Climate change mitigation in Zimbabwe and links to sustainable development

In 2021, Zimbabwe updated its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction target from a 33% reduction in per capita energy sector GHG emissions to a 40% reduction from all sectors, compared to 2030 baseline emission scenarios. This work aims to demonstrate how the actions identified in Zimbabwe's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) can achieve this updated target, and what development benefits could occur in Zimbabwe through the implementation of these actions. The magnitude of GHG emissions in Zimbabwe are modelled historically and to 2030 to quantify GHG emission reduction potentials, and contributions to selected sustainable development goal targets, from implementation of 28 mitigation measures. The estimated ∼37 million tonnes CO2-equivalent emissions emitted by Zimbabwe in 2017 are projected to increase by 109% to ∼77 million tonnes without implementation of any mitigation measures. The mitigation measures included in the updated NDC could reduce GHG emissions by 40% in 2030 compared to the baseline, while additional measures included in other plans and strategies in Zimbabwe could achieve a further 23% reduction. Implementing Zimbabwe's NDC could also lead to substantial development benefits locally, including to public health, biodiversity, and sustainable energy use. This assessment therefore provides a clear pathway to achieve Zimbabwe's updated climate change mitigation commitment, as the target is linked to the implementation of specific, concrete mitigation actions. It provides a practical example as to how methods to assess climate mitigation and development priorities can be integrated within climate change mitigation target-setting assessments. The more widespread adoption of prospective, quantitative assessment of development benefits from climate change mitigation actions could provide further motivation for more ambitious climate change action

Politics of nanotechnologies in food and agriculture

The chapter discusses the reasons for the delay in the regulatory intervention concerning nanotechnologies used in the agriculture and food sectors. The main finding is that unregulated introduction of nanoinnovation into the food system is due to the current neoliberal food policy and to the power struggles that characterize the economic, social and political dynamics within the global supply chain. Therefore, it is necessary to put the ‘question concerning technology’ at the center of the regulatory debate in order to implement a regulatory system able to face nanorisks. Which means looking at the way in which technology controls power relationships within society. Attention should be shifted from efficiency to power issues, and new technologies should be assessed from a political rather than an economic or ethical perspective

Effects of high pressure and heat processing on the structure and rheological properties of food proteins

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Effects of high pressure and heat processing on the structure and rheological properties of food proteins.

This study evaluated the effect of heat and high pressure processing of whey protein isolate, beta-lactoglobulin, egg albumen, ovalbumin and their binary mixtures. Rheological studies of whey proteins (15% w/w) in distilled water indicated that gels made by heating at 90°C for 30 min were stronger and more elastic compared with pressure-treated gels (400-600 MPa for 20 min). Gel strengths at higher pressure (650-800 MPa) were similar to heated samples, hi contrast, egg albumen proteins (15% w/w) in distilled water showed no gelation below 500 MPa but increased in strength with increasing pressure, although values remained below those of heat- induced gels. Heat and pressure treatment of whey/egg albumen protein mixtures (10:5) produced gels stronger than expected indicating synergistic interactions. Sucrose influenced gelation and interactions, with 20% sucrose being the optimal for egg albumen and whey proteins. Sucrose addition produced weaker pressure-treated gels compared with heated gels. Addition of 1% NaCl produced stronger whey protein gels compared with egg albumen but weaker mixed whey/egg albumen gels. Combined heat (50°C or 60°C) and pressure (600 MPa) produced weaker gels compared with heat treatment alone, but stronger gels than pressure treatment alone for both whey and egg albumen proteins and mixtures. Values increased with increasing temperature due to greater protein unfolding, as shown by Differential Scanning Calorimetry. FT Raman spectroscopy indicated that both heat and high pressure affected alpha-helix, beta-sheet structure, hydrophobic interactions and disulphide bonds. Heat caused greater changes in disulphide bonds and beta-sheet structures but pressure produced greater changes in hydrophobic interactions. Self deconvolution of the Amide I band showed quantitative changes in secondary structures. Random coil increased in high pressure treated (600 MPa, 30 min) beta-lactoglobulin, whereas, for ovalbumin, beta-turns doubled. The different mechanisms of gelation observed for heating and high pressure treated egg albumen, whey proteins and their mixtures can provide novel textures

The case for regulating nanotechnologies: international, European and national perspectives

Governments in leading industrialized countries are currently primarily relying on existing regulatory frameworks for environmental, health and safety regulation to cover nanotechnology risks. European and national regulators have generally concluded that any risks posed by nanomaterials can be addressed using existing frameworks, with minor adjustments to specific regulations. Identifying appropriate responses to uncertain risks is a difficult task for policy makers and regulatory agencies, as they are faced with a high degree of scientific uncertainty, the need to balance the costs and benefits of regulation, and the need to find a reasonable compromise between scientific freedom, technological innovation, consumer safety and environmental protection. As nanotechnologies are arguably only recently gaining public prominence, and their regulation is still in its infancy, this article examines some of the issues faced by regulators, offers insights into potential methods for regulation, and critiques the current state of international, European and national law and policy. The article concludes that to address the current regulatory gaps and environmental and health safety concerns surrounding nanomaterials, nanospecific regulation establishing product specification, notification, public disclosure and risk assessment requirements is necessary