Características dos Materiais da Coleta Seletiva de Resíduos Sólidos no bairro Camobi/Santa Maria/RS

Authors

  • Elenice Gomes MSc. em Extensão Rural pela UFSM
  • Airton Sieben MSc. em Geomática pela UFSM
  • Waterloo Pereira Filho Professor Dr. Departamento de Geociências da UFSM

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X9666

Abstract

The discard of solid wastes has been representing a seriousenvironmental problem at the present time. In this sense, the recycling hasbeen presenting as viable alternatives for this subject. In this manner, it isaimed to observe the characteristics of recycled materials given in the selectivecollection in two areas in the Camobi neighborhood, Santa Maria - RS. Thesample areas possess differentiated social economics characteristics. Theprocess of selective collection began in the two experimental areas, being thepopularization accomplished with use of informative pamphlet and of chat withthe residents in the respective areas. The collection will have continuity,however the data for the research were collected for five weeks (between Mayand June of 2003). The selectors' association of recycled material, accomplishedthe collection and also the weighing of the waste. It was observed that there isno significant difference among the two areas, with plastic and paper, whichproduce the same amount. The amounts of scrap and aluminum were moreexpressive in the area with smaller power purchasing, however the glass ismore representative in the larger power purchasing area. It was observed thatin the larger power purchasing area was a continuous growth in the contributionof recycled material.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Elenice Gomes, MSc. em Extensão Rural pela UFSM

Airton Sieben, MSc. em Geomática pela UFSM

Waterloo Pereira Filho, Professor Dr. Departamento de Geociências da UFSM

Downloads

Published

2004-07-12

How to Cite

Gomes, E., Sieben, A., & Pereira Filho, W. (2004). Características dos Materiais da Coleta Seletiva de Resíduos Sólidos no bairro Camobi/Santa Maria/RS. Ciência E Natura, 26(1), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X9666

Issue

CIÊNCIA E NATURA, V. 26, N. 1, 2004

Section

Biology

License

To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.