Investigation of mechanisms governing emission of odorants

The literature identifies several models that describe inter-phase mass transfer, key to the emission process. While the emission process is complex and these models may be more or less successful at predicting mass transfer rates, they identify three key variables for a system involving a liquid and an air phase in contact with it: • A concentration (or partial pressure) gradient driving force; • The fluid dynamic characteristics within the liquid and air phases, and • The chemical properties of the individual components within the system. In three applied research projects conducted prior to this study, samples collected with two well-known sampling devices resulted in very different odour emission rates. It was not possible to adequately explain the differences observed. It appeared likely, however, that the sample collection device might have artefact effects on the emission of odorants, i.e. the sampling device appeared to have altered the mass transfer process. This raised the obvious question: Where two different emission rates are reported for a single source (differing only in the selection of sampling device), and a credible explanation for the difference in emission rate cannot be provided, which emission rate is correct? This research project aimed to identify the factors that determine odour emission rates, the impact that the characteristics of a sampling device may exert on the key mass transfer variables, and ultimately, the impact of the sampling device on the emission rate itself. To meet these objectives, a series of targeted reviews, and laboratory and field investigations, were conducted. Two widely-used, representative devices were chosen to investigate the influence of various parameters on the emission process. These investigations provided insight into the odour emission process generally, and the influence of the sampling device specifically.

Not for profit income tax exemption : is there a hole in the bucket, dear Henry?

Australia’s Future Tax System Review, headed by the then head of the Australian Treasury, and the Productivity Commission’s Research Report on the not for profit sector, both examined the state of tax concessions to Australia’s not for profit sector in the light of the High Court’s decision in Commissioner of Taxation v Word Investments Ltd. Despite being unable to quantify with any certainty the pre- or post-Word Investments cost of the tax concessions, both Reports indicated their support for continuation of the income tax exemption. However, the government acted in the 2011 Budget to target the not for profit income tax concessions more precisely, mainly on competitive neutrality grounds. This article examines the income tax exemption by applying the five taxation design principles, proposed in the Australia’s Future Tax System Review, for assessing tax expenditure. The conclusion is that the exemptions can be justified and, further, that a rationale for the exemption can be consistent with the reasoning in the Word Investments case.

Point Henry Bushfire Safety : 10 Year Plan

Bushfire responsive design and management strategy at the bioregion scale. 248 Page document containing text, original designs, photographs, masterplans and critique - created as an alternative community-based strategy for risk mitigation and management reponse to bushfire in the Point Henry and Bremer Bay region of Western Australia. Document drafted as an alternative to a local government commissioned plan which had many shortcomings. It was presented as a 'powerpoint' presentaion at a public meeting in Bremer Bay on 7th April 2014 and disseminated to local community members and councillors to encourage public debate and feedback to the Shire of Jerramungup, WA.