A critical analysis of attenuation effects of different types of ear protective devices

1991 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 210-213
Author(s):  
A. B. Rao ◽  
BN Pranesh Rao
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Protective Devices ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Ear Protective Devices

scholarly journals Embodied Energy and Embodied GWP of Windows: A Critical Review

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (13) ◽  
pp. 3788
Author(s):  
Francesco Asdrubali ◽  
Marta Roncone ◽  
Gianluca Grazieschi
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Strong Dependence ◽  
Primary Energy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Embodied Energy ◽  
Construction Sector ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Operational Phase ◽  
Operational Impact

The construction sector is one of the most energy-intensive in the industrialized countries. In order to limit climate change emissions throughout the entire life cycle of a building, in addition to reducing energy consumption in the operational phase, attention should also be paid to the embodied energy and CO2 emissions of the building itself. The purpose of this work is to review data on embodied energy and GWP derived from EPDs of different types of windows, to identify the LCA phases, the most impacting materials and processes from an environmental point of view and to perform a critical analysis of the outcomes. The results show a strong dependence on the typology of the frame, with wooden windows having competitive performances: lower average primary energy non-renewable (1123 MJ/FU), higher average primary energy renewable (respectively 817 MJ/FU) and lower global warming potential (54 kgCO2eq/FU). More transparency and standardization in the information conveyed by the program operators is, however, desirable for a better comparability of windows performances. In particular, the inclusion of the operational impact in the EPD is sporadic, but strongly important, since it can be the most impactful phase.

scholarly journals Reframing the public sociology debate: Towards collaborative and decolonial praxis

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Arribas Lozano
Keyword(s):  
Academic Success ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Public Sociology ◽  
Good Opportunity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Professional Sociology ◽  
Different Types

This article presents a critical analysis of Michael Burawoy’s model of public sociology, discussing several of its epistemic and methodological limitations. First, the author focuses on the ambiguity of Burawoy’s proposal, problematizing the absence of a clear delimitation of the concept of ‘public sociology’. Second, the author links the academic success of the category of public sociology to the global division of sociological labour, emphasizing the ‘geopolitics of knowledge’ involved in Burawoy’s work and calling for the decolonization of social science. Then, the author expounds his concerns regarding the hierarchy of the different types of sociology proposed by Burawoy, who privileges professional sociology over other types of sociological praxis. Reflecting upon these elements will provide a good opportunity to observe how our discipline works, advancing also suggestions for its transformation. Along these lines, in the last section of the article the author elaborates on the need to go beyond a dissemination model of public sociology – the unidirectional diffusion of ‘expert knowledge’ to extra-academic audiences – and towards a more collaborative understanding of knowledge production.

scholarly journals When was Dostoevsky’s Father Born? (Critical Analysis and Source Classification)

2020 ◽  
pp. 218-239
Author(s):  
Boris Tikhomirov
Keyword(s):  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
Different Types

The article presents a comprehensive review and critical analysis of all the documents identified to date that allow making assumptions about the year of birth of Mikhail Andreyevich Dostoevsky – the writer’s father. It identifies different methods for calculating the year of birth based on different types of documents. The systematization of the sources shows that one group of documents indicates as M.A. Dostoevsky’s year of birth 1788, while another 1787. The beginning of the two traditions can be traced to two contradictory documents, equally dating back to the records of the Podolsk Seminary in 1809. In conclusion, it is stated that the question that gives the title to the article remains open until the discovery of the metrical records about the birth and baptism of the writer's father.

Evaluation of Ear Protective Devices

1956 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 773-773
Author(s):  
David T. Blackstock ◽  
Ronald G. Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Protective Devices ◽  
Ear Protective Devices
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document