-dry process.

Operating Cost

Labour costs are the major contributor for this sector since spotting and finishing employs manual labour to accomplish these tasks. Compliance costs associated with GreenEarth® and Perc cleaning add to the overall costs since government rules and regulations ensure that all establishments are operating on par with the industry standards. Wet cleaning does not require filters and because of this maintenance costs are eliminated.

Disposal Cost

In GreenEarth® and Perc cleaning, wastes from solvents and filters are treated as toxic wastes and must be disposed of using techniques specific to hazardous wastes. Wet cleaning has a huge advantage in this sector since the waste solvents are not toxic due to the use of non-toxic, biodegradable detergents and can easily be drained into the sewage systems.

Cost Summary

Based on the analysis conducted, all three processes are labour intensive and a majority of the costs are dedicated towards that sector. However, GreenEarth® and Perc cleaning have additional costs in the maintenance and disposal sectors due to the filters used and the toxic wastes released. Wet cleaning is a superior method compared to the other two alternatives since the costs are reduced significantly due to its environmentally friendly process.

Streamlined Life Cycle Analysis (SLCA)
The results from the SLCA indicate that wet cleaning had the least environmental impact with a score of 76 out of 100. GreenEarth® cleaning had a matrix score of 58 whereas perc cleaning was the most environmentally unfriendly alternative with a score of 50. In the resource provisioning stage, perc and GreenEarth® cleaning received low scores because the manufacturing of the solvents take place at very high temperatures, thus making them energy intensive processes. Wet cleaning on the other hand uses only water and detergent and the only process that requires energy is the pumping of water.

In the process implementation stage, the three alternatives received similar scores. This is because virgin materials such as steel and plastics are used in the manufacturing of the equipment. In the primary process operation phase wet and GreenEarth® cleaning scored higher than perc cleaning because perc is a toxic substance and the liquid waste formed during operation cannot be disposed of by regular means. The other two alternatives use non-toxic solvents and can be released into the drains.

The three alternatives received scores in the same range during the complementary process operation phase because all of them involved the use of large steam ironing pressers. In the disposal stage perc cleaning received an extremely low score since water separators are needed to filter perc from the waste water. All alternatives involve the use of an electric arc furnace to recycle steel as well as using landfills to store plastics, electronic components and filters.

Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Analysis (EIOLCA)
Referring to the graphs in the EIOLCA section, the economic activity is very similar for all three alternatives. However, it is significantly higher in complementary process stage. This is due to the substantial amount of labour required. When comparing the energy use, perc cleaning and GreenEarth® cleaning have similar results due to the same types of machine being used. However in the complementary process phase, a lot more energy is needed for perc due to the finish of the clothing. On the other hand, it requires less energy in the primary process phase since it is more aggressive than D5 and is able to treat and spot the clothes more effectively. Again pure nonsense above. GreenEarth requires twice the energy to dry vs Perc. The author clearly has an axe to grind and does not allow the facts to intervene!

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) is highest for GreenEarth® cleaning in the resource provisioning stage since the process of manufacturing D5 involves the use of furnaces, grinders and distillation tanks. In the disposal stage, perc cleaning has the highest GWP since it is a toxic solvent and has to be disposed using controlled methods. When the solvent is disposed of incorrectly toxins are released into the environment. While comparing the total toxins release, perc is the highest in almost every phase except for the primary process phase. Wet cleaning however, has the lowest toxin releases in every stage, since it uses organic materials and the solvent does not have to be manufactured in a lab.

Societal Analysis
Based on the detailed societal analysis, Perc has the greatest negative impact on society because it can cause a variety of health problems and it also increases the probability of cancer in humans. Wearing masks should be made mandatory for workers in the dry cleaning industry. Preventative steps should also be taken to ensure that no waste water contaminates the drinking water. Wet cleaning has the most positive impact on society since the public is attempting to make the transition to a more environmentally friendly culture. GreenEarth® cleaning is an odourless liquid and does not leave a distinct smell in the dry-cleaning facility. Since it is a non-toxic solvent, it causes no harm to humans when used in a variety of applications.

Recommendations
The table shown below summarizes the results of the analysis through a matrix, which ranks each alternative in terms of technical performance, costs, EIOLOCA and SLCA. The alternatives are ranked using a number from 1 to 3 with 1 being the lowest score and 3 being the highest score. The overall score for each alternative is obtained and are compared with each other. The matrix illustrates that Perc cleaning was the most effective in terms of technical performance due to its unique ability to remove stains from all types of fabric. However, in the other categories, wet cleaning always scored the highest. This is because wet cleaning uses non-toxic, biodegradable detergents that have a minimal impact on the environment. The costs associated with this alternative are also nominal since filter changes, maintenance costs and disposal costs are virtually eliminated. GreenEarth cleaning was the most dependable alternative since it accomplished each function at a consistent rate.

After evaluating the results of the analysis, the recommendation is that new laws should be put in place in order to drive dry cleaning establishments using Perc cleaning to make the switch to wet cleaning. While the initial costs of converting the system might be high, the benefits in the long run will outweigh them.

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
Perc cleaning is the most commonly used dry cleaning method in North America. It is an aggressive cleaner that cleans clothes effectively better than all known alternatives. However, Perc has its disadvantages since its aggressiveness can easily damage delicate clothes. It is also toxic and it has adverse health and environmental impacts, which will be discussed in detail in the subsequent sections.

Wet Cleaning
Wet cleaning is a highly efficient method of cleaning and has little impact on the environment as it uses a minimal amount of mild non-toxic and biodegradable detergents. Wet cleaning uses large, specialized machines to gently wash and dry clothes. These machines are computer controlled, allowing the operator to program and adjust tumbler speeds, water/detergent levels and drying times. The intended function of this alternative is preserved as clothes are not damaged during the process. However, there exists a misconception that clothes shrink due to the use of water. This is false as there are several reasons for clothes shrinking. Most items labelled ‘dry clean only’ are commonly mislabelled and can easily be dry cleaned.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
In 2002 GreenEarth® Cleaning contacted the International Fabricare Institute (IFI) to evaluate and compare their new solvent. The conclusion from the testing done found that the GreenEarth® solvent and PERC are very similar in terms of cleaning performance, and the GreenEarth® solvent-detergent combination is an effective cleaning agent scoring well in the IFI Cleaning Performance Test (CPT), only scoring low in percent salt removal. In terms of stain removal the GreenEarth® process is as effective as Perc except for ballpoint ink and shoe polish stains. Clothes are tagged ‘dry-clean only’ when the use of water, wash cycle, and high temperature drying are damaging to the garment. The IFI study found that the ‘dry-clean only’ garments experienced less damage during the GreenEarth® process. The GreenEarth® system can also handle a wider variety of speciality items without damage such as beads, sequins, and metallic objects. The cleaning process itself is very similar to Perc where the only major difference is in the machine type. GreenEarth® uses Class IIIA machines and PERC uses Class IV machines.

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
Capital Cost

Perc cleaning can be hazardous for the environment; therefore control systems are needed, such as proper ventilation, Perc filters and a carbon absorber. As a result of these control systems, the capital cost has increased in recent years. Taking the average of six different machines the cost is $47,475 priced in 1997. For the cost analysis to be consistent the capital cost must be in terms of cost per year. The machine has an expected life of 15 years and a 4.75% or 6.375% cost of capital in 1997 and 2008 respectively. The cost was annualized to be 6,606.30 using 4.75% and 4,272.75 using 6.375%. In some states there is a grant given to drycleaner who switch to non-Perc machines; for example New York gives up to $4000. For this cost analysis the maximum possible cost is to be determined, so an opportunity cost of $4000 must be included. It should be noted that costs associated with rent/owning property have been excluded in capital cost calculations as all alternatives will have the same cost.

Operating Cost

Prior to 2001, an average of 116 gallons of Perc was used per month; however in 2001 new equipment was developed and implemented. The new machines are computer programmed; therefore Perc losses and exposure to humans are reduced. Perc usage went down by 82% enabling only 20.88 gallons to be used per month. With the average cost of Perc at $6.83 per gallon, the average yearly cost of Perc is $1711.33. Perc cannot be used as the lone cleaning agent and is used in combination with detergent, which costs $26 per gallon. The detergent to be used should be approximately 46% of the Perc being used, i.e. for 100 gallons on Perc; 46 gallons of detergent are needed. The annual cost for the detergent would be approximately $3000. Before the clothes can be put into the machine, spotting must be performed on each garment. This procedure requires labour and taking an average from 8 case studies this cost is $21,411. Similarly after the clothes are taken out of the machine, pressing/ironing is needed; this process will also need labour, and an average is $74,492. Both the spotting, and ironing costs assume the employees are paid $10 per hour. Gas and electricity are utilities required to run the establishment. Upon taking an average the annual cost of electricity is determined to be $11,445.00 and $12,220.00 annually for gas. This electricity cost includes the energy used by the machine. One such dry cleaning machine draws roughly 2.6 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity. Assuming 6 loads are completed per day, each load takes ½ hour, and the cost per kWh is $0.058 , therefore the electricity cost contributed solely by the machine is $141.151. As mentioned above when Perc is being used, control systems are needed. Perc filters cost $606 annually, and various cleaning chemicals for the machine cost $1,307 annually. Assuming the maintenance cost to be 3% of the total revenue the maintenance cost is $10, 0002. Dry cleaning establishments face many government regulations and regular inspections resulting in a cost associated with keeping everything up to code. This cost will vary depending on the amount of Perc being used at the establishment and the jurisdiction in which the establishment is located. Based on an EPA report from 2006 this cost can be estimated to be 1.9% of the total revenue and this comes up to $6333.57 ($2006).

Disposal Cost

Unlike regular laundry, the waste produced from Perc cleaning is considered toxic. As mentioned 20.88 gallons of Perc are used monthly, this results in 72 gallons of toxic waste which needs to be disposed of. The filters must also be disposed and this would cost $300 monthly or $3600 annually.

Cost Summary

From the cost analysis it can be seen that Perc cleaning is labour intensive since it accounts for roughly 58% of the annual costs. Though Perc cleaning produces toxic waste, the disposal only amounts to 2% of the annual cost, the capital costs make up 7% and the remainder of the costs are other operating costs. Out of the other operating costs, energy costs (both gas and electricity) amount to 57%. Maintenance is another major component, amounting to 20% of the other operating costs.

Sensitivity Analysis

To conduct the sensitivity analysis, three sets of parameters were changed. Costs were varied in order to view the most prominent factors in determining the total cost. Wages are assumed to be $10 per hour for the cost analysis. This value is quite higher than the allotted minimum wage in the United States. Bringing the wages down to the federal minimum wage ($5.85) results in a significant drop in labour and spotting costs. Prices of detergent varied from $38 to $13 while studying several case studies. If the cheapest available detergent is used, a small decrease of 2% in overall cost is noticed. Conducting another test using a 10% decrease in detergent does not yield any significant results. Other variables such as interest rate on capital costs do not yield any significant results either.

Wet Cleaning
Capital Cost

Capital costs include the cost of buying machinery and associated equipment such as tensioning machines. The capital costs of equipment were annualized by amortizing the costs over a 15 year period under the assumption that all equipment will have the same useful life. An interest rate of 4.750% from the US federal register was used in this analysis. A 50 lb machine with tensioning equipment cost $42500 in 2005 and $46067 in 2008.

Operating Cost

Operating costs include the use of detergent, labour costs for spotting and finishing jobs, electricity and gas. An assumed labour cost of $10 per hour is used in the study. Detergent costs amount to $22 per month for around 58,000 lb of clothes per year. This translates to around $0.005 per lb clothes spent on detergent. The largest costs are due to spotting and finishing labour. Wet cleaning machines do not require filters and therefore costs directly resulting from filter changes and maintenance are eliminated.

Disposal Cost

Wet cleaning has a great advantage when it comes to disposal costs. Due to the use of non-toxic biodegradable detergent, waste water can simply be drained into sewage systems. No special handling is required for chemicals and therefore these costs are minimized.

Cost Summary

Cost data was collected from sources dated 2005, therefore to conduct sensitivity analysis all costs were brought to 2008 dollars. The following table summarizes all costs as they appear. As noted, these costs are extremely lower than costs resulting from other dry cleaning methods, trumping initial assumptions and dry cleaners who believed wet cleaning to be an expensive procedure.

Sensitivity Analysis

To conduct the sensitivity analysis, three sets of parameters were changed. Costs were varied in order to view the most prominent factors in determining the total cost. Wages are assumed to be $10 per hour for the cost analysis. This value is quite higher than the allotted minimum wage in the United States. Bringing the wages down to the federal minimum wage ($5.85) results in a significant drop in labour and spotting costs.

Prices of detergent varied from $38 to $13 while studying several case studies. If the cheapest available detergent is used, a small decrease of 2% in overall cost is noticed. Conducting another test using a 10% decrease in detergent does not yield any significant results. Other variables such as interest rate on capital costs do not yield any significant results either.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
Capital Cost

Green Earth cleaning is a relatively new technology and machine costs have remained consistent, which in this analysis is a 75 lbs GreenEarth® certified dry-to-dry machine priced at $53,900 in 2005. The adjusted price is $44,295 in 1997 and $58,424 in 2008. The machine has an expected life of 15 years and a 4.75% or 6.375% cost of capital in 1997 and 2008 respectively.

Operating Cost

The cost categories included in the operating cost analysis are the following; solvent cost, detergent cost, GreenEarth® affiliation cost, electricity cost, natural gas cost, spotting labour cost, finishing labour cost, maintenance cost, and compliance cost. These costs are included in the analysis for importance in operation, ability to highlight major differences, and availability of information. The cost analysis assumes 312 workdays per year and industry standard assumptions based on average values of case studies are summarized in Operating Costs Table.

Disposal Cost

The waste solvent and filters must be disposed of using hazardous waste disposal methods. Industry standard waste disposal for GreenEarth® cleaning is $1400 in 2005.

Cost Summary

The analysis showed that the GreenEarth® dry-cleaning process is labour intensive and amounts to 68% of the total annual cost. Total annual costs are summarized in Cost Summary Data Table.

Sensitivity Analysis

The cost analysis shows that dry-cleaning operating costs are dominated by labour cost; both spot treating and finishing. Therefore varying the hourly cost of labour is necessary to realize its full effect on the final annual cost. When the labour cost is varied from U.S. minimum wage ($5.85 per hour) to $15 per hour the results show that an increase in every dollar per hour increases the final annual cost by $7,670, corresponding to a 6.75% increase.

Different dry-cleaners use different amounts of detergent, based on their personal experiences, for optimal cleaning. The results show that an increase in every gallon of detergent contributes to an increase of $59.62 to the annual cost, which represents a growth of 0.053%.

The cost of retro-fitting a PERC machine to use GreenEarth® technology varies. It is not always practical and difficult to implement depending on the machine. However the cost can be much less than purchasing new equipment. Assuming a cost of retro-fitting to be $15,000 in 1997, the results show that decreases the annual cost by $4742.96, which is a 4.17% reduction. 2011 BOWE Price for P to M conversion is around 6000 euro.

The sensitivity analysis shows that the final annual cost is most affected by labour and capital costs.

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
The consumables of Perc cleaning are Perc, spotting chemicals, and detergent. Perc is synthesized in a lab by the oxychlorination of the feedstock ethylene dichloride. When this is done trichloroethylene and small amounts of hydrogen chloride (HCl) are also produced. This process takes place at over 420 degrees which makes this an energy intensive process. Ethylene dichloride is widely available and does not require high amounts of energy. There are no solid residues; however there are HCl gas residues, which are controlled.

Process Implementation

Laundry machines require large amounts of stainless steel; hence some virgin material is used. There is also an electronic control panel made of plastics. Installation of the machine is not energy intensive. Dry cleaning machines are usually large and complex in nature, therefore a large amount of energy is used in manufacturing the machine, and no conservation is practiced. Packaging the machines ultimately produces solid waste, this includes cardboard boxes and packaging materials, these packaging materials are completely recyclable. There should be little liquid residue when installing the machine. Machines are heavy and need transport via trucks, emissions from the trucks release CO and other gases into the air.

Primary Process Operation

Perc is a toxic solvent which is probably carcinogenic to humans and is carcinogenic to animals; this is definitely not the best material choice. A typical dry cleaning machine has a rating of 2.6 kWh, which is higher than a conventional electric oven which is considered to have a fairly high rating of 2 kWh,. The rate at which the machine draws current is not favourable, however we assume it is only on for 1.5 hours daily on weekdays therefore it is satisfactory. During the primary process “solid muck” is produced most of which is not toxic, and the part which is toxic is removing during “cooking”. When dry cleaning with Perc the liquid waste is considered toxic, this cannot be poured down the sink or drain. A check for leaks must be done daily. Gaseous Perc causes dioxins to form in the atmosphere. Complementary Process Operation

The secondary operation used is ironing which requires an iron, energy and water to operate. Water and natural gas are the only consumables, the use of water is minimized, natural gas is used in the pressing machines and its use is not minimized. Natural gas should be minimized as it is a non renewable energy source. Energy to operate the iron is needed, the wattage of a typical iron is 1100 W, and dry cleaners use large pressers which will require more energy and gas. This iron will be used for a significant portion of the day; therefore a lot of energy is used. A small amount of solid residue is produced. Water is a residual of ironing, it may be spilled when filling the iron. When ironing steam, CO2 and Mono-Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) are released, this is because the presser requires natural gas to boil the water, steam is released after pressing, CO2 and Mono-Nitrogen Oxides are also released from the exhaust.

Refurbishment, Recycling, Disposal

Components are easy to separate, major components can be recycled, filters and electrical components could be recycled or refurbished but are usually not. There is a large variety in the materials used. To recycle steel, an electric arc furnace (EAF) must be used. EAFs are very energy intensive and produce non-toxic solid muck. Toxic Perc is removed during “cooking”. Electronic components from machinery end up in landfills although they could be recycled. Other hazardous solid wastes include Perc sludge, filters, and filter coatings. The waste water is carefully controlled; water separators are used to remove a large portion of Perc from the waste water. This allows dry cleaners to comply with government regulations regarding PPM Perc in water. To transport this waste to another facility, a closed direct-coupled delivery system is needed. If the drycleaners want they can dilute the waste water until the concentration of Perc is less than 0.7 PPM, then the solution may be evaporated into the environment. If the dilution is not done correctly too much Perc goes into the environment, which has adverse health effects on people and animals,.

Wet Cleaning

Resource Provisioning

Water and detergent are abundant materials and no other virgin materials are used. Spotting chemicals are bought in a negligible volume but are toxic and therefore a lower score is given. Pumping of water to dry cleaners requires energy. Detergent and chemicals also need to be shipped. No solid or residues are created in production and transport of materials. Transportation of detergents via trucks and ships creates green house gas emissions.

Process Implementation

Laundry machines and tensioning equipment require the use of high quality stainless steel; hence virgin material is used. The use of plastics, high efficiency motors and electronic components that are hard and expensive to recycle lowers the score. Production of complex laundry equipment uses a lot of energy. Machines are usually very large, and transportation/installation uses considerable amount of energy. Machines are packaged in large cardboard boxes, which are recycled. Minor liquid residue is produced during the production process. Transport of heavy equipment releases toxins and green house gases into the atmosphere.

Primary Process Operation

Biodegradable and non-toxic detergents and water are the only components used. Some toxic spotting chemicals are used. Highly efficient computer controlled machinery are used to keep track of every aspect of the process. Energy usage can be controlled using the system. Negligible amount of cloth fibres are released during the process. Detergent dissolves into water during the wash cycle. Soapy water is discharged at the end of each cycle. The use of non-toxic soaps allows draining the water into the sewage system. No gaseous residue during primary process. Hot air and steam are release during drying process.

Complementary Process Operation

Complementary process involves air drying, which require minimal energy and some residual water. Ironing is also required. This uses a lot of energy hence lowering the score. Refurbishment, Recycling, Disposal Stainless steel metal parts are easily recycled. High density plastic sections are harder to recycle and end up in landfills. Other electronic components and motors end up in landfills. Water used is sent to sewage treatment plants and is deposited back into the environment. Steel loses some of its inherent physical properties during the recycling process, and has drastically reduced energy and material requirements than refinement from iron ore. Therefore, recycled steel is not used in production of high quality machines. Plastic sections will end up in landfills as sorting and recycling of materials isn’t economically viable. Recycling of aluminium results in 15% of material lost as dross. Minimal liquid residue occurs during recycling, also, recycling of steel results in EAF emissions that are harmful to the environment.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
Resource Provisioning

The consumable materials in the process are the GreenEarth® (D5) solvent, spotting chemicals and the detergent. The manufacture of the solvent requires silica (SiO2), methanol (CH3OH), and hydrochloric acid (HCl). Silica is naturally available in sand deposits and is primarily gathered though surface quarrying, methanol is produced in large plants from natural gas, and hydrochloric acid is produced and extracted in the manufacturing process and recycled back in. The D5 manufacturing process involves five energy intensive steps. These steps include a melting phase where the silica is placed in a furnace, a grinding phase, which results in silicon metal powder, a fluid bed reactor, and two industrial distillation stages. Solid and liquid residues from this stage are used for secondary products, such as construction sands from the silica mining and other silanes from the D5 manufacturing process. The gaseous outputs from manufacturing D5 are primarily in the form of flue gas from the furnace. Flue gas is a mixture of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, water vapour, oxygen and small amounts of Mono-Nitrogen Oxides (NOX), Sulfur Oxides (SOX), and Carbon monoxide. Process Implementation

Recycled steel, aluminium and high-grade plastics can be used in the equipment manufacture; however there is a certain amount of virgin plastics and steels also in use. Equipment manufacturing is an energy intensive process; installation however is a low energy process. Solid residues are primarily from the cardboard boxes, crates and packaging foam during transport; which is all almost completely recyclable and reusable. Equipment manufactures are located all around the world (China, Europe, America) therefore cargo ships and transport trucks are the primary source of Greenhouse gas (GHG).

Primary Process Operation

D5, spotting chemicals, and detergent are the consumable material during process operation and are non-toxic and made from materials that are not scarce. The dry-cleaning process is energy intensive, and little or no conversation is practiced. Liquid residues are produced during the primary process such as used solvent.

Complementary Process Operation

Water and natural gas are the primarily consumables during the complementary process, with includes pressing and steaming. The complementary process requires large amounts of energy and time. The energy required to operate a typical press is 1100W. Gaseous residues such as CO2 and Mono-Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) are released from the boiler unit used to heat up water for the stream iron.

Refurbishment, Recycling, Disposal

Major components of the machinery can be recycled (steels and aluminium), however the filters, plastics and electronic components are not recycled or refurbished. Plastic are not recycled due its high energy intensive recycling process and degradable reuse. Aluminium recycling requires 5% of the energy and produces 5% of the CO2 of primary aluminium production from virgin materials. One tonne of recycled steel requires 75% of the energy and reduces solid residues by 1.28 tonnes, gaseous residues by 86% and liquid residues by 76% compared to steel production from iron ores. Disposal of D5 uses minimal energy; because it is not classified as a volatile organic compound, hazardous air pollutant, and is safe for the environment and humans. D5 is a biodegradable compound and will readily decompose in air, water and soil; therefore none of its components will end up in a landfill. D5 will break down into silica, water and carbon dioxide. The filters, plastic and electronic components will end up in a landfill.

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
Detergent and Solvent Production

Solvent manufacture is represented by the other inorganic chemical sector. The total economic activity of the stage is the producer cost of the soap and detergent. Detergent manufacture is represented by the soap and other detergent manufacturing sector. The final demand for the sectors was calculated to be $1,364 and $2,390 respectively.

Equipment Implementation

The Process Implementation stage is represented by the commercial laundry and dry-cleaning machinery sector. The total producer price for this sector was calculated to be $43,436.

Primary Process

The primary dry cleaning process is represented in the EIOLCA model by the dry cleaning and laundry services sector. The final demand for the sector was derived to be $24,811. This cost was determined by adding half the electricity cost, the cost of spotting and the cost of filters.

Complementary Process

These processes are also represented by apparel pressing services and other services in the dry cleaning and laundry services sector. The cost for this sector are represented by $80,267, which is the cost of half the electricity, plus half the gas cost and the finishing labour cost. Recycling and Disposal

The waste management and remediation sector was used to discuss the recycling and disposal of machines at the end of life. The disposal cost was taken to be the total disposal plus 10% of the machine cost to account for recycling this was calculated to be 8,650.

Wet Cleaning
Detergent Production

Detergent manufacture is represented by the soap and other detergent manufacturing sector. This sector is primarily responsible for the manufacturing and packaging of soaps and detergents. The final demand for this sector is calculated from the average detergent purchase price of $1,072 in 1007 dollars.

Equipment Implementation

The Process Implementation stage is represented by the commercial laundry and dry-cleaning machinery sector. Cost of purchase of machines is represented by the annualized cost of capital. In 1997 dollars an average cost of $2,048 was used as the producer price. Machines cost in the range of $23,000 to $67,000 ranging in size from to small 40 pound machines and larger 65 pound machines. Dry Cleaning Process

The primary dry cleaning process is represented in the EIOLCA model by the dry cleaning and laundry services sector. The final demand for the sector was derived to be $7,617 in 1997 dollars and mostly involved labour required for spotting of stains on clothes before wet cleaning. Pressing, Tensioning and other Complementary Processes Secondary processes involve finishing touches to garments such as tensioning, pressing and steaming. These processes are also represented by apparel pressing services and other services in the dry cleaning and laundry services sector. The largest costs came from this sector and its high labour requirement, amounting to $26,012 in 1997 dollars.

Recycling and Disposal

The waste management and remediation sector was used to discuss the recycling and disposal of machines at the end of life. The cost of recycling was assumed to be 10% of the cost of equipment used.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
Detergent and Solvent Production

Resource provisioning for the GreenEarth process is represented by the ‘Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing’ and ‘Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing’ sectors. The total economic activity of the stage is the producer cost of the soap and detergent. The economic activity was calculated for one year with a pre-tax margin of both the detergent and solvent manufacturing of 19.5%. The final activity was found to be $4728 and $1220 per year for the detergent and solvent respectively. Process Implementation

Process implementation is represented by the ‘Automatic Vending, Commercial Laundry and Dry-cleaning Machinery’ sector. The total economic activity of the stage is the producer cost of the dry-cleaning manufacturer for one machine. The economic activity was calculated for one year with a pre-tax margin of 9.3%. The final activity was found to be $40526 for one machine.

Primary Process

The primary process operation is represented by the ‘Dry-cleaning and Laundry Services’ sector. The total economic activity of the stage is the filter cost, half the electricity cost and the spotting labour cost for one year. The final activity was found to be $28594.62 per year.

Complementary Process The complementary process operation is also represented by the ‘Dry-cleaning and Laundry Services’ sector. The total economic activity of the stage is half the electricity cost, gas cost and the finishing labour cost for one year. The final activity was found to be $41376.8 per year.

Recycling and Disposal

Refurbishment, recycling and disposal is represented by the ‘Waste Management and Remediation Services’ sector. The total economic activity of this stage is comprised of the waste disposal cost and 10% of the total equipment cost; 10% of the total equipment cost is assumed to be the machine disposal cost. The final activity was found to be $5580.5 per year.

Perchloroethylene Cleaning
Environmental and economic impacts are not the only parameters to be considered in the process design. Perc also possesses several adverse effects on society. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), concluded that Perc is a group 2A carcinogen, based on evidence in humans and animals. According to the IARC, a group 2A carcinogen means that the substance is probably carcinogenic to humans. In addition, acute exposure to Perc can slow down the central nervous system, cause eye and respiratory irritation whereas chronic exposure can cause kidney and liver problems. Perc has also been listed as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP). The reasons listed above make it essential to reduce the amount of Perc inhaled by workers, and ensure no waste water seeps into the ground thereby contaminating drinking water. This can be done by using the control systems previously mentioned such as carbon absorbers, Perc filters, and distilling waste water to extract Perc,.

Wet Cleaning
People, in general, are influenced by the behaviour and attitude of society. The public is shifting towards an environmentally conscious culture. Events such as Earth Day and Earth Hour reinforce this assumption. Organizations that are dedicated to supporting the environment such as Green Ontario are attempting to educate the public about wet cleaning. The public’s concern for the environment is partially responsible for more dry cleaning companies making the transition to wet cleaning systems. Consumer surveys have shown that people also like the smell and feel of clothes that have been wet cleaned. Customers of cleaning companies that have converted to 100% wet cleaning system have remarked that clothes “feel and smell lighter and fresher” and the decrease in the pollution of the environment makes the customers feel good about themselves.

GreenEarth® Cleaning
Designing for the environment and economics are the two major issues one must consider when implementing a new process, however there are other issues that must be addressed such as societal preferences, values, and public safety. The solvent used in the GreenEarth® system is clear, colourless and most importantly odourless. This is advantageous over PERC, which leaves a distinguishable smell in the dry-cleaning facility and on the garments. D5 is one of the most studied commercial and industrial chemicals and because of this a variety of studies are conducted on this solvent. The Siloxane Research Program (SRP) is a voluntary program whose commitment of $30 million and decades of in-depth research has concluded that D5 is not an irritant to skin, non-toxic and causes no harm to humans when used in commercial and industrial applications. Recently there has been a large initiative to reduce the earth’s carbon footprint and societal values are shifting to recognize this.


text: Category:Statistical software

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Category:Statistical software


text: File:Rock Salt EIOLCA.jpg

title: File:Rock Salt EIOLCA.jpg


text:
Design for the Environment/Residential Insulation

This page is part of the Design for the Environment course

Residential wall insulation is a fundamental component of the modern house. Layered between the exterior bricks and the drywall inside, insulation forms the major barrier against thermal conductivity through the exterior of a house.

Currently the most commonly used insulation in Canada is mineral wool insulation, however this insulation has associated environmental concerns, and therefore warrants an analysis of more environmentally friendly alternatives. Using Rockwool as our baseline alternative, two other forms of insulation were analysed in order to evaluate the best material for this application. The two other materials chosen were flax as alternative one, and Cotton Denim insulation as alternative two. The goal of this report is to provide future home owners a basis to compare available forms of residential wall insulation, and make an informed decision when choosing the type of insulation for their home.

Project Information
Section1 Group 9A  Brandon McLean (Brandon McLean) Janice Luu (J.Luu) Patricia Sheridan (pksheridan) Catharine Darling (Catie)

Highlights and Recommendation
A functional analysis was initially performed to ensure that all materials met the requirements of the Ontario Building Codes, and were suitable for use in the Greater Toronto Area. An R-value of 17 for basement walls, 20 for the upper walls and 32 for the ceiling was used as the basis of comparison for each insulation. Since all the insulation materials were available in either the exact desired R-value or greater, each achieved the desired insulating capacity required. Also, since all insulation materials met the building code standards for moisture, fire and mould resistance, and all could last a minimum of fifty years without degradation there was no clear distinction between the different materials. However, when evaluated on the health risks that needed to be taken during installation, Rockwool required significant protection to the installer, and thus was a less likely candidate for recommendation based on this evaluation.

To determine the environmental impact of each insulation two forms of lifecycle assessments were completed. A Streamlined Life Cycle Assessment was used as a qualitative measure to determine the apparent environmental impact, and an Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment was used as a quantitative measure to determine the amount of environmental impact created from the amount of insulation used. Since the environmental impact of the use stage of our material is negligible as the material simply sits within the walls, the use stage was analysed in terms of the functional performance of the material.

Combining the results from both analyses it was determined that the cotton denim alternative was the most environmentally friendly alternative. This was largely due to 85% of the material used to make this insulation being post-industrial denim waste. As a result, since the material would have been disposed of anyway, there is no impact in the pre-manufacturing stage. As well, since the material is almost completely biodegradable, it has minimal impact at its end of life. The flax alternative was eliminated as a potential candidate for recommendation during this stage due to the environmental impact of shipping the insulation over from Europe. Until there is a manufacturing plant located in North America, this is not a viable alternative as the impact of shipping insulation across the world is much more significant than the benefits of being a biodegradable alternative. Since rockwool is made of non-renewable resources, and has a large environmental impact during its pre-manufacturing and manufacturing stage, it is clear that this alternative has a large environmental impact and is not a good choice.

A cost analysis was performed to ensure that the alternatives were within a feasible price range for the average home owner. The cost to insulate a house with rockwool was determined to be approximately $4000, while the cost to insulate with flax was approximately $6800. The cost to insulate with the most environmentally friendly alternative, cotton denim, was $5300. Since the difference between rockwool and cotton denim was less than 25% of the cost of rockwool, it was decided that the price difference was not significant enough to warrant reversing the projected recommendation from the environmental analysis.

A societal analysis was completed to determine if there were any major reasons why a future home owner would not wish to purchase a specific insulation alternative. Rockwool was decided to have the greatest impact as the fibres caused detrimental health effects to the workers with long term exposure. For flax, concerns were raised that if the insulation was used on a large scale, as mineral wool currently is, there would be issues with producing enough crops for both food and insulation and that there could be a disruption in the crop rotations. For cotton denim, no major negative societal impacts were proven which thus continued our recommendation of this as our best alternative.

As a result, it is recommended that a future home owner use recycled cotton denim to insulate their home as it has great environmental benefits without a significant economic cost.

Overview

 * Rock wool insulation has been in world wise use for over 70 years . In the present day version of rock wool insulation compose of 95% natural Basalt rock though the US-EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines (CPG) recommends that there is 75% of recycled steel slag, 0.08% to 3% binders (Phenol formaldehyde resin) and 0.01% to 0.5% de-dusting agent (mineral oil) . Series of research studies are still being conducted on the human health effects when humans are exposed to the fibers of rock wool particularly members of the North American Insulation Manufacturing Association (NAIMA) whom have invested tens of millions of dollars on these researches.

Environmental Analysis

 * The most environmental impact of rock wool insulation occurs during pre-manufacturing, manufacturing and disposal as shown in the Streamlined Lifecycle Assessment (SLCA) below.

Pre-manufacturing
 * Mining of basalt rock releases the most greenhouse gases (GHG) and air pollutants out of all the other sectors within pre-manufacturing. The result of mining could lead to unnaturally high concentrations of GHGs and air pollutants especially SO2.  Also basalt rocks are hard and heavy which would require more fossils fuels to transport to the manufacturer therefore in this stage the emissions of the hydrocarbons (CO and CO2) would be high.  On the positive side of rock wool insulation, the main component of the insulation basalt rock is readily available for extraction as they make most of the world’s oceanic crust .  In terms of the recycled steel slag, in the European countries over 90% of the steel slags are recycled and reused for other application, therefore this by-product is readily available too.

Manufacturing
 * Rock wool is formed by melting the basalt rocks and recycled steel slag in two separate furnaces till they have become molten material. They are then mixed and transferred into a rotating spinner and spun into fibers by a centrifugal force extruding the material through small holes at the side of the spinning device.  The surface is coated with binder phenol formaldehyde to maintain its shape and de-dusting agent mineral oil to suppress dust.  Once this is done, the fibers are collected and formed into blankets or batts .  In this stage, majority of the rock wool manufacturing plants that are part of North American Insulation Manufacturing Association (NAIMA) operates in a close-loop system meaning that there are no wastewater discharges.  Also they would operate under a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard in order to reduce and limit the air emissions.

Disposal
 * Rock wool insulation is not biodegradable; therefore all of the insulation must be land filled at the end of its life cycle . According to a scope of a two-storey house with an approximate square footage of 1500 ft2 and a basement area of 750 ft2, approximately 6000 ft2 of insulation must be land filled.

Cost Analysis

 * The cost analysis was based on a two-storey house with an approximate square footage of 1500 ft2 and a basement area of 750 ft2. The type of rock wool insulation used was Flexibatt from the distributor Home Depot and their supplier was manufacturer Roxul.

Electrical Energy during manufacturing
 * Total electrical energy used is 3570 kWh (from EIOLCA)
 * Hourly price for electrical energy is $0.0535/kWh
 * 3570 kWh × $0.0535/kWh = $191

Insulation Cost
 * Total R14 needed(1750’ ft2)
 * Covers 59.7 ft2, $29.67 per package
 * 1750’ ÷ 59.7’ = 29.3 ≈ 30 packages
 * 30 packages × $29.67 per package = $890.10
 * Total R22 (needed 4179’2’’ ft2)
 * Covers 39.8 ft2, $28.67 per package
 * 4179’2’’÷39.8=105.004≈106 packages
 * 106 packages×$29.67 per package = $3039.02
 * Total per house
 * 3039.02 + 890.10 = $3929.12

Disposal
 * Weight of Insulation:
 * R14 = 15.672kg per package × 30packages = 471.16kg
 * R22 = 13.6kg per package × 106packages = 1441.6kg
 * 71.16 + 1441.6 = 1911.76kg = 1.912 mt
 * Disposal cost for solid waste $71/mt :
 * 1.912 × $71 = $135.75

Therefore total Direct cost: 191 + 3929.12 + 135.75 = $4255.87

Societal Analysis

 * The major issue with rock wool insulation is the health issue during manufacturing and installation stage. Over $100 million for the past 25 years has been spent on numerous research and studies on the long term health risk for workers in manufacturing plants exposed this fiber .  As rock wool is a type of synthetic vitreous fibers (SVF) which can cause reversible skin, eye, and lung irritation if expose to it for a short duration of time which is why much pre-caution must be taken during the installation stage such as wear loose-fitting, long-sleeved and long-legged clothing to prevent irritation and make sure there is good ventilation like open a window or a door .  These fibers are easily inhaled since they are so small but too large to exhale therefore getting stuck in the lungs which would damage the cells in the lungs. These damage cells would reproduce eventually creating a tumour hence lung cancer .  Therefore the fibers produced during the manufacturing stage must have a diameter greater than 1μm; else the substance would be considered a hazardous substance, meaning that it would be subjected to CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation, and Liability Act) requirements.

Overview
Flax fiber insulation is a new form of insulation that started in the 1990’s The type analyzed is composed of 80% Flax fiber, 10% Potato Starch which acts as the binder for the insulation and 10% borax which acts as the fire retardant and provides resistance against pests and mold. The main advantage of these three materials is that they are all natural materials that are easily disposed of through composting or recycling. Flax Fiber Insulation is manufactured in Europe, with the majority in Finland, France and Germany. Flax Fiber insulation is an infeasible option for any non-local distributor, due to the cost and environmental impact of shipping. The suppliers Flauchshaus (Germany) and Flax 100 in the UK both state the impossibility of supplying to Canada.

Environmental Analysis

 * The streamline life cycle analysis can be seen below. From this analysis it is clear that the life cycle stages which produce the largest environmental impact are the pre-manufacturing, manufacturing and transport stages.

Pre-manufacturing
 * The main advantage of flax fiber insulation is that flax fiber and potato starch are completely renewable materials, since it can be grown to meet the demand. All three of the materials have energy intensive pre-manufacturing stages. Before the flax fiber can be combined to form insulation, the flax plant must first be grown, harvested and then the fibers must be separated form the rest of the plant.   New methods, which are much less energy intensive have been created to improve the processing of the flax plant directly related to the separation of the fibers. This technology is only improving, thereby reducing the energy required in the pre-manufacturing stage.  Most of the direct energy comes from the sun, but there is a lot of indirect energy present in the equipment and process required to plant, fertilize, de-weed and harvest the flax plant.  The potato starch has a similarly energy intensive process except the starch must be separated from the potatoes.  Borax has an energy intensive process as the boron must first be mined, and then combined with other chemicals to create borax.

Manufacturing

 * The manufacturing of the product is solely related to combining the three materials into the final insulation product. This is done on a textile non-woven line, and is not a very energy intensive process, with minimal environmental impacts. A comparison of the energy usage shows that the pre-manufacturing stage requires more overall energy by a difference of 142.14 GJ of energy.

Transportation

 * Due to the fact that this product can only be purchased in Europe, for this design to be implemented in Canada would require shipping, primarily by airplane. This presents a large problem due to the low density to volume ratio of the insulation. For one house, at a transport cost of $115 000, (assuming a profit margin of 20% on $147 444.423150 000 dollars) the following emissions were obtained from the EIOLCA:

If the environmental effect of the airplane is taken into account then it that would skew all the other data, making it negligible. The total global warming potential to fly over enough insulation for one house is approximately 174 times greater than the total. The This proves that a non-local distribution of insulation is infeasible, and negates all the positive environmental impacts of the insulation.

Disposal

 * Flax Fiber Insulation is 100% natural and can be disposed of through composting, burning or recycling [18]. This implies that the environmental effect during the disposal stage is negligible. In addition, flax fiber insulation is a carbon neutral alternative, so the amount of C02 in the air that is consumed during growth is equal to the amount released at the end of the lifecycle.

Cost Analysis
The cost of insulation is based upon March 2008 quotes received from Construction Resources based in the UK. For 1 pack, containing three batts of the appropriate size of insulation (120x100x625 mm), the cost is 16.00 pounds, which is equivalent to 32.00 USD. For one house regular two-story house approximately 634 sheets of insulation are required. That is a total cost of $ 6 762.33 per house. The cost of transportation has a huge impact, and influences the feasibility of the design. A quote for one house, as found on a Canadian Shipping company estimated the cost to be approximately $147 444.423. The only cost to the consumer is the cost of the insulation. The insulation can be installed by hand, and would be done by the subdivision contractors. If their salary is considered, it will take an estimate of 1 eight hour day for one worker per house multiplied by an approximate salary of 22.96$/hr. This is a total of $183.68 per house. There is no disposal cost on the insulation, as it can simply be thrown in the compost, or burnt. It does not require any special handling, and will not end up in a landfill if it is assumed it will be properly disposed of.
 * Cost to purchase Insulation:
 * Cost of Transportation:
 * Installation Cost
 * Disposal Cost

Societal Analysis
A major societal concern arises in producing potatoes and flax. The potato crop could be used to as food as opposed starch. An increaded demand for insulation, creates an increase in the demand for potatoes thereby raising the price of potatoes and limiting the quantity available as food. In addition, were the demand for flax fiber insulation to increase dramatically flax would be used more frequently in crop rotation. This would impact the surrounding environment and soil, in removing essential nutrients from the soil. In addition, if both more potato crops and flax crops are required then more farms/crops will be devoted to the flax plant and potatoes, and less will be used to grow food crops such as corn and cereal. An additional societal concern arises due to the limited history of flax fiber use as insulation, since the 1990s. This leaves the consumer and community with a doubt as to the efficiency and resistance to degradation of the insulation, as well as a doubt as to its long-term environmental impact. This is prominent in the minimal usage of flax fiber insulation. The majority of the insulation is chosen by the construction industry. This industry is skeptical of using new materials for insulation that does not have an extensive performance history due to previous disasters.

Overview

 * Recycled denim insulation is a new type of cotton insulation (only 15 to 20 years old) which uses post-industrial denim scraps left over from the manufacturing of jeans and other denim cloths as their primary ingredient. The insulation is made primarily from post-industrial denim waste from large jean manufacturers, however 5% of the material is binder fibre composed of bicomponent plastic and 10% is most likely a cellulose based lofting fibre.

Environmental Analysis

 * As with the other two alternatives, both an EIOLCA as well as a more qualitative streamlined LCA were preformed on denim insulation to determine its environmental impact. As an EIOLCA sector for denim insulation does not exist the following product was created using a scope of 50 average homes and information given in the patent in and pricing obtained from

The major result from the EIOLCA from the above product can be seen below in graphical form.

Additionally the results of the streamlined LCA can be see in the following table:

Pre-Manufacturing

 * The SLCA analysis preformed revealed that the major environmental benefits result from the fact that denim insulation consists principally (85% by mass) of post-industrial denim waste which it successfully diverts from being landfill waste . That being said, relatively minor negative effects do result from its use of non-renewable petrochemical derived plastics and manufacturing intensive cellulose pulp which make up the majority of the other 15% of the product.

 * This result is easily seen in the EIOLCA as well where the majority of greenhouse gas emissions as well as total air, water and gas release, all result from the cellulose and organic fibre manufacturing sector. It should be noted a sensitivity analysis was performed where the cellulose was replaced with polyester type fibre material (also a potental although slighly more unlikly lofting fibre acording to the products patent information ) which decreased the total greenhouse gas emissions by almost two times and the total air residuals by over ten times.

Manufacturing

 * The manufacturing process is fairly simple consisting mainly of three stages :
 * Moulding and distribution of binding and lofting fibre by suction
 * Heat treatment to 150°C
 * Cutting and packing

 * These processes involved in the manufacturing of denim insulation are extremely environmentally friendly. Any waste products are shredded and incorporated back into the manufacturing process; also the process itself produces no gaseous residuals which results in a zero waste manufacturing process . Additionally, the energy requirements needed to manufacture the product is far lower than that of fibreglass or Rockwool insulation, which require temperatures of well over 1000°C to form and bind the insulation fibres in comparison to this product’s 150°C manufacturing temperature.

Transportation/Shipping

 * Some of the largest negative environmental effects come from the product’s delivery phase which both employs a large amount of truck transportation over long distances and utilizes common plastic based packaging. As the majority of denim manufacturing in North America is done in Mexico large amounts of truck transportation are required to deliver this product to a Canadian home. Although the EIOLCA analysis shows transportation to be a large contributor to greenhouse gas emissions this is most likely understated in comparison to the SLCA analysis as it only considers insulation industry norms which involve far less transportation on average. The insulation is also all packaged in large plastic wrapping which will most likely be disposed of afterwards and end up as landfill waste.

Disposal

 * The product is primarily biodegradable cotton, which would be in the landfill regardless of its use as insulation. Additionally, most of the other components used are natural or non toxic materials such as paper based cellulose or naturally occurring borax and therefore should not adversely affect the ecosystem. As such, denim insulation also performs extremely well in its disposal phase. It is important to note that EIOLCA does not consider the disposal phase of a product so only SLCA results are discussed in this section.

Cost Analysis

 * Using the products information obtained from, price quote obtained from distributors located in the GTA and the Canadian R value recommendations , the total cost of denim insulation required to insulate a two-storey house with an approximate square footage of 1500 ft2 and a basement area of 750 ft2.is calculated as follows:

R-Value/Insulation Choice
 * R-20 for walls- therefore chose Bonded Logic R-21 (product code 10000-02124)
 * R-17 for basement walls – therefore chose Bonded Logic R-19 (product code 10000-02124)
 * R-32 for ceiling – therefore chose Bonded Logic R-19 (product code 10000-02124)layered over R -13 (product code 10000-01324)

Area Calculations (accounting for 2.5% safety factor):
 * 1669’* 1.025 = 1711 square feet of Bonded Logic R-21
 * (761’*1.025) + (750*1.025) = 1549 square feet of Bonded Logic R-19
 * 761*1.025 = 780 square feet of Bonded Logic R-13

Costs Calculations:
 * R-21 (@$1.47/ft2) –1711ft2*$1.47/ft2 = $2515.17
 * R-19 (@$1.36/ft2) – 1549ft2*$1.36/ft2 = $2106.64
 * R-13 (@$0.88/ft2) – 780ft2*$0.88/ft2 =  $686.40
 * Total = $5308.21
 * Including tax = $6051.36

It should also be considered that installation of this material will probably be somewhat less expensive as it is easier to handle and requires no additional safety equipment. This means that the cost of direct labor would possibly be less than normal; however, due to the fact that this is a new product and no studies have been conducted on how much labor it would save it is impossible at present to determine exact numbers for this statement.

Societal Analysis
A number of positive societal effects were identified with the use of denim insulation. Public preference for this product is extremely positive as it can be handled without the use of any protective equipment. Furthermore, it is extremely easy to install and far less hazardous than most types of insulation not have any of the negative stigmas which have been created about the possible carcinogenic effects of many other types of insulation. Another benefit of Denim is that the material has excellent sound absorbent properties, better than those of regular fibreglass or Rockwool insulation making it an ideal alternative for closely packed neighbourhoods where sound is an issue.


text: File:Potassium EIOLCA.jpg

title: File:Potassium EIOLCA.jpg


text: File:CMA EIOLCA.jpg

title: File:CMA EIOLCA.jpg


text:
Topic talk:Mining machinery engineering

Anyone interested engineering some mining equipment? --Remi 03:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: Topic talk:Mining machinery engineering


text:
File:Rick Steele SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text: File:Gapperchart asphalt1.jpg

title: File:Gapperchart asphalt1.jpg


text:
File:Hicks999 SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text: File:Gapperchart ECRT1.jpg

title: File:Gapperchart ECRT1.jpg


text: File:Gapperchart steel1.jpg

title: File:Gapperchart steel1.jpg


text:
File:Eldorino SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
File:AmosNusheg SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
File:Brutal Enigma SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
File:Raj librans SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
File:NinjaHOUSE SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
Instructional design/Learning objectives/Cognitive Domain Verb Usage, Part 2

Analysis
Analysis refers to the ability to break down material into its component parts so that its organizational structure may be understood. This may include the identification of the parts, analysis of the relationships between parts, and recognition of the organizational principles involved. Learning outcomes here represent a higher intellectual level than comprehension and application because they require an understanding of both the content and the structural form of the material.

Synthesis
Synthesis refers to the ability to put parts together to form a new whole. This may involve the production of a unique communication (theme or speech), a plan of operations (research proposal), or a set of abstract relations (scheme for classifying information). Learning outcomes in this area stress creative behaviors, with major emphasis on the formulation of new patterns or structures.

Evaluation
Evaluation is concerned with the ability to judge the value of material (statement, novel, poem, research report) for a given purpose. The judgements are to be based on definite criteria. These may be internal criteria (organization) or external criteria (relevance to the purpose) and the student may determine the criteria or be given them. Learning outcomes in this area are highest in the cognitive hierarchy because they contain elements of all the other categories, plus conscious value judgements based on clearly defined criteria.

Practice and Feedback
Now let's practice identifying verbs for the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels of the cognitive domain. Choose the correct answer for each question below by clicking a box. At the end, click the Submit button for the correct answers.   {Which of the following is a performance verb for analysis? - Classify - Sort + Examine - Describe
 * type="[]"}

{Which of the following is a performance verb for synthesis? - Select + Formulate - Apply - Choose
 * type="[]"}

{Which of the following is a performance verb for evaluation? - Draw - Solve - Demonstrate + Diagnose
 * type="[]"}

References and Writing Aids
(1) A Graphic of Bloom's Taxonomy with Cognitive Verbs

(2) The updated taxonomy with interactive table

Cognitive Taxonomy Table

Navigation
Click Next to continue.


text:
File:SwitchbladeSavior SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
Instructional design/Learning objectives/Cognitive Domain Verb Usage, Part 2/Explanation of Answers

1. Which of the following is a performance verb for analysis ? ...Classify (Comprehension) ...Sort (Comprehension) ...Examine (Analysis) ...Describe (Comprehension)

2. Which of the following is a performance verb for synthesis ? ...Select (Knowledge or Evaluation) ...Formulate (Synthesis) ...Apply (Application) ...Choose (Knowledge or Evaluation)

3. Which of the following is a performance verb for evaluation ? ...Draw (Knowledge or Comprehension) ...Solve (Application) ...Demonstrate (Application) ...Diagnose (Evaluation)


text:
File:Edgard navarrete SBTDS Script Formatting.pdf

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to format a movie script


text:
User talk:Brandon McLean

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Brandon McLean, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brandon McLean


text:
User talk:Catie

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Catie, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Catie


text:
User talk:DamonQuan

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello DamonQuan, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 06:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:DamonQuan


text: File:EIOLCA Air Bars.JPG

title: File:EIOLCA Air Bars.JPG


text: File:EIOLCA Output Plot.JPG

title: File:EIOLCA Output Plot.JPG


text: File:Total EIOLCA Plots.JPG

title: File:Total EIOLCA Plots.JPG


title: File:EE-PRE-phys-2.png


text:
User talk:Shervin.shalchian

Welcome
Hello Shervin.shalchian, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! --Remi 07:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Shervin.shalchian


title: File:EE-PRE-phys-3.png


title: File:EE-PRE-phys-4.png


title: File:EE-PRE-phys-5.png


text:
User:Ashashyou

I am a Physican specialized in geriatric medicine.

I am living in Cairo, Egypt.

title: User:Ashashyou


title: File:EE-PRE-chem-1.png


title: File:EE-PRE-chem-2.png


text:
Talk:Assistive Technology

this doesnt help me at all
 * Sorry to hear this. Could you specify more in what matter it doesn't help you ? Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Assistive Technology


title: File:EE-PRE-chem-3.png


title: File:EE-PRE-chem-4.png


text:
User:Andrewa

G'day! I'm Andrew Alder.

You can learn more about me at my English Wikipedia user page. Andrewa

'''This Wikiversity editor in their contributing to scholarly works, agrees to strong scholarly ethics. In particular this Wikiversity editor''':

 * Is committed to presenting a balanced, objective, accurate, and informative account of all relevant scholarly evidence, facts, analysis, and ideas within all scholarly topics of study in the interest of full disclosure and honesty.
 * Does not condone illegal, deceptive, or otherwise unethical practices in their own contributions or in others'.
 * May for research purposes contribute outside of the restrictions of NPOV.
 * Will respond to all questions about the ethical caliber of their contributions on their |talk page.

title: User:Andrewa


text:
User talk:Andrewa

''As I visit English Wikipedia far more regularly than this wiki, it's probably best to use my talk page there rather than this one. But if you have an account here but not there, or if you just prefer to, feel free to use this page. You'll get my attention faster if you also drop me a short note at English Wikipedia, just saying I have mail here. This note can be anonymous but please mention WIKIVERSITY so I don't need to check all the wikis on which I have accounts. Thank you and Welcome! Andrewa 13:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)''

title: User talk:Andrewa


text:
Peak oil, energy, and society/Caleb's page

The idea of recycling has been around as long humans have existed, from the Native Americans using ever part of the buffalo to 19th century farmers using compost to fertilize their fields. Now during the "green revolution" a new kind of recycling has emerged. An "industrial recycling", this involves taking a less used natural resource and processing it to be use used from flooring to t-shirts. Another form of "industrial recycling" is taking used processed materials and re-processing them to be used again. Some example of "industrial recycling" are; cork floor,bamboo floors, resin tiling, sunflower shelving, processed plastic t-shirts,etc. The benefits of the products range, for some it's using materials that otherwise would be in land fills, or using a more resilient natural resource such as using bamboo flooring as opposed to wood flooring. The downside range just as widely, for some it's using huge amounts of energy on recycling materials as opposed to just reducing use, and for others it the use of toxic chemicals  that is needed to successfully recycle it. Over all recycled materials have there pros and cons but when ever possible reducing use instead of finding some strange recycled material has only pros.


text:
Peak oil, energy, and society/Charlotte's page

Solar panels can be used for many things, including heating water, space heating, and electricity. The kind to make electricity is called a photovoltaic panel. It is made of silicon and has no moving parts. When the sun hits the solar cell, it converts it into electricity. Massachusetts Innovation Center has the largest collection of solar panels in New England on a renovated mill building in Fitchburg, Massachusetts. Their system has no batteries and is connected to the grid. One benefit is that they are somewhat energy independent. A downside is that on cloudy days or when the panels are covered with snow they can’t produce much electricity and so they still have to rely on the grid most of the winter.


text:
Peak oil, energy, and society/Ian's page

Solar it growing more popular by the day. one place where an example of this can be seen is at Massachusetts Innovation Collaborative, LLC, in Fitchburg Ma. Here, thanks to a government grant, over 100 solar panels are used to power this structure. This old Mill was renovated into a school and housing structure with the idea of recycling, green living, and being off the grid in mind. Old metal panels, used lumber, etc. leftover from the mill days were used in renovation as walls, ceilings and used for decoration. Along with solar panels powering the structure, two geothermal systems heat and cool oil-free all year long. The M.I.C continues to be worked on to this day and it is not yet used for housing but should be within the next year or so. This structure is an excellent example of re-using old abandoned structures as apposed to tearing them down, and good, real life solutions to oil for the greater good of the community. They also have the largest commercial solar installation in New England.


text: Category:Peak oil, energy, and society

title: Category:Peak oil, energy, and society


text:
User talk:Waldo~enwikiversity

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Waldo, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Waldo. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Waldo~enwikiversity that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:25, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Waldo~enwikiversity


text:
User talk:Jasper the JRT

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Jasper the JRT, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jasper the JRT


text:
User talk:Pksheridan

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Pksheridan, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pksheridan


text:
User talk:Ashashyou

Merhaba, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Ashashyou, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: regulate the use of the medicine, pharmacy and dentistry ?
ping, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 21:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

New board member
Hello Ashashyou,

We have a new candidate for an editorial board position: Talk:WikiJournal_of_Medicine As a peer reviewer, I'd like you to participate in the vote.

Best regards,

Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ashashyou


text: File:Mater-Bi EIOLCA Air Bars.JPG

title: File:Mater-Bi EIOLCA Air Bars.JPG


text:
User talk:Noam04

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Noam04, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Noam04


text:
User talk:Nick.berube

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Nick.berube, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nick.berube


text:
User talk:MHuang

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello MHuang, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 15:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:MHuang


text:
Talk:Writing discipline specific research papers

Wassup Ms. Davis!

Broken Link to Brizee, H. Allen. Writing a Research Paper
The link provided to "Brizee, H. Allen. Writing a Research Paper" provided in the section on how to take notes is now broken. I have not yet found an exact replacement for this reference, however the materials at: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/658/1/  seem useful here. --Lbeaumont (discuss • contribs) 12:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

The essential role of intellectual honesty
I suggest adding a section highlighting the essential role of intellectual honesty in any research paper. Thanks! --Lbeaumont (discuss • contribs) 11:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Please clarify "the second degree"
Please clarify your use of the term "the second degree". I am not familiar with that term and I cannot find a relevant article in Wikipedia. Thanks!


text:
User talk:J.Luu

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 16:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello J.Luu, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may
 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research activities;
 * Read and help develop our community policies；or
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 16:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:J.Luu


text:
Neuroethics

Welcome to these pages on Neuroethics Research and Communications.

Areas of science
At the moment, in addition to building more general resources, we are focusing on three scientific areas:

 * Brain Imaging
 * Brain Manipulation
 * Predictive Medicine

General resources

 * /Books/
 * /Blogs/
 * /Courses/
 * Magazines
 * /News/
 * /Journals/ and journal articles
 * Neuroscience centres around the world
 * /Centres/
 * /Associations/
 * /Events/

Art

 * /Fiction/

title: Neuroethics


text:
User:Benja/2008/04/Notes on Fudenberg and Levine article

Notes on:

Random stuff that I'm writing down to help me figure out the details of the paper. Also, incidentally, to learn LaTeX math syntax.

Correctness of definition of Nash equilibrium
Page 528 (page 7 of PDF) states that a Nash equilibrium can be defined as a mixed profile σ such that for each $$s_i$$ with nonzero probability, there's a $$\mu_i$$ such that

 * 1) $$s_i \mbox{ maximizes } u_i(\,\cdot\,, \mu_i)$$, and
 * 2) $$\mu_i\Big[\Big\{\pi_{-i} | \pi_j(h_j) = \hat{\pi}_j(h_j|\sigma_j)\Big\}\Big] = 1 \quad \mbox{for all } h_j \in H_{-i}$$.

In the next paragraph, the authors state that (2) says that each player's beliefs $$\mu_i$$ are "a point mass on the true distribution," i.e., that there is a single $$\pi_{-i}$$ such that $$\mu_i(\{\pi_{-i}\}) = 1$$. Why is this true?

Lemma 1. For any probability distribution $$\mbox{Pr}$$ and non-empty collection of events $$\mathbf{E}$$ such that $$\forall A \in \mathbf{E}: \mbox{Pr}(A) = 1$$, it holds that $$\mbox{Pr}(\bigcap \mathbf{E}) = 1$$.

Proof. Omitted.

Corollary 1.1. (2) is equivalent to:
 * $$\mu_i\Big[\bigcap_{h_j \in H_{-i}} \Big\{\pi_{-i} | \pi_j(h_j) = \hat{\pi}_j(h_j|\sigma_j)\Big\}\Big] = \mu_i\Big[\Big\{\pi_{-i} | \forall h_j \in H_{-i}: \pi_j(h_j) = \hat{\pi}_j(h_j|\sigma_j)\Big\}\Big] = 1$$.

Lemma 2. There is exactly one deleted behavior strategy profile $$\pi_{-i}$$ such that $$\forall h_j \in H_{-i}: \pi_j(h_j) = \hat{\pi}_j(h_j|\sigma_j)$$.

Proof. $$\pi_{-i}$$ is by definition uniquely determined by the values of $$\pi_j(h_j)$$ for $$h_j \in H_{-i}$$.

The authors' assertion now follows immediately from Corollary 1.1 in combination with Lemma 2.