0
Written justification for not purchasing required recycled content or biobased products with a Government Purchase Card (select THREE that apply)?
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
Is not required but is recommended, May be required within particular organizations, May be based on price, performance, or product availability.
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Is Written justification for not purchasing required recycled content or bio based products with a Government Purchase Card?
No, written justification for not purchasing required recycled content or biobased products with a Government Purchase Card is not sufficient. Compliance with sustainability requirements is necessary to promote environmental goals and reduce the government's carbon footprint. Agencies are required to make every effort to prioritize these purchases.
Biobased USA - Product SoySoap for soybeans miracle grow formulation or fake?
Might be real as it just won the Soybean Enhancement Trails at NCSU!
What has the author Meredith A Williamson written?
Meredith A. Williamson has written: 'U.S. biobased products market potential and projections through 2025' -- subject- s -: Forecasting, Biomass energy industries
What are biobased products?
products that are composed in whole or in significant part of biological products or renewable domestic agricultural materials or forestry materials
For what purpose is radiocarbon dating used?
Radiocarbon dating is used to determine the age of organic materials, such as wood, bones, and shells, by measuring the amount of carbon-14 remaining in the sample. This helps archaeologists, anthropologists, and geologists to establish accurate timelines for events and artifacts in the past.
Can biofuels curb the production of greenhouse gases?
Yes, since we are simply recycling the CO2 . Corn and soybeans may be the current "go-to" crops for producing ethanol and biodiesel, respectively. But two other crops--switchgrass and hybrid poplar--could steal the show in the future when it comes to curbing greenhouse gases, according to Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and collaborating scientists. In a study published in the April issue of Ecological Applications, ARS scientist Paul Adler and colleagues compared the net production of carbon dioxide and two other greenhouse gases associated with producing biofuels from several different bioenergy crops. In short, it takes energy to produce energy, notes Adler, who's in the ARS Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit, University Park, Pa. For example, operating a tractor to plow, plant, fertilize and harvest all require gasoline or diesel fuel. This, in turn, releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases tied to global climate change. The good news? Bioenergy crops offset their greenhouse-gas contributions in three key ways: by removing carbon dioxide from the air and storing it in crop roots and soil as organic carbon; by producing coproducts and byproducts like protein for animal feed and fertilizers for other crops, which saves on energy to make feed by other means; and by displacement, whereby replacing a fossil fuel with a biobased one "recycles" rather than adds more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Together with ARS scientist Stephen Del Grosso of Fort Collins, Colo., and William Parton of Colorado State University, Adler predicted a 40 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions if ethanol and biodiesel from corn-soybean rotations were used instead of gasoline and diesel. This reduction was about two times greater than using ethanol produced from corn grain alone. However, the team predicted that using switchgrass and hybrid poplar would produce nearly a three-fold greater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to corn-soybean rotations. This tends to take the pressure off of these crops, since they are primarily used for food production. This research shows that biofuels do indeed have potential to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere while helping reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil, according to Adler. ARS is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief scientific research agency. The full text of this article is available on the ARS web site. To grow the corn needed to make ethanol, you have to use tractors. Tractors burn diesel fuel, which is a fossil fuel, which releases carbon dioxide when it burns. As it turns out, it takes more energy to grow the corn than you get out of the ethanol. At this point, we would be better off to just burn the diesel in automobiles. But that's not the end of the story. Even though ethanol is not a "fossil fuel", it still contains carbon, and therefore still releases carbon dioxide when it burns. So, you get more CO2 emissions by producing and using biofuels than you get from burning the fossil fuels directly in automobile engines.
