 |
|
|
|||||
If you want to recycle an old electric toothbrush or pair of headphones with a lithium battery embedded inside, it can be hard to find a place to do itand many existing battery collection boxes are fire risks. Thats why Redwood Materials, the battery recycling and energy storage company founded by ex-Tesla engineer J. B. Straubel, just redesigned the collection bin. The new bins, rolling out first in San Francisco stores in partnership with the citys environmental department, can accept any type of rechargeable device, from phones to electric razors, earbuds, and loose lithium batteries. When someone drops a battery or device into a slot, the bin automatically lowers it into a sealed 50-gallon drum and coats it in fire suppressant. The bin also uses sensors to monitor itself to prevent fires. [Photo: Redwood Materials] Consumer recycling has been incredibly challenging, says Alexis Georgeson, Redwoods vice president of external affairs and consumer recycling programs. I think some of the issues and lack of technology to enable frictionless, free, visible collection points for consumers have contributed to the abysmal collection rates that were at right now. Only around 16% of electronics are recycled in the U.S. right now. Most batteries end up in junk drawers or landfills, because fundamentally consumers just dont understand how to get them recycled, Georgeson says. [Photo: Redwood Materials] Redwood launched to handle battery recycling for businesses in 2017, but people who heard about the startup almost immediately began dropping off their own batteries at the companys front door or shipping them in. The company started working with nonprofits and communities trying to make recycling easier, and previously placed standard collection bins at some locations. But those bins didnt solve the challenge of fire risk, so they had to be monitored by staff. [Image: Redwood Materials] The new bins manage fire risk without human intervention, so they can scale up much more easily. Theyre also secure, so someone could feel safe dropping in an old phone or laptop, unlike in the open cardboard boxes that exist in some other stores. When the drums are full, Redwood adds them to pallets that are shipped back to its Nevada facility for recycling. (The fire suppressant is also reused.) EV batteries still make up a bigger volume of the companys recycling; a single Tesla Model 3 battery is equivalent to several thousand iPhone batteries. But as the number of battery-filled devices keeps proliferating, and consumers quickly get rid of them, the potential scale is large. Redwood plans to install the bins in other parts of the Bay Area, then Nevada, and then deploy them nationally. Even before the official launch in San Franciscoand without any promotion or signagethe bins are already popular. We actually rolled the bins out very quietly a couple of weeks ago, and we’ve already filled several of them up, Georgeson says.
Category:
E-Commerce
The Trump administration said in a court filing Monday that the president’s White House ballroom construction project must continue for unexplained national security reasons and because a preservationists’ organization that wants it stopped has no standing to sue.The filing was in response to a lawsuit filed last Friday by the National Trust for Historic Preservation asking a federal judge to halt President Donald Trump’s project until it goes through multiple independent reviews and a public comment period and wins approval from Congress.The administration’s 36-page filing included a declaration from Matthew C. Quinn, deputy director of the U.S. Secret Service, the agency responsible for the security of the president and other high-ranking officials, that said more work on the site of the former White House East Wing is still needed to meet the agency’s “safety and security requirements.” The filing did not explain the specific national security concerns; the administration has offered to share classified details with the judge in a private, in-person setting without the plaintiffs present.The East Wing had sat atop a emergency operations bunker for the president.Quinn said even a temporary halt to construction would “consequently hamper” the agency’s ability to fulfill its statutory obligations and its protective mission.A hearing in the case was scheduled for Tuesday in federal court in Washington.The government’s response offered the most comprehensive look yet at the ballroom construction project, including a window into how it was so swiftly approved by the Trump administration bureaucracy and its expanding scope.The filings assert that final plans for the ballroom have yet to be finalized despite the continuing demolition and other work to prepare the site for eventual construction. Below-ground work on the site continues, wrote John Stanwich, the National Park Service’s liaison to the White House, and work on the foundations is set to begin in January. Above-ground construction “is not anticipated to begin until April 2026, at the earliest,” he wrote.The National Trust for Historic Preservation did not respond to email messages seeking comment.The privately funded group last week asked the U.S. District Court to block Trump’s project.“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,” the lawsuit states. “And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in.”Trump had the East Wing torn down in October as part of his plan to build an estimated $300 million, 90,000-square-foot (27,432-square-meter) ballroom able to accommodate about 1,000 people before his term ends in January 2029. He says presidents before him long have wanted an event space larger than the rooms currently at the White House, and says the ballroom would end the practice of entertaining visiting foreign dignitaries in large, temporary pavilions on the south grounds.The Trust asserts that the plans should have been submitted to the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts and Congress before any action was taken. The lawsuit notes that the Trust wrote to those entities and the National Park Service on Oct. 21, after East Wing demolition began, urging a stop to the project and asking the administration to comply with federal law, but received no response.The lawsuit cites several federal statutes and rules detailing the role the planning and fine arts commission and lawmakers play in U.S. government construction projects.The administration argued in its response that the president has the authority to modify the White House and included the extensive history of changes and additions to the Executive Mansion since it was built more than 200 years ago. It also asserted that the president is not subject to the statutes cited by the plaintiffs.Department of Justice attorneys said in the filing that the plaintiff’s claims about the East Wing demolition are “moot” because the tear-down cannot be undone. The administration also argues that claims about future construction are “unripe” because the plans are not final.The administration also contends that the Trust cannot establish “irreparable harm” because above-ground construction is not expected until spring. It argues that the reviews sought in the lawsuit, consultation with the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts, “will soon be underway without this Court’s involvement.”Trump’s ballroom project has prompted criticism in the historic preservation and architectural communities, and among his political adversaries, but the lawsuit is the most tangible effort thus far to alter or stop his plans for an addition that itself would be nearly twice the size of the White House before the East Wing was torn down.In 2000, the National Park Service’s Comprehensive Design Plan for the White House first identified the need for a larger event space to address an increase in visitors and to provide a venue suitable for major events, according to the administration’s filing. Darlene Superville, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Vega Farms, a California-based food producer, has voluntarily recalled Vega Farms-branded in-shell eggs due to a Salmonella outbreak that has sickened more than 60 people and led to more than a dozen hospitalizations. Heres what you need to know about the outbreak, impacted products and retailers, and what to do if you have the recalled eggs in your possession: How many people got sick? In a notice posted on Friday, December 12, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) warns businesses and consumers to avoid eating, serving, or selling recalled in-shell Vega Farms eggs. According to the agency, 63 California residents have reported illnesses linked to the Salmonella outbreak, and 13 people have been hospitalized. Fortunately, no deaths have been reported. During an inspection, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and CDPH collected egg and environmental samples from Vega Farms. Multiple samples tested positive for Salmonella. At least one sample matched the strain found in sick individuals. Which products are impacted by the recall? Here are more details about the recalled product: Brand: Vega Farms Product description: Brown eggs Julian Date (3-digit number from 001 to 365 corresponding to the day of the year): 328 and prior Sell-by dates: 12-22-25 and prior Retail package sizes: 1-dozen cartons; 30-egg flats Food service packaging: 15-dozen cases (contains 6 flats of 30 eggs each) The CDPH has images of the product labels on its website. Where were the recalled eggs sold? According to the CDPH, the recalled Vega Farms eggs were distributed to restaurants, grocery stores, co-ops, and at farmers markets in the Sacramento and Davis areas of Northern California. State health officials have published a retail distribution list with a handful of impacted retailers. Cafe Bernado, 234 D St., Davis, CA 95616 Cafe Bernado, 2730 Capitol Ave., Sacramento, CA 95816 Cafe Bernado, 515 Pavilions Ln., Sacramento, CA 95825 Davis Foods Co-op, 620 G St, Davis, CA 95616 Paragarys, 1403 28th St., Sacramento, CA 95816 Ristorante Piatti, 571 Pavilions Ln.k Sacramento, CA 95825 Sacramento Foods Co-op, 2820 R St., Sacramento, CA 95816 Sage Market, 201 Sage St., Davis, CA 95616 Segundo Market, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616 Taylors Market, 2900 Freeport Blvd., Sacramento, CA 95818 Tercero DC, 237 Tercero Hall Circle, Davis, CA 95616 UC Davis Cuarto Market, 550 Oxford Circle #1ST, Davis, CA 95616 Dont consume the recalled product Recalled products should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase for a refund. Businesses shouldnt sell recalled products. What’s more, any items or surfaces that have come in contact with the recalled product should be washed and sanitized. If youve become sick after eating recalled eggs, contact a healthcare provider. If you see the recalled product for sale, call the CDPH Complaint Hotline at 800-495-3232 or submit an online report through CDPHs Food and Drug Branch. If you have any questions about the recall, you can call Ramsi Vega at (530) 400-9505 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. What is Salmonella infection? Salmonella infection is a bacterial disease. Humans usually become infected through contaminated water or food, according to the Mayo Clinic. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Salmonella infection symptoms typically begin six hours to six days after infection. The most common symptoms are diarrhea, fever, and stomach cramps. Illness typically lasts four to seven days. Most people recover without medical treatment. However, some people are more likely to get very sick and may require medical treatment. This includes children under 5, adults 65 and older, and people with weakened immune systems. Why does this sound familiar? Salmonella-related egg recalls have been in the headlines a lot this year. Although this latest recall is limited to California, others have impacted nationally distributed products. In October, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said that more than six million eggs from an Arkansas-based food producer were recalled due to Salmonella concerns. And over the summer, nearly 100 people across 14 states were sickened by Salmonella linked to eggs.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||