Add millions of used contact lenses to the plastic waste that’s finding its way into oceans and lakes.

A new study released Sunday estimates that these slippery transparent discs, vital to the vision of an estimated 45 million Americans, are often flushed into the sewer instead of placed in the trash or recycled.

Worn for as little as a day, their small size contributes to the danger they could eventually wind up polluting a lake, river or go out to sea, says the study being presented at a conference by Arizona State University researchers.

“I wondered what happened to these lenses,” said Rolf Halden, director of ASU’s Biodesign Institute Center for Environmental Health Engineering. “In the bathroom, they can get lost in the sink or go down the toilet. I am an engineer, so let’s see how big the problem is.”

The answer, as it turns out, is that the problem is substantial. Up to 20 percent of wearers aren’t tossing their old lenses into waste containers, opting instead for disposal in sinks and toilets. But because lenses are made of such tough plastics, they don’t break down fully when exposed to microbes. ASU’s study found that after going through  a sewage treatment plant, they become even smaller pieces, which can find their way into fish, birds or other animals.

Of about 14 billion contact lenses used in the U.S. every year, the study estimated that up to 50,000 pounds get flushed or otherwise go down the drain, most destined for waste treatment plants. Just how many end up in the ocean or waterways couldn’t be determined.

It’s a similar problem to other flotsam of daily life, from straw forks to plastic bags. Recognition of how many plastic straws end up in the trash, and eventually the ocean, prompted Starbucks to say it is going to phase them out globally by 2020. McDonald’s plans to test alternatives in the U.S. later this year.

Researchers could only find one maker, Bausch + Lomb, that is seriously pursuing a contact-lens recycling program. Since the program began in November 2016, the company says its One by One program has collected packaging waste and 2.5 million used lenses amounting to about seven tons of waste.

“We are continuing it every year and continuing to raise awareness about it,” said Bausch + Lomb spokeswoman Kristy Marks.

Johnson & Johnson, which makes about 5 billion contact lenses a year through its popular Acuvue brand, has attacked the problem by reducing the amount of paper in its packaging and increasing the amount that can be recycled. It hasn’t put an emphasis on the lens itself, which it says weighs only 30 micrograms.

The ASU study, being formally presented Sunday at a meeting of the American Chemical Society in Boston, found that used contact lenses are prevalent in wastewater sludge after sewage treatment. A pair of leftover lenses can usually be found in every two pounds of sludge, according Charles Rolsky, a doctoral student who also worked on the study.

The problem is that since sludge is often deposited on land, those lenses can eventually wash into lakes or rivers where fish can consume them.

The answer, Halden believes, isn’t to ban contact lenses. Too many people, including himself, depend on them. And daily disposables, rather than the ones that people wear for a week or more, are one of the fastest growing parts of the contact-lens market and more convenient and safe.

Rather, he said, the better solution is to encourage proper disposal. For its program, Bausch + Lomb partners with a company called TerraCycle that specializes in recycling smaller items that wouldn’t normally get separated in the standard process.

The issue with lenses is to deal with not only them but their packaging made up of foil and plastic, which has to be separated in order to go to recycling plants, said  Rick Zultner, director of process and product development for TerraCycle.

“Every waste stream has its unique quirks,” he said.

The best ways to dispose of your contact lenses

Bausch + Lomb has a recycling program that allows contact lens wearers to participate in either of two ways. They can take their used packaging and lenses to any of more than 2,000 participating doctors’ offices. Or they can mail them in directly to the recycling center that works with the company. The user puts their waste in a cardboard box, downloads a preprinted label and ships it.

 

More: Worst types of litter: Plastic straws not even in the top 5

More: Starbucks debuts its first plant-based protein coffee

More: Pebble Beach preview: Automakers focus on car concepts — fast and electric — for Monterey

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2nMsy2a

In the real world, people are increasingly buying SUVs — lots of them, big and small, mainstream and luxury — as they switch over from cars.

But at the Monterey Week of Cars in California, the focus remains squarely on, well,  cars. And this year, automakers are showing up with slew of new concepts and models with nary an SUV in sight.

For the series of shows capped by the Super Bowl of exhibitions, the Pebble  Beach Concours d’Elegance, automakers are revealing a bevy of sexy supercars — and these days, performance is all about being electric.

Four are sure to stand out.

Both Infiniti and Audi are among those planning splashy introductions of their new electric dream mobiles. Hyundai’s Genesis brand will bring its own concept that was shown earlier this year at other shows. And BMW will introduce a new car model, expected to be the latest version of its Z4 roadster, in addition to some concepts.

Concepts, cars that are often designer’s dreams that never go into production, collectively point to the direction of the auto industry. That direction includes challenging Tesla, which has been taking a big bite out of the luxury markets with its long-range electric luxury models. In sports cars, it has shown a prototype of its super-powerful roadster and some rival automakers appears dead set on matching it.

Here are the four new sports cars that show how automakers may answer Tesla:

Infiniti Prototype 10

Without mentioning Tesla or the revised roadster it plans, Infiniti says its Prototype 10 concept car will be a “daring electrified speedster.” The car, which appears to be a single seater, is going to be “providing a window into the brand’s desire to deliver driving pleasure and thrilling performance from electrified powertrains.”  

A drawing of the car released to drum up interest in the unveiling shows a sleek, highly angular design. The car is “a natural evolution of the form language first seen in the Infiniti Q Inspiration,” one of its concepts that was a hit when introduced at a previous exhib itions. It also gives Infiniti a chance to make a point about how it plans to offer electrified versions of all its production models starting in 2021.

Audi PB 18 e- tron

Audi will present its own electric supercar concept, called the PB 18 e-tron. It is meant to evoke memories of the Audi R18 e-tron, a racer. It was designed at Audi’s design shop in Malibu, California.

More: Vroom-vroom! Sotheby’s to auction 1962 Ferrari 250 GTO

More: Rare Lamborghini owned by one of the Beatles is up for auction

More: Infiniti Q Inspiration concept meant to inspire future car lineup

Genesis Essentia

Genesis, the luxury brand that has won critical attention but is still struggling to plant itself alongside the likes of Mercedes-Benz and BMW when it comes to sales, plans to show off the Essentia concept that it unveiled earlier this year.

Genesis calls it “electric and electrifying” and it’s filled with design innovation.

BMW Z4

If indeed BMW brings the next version of its ever-popular sports car to Pebble, it is sure to steal some thunder from Tesla — even if it continues to be conventionally powered.

BMW won’t stop at sports cars. For the show, it will also use the occasion to again display the performance version if its big, new 8-Series coupe and give the North American debut to its Concept M8 Gran Coupe.

 

 

 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2vRjYnw

Listen live to England v India – third Test, day two – Live – BBC Sport

<!–

<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–

<!–

<!–

The sheer scale

The Hajj brings together Muslims from all over the world, regardless of culture, ethnicity, sect or class. It is a religious duty for all financially and physically able Muslims to perform the Hajj at least once in their lives.

Every year, the Saudi government allocates a quota of the number of citizens from each country who are permitted to perform the Hajj. This figure is largely determined by the Muslim population in each country.

Over the past two decades, the total number of pilgrims grew from 1.8 million in 1995 to a peak of 3.1 million in 2012. The number of pilgrims declined sharply in 2013 due to an ongoing expansion project in Mecca and Medina, which is expected to be completed in 2020.

One-third of all pilgrims live in Saudi Arabia but the remainder come from all over the world.

If a single plane was filled with all the pilgrims, it would look like this:

Figures from 2017

Environmentalists are pointing to newly released documents as further proof the Trump administration is making a bad decision in seeking to ease toughening fuel-economy rules.

The internal documents show disagreements between the nation’s top environmental regulator, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Transportation Department’s auto safety arm, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, when it comes to drafting a new policy over fuel economy.

In one June 18 memo, for instance, the EPA quibbles with the expected benefits of the proposed standards. It states elements of them are “detrimental to safety, rather than beneficial.” The agency also questioned some of the facts and statistics underlying NHTSA’s proposal to lower the standards.

The documents were made public on a government website that tracks the evolution of regulations.

Environmentalists seized on the documents as proof that the underlying data on which the rules are being relaxed is flawed.

“NHTSA appears to have twisted their analysis to support a pre-determined outcome to rollback the standards,” said Roland Hwang, a managing director for the Natural Resource Defense Council’s Climate and Clean Energy Program. “At every turn, NHTSA appears to have picked the most extreme assumptions that strain credulity, especially in the cases of cost and safety.”

Another environment advocate, Andrew Linhardt, deputy director of the Sierra Club, said the documents “ignored all the evidence showing the health and safety benefits of the Clean Car standards in favor of destroying clean air and healthy communities.” 

More: ‘Journalists are not the enemy’: 300 media outlets push back against Trump rhetoric

More: Court orders ban on pesticide that could harm babies’ brains, says EPA violated law

More: New Omarosa tape: Lara Trump tried to buy my silence with campaign job

He said in a statement that Andrew Wheeler, the EPA’s acting administrator, should yank the proposed new rule and “focus on strengthening the standards — as the people and facts support — rather than continue with this charade.”

Earlier this month, the Trump administration proposed freezing Obama-era fuel efficiency standards rather than continuing to make them tougher. It argued that smaller vehicles aren’t as safe as bigger ones that typically burn more fuel. It also said that tougher fuel efficiency standards will make cars more expensive, and that if they cost less, more people will replace their current vehicles with those equipped with the latest safety technology.

The Obama administration set targets that included the U.S. fleet of cars having average fuel economy of 41.7 miles per gallon by the 2020 model year and 54.5 mpg by 2025. Many automakers have supported the move to freeze fuel efficiency standards in order to make new vehicles more affordable. 

Dan Sperling, director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, said the figures underpinning the administration’s arguments are “flimsy” and that “they use very aggressive numbers.”

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2Mtu07F

President Donald Trump has asked Wall Street’s top regulator to look into whether U.S. companies should report their financial results less often, a move that could upend long-standing rules and which critics claim could leave investors with too little information about the stocks they own. 

Instead of publicly traded companies disclosing how they’ve done every quarter, which are three-month stretches, the president tweeted Friday that he wants the Securities and Exchange Commission to study if companies should instead share their results every six months.  

In his tweet, Trump said that in speaking with business leaders, he asked what would improve business and jobs, and one told him, “Stop quarterly reporting & go to a six month system.” Trump later said it was outgoing PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi, a member of the Business Roundtable, who called for an end to quarterly reporting in favor of reports every six months. 

As a result, the president said he has “asked the SEC to study” the request of having companies report their profits, losses, sales and other data twice a year.

Trump’s move follows years of debate among academics, investors and corporate executives about how often companies should be required to officially divulge corporate results to securities regulators and investors, says Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at MUFG, a Tokyo-based global bank with offices in New York.  .

The main arguments for reducing the frequency of corporate reporting is that it will reduce the costly, time-consuming practice of gathering and distributing the data, and allow company management to focus more of their attention on executing their long-term business plans and objectives. 

Trump’s move follows a recommendation in June from high-powered CEOs Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase and Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway for companies to move away from quarterly earnings “guidance.” This practice of companies giving investors a heads-up on whether their performance is on track to top or fall short of Wall Street’s expectations, the CEO’s noted, “often leads to an unhealthy focus on short-term profits” and can cause executives to hold back on investment and hiring that “would improve businesses’ future growth.”

But Dimon and Buffett both stressed that their call to do away with corporate “guidance” updates “should not be misconstrued as opposition to quarterly and annual reporting.”  The practice of companies reporting their actual results every three months is an “essential part of U.S. public markets” that is necessary for stock owners to “reliably assess real progress,” they said.

More Money: China tariffs could raise consumers’ tech bill $3.2 billion higher in 2019, trade group says

More Money: FDA approves first generic EpiPen in blow to Mylan

More Money: These are the 25 worst cities in the U.S. to raise children

Critics of Trump’s push for less frequent corporate reporting say quarterly reports are still the way to go, stressing the more frequently investors get updates via regulatory filings from the companies they invest in, the better.

“No smart investor would favor this proposal,” says David Kotok, chairman and chief investment officer at Cumberland Advisors, an investment firm in Sarasota, Florida. “Smart investors want regularity and transparency and directors’  accountability.”

In a statement, SEC chairman Jay Clayton said the regulator has implemented and continues to consider other regulatory changes that encourage long-term capital formation while preserving and enhancing key investor protections.

“The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance continues to study public company reporting requirements, including the frequency of reporting,” he said. “As always, the SEC welcomes input from companies, investors, and other market participants as our staff considers these important matters.”

In a statement after Trump’s tweet, PepsiCo’s Nooyi said many market participants and the Business Roundtable “agree that a short-term only view can inhibit long-term strategy,” adding that her “comments were made in that broader context, and included a suggestion to explore the harmonization of the European system and the U.S. system of financial reporting.” In Europe, companies are required to report some financial information only two times a year.

Here are some issues in the debate about the frequency of corporate earnings reports:

Less reporting means less information

Despite Trump’s contention that cutting corporate reporting from four times a year to two could save money and provide flexibility, the trade-off is investors may know less about the companies they invest in.

“Change is often thought to be good, but I think more information for investors is better,”  Rupkey says. “Eliminating quarterly reports sounds like progress, but it is a step backward where companies won’t have to report as often on what they are doing, what they are earning, what are their sales prospects, what is their strategy.”

Could hide bad corporate behavior

There’s a fear that less communication from companies will allow them to “operate in the dark” and away from the prying eyes of regulators and investors. Less reporting might also invite unsavory practices by companies, some critics argue.

“Cut reporting frequency in half and you invite mischief,” Kotok says.

Adds Rupkey: “It is doubtful they will hire more workers or make more longer-term investments as a result of this change in reporting. Having companies operating in the dark is bad for investors. Operating in the light of day with full transparency is best.”

Still, shareholders could derive benefits if companies focus less on reporting their business results and worrying about meeting Wall Street expectations every three months and more on growing the company for the long term.

There is certainly the possibility that having to report business results less frequently will result in a “reduction in short termism,” says Tom Essaye, founder of the Sevens Report, a financial newsletter.

 

 

 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2OJQv5T

Chelsea and Arsenal contested a chaotic classic at Stamford Bridge on Saturday.

Their five-goal thriller, which the Blues won 3-2, provided constant entertainment – but also plenty of evidence that the best either of these teams can aim for in this season’s Premier League is a top-four finish.

The shambolic manner in which both teams defended in the opening 45 minutes suggests it would be a stretch to pencil in either side as serious title contenders.

Former England defender Rio Ferdinand acknowledged as much when he said on BT Sport: “Neither team will be anywhere near winning the league because they just don’t defend. You’ve got to have balance, both parts of the game.”

Chelsea undoubtedly have real class and enough quality in their ranks to make a bid for the top four and a return to the Champions League, which has been their natural home for almost the entire Roman Abramovich era.

Arsenal are undergoing an understandable transition under Unai Emery after 22 years of Arsene Wenger’s control, and their back four looked all over the place at times on Saturday. In some respects, a top-four finish would be a huge bonus as there will inevitably be some pain from such a seismic change in direction, philosophy and approach.

If they did mount a challenge for the top four in a league that also contains the two Manchester clubs, Liverpool and Tottenham, it would be quite an achievement by the Spaniard.

Expect excitement from Sarri and Emery

Irrespective of whether the title eludes Sarri and Emery, both have a style and approach that will bring character, colour and excitement to the Premier League.

And, on Saturday’s evidence, the excitement will come at both ends of the pitch.

Sarri is a renowned advocate of fast, attacking football as he proved at Napoli, and it was certainly on show here as Chelsea carved out a host of chances once they had cleared their heads after Arsenal came from 2-0 to level at the break.

Jorginho is a top-class acquisition, while the success and importance of keeping Eden Hazard has already been emphasised by his impact as a substitute at Huddersfield Town and against Arsenal.

Sarri is committed to entertaining, progressive football, and watching Chelsea promises to bring plenty of fun this season.

Emery’s jack-in-the-box antics in his technical area and his hands-on approach was quite the sight at Stamford Bridge, and his body language made it clear he does not expect his Arsenal team to take a backward step.

The new manager’s desire to play a high defensive line and demand to play out from the back make for a high-risk strategy, especially given the current personnel does not seem to give him a natural fit, and remains a work in progress.

Emery, however, is a progressive coach and while there may be bad days ahead as well as good as Arsenal adjust, he seems determined to take a bold approach.

Chelsea have class to win silverware

Antonio Conte left Chelsea after winning the Premier League and FA Cup in his two seasons – confirmation there are unique demands at Stamford Bridge but also a winners’ mentality among this group of players.

Kepa Arrizabalaga, replacing Thibaut Courtois in goal, will need time to adjust to the Premier League but there will be no such problems for a player of Jorginho’s calibre.

Sarri is experienced and expansive as a coach, and it is already clear Chelsea’s squad are enjoying his methods and style.

This is why Chelsea will almost certainly be in the reckoning for silverware again this season, although the shambolic defending we saw here, and the ease with which Arsenal carved them open in the first half, will be punished more heavily should it remain unaddressed.

Any side possessing quality such as Hazard, Jorginho and N’Golo Kante, in a more advanced role than we have seen previously, can be expected to be in the shake-up for silverware – and there is no reason to think Chelsea will not have a big chance of extending that winning streak in the cup competitions.

Emery faces huge task

Emery is not just taking on a new job at Arsenal – he is tasked with taking over from an institution whose personality and methods ran through every aspect of the club.

Emery has genuine pedigree from his three successive Europa League wins with Sevilla to titles with Paris St-Germain. Now he must use those qualities to renew Arsenal.

He deserves, and will get, plenty of time as the club knew what a crucial choice they were making when replacing Wenger.

Emery is also stepping in at a time when Arsenal’s rivals in the so-called ‘big six’ look stronger and so much further down the line in their development.

He is not going to be able to sweep out bad habits and old failings in a matter of weeks so he deserves the time and patience Arsenal will give him and the supporters will also surely offer him their understanding.

His team gave the ball away too often here, are clearly still adjusting to the new approach and much work still needs to be done in the transfer windows to come – but there were also signs to encourage Emery.

Yes, it was another damaging defeat against a close rival to leave them without a point from Emery’s first two games, but there was also resilience and fight to come back and not become demoralised after going two down in 20 minutes.

Arsenal have collapsed on plenty of similar occasions in the past but there was no suggestion of that here, which hints Emery is already having an impact on his players.

Lucas Torreira will add a new dimension in midfield, and on other days the chances missed by Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang and others will be converted.

This is a managerial reign in its infancy. Emery will need all the time he can be assured Arsenal will give him.

A strong earthquake jolted the Indonesian island of Lombok, causing landslides on Mount Rinjani and damaging buildings, as it tries to recover from a quake earlier this month that killed hundreds of people.

The US Geological Survey measured Sunday’s quake, which was centred in the northeast of the tourist island, at magnitude 6.3 with a depth of 7 kilometres.

It was felt on the neighbouring island of Bali and was preceded a few minutes earlier by a magnitude 5.4 quake, also in Lombok’s northeast, residents said.

“I was driving to deliver aid to evacuees when suddenly the electricity pole was swaying. I realised it was an earthquake,” East Lombok resident Agus Salim told AFP news agency.

“People started to scream and cry. They all ran to the street,” Salim added.

An Associated Press reporter on Lombok said the tremor caused landslides on the slopes of Rinjani and panic in villages.

Video shot by the Indonesian Red Cross showed huge clouds of dust billowing from the mountain’s slopes.

The shaking toppled motorcycles and there was damage to buildings in Sembalun subdistrict, including a community hall that collapsed.

The hall had sustained damage in earlier quakes, said National Disaster Mitigation Agency spokesman Sutopo Purwo Nugroho. Homes and a mosque were also damaged, he said.

He said so far there have been no reports of injuries or fatalities, but information was still being collected.

Al Jazeera’s Scott Heidler, reporting form the Indonesian capital Jakarta, said that many residents of the area were still psychologically recovering from previous earthquakes.

“Where this earthquake struck today, there had also been a weaker earthquake at the end of last month… so they were rattled to begin with and with this new one they are even more so,” he said. 

Mount Rinjani has been closed to visitors following a July earthquake that killed 16 people, triggered landslides and stranded hundreds of tourists on the mountain, an active volcano.

A magnitude 7.0 quake that struck Lombok on August 5 killed 460 people, damaged tens of thousands of homes and displaced several hundred thousand people.

Indonesia, a sprawling archipelago that straddles the Pacific “Ring of Fire,” is prone to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

In 2004, a tsunami triggered by a magnitude 9.3 undersea earthquake off the coast of Sumatra, in western Indonesia, killed 220,000 people in countries around the Indian Ocean, including 168,000 in Indonesia.

SOURCE: Al Jazeera and news agencies