Questões Militares Comentadas para aluno do ime

Texto 1

                  LANDFILLS AND THE INTRODUCTION OF NANOMATERIALS IN WASTE

      Waste disposal on land (dumping) and landfilling remain the most prominent waste management techniques used ______. The standards and practices for this type of waste disposal vary greatly ranging from uncontrolled sites to highly specialised and controlled engineered landfills. The potential ______ of contaminants through landfill gas and leachate is largely dependent on landfill design, site conditions and the sophistication of the control measures in place, ______ landfill gas recovery and leachate collection and treatment systems.

Modern engineered landfills use ______ barriers, with few relying on natural barriers, to line the bottom of a landfill and incorporate collection systems for both leachate and landfill gas. The purpose of these collection systems is to capture and treat leachate and landfill gas; ______ preventing the migration of leachate into ground/surface water and the release of untreated landfill gases to the atmosphere. An un-engineered landfill would be considered an uncontrolled system due to the lack of environmental controls, potentially resulting in significant environmental exposure of contaminants.

      Because of widespread use of ENMs in a broad range of products, it is possible that some ENMs ______ through landfill gases; however this report will primarily focus on ENMs that may be present in landfill leachate, as this is considered to be the primary means by which ENMs could be transported______ a landfill. Characterisation of landfill gases to identify the presence of ENMs ______ an important area for further research.

      Landfill leachate is generated when rain passes through the waste mass and by the liquid generated due to the breakdown of waste ______ the landfill. The composition of leachate is extremely ______ depending on the type of waste landfilled, the quantity of precipitation, the construction and operation of the landfill, the age of the landfill and other factors such as pH, temperature and microbial populations.

                                                                              (…)

ENMs = engineered nanomaterials.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Landfills and the introduction of nanomaterials in waste. In: Landfilling of waste containing nanomaterials and nanowaste, 2015. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 22/04/2015. 

Texto 1

                  LANDFILLS AND THE INTRODUCTION OF NANOMATERIALS IN WASTE

      Waste disposal on land (dumping) and landfilling remain the most prominent waste management techniques used ______. The standards and practices for this type of waste disposal vary greatly ranging from uncontrolled sites to highly specialised and controlled engineered landfills. The potential ______ of contaminants through landfill gas and leachate is largely dependent on landfill design, site conditions and the sophistication of the control measures in place, ______ landfill gas recovery and leachate collection and treatment systems.

Modern engineered landfills use ______ barriers, with few relying on natural barriers, to line the bottom of a landfill and incorporate collection systems for both leachate and landfill gas. The purpose of these collection systems is to capture and treat leachate and landfill gas; ______ preventing the migration of leachate into ground/surface water and the release of untreated landfill gases to the atmosphere. An un-engineered landfill would be considered an uncontrolled system due to the lack of environmental controls, potentially resulting in significant environmental exposure of contaminants.

      Because of widespread use of ENMs in a broad range of products, it is possible that some ENMs ______ through landfill gases; however this report will primarily focus on ENMs that may be present in landfill leachate, as this is considered to be the primary means by which ENMs could be transported______ a landfill. Characterisation of landfill gases to identify the presence of ENMs ______ an important area for further research.

      Landfill leachate is generated when rain passes through the waste mass and by the liquid generated due to the breakdown of waste ______ the landfill. The composition of leachate is extremely ______ depending on the type of waste landfilled, the quantity of precipitation, the construction and operation of the landfill, the age of the landfill and other factors such as pH, temperature and microbial populations.

                                                                              (…)

ENMs = engineered nanomaterials.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Landfills and the introduction of nanomaterials in waste. In: Landfilling of waste containing nanomaterials and nanowaste, 2015. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 22/04/2015. 

Billions of dollars spent on defeating improvised explosive devices (IED) are beginning to show what technology can and cannot do for the evolving struggle.

Two platoons of U.S. Army scouts are in a field deep in the notorious “Triangle of Death” south of Baghdad, a region of countless clashes between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. The platoons are guided by a local man who’s warned them of pressure-plate improvised explosive devices, designed to explode when stepped on. He has assured them that he knows where the IED’s are, which means he is almost certainly a former Sunni insurgent.

The platoons come under harassing fire. It stops, but later the tension mounts again as they maneuver near an abandoned house known to shelter al-Qaeda fighters. A shot rings out; the scouts take cover. They don’t realize it’s just their local guide, with an itchy trigger finger, taking the potshot at the house. The lieutenant leading the patrol summons three riflemen to cover the abandoned house.

Then all hell breaks loose. One of the riflemen, a sergeant, steps on a pressure-plate IED. The blast badly injures him, the two other riflemen, and the lieutenant. A Navy explosives specialist along on the mission immediately springs into action, using classified gear to comb the area for more bombs. Until he gives the all clear, no one can move, not even to tend the bleeding men. Meanwhile, one of the frozen-inspace scouts notices another IED right next to him and gives a shout, provoking more combing in his area. Then a big area has to be cleared so that the medevac helicopter already on the way can land.

That incident, which took place on 7 November 2007, exhibits many of the hallmarks of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – a small patrol; a local man of dubious background; Navy specialists working with soldiers on dry land; and costly technologies pressed into service against cheap and crude weapons. And, most of all, death by IED.  

Billions of dollars spent on defeating improvised explosive devices (IED) are beginning to show what technology can and cannot do for the evolving struggle.

Two platoons of U.S. Army scouts are in a field deep in the notorious “Triangle of Death” south of Baghdad, a region of countless clashes between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. The platoons are guided by a local man who’s warned them of pressure-plate improvised explosive devices, designed to explode when stepped on. He has assured them that he knows where the IED’s are, which means he is almost certainly a former Sunni insurgent.

The platoons come under harassing fire. It stops, but later the tension mounts again as they maneuver near an abandoned house known to shelter al-Qaeda fighters. A shot rings out; the scouts take cover. They don’t realize it’s just their local guide, with an itchy trigger finger, taking the potshot at the house. The lieutenant leading the patrol summons three riflemen to cover the abandoned house.

Then all hell breaks loose. One of the riflemen, a sergeant, steps on a pressure-plate IED. The blast badly injures him, the two other riflemen, and the lieutenant. A Navy explosives specialist along on the mission immediately springs into action, using classified gear to comb the area for more bombs. Until he gives the all clear, no one can move, not even to tend the bleeding men. Meanwhile, one of the frozen-inspace scouts notices another IED right next to him and gives a shout, provoking more combing in his area. Then a big area has to be cleared so that the medevac helicopter already on the way can land.

That incident, which took place on 7 November 2007, exhibits many of the hallmarks of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – a small patrol; a local man of dubious background; Navy specialists working with soldiers on dry land; and costly technologies pressed into service against cheap and crude weapons. And, most of all, death by IED.  

Billions of dollars spent on defeating improvised explosive devices (IED) are beginning to show what technology can and cannot do for the evolving struggle.

Two platoons of U.S. Army scouts are in a field deep in the notorious “Triangle of Death” south of Baghdad, a region of countless clashes between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. The platoons are guided by a local man who’s warned them of pressure-plate improvised explosive devices, designed to explode when stepped on. He has assured them that he knows where the IED’s are, which means he is almost certainly a former Sunni insurgent.

The platoons come under harassing fire. It stops, but later the tension mounts again as they maneuver near an abandoned house known to shelter al-Qaeda fighters. A shot rings out; the scouts take cover. They don’t realize it’s just their local guide, with an itchy trigger finger, taking the potshot at the house. The lieutenant leading the patrol summons three riflemen to cover the abandoned house.

Then all hell breaks loose. One of the riflemen, a sergeant, steps on a pressure-plate IED. The blast badly injures him, the two other riflemen, and the lieutenant. A Navy explosives specialist along on the mission immediately springs into action, using classified gear to comb the area for more bombs. Until he gives the all clear, no one can move, not even to tend the bleeding men. Meanwhile, one of the frozen-inspace scouts notices another IED right next to him and gives a shout, provoking more combing in his area. Then a big area has to be cleared so that the medevac helicopter already on the way can land.

That incident, which took place on 7 November 2007, exhibits many of the hallmarks of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – a small patrol; a local man of dubious background; Navy specialists working with soldiers on dry land; and costly technologies pressed into service against cheap and crude weapons. And, most of all, death by IED.  

Billions of dollars spent on defeating improvised explosive devices (IED) are beginning to show what technology can and cannot do for the evolving struggle.

Two platoons of U.S. Army scouts are in a field deep in the notorious “Triangle of Death” south of Baghdad, a region of countless clashes between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. The platoons are guided by a local man who’s warned them of pressure-plate improvised explosive devices, designed to explode when stepped on. He has assured them that he knows where the IED’s are, which means he is almost certainly a former Sunni insurgent.

The platoons come under harassing fire. It stops, but later the tension mounts again as they maneuver near an abandoned house known to shelter al-Qaeda fighters. A shot rings out; the scouts take cover. They don’t realize it’s just their local guide, with an itchy trigger finger, taking the potshot at the house. The lieutenant leading the patrol summons three riflemen to cover the abandoned house.

Then all hell breaks loose. One of the riflemen, a sergeant, steps on a pressure-plate IED. The blast badly injures him, the two other riflemen, and the lieutenant. A Navy explosives specialist along on the mission immediately springs into action, using classified gear to comb the area for more bombs. Until he gives the all clear, no one can move, not even to tend the bleeding men. Meanwhile, one of the frozen-inspace scouts notices another IED right next to him and gives a shout, provoking more combing in his area. Then a big area has to be cleared so that the medevac helicopter already on the way can land.

That incident, which took place on 7 November 2007, exhibits many of the hallmarks of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – a small patrol; a local man of dubious background; Navy specialists working with soldiers on dry land; and costly technologies pressed into service against cheap and crude weapons. And, most of all, death by IED.  

Billions of dollars spent on defeating improvised explosive devices (IED) are beginning to show what technology can and cannot do for the evolving struggle.

Two platoons of U.S. Army scouts are in a field deep in the notorious “Triangle of Death” south of Baghdad, a region of countless clashes between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. The platoons are guided by a local man who’s warned them of pressure-plate improvised explosive devices, designed to explode when stepped on. He has assured them that he knows where the IED’s are, which means he is almost certainly a former Sunni insurgent.

The platoons come under harassing fire. It stops, but later the tension mounts again as they maneuver near an abandoned house known to shelter al-Qaeda fighters. A shot rings out; the scouts take cover. They don’t realize it’s just their local guide, with an itchy trigger finger, taking the potshot at the house. The lieutenant leading the patrol summons three riflemen to cover the abandoned house.

Then all hell breaks loose. One of the riflemen, a sergeant, steps on a pressure-plate IED. The blast badly injures him, the two other riflemen, and the lieutenant. A Navy explosives specialist along on the mission immediately springs into action, using classified gear to comb the area for more bombs. Until he gives the all clear, no one can move, not even to tend the bleeding men. Meanwhile, one of the frozen-inspace scouts notices another IED right next to him and gives a shout, provoking more combing in his area. Then a big area has to be cleared so that the medevac helicopter already on the way can land.

That incident, which took place on 7 November 2007, exhibits many of the hallmarks of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – a small patrol; a local man of dubious background; Navy specialists working with soldiers on dry land; and costly technologies pressed into service against cheap and crude weapons. And, most of all, death by IED.