"I am nothing special, of this I am sure. I am a common man with common thoughts and I've led a common life. There are no monuments dedicated to me and my name will soon be forgotten, but I've loved another with all my heart and soul, and to me, this has always been enough."
Most of my recent post on social and politics have been sort of critical to the federal government, but not today... Today I'm going to post on something that I strongly supported, which is improving public transportation...
During this past few days, there have been 3 good news regarding public transportation...
The first one, is that the work for the MRT project (for Greater KL) will start on July next year... It would take probably up to TEN years for the MRT to materialize, so I hope that the project can kick-off soon so that the public can reap the rewards sooner...
The second news is that finally, the LRT extension projects, (more specifically, the Kelana Jaya Line extension and the Ampang Line extension) are proceeding to the next step after many months of no news on the subject... The contractors have been chosen for the project today (or maybe it was yesterday, because I read it in today's newspaper)...
The third news is that Malaysia is considering to build "bullet train" for KL-Singapore route... The project, called High-speed rail (HSR) is still in planning stage... According to news, the HSR service, travelling at an average speed of 350-450km an hour, will transform travel on the KL-Singapore route by cutting travel time to 1.5 to two hours.... The government is doing a feasibility study on this project and the study is due to be completed by mid-2011...
I hope that these projects will proceed smoothly without any delay and not be bogged down by any problems caused by the contractors etc..
Ps: An efficient public transportation system would reduce carbon emission and thus is more environmentally-friendly...
This is what you will get if you google "banana boat lotion"...
This is one of the assignment in Dosage Design 2 that I have been assigned to... Since I had spent quite an effort to find the details of this product, might as well I posted it here for reference... Now if anyone (customers, patients etc) asked you about sunscreen lotion, you can refer to my blog and enlighten them.... Hehe
Banana Boat lotion is designed to be waterproof and provide protection from the sun's UVA and UVB rays. The product comes in SPF (Sun Protection Factor) 15, 30, 85 and 100. The difference between these formulations is the amount of the active ingredients the product contains. The manufacturers claim this product is non-greasy and sweat-resistant. Banana Boat lotion contains 31 ingredients.
Active Ingredients
Banana Boat lotion has 5 active ingredients, all of which are sun-screening agents. The lotion contains the chemical avobenzone (1% concentration), Homosalate (10%), and oxybenzone (4%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (0.80%) for the SPF 30 formula
Moisturizers
Banana Boat lotion contains 4 moisturizers to help skin maintain a supple state. Water adds moisture to skin immediately and helps formulate the texture of the lotion. Stearyl alcohol , glycerin, caprylyl glycol are also moisturizing agents in the lotion.
Emulsifiers and Preservatives
Emulsifiers keep these substances from separating, while preservatives are added to the formula to prevent the possible formation of potentially harmful microorganisms.
Behenyl alcohol and cetaryl alcohol are emulsifiers that also act as emollients to keep skin from drying out.
Glyceryl stearate citrate, disodium ethylene, dicocamide PEG-15 disulfate, dimethyl capramide and cetearyl alcohol work as emulsifiers.
Lecithin, carbomer, xanthan gum, phenoxyethanol and disodium EDTA act as preservatives.
Other Ingredients
Hydrogenated Dimer Dilinoley/Dimethylcarbonate Copolymer is a chemical included in Banana Boat lotion designed to keep the product waterproof. This ingredient allows the product to stay on the skin when exposed to water, resulting in fewer applications throughout the day.
and this is what you will get if you google "banana boat" only.... huhu
I've gotten used to the idea of having daily internet connection... I am currently feeling disconnected from the world when I don't have internet access this semester...
The world was a much better place when there was internet...
If you read my profile, you’d notice d that one of the core issues that I am interested in is the environmental issues, which is a complex issue which is very much related with other issues such as energy and economy.
Carbon dioxide emission leads to irreversible green house effect which destroys the Earth as a whole.Thus, these emissions must be controlled, and minimized in order to preserve the environment. Coal and hydrocarbon are the most polluted energy sources as they emit massive amount of carbon dioxide.
Nuclear energy (in this article referring to fission reactors, not fusion reactors) on the other hand is much more environment-friendly and not-to-mention costs much less economically.
Environment friendly is due to the fact that it did not emit CO2 and only a small amount fission material (eg. Uranium) is needed to produce a very large amount of energy. The waste product of nuclear material is still emitting radiation, but can be processed to be used as radiopharmaceuticals for example. However, managing a nuclear plant must be done with extra care to prevent nuclear-waste spill which can leads to unwanted health-deteriorating radiation emission.
Economic-wise, as only a small amount of fission material is needed to generate a very large amount of energy, the cost to generate energy would be minimized and we would then enjoy lower tariff for electricity. Currently, the energy in Malaysia is very much dependent on oil, natural gas and coal, and the ever-increasing price of these hydrocarbons makes the cost of generating energy to be increasing higher and higher, leading to increasing electricity tariff as time goes by. I once read that Malaysia only needed ONE large (standard size) nuclear reactor to fulfill the energy needs of the people, compared to maybe 50 of coal and hydrocarbon generators in use now.
However, I think that Malaysia would not opted for the large reactors but maybe build smaller nuclear reactor models such as being used in South Korea. Maybe, instead of having one high radiation area, it is a good option to have more areas but emitting much less radiation.
On the downside:
The Malaysian environmentalists uses the age-old mantra of nuclear reactor emit radiation and possibility of nuclear disaster. I do not agree with their weak arguements. Malaysian environmentalists, unlike international environmentalists (like me) do not think of the situation as a whole. They are not thinking of about the economic sense, the technological points, the very unhealthy addiction to hydrocarbons, the condition that one day the hydrocarbons would be depleted and the green house effect. Malaysian environmentalist only care about the radiation around the area where the nuclear reactor will be built. Where are they when the world is discussing the climate change topic in Copenhagen (if I am not mistaken in copenhagen), they should at least have made a strong media statement to lobby the government to present with a strong green solution.
Some writers present the point that nuclear disaster is possible in Malaysia (although unheard of in the present time) because of the lack of maintenance culture in Malaysia. This itself is not a strong point to be discussed, I don’t care, hire a foreign company to run it if you want to make sure it is safe.
Neway, for those people out there who do not know yet that Malaysia has already have a small nuclear reactor in Agensi Nuklear Malaysia for about 20 years and I would say that it is managed just well by the Malaysians.
Some Pakatan Rakyat leaders (Lim Guan Eng and Khalid) have argued that we do not need the nuclear reactor because our energy reserve is very high (about 40%) when it should be much lower. Energy reserve is the energy which is generated but not used (quite a waste kan). They also argued that the Bakun Hydroelectric Dam would be operational soon (dunno when) but would solve the energy problem in the near future.
I agree with them, BUT the nuclear energy takes about 10 to 15 years to be developed and we must not delay, we must start now because this is for the future not for now. We cannot just wake up one day and want a nuclear energy, this needs time. Yes, certain measures must be pushed forward to solve the energy crisis now but we are not discussing this in this article, we are discussing on the future energy needs of Malaysia.
The conclusion:
Nuclear energy is a clean source of energy and it is safe (provided that the management is according to international standards). The nuclear initiatives must start now as it would take years before the energy can be harvested. I think that nuclear is not be the only solution, but it would be the centerpiece of the solution to the energy and environment problems. Nuclear energy complemented with other renewable energy sources such as solar power and wind power may provide a clean energy for the Malaysians in the future. I hope the present Malaysian government will not flip-flop on this issue.
