Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Essay Example for Free

Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Essay The first hydrogen fuel cell was invented in 1839 by William Groves who conducted an experiment that proved electric current could be produced from a electrochemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen. He named the invention a gas voltaic battery. For 120 years the technology layed dormant until 1959 when a modified farm tractor was produced with 15 kilowatt fuel cell. In 1966 the first hydrogen fuel cell road vehicle was made, it had a range of 120 miles and a maximum speed of 70 mph. Due to high production costs the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle program was canceled. For thirty years the hydrogen fuel cell was used for space exploration. In 2003 a government initiative was announced to promote the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. Hydrogen fuel cells can significantly reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses and theoretically could replace the internal combustion engine. There are a variety of challenges that face further development of the fuel cell vehicle. As of 2014 a total of about 60 hydrogen refueling stations are avaliable to the public worldwide. In the Unitied States there are 12 hydrogen refueling stations 10 of which are located in California. Hydrogen fuel costs 400% more to produce than gasoline. There is a high amount of energy that is needed to make hydrogen into fuel. Hydrogen fuel is stored pressurized form in complex storage tanks. The fuel is kept at a low temperature if hydrogen fuel comes into contact with human skin it can cause immediate frost bite. When there is an improperly designed or damaged valve in a hydrogen vehicle it can cause the tank to over pressurize and explode. Hydrogen fuel is extremely flammable if it comes into contact with an oxidizer such as oxygen it immediately catches fire and burns with an invisible flame. In a car accident a ruptured tank can explode from depressurization. Hydrogen fuel can leak into a cars interior, the driver would be unaware of the odorless gas and be breathing no oxygen if the air conditioning is on recycle causing loss of conciseness or asphyxiation. As of 2014 the range of a hydrogen vehicle is 100 miles on average to 300 miles maximum. A 20 gallon gasoline tank is the equivalent of an 80 gallon hydrogen fuel tank. The National Research Council reported in February 2004 The DOE should halt efforts on high pressure tanks and cryogenic liquid storage. They have little promise of long term practicality for lite duty vehicles. In 2015 Toyota will release its first production hydrogen fuel cell mid size sedan for the price of $70,000. Honda has a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle at the cost of $120,000. There are prototype hydrogen fuel cell vehicle models being produced by a number of auto makers. A May 2008 scientific study in Wired News reported experts say it will be 40 years or more before hydrogen has any meaningful impact on gasoline consumption or global warming, and we cant afford to wait that long. In the meantime, fuel cells are diverting resources from more immediate solutions.

European Union Decision Making

European Union Decision Making Introduction The European Union (EU) decision making process is quite a complex perform which involves more than one institution most of the times. The European council, the European parliament, and the European commissions are the key players within this key complex and multi-party process. More than the past five decades the European Parliament (EP) has motivated from being a mainly consultative assembly to being a genuine co-legislature. The growth in the European Parliaments powers was accompanied by a revaluation of its Standing Committees. The European Parliament (EP) is now generally seen as a co-legislator with the Council is a comparatively new development. It did not enjoy any effective rights of participation in the legislative process for more than three decades. As an assembly it started out with only two key powers: the supremacy to pass a motion of censure against the High Authority and the power to be consulted by the Council on selected legislative proposals. The opinions given in this traditional consultation procedure were non-binding. The Single European Act (SEA) 1987 represented a key step promote for the EP. It manifest the inauguration of a new triangular relationship between the Council, the Commission and the EP by introducing the co-operation procedure, which significantly enhanced inter-institutional dialogue, giving the EP the first opportunity to loosen its legislative power and to make use of its agenda-setting powers. The positive experiences structure of the co-operation procedure, the EPs legislative competencies were extended by the Treaty on European Union (TEU) commonly known as the Maastricht Treaty, 1993. Through the co-decision procedures beginning the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) were, granted the power of veto in several policy areas, for the first time. The EPs role considerably strengthened by the Treaty of Amsterdam (1999), especially as regards its involvement in the legislative process. The procedure of co-decision has been extended from 15 to 38 Treaty areas or types of Community action and now applies to new areas within the fields of transport, environment, energy, development co-operation and certain aspects of social affairs. A new element in the Amsterdam Treaty is the reform of the co-decision procedure. Most significantly, a legislative act can now be adopted at the first reading if either the EP fails to suggest amendments to the Commission proposal or the Council agrees to the changes suggested by the EP. The EPs powers were accompanied by a revaluation of the EP Standing Committees. In the EU policy-making process they have become a key element and can be seen as a very important contribution to the determining of legislation. Operating Mode The EP Standing Committees have been described as the â€Å"legislative backbone† of the EP (Westlake 1994, p. 191). Under the proficiency of these committees everything that could possibly be dealt with by the EP, which officially examine only questions referred by the Bureau. The proposals in the practical political process, incoming legislative directly go to the responsible committee or committees. EP committees Development By 1953, committees have played a vital role within the EP from its setting up: seven committees had already installed by the Common Assembly. In 1979, after the direct elections, 16 standing committees were established. By the year of 1999 their number gradually increased to 20. At that point there was a growing feeling, however, that the number of committees should be reviewed with the main objective of distributing the new legislative obligations resulting from the Amsterdam Treaty more evenly (Corbett; Jacobs; Shackleton 2000, p. 105) The number of EP Standing Committees was subsequently reduced from 20 to 17 after the June 1999 elections. They each cover a particular area or policy field of the EUs activities and now have been reshuffled for the purpose of: (Christine Neuhold, 2001) merging issue clusters (external economic relations has been merged with industry and research and the Committee on Regional Policy now deals with policies concerning transport and tourism), emphasizing new priorities (e.g. equal opportunities now has a more prominent role in the Committee on Womens Rights and the same is true for human rights in the Committee on Foreign Affairs), ensuring greater committee oversight. The EPs committee structure does not correspond to any particular model. The Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, CFSP committee is, according to Westlake, clearly modeled on its equivalent in the United States Senate, but has far fewer powers (Westlake 1994, p. 135). Key players in committees We usually found that committee proceedings are to a large size formed by key players in the committee: committee chairmen, vice-chairs and rapporteurs, generally whose role is well known, and also draftsmen of opinion, shadow rapporteurs and committee co-ordinators. The chairmen and three vice-chairmen are its formal officeholders within each committee. When sensitive votes are held in plenary, the chairman presides over the meetings of the committee and can contribute considerably to shaping legislation. The function of the vice-chairmen is generally to stand in for the chairman when he/she is not available. Once a committee has decided to draw up a report or an opinion it nominates a rapporteur (when the committee bears primary responsibility) or a draftsman (when it has to give an opinion for another committee) (Corbett, Jacobs, Shackleton 2000, p. 108, 117). The group co-ordinators play an important role separately from the official officeholders. A co-ordinator selects by each political group who is responsible for allocating tasks to the group members as its main spokesperson. By opposition political group(s), mainly to monitor the work of the rapporteur are appointed the so-called shadow rapporteurs. By political groups the EP committees are composed on a cross-party basis and the composition process is organized in various ways through procedural rules, and by way of bargaining. Assigning leadership positions within committees is formally based on the dHondt procedure, whereby political groups have the choice of which committee they want to chair in an order determined by the size of the group (Christine Neuhold, 2001).   The individual (both full and substitute) members are chosen by the political groups with the aim of ensuring that each committee reflects the overall political balance among the groups in the EP(Christine Neuhold, 2001). The pivotal role of the committee chairmen, a position that has been described as a â€Å"prized office for MEPs† (Hix 1999), can be illustrated by the contrasting examples of two different directives. Even though the committee chairs were heavily lobbied in both cases, especially by industry, the outcome was highly different Normally the selection of rapporteurs and draftsmen is decided within the individual committees by a system, which is more or less the same in all committees. Each political group has, according to its size, a quota of points. The group co-ordinators then discuss reports and opinions to be distributed, decide how many points each subject is worth and make bids on behalf of their group, the bids based in theory (but not always in the practical political process) on the relationship between the number of points already used by the group and the original quota (Corbett, Jacobs, Shackleton 2000, p. 117). Political groups Significance within committees If committees are the legislative backbone of the EP, the political parties are its lifeblood or the institutional cement pasting together the different units of the Parliament (Williams 1995, p. 395). Each party group in the EP represents a very heterogeneous collection of established groups and temporary alliances (Raunio 2000, p. 242). For the legislative period of 1999-2004 eight political groups are represented in the EP (and a number of non-aligned members). In the elections of June 1999 the PES lost more than 30 seats while the EPP-ED gained 52 and now holds (with 233 seats) a 53-seat majority over the PES. It must be pointed out, however, that these two large political groups together hold more than 66 % of all EP seats. In comparison the European Liberal Democratic and Reformist Group (ELDR), which is the third strongest party within the EP, has only 50 members, i.e. 8 % of the seats (EU Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce in Belgium 1999, p. 13). Political groups have their own staff, in which the total number of employees to which a group is entitled, is linked to the groups size and based on the number of languages used in the group. (Christine Neuhold, 2001). Within the larger groups between two to three staff members observe and follow the work done by each committee, whereas one official might be responsible for observing the work of three or four committees in smaller groups (Raunio 2000). A variety of functions perform within the groups by the staff. One very main aspect is to follow and to prepare the committee proceedings and to support the rapporteur i.e. the shadow rapporteur in their political work. The existing task this involves varies from committee to committee. For example in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development the respective administrator is responsible for drawing up voting lists, whereas in the environment committee the Political Group Staff would only bring the voting lists into a readable form. When trying to co-ordinate their positions or exchanging views the rapporteur might in selected cases not negotiate with the shadow rapporteur but with the responsible administrator (Christine Neuhold, 2001). Expertise and openness significance of committee debates EP committees can exploit a growing pool of expertise. When it comes to supporting the rapporteur or draftsman of opinion in the performance of their task the EP Committee Secretariat is attributed great importance. The officials help increase the functional capacity of the EP by assisting the individual MEPs and the committees. The committee staff not only provides scientific and technical information, but also gives advice on â€Å"political† issues (Christine Neuhold, 2001). Separately from the Committee Secretariat interest groups are another important source of information. For the representation of interests Lobbyists gradually notice the importance of the EP. MEPs act in so far as possible as representatives of the European people, however if they are elected by local constituencies. They have to integrate interests with relevance to Europe as a whole and are therefore contacted by actors working within the myriad of networks to be found in the EU system of multi-level governance (Benz 2001, p. 7). Wessels reports that average MEPs have roughly 109 contacts with interest groups from the national and supranational level each year. In total this amounts to some 67,000 contacts and interest groups annually (Wessels 1999, p. 109). A remarkable improvement in the EPs activities is a great increase in the organization of public hearings by the committees. These hearings can serve up numerous purposes: they can facilitate the identification of or familiarization with a particular issue, assist a committee in the scrutiny of draft legislation, and facilitate identification of preferences. A remarkable example is the drinking water directive: a public hearing, involving a wide range of experts and interested parties, was conducted on the revision of this directive. The key conclusion reached was that there is a critical need to evaluate the existing series of directives and decisions on water quality. Consequently of this hearing particular deficits and problems within this context were recognized and methods of reform were proposed. Relations of EP committees with other EU institutions The connection between the EP and other institutions on the European level has evolved extensively with the introduction of first the co-operation and later the co-decision procedures. Co-operation marked an end to the old bipolar relationship between Council and Commission and the beginning of a triangular relationship in which the EPs legislative input was limited at the outset, though it gradually increased later (Westlake 1994, p. 137). Relations with other institutions throughout the legislative process during co-decision The introduction of the co-decision procedure by the Treaty of Maastricht has been regarded as a major step forward for the EP and â€Å"the cause for parliamentary democracy† at the EU level (Shackleton 2000, p.325). Negotiation between the Council of Ministers and the EP committees has established by the new Treaty provision. As soon as the Amsterdam Treaty took effect these contacts were intensified, mainly as a result of the possibility of concluding the procedure at first reading. Both institutions have paid close attention to the â€Å"Joint declaration on the practical arrangements for the new co-decision procedure† of May 1999, which encourages appropriate contacts with the aim of â€Å"bringing the legislative procedure to a conclusion as quickly as possible† (Christine Neuhold, 2001). Each Council Presidency is in contact with the responsible EP committee, and the respective Minister approaches the committee to present the priorities of the Presidencys programme and also illustrates the particular achievements at the end of the six-month period. Even after Amsterdam there are no clear procedural guidelines for the first reading. The most contentious question is how to mandate the representatives of the EP for negotiating with the Council. An additional open question is which members of the Council and EP hierarchy should meet with whom. At the first reading as a means of speeding up the procedure the EP sees the possibility of reaching an agreement, but not something that should be accepted at any cost. Within the conciliation procedure a process of exchange has developed where both sides are open to make concessions, but at a price that differs according to each set of negotiations (Shackleton 1999, p. 331). The procedure has evolved significantly since its introduction by the Maastricht Treaty, â€Å"where a lot was not written down† and even the basic procedural issues were not always clear. Considering the problems of conciliation, the so-called trialogue meetings are of great significance during its preparation. These sessions, neither the Treaty nor the EP Rules of Procedure, have been formed to an extent under the motto â€Å"necessity is the mother of invention†. They were answer back to the gap left in the Treaty between the Councils second reading and convention of the conciliation committee. The Treaty provisions do not require what, should happen after the Council has given its view on the EPs second-reading amendments and before the delegations meet in the conciliation committee. There were occasional bilateral contacts between Council and EP during the first year and a half after the Maastricht Treaty came into effect, but no structured dialogue. As a result both institutions attempted to find compromises in a room, which could hold over 100 persons. Only in the second half year after the Treaty came into effect was the conclusion finally drawn that this was not an efficient forum for institutional dialogue and that conciliation needed to be prepared by a smaller group (Shackleton 1999, p. 333). In light of the smaller number of persons taking part in trialogues, namely the vice-president concerned; the chairman of the responsible EP committee; and the rapporteur At the level of the trialogue and only have to be â€Å"rubber-stamped† in conciliation a large percentage controversial issue is already solved. The optimistic function of the trialogue is illustrated by the directive on end of vehicle life. At second reading the EP adopted a total of 32 amendments. In a series of trialogue meetings, compromises were reached regarding a considerable number of amendments Study conducted on the effect the co-decision procedure has on the EP committees has shown that co-decision has led to a structural concentration of the bulk of the workload on only three out of 20 Permanent Committees. The three committees dealt with the majority of the draft legal acts submitted under co-decision were: (Christine Neuhold, 2001) Committee on the Environment (36.7 %); Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy (25.9 %); Committee on Legal Affairs (16.9 %). As regards the amount of time needed to conclude a co-decision procedure, the analysis reflects that the Committee on the Environment with the heaviest co-decision burden of all committees stabilized the amount of time required for adoption. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy and the Committee on Legal Affairs have even reduced the time needed for the adoption of legislative acts considerably since co-decision was introduced in 1993 (Maurer 1999, p. 29). Role of EP committees within the implementation process One more significant issue is the process of implementing legislation. In the system of comitology, EP committees play only a marginal role. Comitology is a short-hand term for the process by which certain powers of implementation are delegated to the Commission. The comitology committees are composed of representatives of Member State governments and as such are not democratically elected (Bradley 1997). Since installation of the first comitology committees, the EP has put forward far-reaching demands as regards its involvement in the comitology system. Translating them into political science terms, they could be summarised in the following manner (Hix 2000): clear definition of legislative and executive matters so that the executive authority would be strictly responsible for implementing measures; when implementing acts have been adopted by way of co-decision in the legislative process, the EP should be put on an equal footing with the governments of the Member States; limitation of the executive powers of the Member State governments (at least to a certain extent); the right of the EP to examine all draft implementing acts before they are adopted with the implementation timetable; the right of the EP to veto legislation before it is implemented. Connection to EU citizens: the problem of accountability and responsibility The concept of accountability for this study is defined in two ways: primary, to be accountable is seen to be in a position of stewardship and thus to be called to answer questions about ones activities and administration. This is very much connected to ensuring a certain degree of openness and transparency within the decision making process. Choices and debates have to be broken down in such a way that citizens are able to understand them and have a certain degree of insight into decision-making processes. Second, to be accountable is perceived as being censurable or dismissible (Bealey 1999, p. 2; Lord 1998). Because of the fact that they are directly elected, the members of the EP are directly accountable to their electorate. Though, the electoral procedures of the EP are questionable as regards the principle of political equality. Concerning accountability, it is also doubtful whether electors are adequately informed about the EPs activities, and they seem to have insufficient motivation to monitor the EP by participating in elections: the average turnout of 49 % in the 1999 EP elections speaks for itself(Christine Neuhold, 2001). The complex EU decision-making procedures are not transparent and sometimes rather difficult to describe and understand, when the process reached by a majority. European parties be unsuccessful to organize dependable factions and the relationships between the EP and other EU institutions, specially the Council, are difficult to comprehend. One of the problems the EP is presently facing is that the EP does not have the authority of a legislature. As a co-legislator together with the Council, it cannot be held accountable for decisions it makes on its own (Benz 2000, p. 16). Additionally, there is no European government that can be held accountable to the EP. The EP has to give the rights of its vote of approval to the Commission and to the Commission President. By vote of censure, it can also force the entire Commission to resign. The EP hence has the power to vote the Commission out of office. Though, it is not the EP but the European Council that selects the President and the members of the Commission. In consequence the composition of the executive is not based on the results of European elections. Changes to the Treaties do not have to be ratified by the EP, nor are members of the EP present at Intergovernmental Conferences held with the aim of Treaty reform (Raunio 2000, p. 231). By this study it has been reflected, complex forms of inter-institutional bargaining make it difficult to pinpoint what decisions were taken by whom. Main decisions are taken in smaller groups such as the trialogue that permit for the achievement of consensus with other institutional actors such as the Council. However, the conclusion of complex deals obscures who has won or lost on particular issues. The circumstances is problematical by the fact that MEPs are like members of any national parliament confronted with a fundamental conflict of roles, specifically that of the competent co-legislator versus the representative of the interests of the people who elected him/her. The previous requires expertise and knowledge and complicated negotiations within the committee and with representatives of the EU institutions. The concluding requires stable contact with the EU citizens. The burden of committee work will require more time and effort of MEPs, making it more difficult to tend to the interests of the â€Å"potential voter† With the growth in the EPs legislative tasks. Concluding notes The actual authority of the EP is at least partly based on the work of its committees. In shaping EU legislation they play a vital role. This becomes noticeable when taking a final look at what EP committees achieve: Operation of economization: From an improved familiarity with the subject, EP committees make processing of a growing workload possible and benefit. To cope with its increasing legislative workload, committees play a vital role in the EPs quest. This improved burden for committees has not led to a slowing down of the decision-making process. Information acquisition: This improved familiarity of committee members with particular issues leads to improved specialization, thereby increase the confidence of non-committee members in the work of the committee. It has found that the EP committees constitute an important arena for the communication of interests. MEPs can use a rising pool of expertise from members of the Committee Secretariat on the one hand and on the other hand representatives of interests groups or NGOs. Co-ordination: Committee members are selected on a cross-party basis and through different means: throughout the political groups, procedural rules, and bargaining. The political groups within the EP have found different means to maximize their influence within committees, for instance by appointing shadow rapporteurs and group co-ordinators. Committees however provide an arena for the political groups to deliberate in order to find the necessary majorities, something not possible in plenary sessions. Input of smaller political groups: committee membership provides a real chance for representatives of smaller political groups in certain instances for example the Greens/EFA to take part in the shaping of legislation, by appointing the rapporteur for example. Consensus-building: The EP committee construction can give to consensus-building by providing an arena for detailed deliberation, which is not possible in plenary. It has found that divisions in committees are very issue-specific, and it must be noted that the committee lead very often plays an integrative role. Publicity: Committee meetings are usually open to the public and also the media. Committees permit members and committee chairs in particular to make publicity, at least when controversial topics such as the BSE crisis are on the agenda. Beyond this categorization, this provides an overview of how EP committees operate rather more normative, conclusions. The Standing Committees and the EP operate in a very different environment than the committees in national parliaments, a key difference being the lack of a European government directly accountable to the EP and the unique forms of decision-making in the multi-level system of European governance. In this process of relations with other EU institutions, remarkably the Council and the Commission, the EP committees play a vital role. The EPs work environment brings order and structure by the committee-based division of labor. Committees present personnel and structural resources which build up the negotiating position of the EP vis-ÃÆ'  -vis the Council, for instance in the co-decision process. Vital players in committees for example group co-ordinators, chairmen and rapporteurs not only contribute to cohesion and coherence within committees, but play a very important role in finding useful solutions to problems, so raising the committees output significantly. It has found that key players are often appointed due to their expertise in the particular policy area, which is sometimes gained throughout work within the industry previous to their parliamentary career. This and the fact that they can use a growing pool of expertise enhances their standing vis-ÃÆ'  -vis other institutions. It is also found that political actors who have acquired experience with these very specific forms of inter-institutional negotiations are selected to deal with co-decision, thus contributing to the level of trust and coh erence, particularly during conciliation. By the negotiations this is illustrated which dealt with the SOCRATES programme, the revision of the directive on open network provisions regarding voice telephony where the rapporteur was re-appointed, and the Fifth Framework Programme. Committees enlarge accountability of the EP as much as their meetings are usually open to the public and committee documents for instance draft reports are rather freely available. By meeting visiting groups and spending a large part of the working week in their constituencies, i.e. Member States Committee members also try to build up the link to EU citizens. Moreover committees enable effective communication of relevant (citizen) interests to those involved in the process of governance. Contact with lobbyists has normally become part of the daily business of committee members. In spite of these positive aspects, EP committees can do little to alleviate general structural deficits regarding accountability and legitimacy within the multi-level system, such as the lack of a European government, which is directly accountable to the EP.

Maori Land Issues :: essays papers

Maori Land Issues It^s a known fact that land issues have always been a major topic within Maori and Pakeha race relations in New Zealand. The disputes go back to the 1800 when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840. According to the second article of the Treaty, land could only be sold to the Crown if the owners wished to sell them. Disputes over the government^s attempts to buy more land at very cheap prices that were below the value of the land was one of the many reasons that led to the New Zealand Wars in the 185os and 1860s. As a result of the wars, under the New Zealand Settlement Act in 1863, 800,000 hectares of Maori land was confiscated by the government as a punishment for those tribes who opposed the government. Bitterness over the land the Maori people lost and sorrow over the people who lost their lives made an ugly scar in the history of race relations in Aotearoa. With the Native Lands Act in 1862 individual purchase of Maori land was allowed. Although the confiscations caused bitterness and resentment among those affected tribes, the work of The Native Land Court led to far more land being lost, and this affected all tribes. The Native Land Court was set up in 1865 with the intention of getting rid of the communal ownerships of Maori land which was called individualisation so it could be sold more easily. The Court had the intended effect: land sales continues at an increasing rate. By 1911 only 10% of New Zealand^s 66 million acres remained in Maori hands. In 1900 James Carroll, the first Maori Minister of Native Affairs, passed a notable piece of legislation: a Maori Land Administration Act which set up a Council which was based on Carroll^s ^taihoa^ (wait and see) delaying policies. In the Council, Maori owners were in majority, to administer the lease of Maori land. The Council leased but sold very little land and this caused settler discontent and in 1905, the Council were replaced by a European dominated Boards. By the end of the Liberal^s time in office in 1912, a further 3 million acres of Maori land had been sold. Also Sir Apirana Ngata worked with James Carrolls on the Maori Councils Act in 1900. After the Act failed to help Maori people, Ngata decided that the best way he could change laws and policies that affected Maori was through parliament. In 1905 he won the seat for Eastern Maori. As an MP Ngata could

An Inspector Calls by J.B.Priestly Who killed Eva Smith? Essay

An Inspector Calls by J.B.Priestly Who killed Eva Smith? There are many different factors involved with the death of Eva Smith that should be considered while asking the question whom ultimately killed Eva Smith. Each one of the Birling family (including Gerald Croft) pushed Eva Smith that extra bit closer to killing herself, but no one person was individually responsible for her death. Whether one person was more to blame than any other it is hard to say. Although these people contributed to her unfortunate end to life, her position in life and society are also greatly to blame. It is Mr. Arthur Birling who starts off the train of events, as he is the first to come in to contact with Eva Smith. Mr. Birling sacked Eva Smith from his factory after she and a few others went on strike, demanding higher wages. As Mr. Birling said to the inspector, 'She'd had a lot to say - far too much - so she had to go'. I don't see that he did anything wrong, anyone in his position would have done the same. And as he says, it's his duty 'to keep labour costs down'. He's a 'hardheaded businessman', as he calls himself, he'd do anything to make as much profit as possible. He wasn't to know what would happen to Eva Smith two years down the line, after he sacked her. As he said 'If you don't come down sharply on some of theses people, they'd soon be asking for the earth'. Although Mr. Birling didn't do anything wrong in my eyes, he wasn't portrayed too well throughout the play. He shows himself to be arrogant, complacent and self-absorbed. One major flaw in Mr. Birling's behaviour is that he seems to show no remorse at all for Eva, and after all he did help drive her to commit suicide. He shows no regret for dismissing E... ...ike ending her life, and she wouldn't be lying on a slab with her insides burnt out. After all, she was the person who decided to kill herself, she could have tried for another job, she could have accepted the money from Eric and she could have made him responsible for the baby, when it came. In conclusion, it would be unfair to put the blame onto one person, when each and every one of them helped contribute to Evas' miserable end to life. It may be more accurate to blame society, her class, and the time in which she lived. No real crime has been committed in this play, but I believe that the Birling family should share the moral responsibility for this young woman's pitiful suicide. Then maybe next time they are about to do something selfish they'll think of the devestation they might bring to others, and not just the benefit they bring to themselves.

Domus Aurea, Golden House Of N :: essays research papers fc

The Domus Aurea, Golden House of Nero In AD 64, Nero set fire to the city of Rome. The exact reasons he did it are not fully known. It is thought that he partly did for poetic or artistic purposes, or for the purpose of clearing away a city that had currently dissatisfied him. In its place however he did rebuild a better Rome, for the most part that is. A large portion, and arguably too large of a portion, was expropriated for the use of his own residence to be called the Domus Aurea. This is translated: The Golden House, and so, the residence is called: The Golden House of Nero. While the Domus Aurea had rather unjustified reasoning behind it, it is one of the greatest architectural achievements of the ancient world. Nero’s residence before his Golden House, was the Domus Transitoria. This was by now means any small living space. It was considered to be a mansion in itself. This palace linked to the Imperial Gardens of Maecenas on the Esquiline hill. It also spanned up the Velian slope beside the Forum (Grant 164). However this structure was not destroyed in the fire of 64. However it did clear out a valley behind it making room for Nero’s future house. Promptly after the fire construction was begun on Nero’s Golden House. It would continue until AD 68 (Wheeler 142). In fact the Domus Transitoria would soon become part of the new Domus Aurea. The architects of this great project were more engineers than they were architects. Their names were Severus and Celer (Picard 116). They were more like Italian bosses heading up a team of technicians who came to Rome in hordes due to their recent fire. However, these engineers main goal was to make the estate look bigger and be bigger without actually expanding. They accomplished by working on it from the inside out, utilizing paintings on walls that gave the impression of going on for infinity. It is an under statement to refer to these buildings as houses at all though. They were clearly much more than this, in even their smallest proportions. The Domus Aurea itself was a series of buildings and landscapes designed to give the impression of a vast park in a relatively small area for such a thing (Picard 116). The idea behind this was that you would create something more beautiful for the beholder if your creation was beautiful for how you used the earth.

Small Talk

Small Talk We’ve all engaged in some sort of small talk either in the office, on campus, at a party, or other places where you find yourself in the company of others. For some of us, participating in small talk may come easily, while for others it may be quite difficult. Some individuals may find small talk to be irritating while others find it a necessity. In this paper I am going to explore what exactly defines small talk as such; the reasons why people find the need to engage in small talk; the benefits, and disadvantages of small talk; is there an ethical approach to small talk; and provide tips on how to participate in small talk—without it creating an uncomfortable atmosphere. What exactly defines small talk as such, segregating it from the normal conversations exchanged between two individuals? Small talk is defined as a light conversation; it is typically polite and about matters of little importance, especially between people who do not know each other well. In these conversations general-interest topics are commonly discussed such as movies, sports, food, travel, and music. Many find that those who engage in this form of conversation are approachable and friendly. By taking an active part in these conversations you send a message that you are ready, willing and able to communicate. This may not seem like a difficult task, considering all humans communicate at various levels daily, but to engage in small talk may actually be very difficult, so when done willingly and well it can say a lot about that person. Part of being successful at small talk is being an avid listener. This is a very important part of conversation. Many get worried about being able to communicate their thoughts clearly that they neglect to listen. Listening carefully helps in understanding and encouraging those who are speaking to you. Franklin Roosevelt, the thirty-second president of the United States of America, believed that most people were poor listeners. He believed that this held true especially when engaging in small talk conversations. To prove his point and amuse himself, he would greet visiting guests with, â€Å"I murdered my grandmother this morning. He was usually responded with a puzzling look yet a polite nod in approval. However, one evening he was impressed when one guest responded with a surprising response, â€Å"I’m sure she had it coming. † Even so, Roosevelt did prove the common neglect individuals give towards small talk. So, why do people engage in small talk? Talking is the primary form of communication between all beings. The mere act of t alking is a way to â€Å"break the ice,† relieve any tensions, and it helps individuals find a common ground amongst them. Small talk is most commonly found in an instance when there is an uncomfortable silence, or is used in a situation where a person is waiting for something—it passes the time. There are many instances when people feel they have to engage in small talk simply not to be rude. We have been cultured in our society to view small talk as a politically correct act when in one of these instances. Those who do not openly converse with others are looked upon as rude and unapproachable. This leads to the topic of the benefits small talk has and its importance. An article from the Los Angeles Times entitled, â€Å"Researchers take a high view of idle chatter† showed that an increase of social contact aided mental function. This affect is similar to those of solitaire games such as Sudoku and crossword puzzles, which have the same benefit when engaged in for the same amount of time. Good news for those who enjoy chatter, but not great for those who have difficulties with it. Striking a conversation with someone gives him or her the opportunity to either accept or reject you. This is probably the main reason for its importance. Americans typically strive to be accepted by their peers. We want to be liked by our peers and when we engage in small talk we are being judged. A lot of the time it is the first impression we leave with someone. Another benefit of small talk is meeting new people and possibly new friends; or making new business relations, which could lead to a promotion or new business venture. Wendy Warman, co-author of Loud and Clear: How to Prepare and Deliver Effective Business and Technical Presentations, gives instructional seminars on how to effectively participate in small talk for big success. Warman discusses the importance of small talk in order to improve communication, boost sales, enhance customer service and increase profits in any organization or industry. These are all very important benefits, which I think everyone could find use for. Now that we more thoroughly understand the basic means of small talk and what small talk actually consists of, we need to be aware of the topics chosen for these conversations. There is an ethical approach to small talk and ethical judgments need to be made. Very frequently small talk is shared between individuals whom do not know each other well, therefore there are many ‘forbidden’ topics that should be avoided. When people do not know each other well it is not a wise decision to discuss personal information such as salaries or divorce. Two main topics that should be avoided are religion and politics. The foundationalist’s view should not be considered here since everyone’s justified beliefs on these topics might vary. The intent of small talk should basically be to get to know someone better, keeping in mind other peoples feelings. Raised emotion may arise if one of these topics is brought forth in a conversation. The consequence of these discussions may be a negative response, being that many people have different beliefs and opinions in the matter. An altruistic approach is definitely called for when engaging in small talk. The â€Å"golden rule† of â€Å"Love your neighbor as yourself† should be remembered in these situations. Placing the other person’s feelings first will usually lead to a pleasant conversation with affirmative results. Thus one can also say a utilitarian approach is also necessary when engaging in small talk. There are some basic guidelines one can follow to assist in creating proficient small talk. The first step before going to a function or gathering is to prepare yourself. Here is a list of tips that will help in engaging in small talk: 1. One should derive at least three topics to discuss as well as four questions that can be asked to others to spark conversation. If you know that there will be people there that you have met before, try to remember some things about them that you can bring up . . . maybe a charity they’re involved with or a hobby they partake in. 2. Be the first to say â€Å"Hello. Offering your name when greeting someone will avoid an uncomfortable situation of him or her not remembering your name. 3. Make an effort to remember names and use them frequently. 4. Motivate the other person(s) to start talking by asking an open-ended question that is common ground, such as, â€Å"How do you know the host? † 5. Be an active listener and provide feedback. 6 . You were given two ears and one mouth . . . you should listen twice as much as you talk. 7. Try to contribute something interesting to the conversation. Stay away from negative or controversial topics, as mentioned above. . If you want to meet someone in particular, be introduced to him or her by someone they respect. A mutual friend should be asked to do so. 9. When accepting a business card, receive it with both hands, read it, and place it in a coat pocket, purse or wallet to show it is valued. 10. Be mindful of you body language, this can cause others to be uncomfortable. Act confident. 11. Observe and listen before entering a conversation that has already begun. 12. Always be prepared with a few exit lines so you can have a graceful dismissal from the conversation. â€Å"Be bright. Be brief. Be gone. I chose this topic with the expectations of finding good reasons for small talk. Although I find small talk to be necessary and appropriate in certain situations, I find it unne cessary at time and frankly quite annoying. I still think talking about the weather with a fellow employee at the printer is unnecessary, but I don’t see those instances being avoidable. However, I have learned if you are active in using the tips provided, you can obtain more control over the conversation and guide it so that it is more enjoyable. Being prepared for small talk is the best way to avoid ‘lame’ conversation. If you go to a function with a select few topics to discuss, chances are the conversation will be strong and others will be guided by your contributions. Another important matter in successful small talk is to think of others first. This is very important with successful small talk and getting positive results. You want to make people happy and to feel good—everyone likes to be around people that make them feel better about themselves. Reference List â€Å"12 Tips for Making Small Talk. † CareerBuilder. com. 2005. CNN. com. 1 May 2009 Hoekman, Laurel. â€Å"The Benefits of Small Talk. Gray Center SUN News. 2008. Gray Center. 2 May 2009 Murphy, Peter. â€Å"How to Master the Art of Small Talk. † Relationships/Communication. 2007. Ezinarticles. 1 May 2009 Rosenstand, Nina. The Moral of the Story: An Introduction to Ethics (Sixth Edition). New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. , 1994–2009. â€Å"Small Talk. † Encarta World Dictionary. 2009. En cartaMsn. 2 May 2009 â€Å"Small Talk: Who, What, Where, When, Why?. † EnglishClub. com. 1997–2009. nglichClub. com. 1 May 2009 â€Å"Wendy Warman. † World Class Speakers & Entertainers: wcSpeakers. com. 2005–2009. wcSpeakers. com. 2 May 2009.

The federal Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1987

The federal Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1987; established regulations for nursing homes receiving federal funding that includes reimbursements from Medicare or Medicaid programs. It was signed by President Ronald Reagan, and it was the first major revision to the federal standards for nursing home care since the creation of both Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. This legislation changed the legal expectations of nursing homes and their care. If nursing homes do not comply with these regulations they cannot receive federal reimbursement. By the OBRA regulations nursing homes are not allowed to have working nurse aides for more than four months unless they are certified. In order to keep working longer than that aides need to go through a training and competency program. The nursing home will be responsible to verify that the aide is registered in their state. Under OBRA a nurse aide registry must consist of aides who have completed a nurse aide training and have successfully passed the competency evaluation program. The registry must make available the full name of the person, the date his/her training were completed and all the information of any improper conduct. If the person has not practiced in two years he/she may be removed from the registry. OBRA requires that all nursing facilities keep all employees up to date in their trainings. Annual education requires a minimum of 12 hours of training that specially address any weaknesses or areas of concerns that the group may be having. If the facility holds mentally ill patients the aid needs to be able to show that they have the proper skills to handle situations involving those mentally ill patients. The states can have their own training and competency program, for a program to be approves it must meet OBRA regulations. Such training must have a minimum of 75 hours of training of which 16 need to be supervise practical training hours. There are specific requirements under OBRA for a training curriculum. Students need to learn proper communication skills and interpersonal skills, they need to learn how to control infections, the appropriate emergency procedures, appropriates safety procedures. They need to learn how to be able to help patients be independent and to respect the patient’s rights. Students need to learn the needed nursing skills, such as how to correctly take vital signs and how to identify abnormal changes in a patient. They need to be able to know the needs needed when working with patients with mental health problems, and how to give care to patients for cognitively mpaired patients. Some requirements under OBRA are: * To provide services that will help promote each resident’s quality of life to the fullest capacity * To maintain the dignity and respect each resident deserves * To develop a care plan for each resident * To conduct an accurate assessment of each resident upon admission to the center and at any required interval in regards to his overall health * To prevent any decline in regards to daily activities, that includes the ability to east, using the toilet, bathing and walking. The staff of the facility must provide daily living activity care when necessary * To prevent any pressure sores from developing, and if a patient has a sore, to provide any necessary treatment and services to promote healing of such sores, prevent infection, and to prevent any new sores from developing. * To provide the right care for those residents that have urinary incontinence and if it’s possible to try and restore bladder function. It includes also the use of urinary catheters when appropriate, according to the regulations to prevent any adverse consequences related to the use of them * To prevent any type of accidents, this includes any falls, accidental poisonings or any incident that may cause injuries to the residents * To maintain proper nutrition for residents and to prevent any unnecessary weight loss * To provide the residents with sufficient fluid intake as to prevent any dehydration * To ensure that the resident feel free from any medication errors * To make sure the center has enough nursing staff to take proper care of all the resident’s needs * To make sure that all the residents have the right to choose activities, schedules, and healthcare need and that everything is maintained as it should be * To provide all medication services that appropriately meet the physical and psychological needs for each and every resident * To maintain an accurate, complete, and easily accessible clinical recor d for every resident OBRA became a law because of all the public growing concern with the very poor quality of care in many nursing homes and due to all the concerted advocacy of advocates, consumers, provider associations, and health care professionals. OBRA changed the care and lives of nursing home residents all across America. Many improvements have improved the care planning of the residents in the nursing home system. References FEderal and MA Long term care laws and regulations. (2008). Retrieved July 1, 2013, from MANHR: http://www.manhr.org/fed_ma_laws_regs.aspx State Operation Manual. (2011, January 7). Retrieved July 1, 2013, from Appendix PP: http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Manuals/downloads/som107ap_pp_guidelines_ltcf.pdf Hawes C, M. V. (1997, August). The OBRA-87 nursing home regulations and implementation. Retrieved July 1, 2013, from PUB MED.gov: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9256852