Potential of PGPR in Improvement of Environmental-Friendly Vegetable Production

Author(s):  
Haluk Caglar Kaymak
Author(s):  
W. C. Solomon ◽  
M. T. Lilly ◽  
J. I. Sodiki

The development and evaluation of brake pads using groundnut shell (GS) particles as substitute material for asbestos were carried out in this study. This was with a view to harnessing the properties of GS, which is largely deposited as waste, and in replacing asbestos which is carcinogenic in nature despite its good tribological and mechanical properties. Two sets of composite material were developed using varying particle sizes of GS as filler material, with phenolic resin as binder with percentage compositions of 45% and 50% respectively. Results obtained indicate that the compressive strength and density increase as the sieve size of the filler material decreases, while water and oil absorption rates increase with an increase in sieve size of GS particle. This study also indicates that the cost of producing brake pad can be reduced by 19.14 percent if GS is use as filler material in producing brake pad. The results when compared with those of asbestos and industrial waste showed that GS particle can be used as an effective replacement for asbestos in producing automobile brake pad. Unlike asbestos, GS-based brake pads are environmental friendly, biodegradable and cost effective.


2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Ulbrich ◽  
Hannah Kahle ◽  
Philip Kramer ◽  
Margot Schulz

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 1963-1968
Author(s):  
Keat Khim Ong ◽  
Madihah Zainuddin ◽  
Chin Chuang Teoh ◽  
Nor Azah Yusof ◽  
Wan Md Zin Wan Yunus ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 2343-2347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatjana Juzsakova ◽  
Alexandra Csavdari ◽  
Akos Redey ◽  
Tamas Frater ◽  
Laszlo Diossy ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Yu.I. Agirbov ◽  
◽  
R.R. Mukhametzyanov ◽  
E.V. Britik ◽  
◽  
...  

In 1961-2018 in the world as a whole, the gross harvest of potatoes increased from 290.6 million tons to 368.2 million tons, that is, 1.36 times. Over the same period, the production of vegetables and food melons increased from 197.7 million tons to 1,088.8 million tons (5.51 times), and fruits and berries from 199.9 million tons to 867.8 million tons (4.34 times). In a number of states in 1992-2018 the corresponding increase significantly exceeded the average values for the world as a whole, as a result of which their place in the global ranking increased, and the positions of some traditional producers of potatoes and fruits and vegetables decreased. For example, in terms of gross harvest of potatoes in 1992, Russia was in first place, and Poland was in third, while in 2018 they were in 4th and 9th positions, respectively. In terms of vegetable production, Italy and Japan were displaced from 4th and 5th places, which were taken by Turkey and Nigeria. In terms of gross harvests of fruits and berries, Turkey occupied the fifth position in total world production by 2018, although in 1992 it belonged to Italy. Quantitative and qualitative changes inevitably have a significant impact on both the volume of the world market and the parameters of international trade in potatoes, vegetables and melons, fruits and berries. Processes in foreign economic liberalization and economic integration contributed to an increase in the specialization and concentration of production of relevant plants in countries with more favorable natural and climatic conditions, as well as a gradual increase in demand for potatoes, vegetables and melons, fruits and berries from a number of states, including those that used to meet the needs of their population in large volumes at the expense of their own producers. The Russian Federation is one of the significant players in the world potato and fruit and vegetable market. Despite the increase in gross fruit and vegetable production in recent years, Russia’s positions in the global rating dropped from 7th to 10th place in vegetables and melons, from 20th to 31st place in fruits and berries. As for potatoes, there was a decrease in the volume of its production, as a result, Russia dropped from 1st place in 1992 to 4th place in 2018.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document