Caroline Brashear
Mr. Ippolito
Core Biology
3/23/17
Current Event 6: Review
Yin, Yadong, and The Conversation. "Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality."Scientific American. 01 Mar. 2017. Web. 22 Mar. 2017. <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reprintable-paper-becomes-a-reality/>.
The article “Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality,” published by Scientific American introduces a new type of paper with a nanoparticle coating that may allow the material to be erased and reused over 80 times. Even with the increasing usage of technology, paper is still commonly used, and global consumption is predicted to grow. The author mentions that, “Worldwide, the pulp and paper industry is the fifth largest consumer of energy and uses more water to produce a ton of product than any other industry,” (Yin, Reprintable Paper). The paper industry is damaging to the environment, but a new method uses nontoxic ingredients and allows repeated use, thus reducing the environmental impact. The nanoparticles involved are made of two different materials, Prussian blue and titanium dioxide, that can change from clear to visible and back again. The method includes combining the nanoparticles into a solid coating on conventional paper. When an ultraviolet light is shone on it, the titanium dioxide produces electrons. The Prussian blue particles then receive those electrons and change from blue to clear. The paper can be later erased by heating to about 120 degrees Celsius.
As previously mentioned, this is a significant environmental breakthrough since paper use has environmental and sustainability issues, which is why the creation of paper that can be reprinted without having to be industrially recycled first comes with many advantages. Additionally, the Prussian blue nanoparticle used is highly chemically stable. Not only is this a scientifically important advancement, but also economically, because money can be saved by using the same pieces of paper multiple times.
The article was very interesting and well-written, and provided a learning experience for the reader about a new method in producing environmentally-efficient paper. It was a strong piece of writing in that the methods used to create the paper were thoroughly described, as well as advantages that the new paper could bring. Although, the article was bias because it only discussed the benefits of producing this new product, and didn’t talk about any potential drawbacks. Also, the author refrained from talking about if this product could become available, and how much it would cost to own a special printer for this method. Lastly, I think the article would’ve been better if the author mentioned the economic impacts that this new product would yield. Overall, the article was a worthwhile read and discusses a topic that is relevant to the current needs of our environment.
Alyssa Lee
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Biology 10H
30 March 2017
Yin, Yadong, and The Conversation. "Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality."Scientific American. 01 Mar. 2017. Web. 22 Mar. 2017. .
I decided to evaluate my classmate Caroline’s review on “Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality” by Yadong Ying and The Conversation. There were a multitude of aspects to her review that I believe to have been truly well-done and well crafted; for example, the way in which Caroline describes the process by which the paper can be reused in detailed and provides a clear picture as to how it is done. She states, “The method includes combining the nanoparticles into a solid coating on conventional paper. When an ultraviolet light is shone on it, the titanium dioxide produces electrons. The Prussian blue particles then receive those electrons and change from blue to clear. The paper can be later erased by heating to about 120 degrees Celsius.” Her steps listed are sequential and the importance of each individual step is made clear, such as when the titanium dioxide produces electrons to change the Prussian blue particles “from blue to clear”. Another aspect of Caroline’s review that was done well was her interpretation of why this was so important to the better future of our world. She states, “As previously mentioned, this is a significant environmental breakthrough since paper use has environmental and sustainability issues…” Caroline eloquently explains to the readers the significance of such a profound scientific breakthrough in that it will save both money and natural resources, serving a double benefit to mankind. Caroline was also able to accurately detect and pinpoint the bias in the article itself, which is an acquired skill that she performed in an exemplary manner. She mentions that the article contains no drawbacks as to the reusable paper process, which is most likely untrue because with such a largely beneficial innovation, why would the scientists not release this product to the general public? She encapsulates this idea by commenting “...the article was bias because it only discussed the benefits of producing this new product, and didn’t talk about any potential drawbacks.”
Despite the fact that her review was very well-written, there are some aspects that could be amended to make the review a better read. For example, I noticed some grammatical errors in some of her review. Caroline states, “Although, the article was bias…” In terms of context, this word was not necessary; a better word/phrase to have used would be “however” or “despite the previous good aspects”. Errors such as these did not greatly hinder my reading process, but they nevertheless need to be fixed. Another area of her review that could be improved would be her lack of a mention of some potential drawbacks- although she does mention in her review that the article itself failed to do so by “only discussing the benefits of producing this new product”, she still could have speculated as to the negative impacts of this newly developed process.
From reading this review and article, I have gained knowledge concerning the development of this revolutionary product that could possibly change life as we know it on Earth by conserving more trees and therefore, preserve nature. I chose this article because I was interested in the way in which a product that could make paper reusable would work, as it is a very important and debatable issue in our world today, what with our growing concerns of pollution and deforestation. This review has opened up my mind to the problems that we face in terms of the negative effects of modernization and industrialization. I have also been reminded of the importance of conserving all forms of nature, be it animal or plant related- therefore, I do hope to see this invention put to good use in the near future so that we can continue to live on this Earth without contaminating the beauty of nature that we take for granted everyday.
Kevin Leka
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Core Bio H
March 30 2017
Yin, Yadong, and The Conversation. "Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality."Scientific American. 01 Mar. 2017. Web. 22 Mar. 2017. .
For this week’s current event review, I read Caroline Brashear’s report on "Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality." Caroline did a good job on the review that was precise and relative to a growing concern in society, paper consumption. She did a good job explaining and reviewing the article’s main points by addressing the issue in society first and how reprintable paper might be able to quickly solve that. Caroline introduced her article by speaking about a new nanoparticle coated paper that can be reused up to 80 times. She gave background to how large of an issue this was and wrote a good explanation on why reusable paper will quickly solve it. Caroline also explains the benefits of reusable paper which will decrease the amount of water being used to create paper today and will contain, hopefully, more chemically stable elements within the paper. Although this topic is hardly spoken about, Caroline did a good job reporting on paper being the “fifth largest consumer of energy.” Caroline used a rich vocabulary which showed her understanding of the article. While she was analyzing the article in her review, she used the same terms found in the article and explained how the paper worked on a chemical level. This chemical explanation further showed her understanding about the topic. Also, Caroline’s analysis was well done because her conclusion was carefully done, while giving good feedback towards the author of the article and areas of improvement.
Caroline could only improve in a few areas, since she had written such a great review. She could have furthered the research and explained any potential drawbacks that the author did not mention. Although the author of her article refrained from discussing the product’s availability, Caroline could have looked further into the subject and included this information. Caroline wrote a great paragraph on the significance of the environmental breakthrough since, “paper use has environmental and sustainability issues, which is why the creation of paper that can be reprinted without having to be industrially recycled first comes with many advantages..” She did not have any spelling or grammatical issues, however in her writing she could have discussed more information about the economic impacts that the reusable product would have and how expensive the paper could potentially be.
While reading Caroline’s review, I realized how big of a strain paper has on our environment, economy and lives since the world still revolves around the exchange of paper documents. This review was interesting to read because I had forgotten about the paper crisis we will soon face, however this article provides an interesting option to paper. The review was very interesting and Caroline’s analysis was well done. Reading the review reminded me of paper’s role in society and even though we have all made great leaps in technology, paper is one thing we are not yet ready to shred.
good job :)
Catie Burnell
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
April 17, 2017
Core Biology Honors
My classmate Caroline Brashear wrote a great review on the article “Reprintable Paper Becomes a Reality” by Yadong Yin of Scientific American. Caroline did an excellent job explaining the findings of the article and restating them in a way that was easy to understand. Additionally, Caroline did a great job detailing exactly how this reusable paper functions. I also enjoyed how Caroline explained the relevance of the paper industry not only to the economy, but to the environment, and how this new form of reusable paper would allow the paper industry to be less harmful to the environment.
Although Caroline overall had a fantastic review, there are a few things she could improve upon. For example, I think it would have been beneficial to have included some more quotes from the article in order to further prove the claims made in her review. Also, it would have been great if Caroline had gone into further detail regarding the economic impacts of reusable paper. Nevertheless, Caroline composed a very well-written and cohesive review that was very interesting to read.
This article stood out to me mainly because this is the first I’ve heard of the development of reusable paper. The technology developed in order to create reusable paper is outstanding and fascinating, and I imagine that this technology will gain momentum in years to come as scientists begin looking for ways to digress the harmful environmental impacts of the paper industry.