Friday, July 10, 2020

Plant- Microbial fuel cell: Generating electricity from green, living plants

This article is by

Share this article

Article Contributor(s)

Charvi Trivedi

Article Title

Plant- Microbial fuel cell: Generating electricity from green, living plants

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

July 10, 2020

URL

Marshland near Blythburgh. View over the tidal River Blyth

Marshland near Blythburgh. View over the tidal River Blyth  | Source:  Eileen Henderson via Wikimedia

Humans are capable of discovering and creating great things with the help of science and one such impressive discovery is that green, living plants can generate electricity. It may seem unbelievable, but not impossible.

One must be wondering how this technology works. Well, the answer is quite simple; photosynthesis. Plants excrete organic matter into the soil as a result of photosynthesis. Only some of the organic matter is used by plants and the rest is released in the soil. This released organic matter is broken down by bacteria. In the breakdown process, electrons are released as a waste product. Since the movement of electrons produces electricity, these electrons, which are of no use to the plant, can be harvested. The best part about this innovation is that the plants from which energy is being generated are not affected in any way.

This idea was first put into use by a Dutch start-up called Plant-e. This company was launched in September 2009 and is successful in launching and selling many environment- friendly products like DIY kits to the public for experimentation purposes and modular systems which could be easily installed on green roofs for abundant electricity production. Plant-e is involved in various projects, within The Netherlands, like automatic lighting systems in gardens and many more.

This technology works with the plants which thrive in moist soils and where the water is present in abundance. Therefore marshlands, paddy fields and deltas are some of the most suitable places for setting up plant batteries as a huge amount of water is present in those areas. Hence, the use of this technology is limited to certain geographic areas containing moist soils and cannot be used in arid regions. It may, however, promote the growth of more trees and plants which will gradually reverse the malicious effects of global warming.

Another obstacle in widespread adoption of this technology in today’s time is the high cost of installation of the system. The initial adopters of this technology are those who are attracted by the efficiency and eco-friendly nature of the plant batteries and willing to pay a premium for it.

The concept of plant batteries can be further taken into rural areas where most of the population still does not have access to adequate electricity. It is estimated that plant-MFC technology can cover upto 20% of European Union’s primary future electricity needs. Also, plants are almost 100% efficient at converting photons from sunlight into electrons which indicates a bright future for this technology. However, more research needs to be done in this field.

Another innovation in the field of green electricity is using algae , which often grows in ponds and rivers, for generating electricity. The basic concept which explains the working is similar to the way plants are able to produce electricity; photosynthesis.

Various other ventures in the field of renewable energy also include vegetable batteries, meaning, electric power generated from fruits and vegetables like lemons, tomatoes and potatoes, have been investigated. According to experiments, at least 3 to 4 vegetables are required just to light a small LED bulb. Moreover, it leads to poisoning of the vegetables and those food products need to be thrown away, without being useful for consumption purposes. It is therefore not a viable option for energy production.

Plant based electricity generation is still an evolving technology which has immense potential for producing energy in an environmentally sustainable way. It will realise full potential when the installation cost is attractive enough for the farmers to prefer it over the electricity grids or fossil fuel based personal electricity generator sets.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 4:57 PM

India’s Transgender (Protection of Rights) Act: Why the activists are opposing it?

On July 13, 2020 the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment of India notified the release of draft Rules for the much-disputed Transgender (Protection of Rights) Act 2019, and has given citizens 30 days to submit suggestions and objections.

The Ministry first published the draft Rules on April 18, 2020 and asked for comments by April 30, later extended to May 18. Based on the central government’s consideration of the submitted feedback, the updated Rules were once again opened to critique.

As summarised in this analysis by PRS Legislative Research, the Rules lay out the detailed process regarding issuance of Certificate of Identity, and welfare measures, medical facilities and such for transgender people. It also specifies that the National Institute of Social Defence will act as secretariat for the National Council for Transgender Persons.

Analysis

  1. The Act is infamous for claiming to confer the right to self-perceived gender identity, which is also enshrined in the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) vs. Union of India judgement, but continuously neglecting this right thereby going against both a Supreme Court judgement and its own statement.
  2. This manifested once again in Rule 4 of the first draft of Rules which required a psychologist’s report— while paradoxically insisting that it requires “no medical examination”— as part of the application process. This requirement was removed from the recent draft of the Rules after backlash.
  3. Also, as stated in the Act, it is the District Magistrate who will determine the final “correctness” of the application, essentially stripping transgender people of any supposed right to self determination. It is worth noting that this places the District Magistrate, an executive figure, in a judicial position, one of ‘judging’ the ‘authenticity’ of a person’s gender identity.
  4. The above mentioned application will only provide a Certificate of Identity that states a person’s gender identity as transgender. To be able to apply for a revised Certificate of Identity to change one’s gender to male/female as per Rule 6, a person must undergo gender reassignment surgery and on top of that provide a certificate stating this from the Medical Superintendent or Chief Medical Officer from the medical institution which facilitates the surgery.
  5. This is problematic for a large multitude of reasons, including but not limited to: many transgender people not feeling the need for medical or surgical intervention, the policing of transgender people’s identity as only being ‘valid’ if they undergo surgery, and the sky-high costs of surgery contrasted with large numbers of transgender people living in unsupportive environments and/or being unable to finance their surgery.
  6. The right to self-identification continues to be blatantly violated in Rule 8, under which a District Magistrate can reject an application, following which the applicant has a right to appeal the rejection only within 60 days of intimation of the same, as stated in Rule 9.
  7. The right to self-determination was also thrown out the window when the first draft Rules imposed a penalty on “false” applications, once again referring to the arbitrary power of the District Magistrate. This has also been removed following strongly negative reactions.

It is important to compare the two versions of the Rules despite the second one being arguably better and cognizant of some of the demands made by the citizens and other stakeholders.

The first version of the Rules quite clearly depicted the narrowly cisnormative perspective through which transgender lives are seen by the people in power. Despite the many changes as a result of relentless protests, the Act is nowhere near to truly respecting and empowering transgender people.

The decision to give the final say to the District Magistrate- which some argue made the process harder than it used to be before the Act- and the refusal to provide affirmative action or reservations to ensure representation in positions of authority that transgender people have historically been denied access to.

It also does little to counter discrimination, as is seen most clearly in the punishment of sexual assault and rape being much less than for the rape of a cisgender woman. It advocates for plenty of measures but does pitifully little to ensure or enable these changes.  

History of the Act

The history of the Act is a turbulent one. The 2016 Transgender (Protection of Rights) Bill, was almost immediately slammed by activists, NGOs, other human rights organisations, and citizens, for multiple reasons.

The most derided was the provision to set up a ‘District Screening Committee’ which included the District Magistrate, a chief medical officer and a psychiatrist among others, for the sole purpose of scrutinising a transgender person’s body and identity. It also criminalised organised begging, an activity specifically common among the Hijra community.

The Lower House of the Parliament, the Lok Sabha, rejected all the proposed changes by the parliamentary standing committee along with the demands of the transgender community, and passed the bill with some amendments in 2018. A short-lived victory came in the form of the lapse of the bill due to the 2019 general elections.

However, as soon as the NDA government was re-elected, the bill was reintroduced in the Parliament with some more changes, particularly the removal of the section on District Screening Committees, but was still unsatisfactory.

The full text of this bill was not released when it was approved by the Union Cabinet on July 10, 2019, but on the morning that it was tabled in the Lok Sabha, garnering another consecutive year of protest since it was first introduced.

This is the bill as it exists today, having been passed by the Lok Sabha on August 5, 2019. When the motion to refer it to a select committee failed in the Rajya Sabha, it was passed on November 26, 2019, and received presidential assent on December 5, 2019. Recent developments include a writ petition in the Supreme Court challenging the validity of the Act.

Despite it becoming the law of the land, transgender citizens and activists such as Esvi Anbu Kothazam and Kanmani Ray continue to criticse it and the insidious transphobic thinking that has always guided it.

Read More