The reservoir network: A new network topology for district heating and cooling

Thermal district networks are effective solutions to substitute fossil fuels with renewable energy sources for heating and cooling. Moreover, thermal networking of buildings allows energy efficiency to be further increased. The waste heat from cooling can be reused for heating in thermal district systems. Because of bidirectional energy flows between prosumers, thermal networks require new hydraulic concepts. In this work, we present a novel network topology for simultaneous heating and cooling: the reservoir network. The reservoir network is robust in operation due to hydraulic decoupling of transfer stations, integrates heat sources and heat sinks at various temperature levels and is flexible in terms of network expansion. We used Modelica simulations to compare the new single-pipe reservoir network to a basecase double-pipe network, taking yearly demand profiles of different building types for heating and cooling. The electric energy consumed by the heat pumps and circulations pumps differs between the reservoir and base case networks by less than 1%. However, if the reservoir network is operated with constant instead of variable mass flow rate, the total electrical consumption can increase by 48% compared to the base case. As with any other network topology, the design and control of such networks is crucial to achieving energy efficient operation. Investment costs for piping and trenching depend on the district layout and dimensioning of the network. If a ring layout is applied in a district, the reservoir network with its single-pipe configuration is more economical than other topologies. For a linear layout, the piping costs are slightly higher for the reservoir network than for the base case because of larger pipe diameters

Acer glabrum Torr.

https://thekeep.eiu.edu/herbarium_specimens_byname/4705/thumbnail.jp

Risk Tradeoffs and Equitable Decision-Making in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, societies have faced agonizing decisions about whether to close schools, shutter businesses, delay nonemergency health care, restrict travel, and authorize the use of emergency Covid-19 countermeasures under limited scientific understanding. Measures to control the spread of COVID-19 have disrupted our health, educational, and economic systems, tarnished our mental health, and took away our cherished time with family and friends. Conflicting advice from health agencies on the utility of public health measures left us wondering, was it all worth it? We still do not have all the answers to guide us through difficult risk-risk tradeoff decisions during a health emergency. When both action and inaction can result in significant harm and irreversible damage, decisions surrounding infection control measures become complicated, and there is no single correct answer. Yet ethics can help us think about hard trade-offs that weigh competing values and have deep consequences for society and particularly the most disadvantaged. This essay discusses the challenges of making policy trade-offs amid scientific uncertainty. While there may be no perfect formula for deciding what to do and when, we propose four key considerations for assessing risk-risk trade-offs, involving effectiveness, less-restrictive means, harm identification and amelioration, and equitable distribution. We then and apply those four considerations to the areas of education, economies, health care, travel and migration, social engagement, and medical countermeasures, examining governments’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and assessing how responses to the next major outbreak can be improved

Using COVID-19 to Strengthen the WHO: Promoting Health and Science Above Politics

On April 14, 2020, President Trump announced the suspension of funding for the World Health Organization (WHO) to investigate WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic—citing WHO’s “disastrous decision” to oppose a travel ban on China, and for being slow and “China-centric.” Certainly, China failed in its international duty to respond rapidly and transparently to the novel coronavirus, and it suppressed truthful information, propelling a localized outbreak into a pandemic now in over 210 countries. Yet close examination of WHO’s COVID-19 response reveals that the Organization acted in line with its authority under the International Health Regulations, and using the available scientific evidence. Still, WHO’s response has been constrained by its limited funding and authority, and its need to maintain diplomacy among member states. We are facing a once-in-a-century health emergency, with WHO under attack as never before. But out of a crisis can come an historic opportunity to strengthen WHO to become the health agency the world desperately needs. What might WHO reform look like if we truly want to empower the Organization, as we should? That reform should address the structural problems that put WHO in the crossfires of geopolitical disputes and force it to appeal to countries’ political interests instead of the best scientific evidence. We propose an emboldened WHO Director-General, sustainable funding, strengthened authority to use unofficial data, and incentives for states’ compliance with global health norms

How the Biden Administration Can Reinvigorate Global Health Security, Institutions, and Governance

The tragedy of COVID-19 can be fertile soil for deep structural reforms. President Biden can both bolster the immediate responses to COVID-19 and its vast ramifications, and spearhead lasting changes to create a healthier and safer world, from which the United States would richly benefit. The agenda we propose for President Biden is ambitious, yet US. bold leadership on global health will benefit all people, including Americans, and is in the U.S. national interest Along with responding to the COVID-19 domestically, the Biden administration should enhance U.S.-initiatives home, expanding the Global Health Security Agenda and restoring and reinvigorating the PREDICT animal virus identification and tracking project, while ensuring that the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile is fully stocked with critical medical supplies and expanding research and development of antimicrobials. To enable the world to benefit from U.S. science – and to benefit from it – the administration should support the Open Science movement. And the administration should work with Congress to use devote 2% of past and future U.S. domestic COVID-19 spending to the global response, extend a debt moratorium, and enhance debt cancellation. The United States should lead strengthened global governance for health security, beginning with proposing a doubling of mandatory WHO contributions, WHO reform including enhanced civil society participation, and strengthening the International Health Regulations (2005). Meanwhile, along with joining and funding the global vaccine distribution mechanism, COVAX, the Biden administration should propose creating a permanent facility for distributing PPE and other medical supplies and equipment, diagnostics, therapies, and vaccines during epidemics and pandemics. And by supporting use of TRIPS-flexibilities and, going further, supporting suspending intellectual property rights related to COVID-19 technologies, expanding production and increasing access, the administration would enable expanded global production, enhanced access, and lower prices. Finally, the Biden administration should lead a collaborative global effort to ensure that the global health architecture is firmly based in human rights, which would enhance equity and accountability and elevate the voices and priorities of marginalized populations. At its foundation would be the Framework Convention on Global Health, a proposed treaty that, if adopted, would strengthen implementation of the right to health and promote global health equity, while a Right to Health Capacity Fund could support right-to-health advocacy, accountability, and participation mechanisms

Copula and focus constructions in selected Ethiopian languages

The major aim of this work is to give an overview of present tense copula constructions in selected Semitic and Cushitic languages spoken in Ethiopia. In particular, we deal with languages spoken in the central parts of the country, namely Gurage languages of different genetic affiliations, Wellegga Oromo and K’abeena. In addition we discuss data from Ge’ez, Tigre, Tigrinya, Argobba, Amharic and Harari