Slowly strolling along the shores of the lake among historic setting, olive groves, mountains, islands and bucolic viewsThinking of Lake Como the beauty of the surroundings, international tourism, historic villas immediately come to mind which in spring are filled with flowers, memories of an elegant history, splendid glimpses of ancient churches and medieval castles, fish-based cuisine and the traditions of village festivals. But Lake Como also has a charm made up of the mountains that jut out over it, giving lovers of slow trekking to take innumerable walks, enjoying the tranquility of the environment and the beauty of the historical places. There are many, which can be done in stages lasting several days, or others that can be done in a day, all panoramic, more or less demanding as far as it's about the difference in height, but each with a particular, unique charm that you will remember for a long time. Every walker can choose the walk that will meet their expectations, but each one will give you the feeling of living inside a film because, step by step, the splendid panoramas will constantly accompany you. Among the many walks that we can recommend, I would mention the Lake Como Greenway, which starts on the western shore of the lake, in the village of Colonno and ends in Menaggio, with a succession of exciting villages overlooking the lake. The length of the Greenway is approximately 10 km., dividing it into various stages if desired, winding along beaten paths, internal roads of the villages, old mule tracks. You will pass villages such as Sala Comacina, Ossuccio, Lenno, Mezzegra, Tremezzo, Griante and Menaggio. For those who know this side of the lake a little, we can say that we are in the presence of historic villas such as Villa Balbianello, La Quiete, Carlotta , Palazzo Rosati and many others that punctuate this branch of the lake with their architectural elegance and the beauty of their flower gardens. The walking route is characterized by non-binding ups and downs, considering that along the entire route we can record approximately 220 meters in altitude, the terrain where walking is always well cared for and does not require any special equipment, other than a pair of comfortable trekking shoes, a backpack with water to drink and a camera always at hand. In any case, along the Greenway, you will come across some refreshment points and, in case of tiredness, you can easily go down to the lake, in where it is possible to find a bus stop or a boat to return to the starting point. Many historical points to admire and visit, some of which date back to the medieval period, such as the village of Sala Comacina, the tower of Villa and many ancient churches that characterize the villages that you meet while walking. More than the story, these are the photographs that can make the enthusiast of slow walking understand how splendid the route is, which can be covered in 3-4 hours, and this is why we report them at the end of the article, with the hope of having given you an inspiration for a relaxing day on Lake Como. Machine translation. We apologize for any inaccuracies. Original article in Italian.
SEE MORESoaps, detergents, shampoos, are just some examples of compounds that contain surfactantsLike every medal there is a bright side and a dark side, in our case, today, we are talking about both the bright side, that is, cleaning products that fulfill a noble and dutiful task, as well as on the dark side, which concerns the environmental impact of the discharge of surfactants into rivers, lakes and seas. What are surfactants Surfactants, also known as surfactants, are chemical compounds that are commonly used in detergents, such as shampoo, soaps, detergentsand many other personal and domestic cleaning products. Their main function is to lower the surface tension between two immiscible phases, such as water and oil , allowing them to mix into a homogeneous solution. This ability makes them effective at dispersing grease and dirt, facilitating cleaning and eliminating impurities. Surfactants can be of different types: - as anionic - cationic - non-ionic - amphoteric each with specific properties depending on the desired application. Categories and differences between surfactants Surfactants can be divided into several main categories based on their polarity and electrical charge. The main categories of surfactants are: Anionic surfactants These surfactants have a negative charge when dissolved in water. They are commonly used in laundry and dish detergents, as well as soaps. Examples include sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and sodium lauryl sulfonate (SLES). Cationic surfactants Unlike anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants have a positive charge in an aqueous environment. They are often used as additives to fabric softeners, hair conditioners and fabric detergents. Examples of cationic surfactants include quaternary ammonium chlorides. Non-ionic surfactants These surfactants have no electrical charges and are often used in delicate detergents, such as detergents for sensitive skin or dishwasher detergents. Examples include ethoxylated fatty alcohols (AEOs) and ethoxylated nonylphenols (NPEs). Amphoteric surfactants They can have both positive and negative charges under different pH conditions. They are commonly used in hair products, such as shampoos and conditioners. A common example of an amphoteric surfactant is cocamidopropyl betaine. The differences between surfactants mainly concern their electrical charges and the properties that these give to the compounds. Additionally, the type of surfactant used can impact its effectiveness for specific applications, such as fat removal, foaming, and the ability to be stable under different conditions of pH and temperature. The choice of surfactant will depend on the specific needs of the product and its intended use. The history of surfactants The use of natural surfactants, such as soap, dates back thousands of years. The first attempts to clean and wash objects pushed man to use mixtures of oils and fats of animal and vegetable origin, which already contained natural surfactant compounds. These surfactants present in the soap allowed the surface tension of the water to be reduced, making cleaning easier. However, the large-scale production of synthetic surfactants, such as those used today, began during the 20th century, with major developments in industrial chemistry and materials first. In fact, the first synthetic surfactants were developed during the first half of the 20th century and were mainly used in the detergent and soaps. There is no single inventor of synthetic surfactants, but credit goes to many scientists and researchers who have helped develop and refine these chemical compounds over time . Their discovery and application have had a significant impact on the cleanliness, hygiene and production of a wide range of chemicals and modern consumer goods. What does the discharge of surfactants into the environment mean The discharge of surfactants into the environment can have several negative effects, as these chemical compounds can be harmful to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Let's see some of the main environmental problems related to the discharge of surfactants into the environment: Water pollution Surfactants can enter water bodies through domestic and industrial wastewater. These compounds can alter the surface tension of water, reducing the ability of organisms to glide or float. This may have negative effects on some aquatic species, such as insects or small animals that move on the surface of the water to feed or reproduce. Toxicity to aquatic life Some surfactants, especially non-biodegradable ones, can be toxic to aquatic organisms such as fish, invertebrates and aquatic plants. These compounds can damage organisms present in aquatic ecosystems, altering their physiology and their ability to survive and reproduce. Foaming Excessive discharge of surfactants can lead to foaming on the surface of the water, especially at discharge sources such as rivers or lakes. This foam can interfere with oxygen transport, create obstructions and obstacles for wildlife, and become an aesthetic problem. Soil pollution If surfactants are absorbed into the soil, they can contaminate groundwater or negatively affect soil microorganisms, compromising soil health and fertility. What are biodegradable surfactants Biodegradable surfactants are chemical compounds that can be easily broken down and decomposed naturally by biological organisms present in the environment, such as bacteria and other microorganisms . This characteristic makes them less harmful to the environment than non-biodegradable surfactants, since they degrade quickly and transform into less toxic substances. Let's see what the main biodegradable surfactants are:Sugar-based surfactants They are obtained from plant sources such as corn, sugar cane or coconut. They are considered biodegradable and often used in eco-friendly and sustainable cleaning products. Amino acid-based surfactants They are derived from amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. They are biodegradable and commonly used in personal hygiene products, such as shampoo and mild cleansers. Surfactants based on vegetable oils Some surfactants can be obtained from the saponification of vegetable oils such as palm oil or coconut oil. They are biodegradable and used in cleaning and skin care products. Enzyme surfactants They are based on enzymes, which are highly biodegradable natural proteins. They are often used in laundry and dishwasher detergents. Surfactants of natural origin Some surfactants can be extracted from natural sources such as soapworts (Sapindus spp.) or other trees and plants. When choosing products containing surfactants, it is always advisable to look for those with "biodegradable" or "eco-friendly" labels to help reduce the environmental impact of their use.
SEE MOREThe legislation on the use of recycled plastic in food packaging, especially as regards PET, is favoring a widespread use both in the beverage sector and in food trays Having obtained certification from EFSA, manufacturers are using post-consumer recycled plastic in food packaging. the doubt that arises from many parts concerns the certainty or not of the possible transfer by the recycled plastic, of harmful substances that can migrate to man, as the checks are made not on the food contained in the packaging but on the production processes. The article by below describes the problem through the interview with Floriana Cimmarusti is Secretary General of Safe Food Advocacy Europe (SAFE). Until now, companies have not used recycled plastics in food packaging due to safety concerns. But times are changing and they seem ready to reconsider their position: the EU is about to authorize more than 100 “safe” recycling processes for food contact applications. Floriana Cimmarusti is Secretary General of Safe Food Advocacy Europe (SAFE), a non-profit organization based in Brussels: spoke about the toxicity risks in recycled plastic packaging. We propose below the translation of the interview that he gave to the Euractiv news magazine. “The risk of toxic substances contaminating food already exists with virgin plastic, so it will only be higher with recycled packaging from old plastics that may contain banned chemicals ”says Floriana Cimmarusti. Companies like Tetra Pak have never used recycled plastics in food packaging due to safety concerns. They now appear ready to reconsider their position ahead of the EU decision to authorize more than 100 "safe" recycling processes for food contact applications. So what has changed? Are recycling processes now safer? No, it's just that those recycling processes will now be formally authorized for use in food contact applications. Therefore Tetra Pak and other companies will be legally protected if they use recycled plastics that have been manufactured using these authorized processes. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has already given a favorable opinion on these recycling processes, therefore as soon as the European Commission will approve them through the comitology procedure, it will become law. Legally, food packaging companies will then be able to use all the recycled plastics they want. And in case something goes wrong, they will be protected by EU law against potential litigation by consumer groups. Without this type of authorization, it would be very risky for companies to use recycled plastics. Food packaging companies have no interest in seeing a scandal break out over the safety of their products. So they have to trust that at least some of these processes are indeed safe. I'm sure they believe the system is safe. But as soon as the EU approves the process, they will not face any legal risk, which is a key point for them. Recycled plastic can come from very different places and contamination can happen very easily, for example when people mix the trash they goes into their containers for recycling. Can a standard procedure approved at EU level actually ensure that no contamination occurs? PET is the only type of plastic that is easier to clean in the recycling process, and therefore considered the safest after recycling. But there will always be a risk. Many types of plastics absorb chemicals during waste management and it is very difficult during recycling to eliminate them. For example, it is a challenge to introduce sorting systems that separate food contact materials from non-food plastics. The risk of toxic contaminating food is already present with virgin plastics, so it will only be higher with recycled plastics than old plastics that may contain highly toxic and prohibited chemicals. For example, levels of oligomers (unintentional by-products of plastic that migrate into food) are higher in recycled plastic than in plastic virgin. Some tests have also shown that migration levels in vegetable oils are higher with recycled plastics than with virgin plastics. Also, a lot of unidentified contaminants were found in recycled plastic that we don't find in virgin plastic. These contaminants come from cross-contamination during waste management. Finally, a lot of additives are found in recycled PET that are absent in virgin plastics or present in much smaller quantities, and these additives have been shown to have higher migration rates in recycled plastics than in virgin plastics. Thus, the risk of contamination with recycled plastic is clearly higher than that of virgin plastic. The European Commission is preparing to approve 140 new recycling processes for use in food contact applications such as packaging. EFSA has already expressed a favorable opinion to all but 3 of them, in which the assessment was inconclusive. What do you know about these 140 recycling processes? Am I really safe? I do not think that the risk assessment procedure used by EFSA can give us full certainty that recycled plastics are safe. As I said, many types of plastics absorb chemicals during use and waste management, which are difficult to remove during recycling. Furthermore, it is important to remember that EFSA's risk assessment focuses on starting the recycling process, not on the finished product that comes out at the end. Therefore, there is no serious analysis of chemicals at the end of each recycling process. And this data is currently lacking. Furthermore, the cumulative exposure is not taken into account by EFSA when the exposures are estimated. Now, most of these recycling processes involve PET plastic, which is one of the few exceptions that allows for quite thorough cleaning during recycling. However, even in PET, plastic polymers often degrade during use and recycling. And this can result in oligomers that can migrate into food. Brominated flame retardants have been found regularly in plastic articles intended for materials in contact with food, which clearly indicates that waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) was used in the process. And this is clearly not allowed. So better application is needed to improve this situation. Was there a sufficient amount of control over these 140 EFSA-approved recycling processes? No, due to the questionable EFSA risk assessment procedure. We must not forget that some of the data submitted to EFSA by the complainant companies are confidential trade secrets , as for glyphosate. In the case of glyphosate, part of the data, the important one, has been obscured from the official text. I'm afraid the same happens with those recycling processes. So we can't read all the data. And there is no scientific review of the data presented by an independent laboratory. Clearly, there isn't enough research to tell us whether or not recycled plastic is dangerous for consumers. So I think it's a little too fast to adopt 140 methodologies in such a short time. We simply don't know how many chemicals there will still be at the end of the recycling process and what kind of migration will take place in the food. In an ideal world, how would a safe recycling process for food contact applications work? An independent research center should conduct the risk assessment. And the data required for this assessment should be collected by an independent organization, not by the industry that requires approval of the recycling process. We shouldn't just trust the research done by companies, which is what's happening right now. We believe there should be no compromise between consumer safety and economic profit. The Commission wants to use an accelerated approval procedure for those 140 recycling processes, which means that Parliament and the Council will not have the opportunity to check decisions before they are made. How does it feel? We don't feel comfortable with that. The European Parliament should be involved so that consumer health can be adequately protected. It is really a pity that Parliament cannot say anything about it. Plastic is lightweight and economical, making it a convenient option for food packaging. So what are the green alternatives? An alternative could be glass because it does not cause the migration of chemicals into food. With aluminum or plastic, there is. Of course, it would not be practical to pack everything in glass - it is heavy, it can break, etc. And the problem with bio-based alternatives is that they aren't strong enough. But there are some alternatives. We are campaigning with restaurants and bars to encourage them to use alternatives to disposable plastic cups for coffee and tea, such as bamboo. When you put something hot in plastic, there is more migration of chemicals, so the campaign raises awareness of alternatives. You can also use reusable steel containers or try to sell as many plastic free or bulk products as possible. More and more stores sell products such as pasta, nuts, sweets or rice in pieces that customers put in cotton bags that they take to shop. Related Articles Automatic translation. We apologize for any inaccuracies. Original article in Italian. Veganoc Observatory
SEE MORETravel That Matters Don't Need Big LuggageWe will rather go on a journey together, a journey of discovery into the most secret corners of our mind. And to undertake such a journey you have to travel with little luggage; we cannot be burdened by opinions, prejudices and conclusions, all that old baggage we've been putting together over the last two thousand years and more. Forget everything you know about yourself; forget everything you thought about yourself; we'll start as if we don't know anything. Krishnamurti
SEE MORE