SOCIAL CONNECT AND RESPONSIBLITIES (21SCR39) IGAJ AHAMMAD (22CI017)
CHAPTER-I
NEEM TREE
INTRODUCTION
Neem is a member of the mahogany family, Meliaceae. It is today known by the botanic name Azadirachta indica A. Juss. In the past, however, it has been known by several names, and some botanists formerly lumped it together with at least one of its relatives. is a member of the mahogany family, Meliaceae. It is today known by the botanic name Azadirachta indica A. Juss. In the past, however, it has been known by several names, and some botanists formerly lumped it together with at least one of its relatives
Scientific name of the neem tree is Azadirachta indica A. Juss.The synonyms are Antelaea azadirachta (L.) Adelb.; A. javanica Gaertn.; Melia azadirachta L.; M. indica (A. Juss) Brandin. Some of the common names Neem, neem tree, mkilifi, mwarubaini kamili (Kiswahili) Family Meliaceae’
The exact origin of this native range of this species is obscure, but it is thought to be native to the Indian Sub-continent (India and Bangladesh) and South-east Asia. It’s naturalised distribution (global) Locations within which Azadirachta indica is naturalised include northern Australia, tropical Asia, Africa, Fiji, Mauritius, Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and many countries in South and Central America. Introduced, naturalised or invasive in East Africa Azadirachta indica is invasive in parts of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda (A.B.R.Witt pers. obs.).
THE HABITAT OF THE NEEM TREE
The habitat of neem tree is generally dry and hot. The tree can tolerate temperatures up to 122 degrees Fahrenheit, but it cannot cope with cold; temperatures below 40 degrees Fahrenheit cause the tree's leaves to fall and can kill the tree. Neem tree's ideal temperature range is about 50 to 98 degrees Fahrenheit. Known for its drought tolerance, neem tree can survive as little as 6 inches of annual rainfall but grows best when it receives 18 to 47 inches per year. It tolerates dry periods lasting seven or eight months. In the wild, it grows at altitudes between sea level and 2,300 feet.
POTENTIALITY OF NEEM
Neem has a lot of potential uses in field of medicine. For eons, it has been in the field of ayurvedic. Now, there has been ongoing studies to see the potential use for various disease.
INFECTIONS
Viral infections:
Neem might help with dengue fever by possibly stopping the growth of the dengue virus. It might interfere with the replication of the coxsackie B virus, a group of viruses that causes ailments ranging from stomach upset to full-fledged infections in humans. Neem leaf has traditionally been used for viral diseases such as chickenpox and smallpox as well. However, more studies are required to prove such claims.
Bacterial infections and Skin infections:
Recent studies have focused on antibacterial activities of neem in the mouth, specifically in gum disease and tooth cavities. Neem is also thought to be very effective in managing scabies, but sufficient scientific data does not exist for human studies. Since neem might have potential antimicrobial properties, it may be helpful for various skin problems and diseases such as acne, eczema, and other skin conditions. Neem oil might also help with psoriasis symptoms. However, more research is required to back up such claims.
Fungal infections:
Studies have shown that neem might have antifungal characteristics, which might help with fungal infections like athlete’s foot, ringworm and candida, commonly called as a yeast infection or thrush-causing organism. Thrush is a fungal infection that can occur in the mouth, throat or other parts of the body. However, more research is required.
CANCER:
Flavonoids and other chemicals found in neem might play a role against the worsening of cancer. Several studies suggest that high flavonoids might help stop the growth of cancer. Neem and its extracts have a potential action against a wide range of cancer cells in humans that include cancers of the skin, breast, lung, oral, stomach, liver, colon, and prostate. However, much more extensive research is required to prove its potential use. Moreover, cancer is a serious condition and you should consult a qualified doctor for its diagnosis and treatment.
DIABETES:
Studies have recently started to focus on the hypoglycaemic (lowering blood sugar) effect of neem. The exact mechanism is not clear, however, the effects are visible.3 Please consult a doctor, as conditions like diabetes are to be diagnosed and treated by a doctor.
LIVER:
Neem might have some effect on liver protection, which in turn might aid the purification of blood. Neem leaf might help reduce liver damage occurring due to chemicals by stabilising serum marker enzyme levels and by increasing antioxidant levels, like those present in natural carotenoids, vitamin E and C. These antioxidants might help to neutralize free radicals and may inhibit damage. However, more research is required. Kindly consult a doctor. Potential uses of Neem for Immunity: The most important potential use of neem may be due to its immune-stimulating property. It might help both the cell mediated and lymphocytic immune systems, including “Killer T” cells. These cells might help to kill viruses, other microbes, etc. by releasing toxic chemicals into them. However, more research is required to be sure.
SIDE EFFECTS OF NEEM
Interactions with Other Drugs:
There is a lack of studies regarding the interactions of neem with other drugs. Therefore, there is a need for more research on this subject. However, you should consult a doctor before using neem and its parts. You should make sure to disclose all the current medication being used.
CHAPTER-II
HERITAGE WALK
BANGALORE PALACE
INTRODUCTION
Bangalore Palace is a royal palace located in Bangalore, Karnataka, India, in an area that was owned by Rev. J. Garrett, the first principal of the Central High School in Bangalore, now famous as Central College. The commencement of the construction of the palace is attributed to him.
Quick Facts Of Bangalore Palace
Timings: 10 AM to 5.30 PM
Entry Fees: INR 230 (Indians) INR 460 (Foreigners)
Visit Duration: 2 to 3 hours
Address: Palace Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru – 560052 (MAP)
HISTORY
Bangalore Palace stands on a piece of land originally owned by Reverend J Garrett, who was the principal of Bangalore Central High School. In 1873, the land was purchased at a cost of 40,000 rupees by the British guardians of Maharaja Chama Rajendra Wadiyar X, who was a minor then. The property was purchased to provide a suitable place for the young Maharaja to stay in Bangalore and complete his administrative training. The construction of the palace started in 1874 and was completed by 1878. John Cameron, who was also the superintendent of Lal Bagh Botanical Gardens, carried out the landscaping of the property.
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
Bangalore palace is model of Windsor Castle. The total area of Bangalore palace is spread in 45000 square feet. It is a two storied granite building with fortified towers and turreted parapets which are characters of Tudor architecture of England. Interior of Bangalore palace is full of decorations with floral patterns, intricately carved capitals, patterned cornices. The façade of the palace is exotic with combination of tall watch-towers. It has Roman pointed arches and bastion –like towers. It is in the heart of Bangalore.
CRAFT CORNERS
Dastkar Bazaar is the one of the craft corners near Bangalore palace. Craft corners was established in 2003.The main aim of craft corners is to give beautiful handmade crafts to people. In CRAFTING CORNER all crafts are made by handicapped artists and widow. Craft business gives opportunity to all enough them to showcase their talents as well as it can become source of income. There are many types of crafts such as Handmade jewelry, Bags, Showcase items, etc.
The BENGALURU DASTKAR BAZAAR will offer a wide range of lifestyle accessories, silver jewellery, and adornments, metal crafts, carved furniture & decorative products, pottery & ceramics, basketry & fibre crafts, leather products, traditional paintings, a variety of hand-woven, embroidered, block printed textiles and much more from every corner of the country. Dastard invites you to help crafts people revive and recover lost livelihoods during the lockdown.
CHAPTER-III
ORGANIC FARMING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
Organic farming ,also known as ecological farming or biological farming, is an agricultural system that uses fertilizers of organic origin such as compost manure, gr manure, and bone meal and places emphasis on techniques such as crop rotation and companion planting. It originated early in the 20th century in reaction to rapidly changing farming practices. Certified organic agriculture accounts for 70 million hectares (170 million acres) globally, with over half of that total in Australia. Organic farming continues to be developed by various organizations today. Biological pest control, mixed cropping and the fostering of insect predators are encouraged. Organic standards are designed to allow the use of naturally-occurring substances while prohibiting or strictly limiting synthetic substances. For instance, naturally-occurring pesticides such as pyrethrin are permitted, while synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are generally prohibited. Synthetic substances that are allowed include, for example, copper sulphate elemental sulphur and Ivermectin.
Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972 Organic agriculture can be defined as "an integrated farming system that strives for sustainability, the enhancement of soil fertility and biological diversity while, with rare exceptions, prohibiting synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, and growth hormones".Since 1990, the market for organic food and other products has grown rapidly, reaching $63 billion worldwide in 2012. This demand has driven a similar increase in organically-managed farmland that grew from 2001 to 2011 at a compounding rate of 8.9% per annum. As of 2020, approximately 75,000,000 hectares (190,000,000 acres) worldwide were farmed organically, representing approximately 1.6% of total world farmland .Organic farming can be beneficial
HISTORY
Agriculture was practiced for thousands of years without the use of artificial chemicals. Artificial fertilizers were first developed during the mid-19th century. These early fertilizers were cheap, powerful, and easy to transport in bulk. Similar advances occurred in chemical pesticides in the 1940s, leading to the decade being referred to as the 'pesticide era'. These new agricultural techniques, while beneficial in the short-term, had serious longer-term side-effects such as soil compaction, erosion, and declines in overall soil fertility, along with health concerns about toxic chemicals ki entering the food supply. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, soil biology scientists began to seek ways to remedy these side effects while still maintaining higher production.
In 1940 Howard published his An Agricultural Testament. In this book he adopted Northbourne's terminology of "organic farming". Howard's work spread widely, and he became known as the "father of organic farming" for his work in applying scientific knowledge and principles to various traditional and natural methods. In the United States J. I. Rodale, who was keenly interested both in Howard's ideas and in biodynamics, founded in the 1940s both a working organic farm for trials and experimentation, The Rodale Institute, and Rodale, Inc. in Emmaus, Pennsylvania to teach and advocate organic methods to the wider public. These became important influences on the spread of organic agriculture.
Increasing environmental awareness in the general population in modern times has transformed the originally supply-driven organic movement to a demand-driven one. Premium prices and some government subsidies attracted farmers. In the developing world, many producers farm according to traditional methods that are comparable to organic farming, but not certified, and that may not include the latest scientific advancements in organic agriculture. In other cases, farmers in the developing world have converted to modern organic methods for economic reasons.
CROP DIVERSITY
Organic farming encourages crop diversity. The science of Agroecology has revealed the benefits of polyculture (multiple crops in the same space), which is often employed in organic farming. Planting a variety of vegetable crops supports a wider range of beneficial insects, soil microorganisms, and other factors that add up to overall farm health. Crop diversity helps the environment to thrive and protects species from going extinct. No
COMPOSTING
Using manure as a fertilizer risk contaminating food with animal gut bacteria, including pathogenic strains of E. coli that have caused fatal poisoning from eating organic food. To combat this risk, USDA organic standards require that manure must be sterilized through high temperature thermophilic composting. If raw animal manure is used, 120 days must pass before the crop is harvested if the final product comes into direct contact with the soil. For products that do not directly contact soil, 90 days must pass prior to harvest.
In the US, the Organic Food Production Act of 1990 (OFPA,) as amended, specifies that a farm can not be certified as organic if the compost being used contains any synthetic ingredients. The OFPA singles out commercially blended fertilizers [composts] disallowing the use of any fertilizer [compost] that contains prohibited materials.
The economics of organic farming, a subfield of agricultural economics, encompasses the entire process and effects of organic farming in terms of human society, including social costs, opportunity costs, unintended consequences, information asymmetries, and economies of scale.
Labour input, carbon and methane emissions, energy use, eutrophication, acidification, soil quality, effect on biodiversity, and overall land use vary considerably between individual farms and between crops, making general comparisons between the economics of organic and conventional agriculture difficult.
In the European Union "organic farmers receive more subsidies under Agri environment and animal welfare subsidies than conventional growers".
PRODUCTIVITY
Studies comparing yields have had mixed results. These differences among findings can often be attributed to variations between study designs including differences in the crops studied and the methodology by which results were gathered.
A 2012 meta-analysis found that productivity is typically lower for organic farming than conventional farming, but that the size of the difference depends on context and in some cases may be very small. While organic yields can be lower than conventional yields, another meta-analysis published in Sustainable Agriculture Research in 2015, concluded that certain organic on-farm practices could help narrow this gap. Timely weed management and the application of manure in conjunction with legume forages/cover crops were shown to have positive results in increasing organic corn and soybean productivity.
Another meta-analysis published in the journal Agricultural Systems in 2011 analyzed 362 datasets and found that organic yields were on average 80% of conventional yields. The author's found that there are relative differences in this yield gap based on crop type with crops like soybeans and rice scoring higher than the 80% average and crops like wheat and potato scoring lower. Across global regions, Asia and Central Europe were found to have relatively higher yields and Northern Europe relatively lower than the average.
PORFITABLITY
In the United States, organic farming has been shown to be 2.7 to 3.8 times more profitable for the farmer than conventional farming when prevailing price premiums are taken into account. Globally, organic farming is 22–35% more profitable for farmers than conventional methods, according to a 2015 meta-analysis of studies conducted across five continents.
The profitability of organic agriculture can be attributed to a number of factors. First, organic farmers do not rely on synthetic fertilizer and pesticide inputs, which can be costly. In addition, organic foods currently enjoy a price premium over conventionally produced foods, meaning that organic farmers can often get more for their yield.
The price premium for organic food is an important factor in the economic viability of organic farming. In 2013 there was a 100% price premium on organic vegetables and a 57% price premium for organic fruits. These percentages are based on wholesale fruit and vegetable prices, available through the United States Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service. Price premiums exist not only for organic versus nonorganic crops, but may also vary depending on the venue where the product is sold: farmers' markets, grocery stores, or wholesale to restaurants. For many producers, direct sales at farmers' markets are most profitable because the farmer receives the entire markup, however this is also the most time and labour-intensive approach.
There have been signs of organic price premiums narrowing in recent years, which lowers the economic incentive for farmers to convert to or maintain organic production methods. Data from 22 years of experiments at the Rodale Institute found that, based on the current yields and production costs associated with organic farming in the United States, a price premium of only 10% is required to achieve parity with conventional farming. A separate study found that on a global scale, price premiums of only 5-7% were needed to break even with conventional methods. Without the price premium, profitability for farmers is mixed.
For markets and supermarkets organic food is profitable as well, and is generally sold at significantly higher prices than non-organic food.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Compared to conventional agriculture, the energy efficiency of organic farming depends upon crop type and farm size.
Two studies – both comparing organically- versus conventionally-farmed apples – declare contradicting results, one saying organic farming is more energy efficient, the other saying conventionally is more efficient.
It has generally been found that the PRODUCTIVITY Studies comparing yields have had mixed results. These differences among findings can often be attributed to variations between study designs including differences in the crops studied and the methodology by which results were gathered. Another meta-analysis published in the journal Agricultural Systems in 2011 analyzed 362 datasets and found that organic yields were on average 80% of conventional yields. The author's found that there are relative differences in this yield gap based on crop type with crops like soybeans and rice scoring higher than the 80% average and crops like wheat and potato scoring lower. Across global regions, Asia and Central Europe were found to have relatively higher yields and Northern Europe relatively lower than the average.
PORFITABLITY
In the United States, organic farming has been shown to be 2.7 to 3.8 times more profitable for the farmer than conventional farming when prevailing price premiums are taken into account. Globally, organic farming is 22–35% more profitable for farmers than conventional methods, according to a 2015 meta-analysis of studies conducted across five continents. There have been signs of organic price premiums narrowing in recent years, which lowers the economic incentive for farmers to convert to or maintain organic production methods. Data from 22 years of experiments at the Rodale Institute found that, based on the current yields and production costs associated with organic farming in the United States, a price premium of only 10% is required to achieve parity with conventional farming. A separate study found that on a global scale, price premiums of only 5-7% were needed to break even with conventional methods. Without the price premium, profitability for farmers is mixed. For markets and supermarkets organic food is profitable as well, and is generally sold at significantly higher prices than non-organic food.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Compared to conventional agriculture, the energy efficiency of organic farming depends upon crop type and farm size. Two studies – both comparing organically- versus conventionally-farmed apples – declare contradicting results, one saying organic farming is more energy efficient, the other saying conventionally is more efficient. It has generally been found that the labor input per unit of yield was higher for organic systems compared with conventional production.
SALES AND MARKETING
Most sales are concentrated in developed nations. In 2008, 69% of Americans claimed to occasionally buy organic products, down from 73% in 2005. One theory for this change was that consumers were substituting "local" produce for "organic" produce.
LABOUR EMPLOYMENT
Organic production is more labour-intensive than conventional production. On the one hand, this increased labour cost is one factor that makes organic food more expensive. On the other hand, the increased need for labour may be seen as an "employment dividend" of organic farming, providing more jobs per unit area than conventional systems. The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report suggests that increase in investment in green agriculture is projected to lead to growth in employment of about 60 per cent compared with current levels" and that "green agriculture investments could create 47 million additional jobs compared with BAU2 over the next 40 years". Much of the growth in women labour participation in agriculture is outside the "male dominated field of conventional agriculture". Operators in organic farming are 21% women, as opposed to 14% in farming in general.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND EMISSIONS
Researchers at Oxford University analysed 71 peer-reviewed studies and observed that organic products are sometimes worse for the environment. Organic milk, cereals, and pork generated higher greenhouse gas emissions per product than conventional ones but organic beef and olives had lower emissions in most studies. Usually organic products required less energy, but more land. Per unit of product, organic produce generates higher nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions, ammonia emissions, eutrophication, and acidification potential than conventionally grown produce. Other differences were not significant. The researchers concluded that public debate should consider various manners of employing conventional or organic farming, and not merely debate conventional farming as opposed to organic farming. They also sought to find specific solutions to specific circumstances. A 2018 review article in the Annual Review of Resource Economics found that organic agriculture is more polluting per unit of output and that widespread upscaling of organic agriculture would cause additional loss of natural habitats. Proponents of organic farming have claimed that organic agriculture emphasizes closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management providing the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change and that organic agriculture can decrease fossil fuel emissions. "The carbon sequestration efficiency of organic systems in temperate climates is almost double (575–700 kilograms per hectare per year (16.3–19.8 lb/acre/Ms)) that of conventional treatment of soils, mainly owing to the use of grass clovers for feed and of cover crops in organic rotations." However, studies acknowledge organic systems require more acreage to produce the same yield as conventional farms. By converting to organic farms in developed countries where most arable land is accounted for, increased deforestation would decrease overall carbon sequestration.
SALES AND MARKETING
Most sales are concentrated in developed nations. In 2008, 69% of Americans claimed to occasionally buy organic products, down from 73% in 2005. One theory for this change was that consumers were substituting "local" produce for "organic" produce.
LABOUR EMPLOYMENT
Organic production is more labour-intensive than conventional production. On the one hand, this increased labour cost is one factor that makes organic food more expensive. On the other hand, the increased need for labour may be seen as an "employment dividend" of organic farming, providing more jobs per unit area than conventional systems. The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report suggests that increase in investment in green agriculture is projected to lead to growth in employment of about 60 per cent compared with current levels" and that "green agriculture investments could create 47 million additional jobs compared with BAU2 over the next 40 years".
Much of the growth in women labour participation in agriculture is outside the "male dominated field of conventional agriculture". Operators in organic farming are 21% women, as opposed to 14% in farming in general.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND EMISSIONS
Researchers at Oxford University analysed 71 peer-reviewed studies and observed that organic products are sometimes worse for the environment. Organic milk, cereals, and pork generated higher greenhouse gas emissions per product than conventional ones but organic beef and olives had lower emissions in most studies. Usually organic products required less energy, but more land. Per unit of product, organic produce generates higher nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions, ammonia emissions, eutrophication, and acidification potential than conventionally grown produce. Other differences were not significant. The researchers concluded that public debate should consider various manners of employing conventional or organic farming, and not merely debate conventional farming as opposed to organic farming. They also sought to find specific solutions to specific circumstances.
Proponents of organic farming have claimed that organic agriculture emphasizes closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management providing the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change and that organic agriculture can decrease fossil fuel emissions. "The carbon sequestration efficiency of organic systems in temperate climates is almost double (575–700 kilograms per hectare per year (16.3–19.8 lb/acre/Ms)) that of conventional treatment of soils, mainly owing to the use of grass clovers for feed and of cover crops in organic rotations." However, studies acknowledge organic systems require more acreage to produce the same yield as conventional farms. By converting to organic farms in developed countries where most arable land is accounted for, increased deforestation would decrease overall carbon sequestration.
WASTE MANGEMENT
Waste management is an important part of the urban infrastructure, as it ensures the protection of the environment and of human health. It is not only a technical environmental issue, but also a highly political one. Waste management is closely related to a number of issues such as urban lifestyle, resource consumption patterns, jobs and income levels, and other socio-economic and cultural factors. Lately there has been a trend to enlarge the scope of waste management and include it within the larger concept of resource management. Today, waste management must be seen in its full context. It cannot be solved with merely technical end-of-pipe solutions. When we employ a long-term waste management strategy to ensure sustainable development, this will not only affect a number of different dimensions; there are also different levels of decision-making and action involved. Decision-making and action take place at various levels – nationwide, regional, local and finally in households. All aspects and all actors must be considered when we develop a waste management system and implement it in daily life. There are also large differences in the level of proficiency in the countries of the world. It is easy to forget that the category of countries that are now ‘fine-tuning’ their waste management systems is a minority. The vast majority of countries is busy struggling with such basic issues as ensuring sufficient collection services and implementing a minimal degree of control at disposal sites at the same time as they are facing increasing waste amounts due to the trend of urbanisation. There is an interesting parallel to draw between the problems faced by the cities of today’s low-income economies and those of 19th century North America and western Europe. In both cases, the pace of population growth outstripped the capacity to manage urban services.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT OF SOLID WASTES
Environmentally sound waste management is recognised by most countries as an issue of major concern. For both developing and developed countries, waste management is an important factor in ensuring both human health and environmental protection. Article 21.4 of Agenda 21 states that ‘Environmentally sound waste management must go beyond the mere safe disposal or recovery of wastes that are generated and seek to address the root cause of the problem by attempting to change unsustainable patterns of production and consumption.’ Sustainable waste management is realised by using the technical, organisational and financial resources available in a particular locality. Definitions of sustainable waste management will differ depending on the circumstances. The following components are indispensable for the purpose of guide lining the implementation of a system that will be able to achieve the overall environmental objectives of countries and/or regions:
• waste planning; • regulatory framework;
• enforcement of the law.
Waste management is usually regulated by a national and/or regional waste policy. The following hierarchy is generally accepted in this context:
• waste prevention and minimisation;
• reuse and recycling;
• environmentally safe waste treatment including disposal.
Another important component is waste planning and the co-ordination of other policies on a national, regional and local level. Waste planning makes it possible to take into consideration the large number of different factors that have an impact on the waste management system. The overall policy is linked by the objectives and targets that form the regulatory framework for the industry. The complexity of the framework differs from one country to another, but it sets the scene for the industry. In most developed countries, the industry is strictly regulated with regard to licensing, authorisation and compliance with the law of the different waste treatment facilities. Waste planning is also often subject to legislation: the general contents of a plan and the procedure of how to realise it are established by the law. Enforcement of the law and the powers of the regulatory authorities to ensure that the regulatory framework is respected are necessary tools for efficient legislation. This is a weak point in most countries. Non-compliance with environmental legislation is not always deliberate. But there is still a tendency in society to consider this kind of violation less serious than the violation of other laws. The lack of efficient enforcement of such laws is often due to the lack of financial and human resources.
DESCRIPTION OF THE WASTE INDUSTRY
Over the years, the waste industry has developed into three main groups depending on the type of waste dealt with:
• municipal solid waste: this group often includes commercial and institutional wastes,
• industrial waste: industry-specific waste depending upon the industrial activity concerned,
• hazardous waste. Household hazardous waste is usually included in MSW. In developing countries there is often no distinction made between the different sources of waste; it is simply all mixed. Healthcare waste is a small, but highly significant waste stream with a highly rated perception of risk. It contains a wide range of hazardous materials, as well as infectious materials. In this field, there is a significant potential for improvement in all countries regarding waste prevention, segregation and recycling. This is especially true in developing countries where there is a lack of special management and an urgent need for training
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
All countries generate hazardous waste. The quantities generated and their potential impacts depend on many factors, including the level of industrial development, the way in which wastes are managed, the existing state of the local environment and the capacity of the receiving media. While many developed countries now have effective hazardous waste management systems in place, other countries with a long-term industrial base have not yet developed hazardous waste management systems to the same extent. In the developed world, hazardous waste management programmes were started around 30 years ago. They were prompted by a number of pollution incidents. Some of those early mistakes turned out very costly, and the task of cleaning up old pollution can be a very long one. In the United States of today, more money is spent on dealing with past pollution than on managing the current disposal of hazardous wastes, even though the quantities of newly generated waste are greater. While each country’s hazardous waste management system is different, the national systems have some common features. Perhaps the most important of those are the staged introduction of controls and the gradual development of facilities. While the proper controls and facilities are put in place, interim solutions are employed. Some environmentally developing countries have already started to develop a comprehensive system for the environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes. Many are considering how to start, while others have not yet realised the necessity to begin at all. There is a number of lessons to be learned from the experiences and the mistakes made in developed countries during the implementation phases of their hazardous waste management systems. These include:
• wide-ranging hazardous waste management control cannot be introduced overnight, it must be introduced in stages;
• legislative and enforcement measures must be developed at the same time as facilities and support services are established;
CHAPTER -IV
WATER CONSERVATION
INTRODUCTION
Rivers are said to be the means of survival for our civilization. Rivers are considered to be a powerful and precious national asset of India. The conservation of the river ecosystem is non-transferable now. A reasonable legal protection mechanism working hand in hand with the existing statutes must be instituted for the protection of rivers. The restoration and conservation of rivers must be of the highest priority for sustaining humanity and ecology for the present and future generations. River conservation is a planned activity connected with various habitat features and outlines how to conserve all the rivers spread across India.
This book is addressed not only to scientists or environmentalists, but to every person interested in understanding and preserving one of the most fascinating parts of our Planet Earth.
CAUSES OF POLLUTION IN RIVER BODIES
BY HUMANS
Waste from households particularly sewage water from houses that get discharged into rivers or other various water bodies. These wastes are mainly in form of wastage, garbage from personal usage, or liquid wastes and wastes from sewage. These wastes are mainly for domestic use. Along with dumping wastes into water bodies from industries, or by dumping ground by local people. These dumps usually contain plastic, aluminum, glass which affects rivers and is harmful to aquatic life as these wastes don’t easily degrade inside water.
BY INDUSTRIES
Industrial wastes are usually composed of very harmful substances like lead, asbestos, petrochemicals, and traces of mercury, which are hazardous for aquatic life and humans and the quality of water. Various industries are now being constructed near rivers just to dump waste easily, which is moderated by a commission. These also include wastes from plants, textile factories, fertilizer mills, paper mills, hospital wastes, etc who generate liquid and solid wastes into rivers which contaminates them.
WASTES DUE TO RELIGIOUS PRACTICES
Indians have a high religious factor as cleaning themselves in rivers is said to wash away their sins, dumping dead bodies in the river, dumping religious figures of idols after the worship is done for the period are harmful to river bodies.
DUE TO ACID RAIN
Even though acid rain may seem like a natural problem, it is wise to note that acid rains are caused due to acidic particles in the contaminated air. These particles in the atmosphere get mixed with water vapor and result in acid rain which harms the rivers. This results in thermal pollution which increases the temperature of water bodies and gets altered due to these man-made activities. These toxic products when released are harmful to the native plant as well as the animals including aquatic animals.
RAINWATER HARVESTING (RWH
It is the collection and storage of rain, rather than allowing it to run off. Rainwater is collected from a roof-like surface and redirected to a tank, cistern, deep pit (well, shaft, or borehole), aquifer, or a reservoir with percolation, so that it seeps down and restores the ground water. Dew and fog can also be collected with nets or other tools. Rainwater harvesting differs from stormwater harvesting as the runoff is typically collected from roofs and other surfaces for storage and subsequent reuse. Its uses include watering gardens, livestock, irrigation, domestic use with proper treatment, and domestic heating. The harvested water can also be committed to longer-term storage or groundwater recharge.
Rainwater harvesting is one of the simplest and oldest methods of self-supply of water
for households, having been used in South Asia and other countries for many thousands of years. Installations can be designed for different scales including households, neighbourhoods and communities and can also be designed to serve institutions such as schools, hospitals and other public facilities
APPLICATIONS
Rainwater capture and storage system, Mexico City campus, Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education
Cistern, Mission District, San Francisco, California
Rainwater capture, Gibraltar East Side, 1992
Home, with rain collection jars on roof, Panarea, Aeolian Islands, north of Sicily
Rainwater harvesting and hand washing system for a toilet in Kenya.
Rainwater harvesting in Burkina Faso
Plastic Pond for Rainwater Harvesting, Nepal, 2013
Rainwater harvesting system, Kiribati
Rooftop rainwater harvesting is used to provide drinking water, domestic water, water for livestock, water for small irrigation, and a way to replenish groundwater levels.
Agriculture
In regards to urban agriculture, rainwater harvesting in urban areas reduces the impact of runoff and flooding. The combination of urban ‘green’ rooftops with rainwater catchments have been found to reduce building temperatures by more than 1.3 degrees Celsius. Rainwater harvesting in conjunction with urban agriculture would be a viable way to help meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for cleaner and sustainable cities, health and wellbeing, and food and . The technology is available, however, it needs to be remodeled in order to use water more efficiently, especially in an urban setting.
Kenya has already been successfully harvesting rainwater for toilets, laundry, and irrigation. Since the establishment of the country's 2016 Water Act, Kenya has prioritized the regulation of their agriculture industry. Additionally, areas in Australia use harvested rainwater for cooking and drinking. Studies done by Stout et al researching the feasibility in India found RWH was most beneficial used for small-scale irrigation, which provides income with the sales of produce, and overflow used for groundwater recharge.
Missions to five Caribbean countries have shown that the capture and storage of rainwater runoff for later use is able to significantly reduce the risk of losing some or all of the year's harvest because of soil or water scarcity. In addition, the risks associated with flooding and soil erosion during high rainfall seasons would decrease. Small farmers, especially those farming on hillsides, could benefit the most from rainwater harvesting because they are able to capture runoff and decrease the effects of soil erosion.
Many countries, especially those with arid environments, use rainwater harvesting as a cheap and reliable source of clean water. To enhance irrigation in arid environments, ridges of soil are constructed to trap and prevent rainwater from running down hills and slopes. Even in periods of low rainfall, enough water is collected for crops to grow. Water can be collected from roofs, dams and ponds can be constructed to hold large quantities of rainwater so that even on days when little to no rainfall occurs, enough is available to irrigate crops.
Industry
Frankfurt Airport has the biggest rainwater harvesting system in Germany. The system helps save approximately 1 million cubic meters of water per year. The cost of the system was 1.5 million dm (US$63,000) in 1993. This system collects water from the roofs of the new terminal which has an area of 26,800 square meters. The water is collected in the basement of the airport in six tanks with a storage capacity of 100 cubic meters. The water is mainly used for toilet flushing, watering plants and cleaning the air conditioning system.
Rainwater harvesting was adopted at The Velodrome – The London Olympic Park – in order to increase the sustainability of the facility. A 73% decrease in potable water demand by the park was estimated. Despite this, it was deemed that rainwater harvesting was a less efficient
CHAPTER-V
FOOD WALK PURI
Puri (sometimes spelled as poori) is a deep-fried bread made from unleavened whole-wheat flour that originated in the Indian subcontinent. It is eaten for breakfast or as a snack or light meal. It is usually served with a savory curry or bhaji, as in puri bhaji, but may also be eaten with sweet dishes.
Puris are most commonly served as breakfast and snacks. It is also served at special or ceremonial functions as part of ceremonial rituals along with other vegetarian food offered in Hindu prayer as prasadam. Puris are prepared with wheat flour, either atta (whole wheat flour) or sooji (coarse wheat flour). In some recipes, ajwain, cumin seed, spinach, or fenugreek seeds are added to the dough. The dough is either rolled out in a small circle or rolled out and cut out in small circles, then deep fried in ghee or vegetable oil. While deep frying, puris puff up like a round ball because moisture in the dough changes into steam which expands in all directions. When they are golden-brown in colour, they are removed and either served hot or saved for later use (as with the snack food pani puri). Rolled puris may be pricked with a fork before deep frying to make flat puris for chaat like bhel puri. A punctured puri does not puff when cooked because the steam escapes as it cooks.
Puri can be eaten with many savoury accompaniments, including korma, chana masala, dal, potato-based curries (for example, saagu, bhaji, bhujia, Aloo ki tarkari, shaak, and sambharo), shrikhand and basundi. In some parts of India, puri is also served with a mixed vegetable dish that is prepared during Hindu Puja. Puri is also eaten with sweet accompaniments, such as kheer (a dessert prepared with rice, milk and sugar) or halwa (in Hindi-speaking regions of India, the expression "Halwa puri khana", "to eat puri with halwa", signifies a celebration – of possibly modest means). Puri is often the bread of choice for festivals and special occasions.
In southern India, puri is almost always made for breakfast, and on the east coast (Andhra, Tamil Nadu) it's rarely eaten with non-vegetarian dishes. Often, they will be served with pickles, chutneys, dal masalas, potato masala, or gourd curry (either ivy, ridge, or bottle varieties).
The Indian version of a sweet pudding is what we refer to as Kheer. It is basically a milk-based dessert, which has other ingredients, sweetener and flavorings added to it. The most classic version of this dessert is the rich Rice Kheer, where you slow-cook rice grains, whole milk and sugar to perfection. Addition of saffron, nuts, cardamom, etc. is quite subjective when it comes to this typical Kheer Recipe. This particular creamy version is my family’s heirloom recipe which you will love for its deliciousness.
PREPARATION
1. Rinse ¼ cup basmati rice a couple of times in fresh water and then soak in enough water for 15 to 20 minutes.
2. While the rice grains are soaking, take 1-litre full-fat milk in a heavy wide pan or saucepan or kadai.
3. Keep the pan on low to medium-low heat. Stir at intervals so that the milk does not burn at the bottom of the pan.
4. Let the milk come to a boil.
5. Take 1 tablespoon milk from the pan in a small bowl. Let the milk become warm. Then, add a few saffron strands to the milk. Keep aside.
6. After the milk begins to boil, drain all the water from the rice and add it to the boiling milk.
7. Mix very well with a spoon.
8. Simmer and cook the rice on low heat. No need to cover the pan when the rice is cooking.
9. Cook the rice grains till they are 50% done or half-done.
10. Then, add 5 to 6 tablespoons sugar or as required. You can add raw sugar or white sugar. I generally use unrefined raw sugar.
11. Mix the sugar in the milk.
12. Continue to cook rice on low to medium-low heat. Stir at intervals.
HEALTH BENEFITS OF KHEER
1. Improves gut health
Rice present in kheer contains good amount of starch which helps in improving gut health and also reduces inflammation too. Rice kheer is rich in carbohydrates that help in bringing back the glycogen which is used up while doing heavy exercises.
