แท็ก

mg extender pickup truck price

บทความที่เกี่ยวข้อง mg extender pickup truck price

2019 New MG Extender กระบะพันธุ์ยักษ์ ทางเลือกใหม่สำหรับคนต้องการความครบครัน

Extender) รถกระบะจากแบรนด์เอ็มจี เปิดตัวไปเมื่อกลางปี 2019 ด้วยรูปร่างบึกบึนใหญ่โต ดูแข็งแกร่ง มีเอกลักษณ์เฉพาะตัว

Rendered : 2021 MG Extender Gundam Inspired Edition ถ้ากระบะแต่งเป็นหุ่นยนต์ จะเข้ากันมั้ย?

2021 MG Extender (2021 เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) เปิดตัวอย่างเป็นทางการเมื่อเกือบ 2 ปีที่แล้ว แต่ทำยอดขายไม่ดีสมใจอยาก

MG คว้ารางวัลแบรนด์รถยนต์คุ้มค่ายอดเยี่ยม – MG ZS EV รับรางวัลรถใหม่คุ้มค่าสูงสุด

MG (เอ็มจี) ได้รับรางวัลแบรนด์รถยนต์ที่ความคุ้มค่ายอดเยี่ยม (Best Value Brand 2020) จากการประกาศผลรางวัล

ชมจุดเด่นและจุดด้อย 2019 MG Extender รถกระบะพันธุ์ยักษ์ ทำไมยอดขายรั้งท้าย?

2019 MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอ็กซ์เทนเดอร์) เปิดตัวอย่างเป็นทางการในช่วงเดือนสิงหาคม 2562 กลายเป็นผู้เล่นหน้าใหม่ล่าสุดในตลาดรถกระบะเมืองไทยExtender

2021 BIMS ยืนยันจัดมอเตอร์โชว์ปลายเดือนนี้ มีรถบางค่ายไม่มาด้วย เผยทุกข้อมูลก่อนเริ่มงาน

Maserati, Peugeot, Mazda, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz, Great Wall Motors, Nissan, Toyota, Lexus, Honda, Audi, MG

MG ประกาศขึ้นแท่นผู้นำตลาดเอสยูวีในครึ่งปีแรกของปี 2563

MG (เอ็มจี) แบรนด์รถยนต์น้องใหม่ประเทศไทย ประกาศขึ้นแท่นผู้นำตลาดเอสยูวีในครึ่งแรกของปี 2563 ด้วยยอดจำหน่ายรวม

Great Wall Motors ขนทัพรถยนต์รุ่นใหม่กว่า 10 รุ่น ลุยมหกรรมยานยนต์ระดับโลก

เกรท วอลล์ มอเตอร์ส (Great Wall Motors-GWM) ยกทัพรถยนต์รุ่นใหม่จาก 4 แบรนด์ HAVAL, WEY, ORA และ GWM Pickup

อ่านก่อนซื้อ! MG EXTENDER มีข้อดีกับข้อเสียอย่างไร

และต้องบอกเลยว่า MG กล้าหาญชาญชัยมากที่นำรถกระบะ MG EXTENDER (เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) เข้ามาขายในประเทศไทย

2019 New MG Extender  DC 4WD 6AT กับ 4 เหตุผลที่คุณควรซื้อ 

2019 New MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอ็กซ์เทนเดอร์ )DC 4WD 6AT คือรถกระบะน้องใหม่ในตลาดรถกระบะเมืองไทย ที่เปิดตัวด้วยความใหญ่โตของตัวถัง

ชมงาน BIMS 2021 ดู GWM มาแรง MG Extender หน้าใหม่ หรือ Audi e-tron GT และอื่น ๆ เรารวมไว้ให้คุณแล้วที่นี่

รวมถึงกระบะไฟฟ้า GWM Poer EV (โปเออร์ อีวี) มาเรียกน้ำจิ้มกันMGMG (เอ็มจี) เปิดหน้ากระบะที่ได้รับการปรับโฉมใหม่ MG

ดูเพิ่มเติม

คิดดีแล้วหรือ? รวม 5 รถกระบะ EV ที่แปลกจนเราต้องแอบพูดว่า เอ๊ะ?

รถไฟฟ้าในปัจจุบัน ส่วนมากจะมีอยู่ 2 ชนิด ถ้าหากไม่ใช่รถยนต์ทั่วไปสำหรับการเดินทางบนถนนดำ เช่น MG EP (

ครั้งแรกในรอบ 2 ปี Isuzu D-Max ยอดขายแซง Toyota Hilux Revo

ใน 4 อันดับสุดท้าย มีรถกระบะค่ายรอง 4 รุ่นด้วยกัน ตั้งแต่ MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) ซึ่งเป็นรถกระบะค่ายน้องใหม่ที่ชูความใหญ่โตโอ่อ่า

GolF ก็ว่า... 7 ปีของ MG จากบริษัทที่มีแต่คนดูแคลน กลายเป็นผู้นำด้านเทคโนโลยียานยนต์

และสร้างสีสันให้กับตลาดรถยนต์เมืองไทยมากที่สุด แน่นอนว่าคงไม่มีใครปฏิเสธว่า คำตอบนั้นก็น่าจะเป็นน้องใหม่ลูกครึ่งอังกฤษ-จีนอย่าง MG

รู้ข้อดีข้อเสีย MG V80 ก่อนเป็นเจ้าของ

แต่ก่อนจะไปเป็นเจ้าของ MG V80 2019 นี้ AutoFun เลยอยากจะบอกเล่าข้อดีข้อเสียของ MG V80 2019 นี้ก่อนตัดสินใจข้อดีของ

แบงค์บอกต่อ Nissan Almera และ MG HS กับ Extender พร้อมแคมเปญดี ๆ ก่อนสิ้นปีนี้

แบงค์บอกต่อ นำเสนอโปรโมชั่นดี ๆ สำหรับซิตี้คาร์ Nissan Almera (นิสสัน อัลเมร่า) MG HS (เอ็มจี เอชเอส)

แบงค์บอกต่อ แคมเปญรถใหม่ Ford Ranger FX4 Max มาพร้อมของแถมฟรีหลายรายการ

2021 Ford ranger FX4 Max (ฟอร์ด เรนเจอร์ เอฟเอกซ์4 แมกซ์) ตัวแต่งใหม่ของ Ford (ฟอร์ด) ประเทศไทย รวมถึง MG

ชมคันจริง 2021 MG Extender ไมเนอร์เชนจ์ครั้งใหญ่ ขายแน่สิ้นเดือนนี้ คาดราคาทะลุล้าน

2021 MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) มีการปรับโฉมไมเนอร์เชนจ์แล้ว โดยทาง MG ประเทศไทยได้จัดพรีวิวรอบพิเศษ

เทียบสเปกรถกระบะ 4 ประตู ขุมพลัง 2.0 ลิตร 2019 MG Extender วัดมวย 2019 Ford Ranger

2019 MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอ็กซ์เทนเดอร์) เปิดตัวพร้อมแนวคิดรถกระบะพันธุ์ยักษ์ ด้วยสัดส่วนตัวถังที่มีขนาดใหญ่โตที่สุดรุ่นหนึ่งในระดับเดียวกัน

2021 MG Extender ไมเนอร์เชนจ์ ประกาศราคาสุดเย้ายวน เริ่มต้น 559,000 บาท

2021 MG Extender2021 MG Extender (2021 เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) รถกระบะโฉมใหม่ได้รับการประกาศราคาจำหน่ายอย่างเป็นทางการแล้ว

ส่องยอดขายกระบะ 4 ประตูมีนาคม 64 Isuzu D-Max ครองแชมป์ต่อยาวยาว Toyota Hilux ตามมาติด ๆ

MG Extender 437 คันMG Extender (เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) กระบะยักษ์ ได้รับการปรับเปลี่ยนหน้าตามาใหม่ ด้วยราคาเริ่มต้น

เผยสเปก 2020 MG Gloster รถพีพีวีบนพื้นฐาน Extender โอกาสทำตลาดเมืองไทยมากน้อยแค่ไหน?

หลังจาก 2020 MG Gloster (เอ็มจี กลอสเตอร์) ได้รับการเผยโฉมรุ่นต้นแบบโปรโตไทพ์ในอินเดียไปตั้งแต่เดือนกุมภาพันธ์ที่ผ่านมา

Review: MG Extender กระบะยักษ์พันธุ์แกร่ง

Extender 2020 มีรุ่นให้เลือกรวมกว่า 9 รุ่น ได้แก่- MG Extender 2.0 Giant Cab C 6MT ราคา 549,000 บาท-

เสียงวิจารณ์โลกโซเชียลไม่ระคาย ทำไม MG ทำยอดขายผงาดผู้นำ

ความสำเร็จของรถอเนกประสงค์ค่าย MG ทั้ง MG ZS (เอ็มจี แซดเอส) และ MG HS (เอ็มจี เอชเอส) แสดงให้เห็นว่าค่ายรถยนต์น้องใหม่สามารถโค่นแบรนด์ยักษ์อันเก่าแก่ลงได้หากเดินถูกทางยอดขายสะสมของรถอเนกประสงค์ขนาดซับคอมแพ็กต์อย่าง

2021 Great Wall Motor Cannon (Pao) ควรมาไทยหรือเปล่า?

อ่านต่อ: คุณกัสคาดการณ์ : Haval H4 อาจมาไทยปีนี้ จะมีราคา 689,000 บาทเท่า MG ZS ชมภาพจริงที่นี่ตลาดรถยนต์กระบะในประเทศไทยมีขนาดใหญ่พอที่จะรองรับผู้เล่นหน้าใหม่อีกหรือ

MG สร้างจุดขายใหม่ให้ Extender หวังเจาะเอสเอ็มอีหนุนตลาดโต

MG (เอ็มจี) ผู้นำตลาดเอสยูวีในประเทศไทยในช่วงครึ่งปีแรก เริ่มแผนการสำหรับการผลักดันตลาดอื่น ๆ โดยเล็งไปที่ตลาดรถปิกอัพขนาด

Great Wall Black Bullet รถกระบะสุดโหดโชว์ศักยภาพข่ม Ford Ranger Raptor

มองในภาพรวมถือว่าสวยงามและหวือหวาดีทีเดียวคอรถกระบะในเมืองไทยเตรียมตัวพบกับ Great Wall Poerไฮไลท์ของ Great Wall ที่งานปักกิ่ง มอเตอร์โชว์ยังรวมถึง Great Wall Pickup

2021 MG Extender เตรียมตกรุ่นแล้ว Maxus T90 เปิดโฉมไมเนอร์เชนจ์ใหม่ มาไทยเดือนนี้

2021 MG Extender อาจจะมีหน้าตาแบบนี้MG Extender (เอ็มจี เอกซ์เทนเดอร์) รถกระบะรุ่นนี้เปิดตัวในประเทศไทยได้เพียง

2021 MG5 ความหวังใหม่ MG ไทย คาดเปิดตัวปลายปีนี้ ด้วยราคาไม่เกิน 7 แสน

ว่า MG5 (เอ็มจี5) ใหม่อาจจะเข้ามาในไทย หรือที่ฮือฮากันใน Facebook ที่มีการปล่อยภาพโทรศัพท์พร้อมตรา MG

แบงค์บอกต่อ กระบะราคาดีทั้ง Ford และ Mg ส่วนลดเริ่มต้นที่ 200,000 บาท

มีโปรดี ๆ มาบอกต่อกันกับ Ford Ranger กับ Everest และ MG Extender ที่นำรถมาลดราคากันกระหน่ำFord Everest

5 รุ่นกระบะแต่ง เอาใจคนสายโม ในงาน Motor Expo 2020

ควรจะเรียกว่าถูกดัดแปลงให้กลายเป็นรถแข่งถึงจะถูกต้องมากกว่ารถคันนี้เป็นรถที่ถูกใช้ในรายการแข่งขัน Thailand Super Series ในรุ่น Thailand Super Pickup

วิดีโอรถยนต์ที่เกี่ยวข้อง mg extender pickup truck price

mg extender pickup truck price-mg extender pickup truck price-Ford F-150 Lightning (2022)

mg extender pickup truck price-2010 GMC Sierra Pickup Truck Aaron Penny Goes Fishing

mg extender pickup truck price-mg extender pickup truck price-Canyon Dual Position Tailgate

mg extender pickup truck price-BREAKING NEWS LIVE: MAHALAGANG ANUNSYO NG PALASYO | TALK TO THA NATION ADDRESS PRESIDENT DUTERTE

mg extender pickup truck price-NEW MG EXTENDER (Off Road Test)

mg extender pickup truck price-Isuzu MU-X 2021

mg extender pickup truck price-mg extender pickup truck price-How to install piston rings and not break them. Oil ring explanation POV installation! #pistonrings

mg extender pickup truck price-All New Mazda 2021 BT-50 Pickup Truck Reveal

mg extender pickup truck price-MG Extender (Off Road Test) | Topspeed Class

mg extender pickup truck price-All New 2022 Kia EV6 Electric Crossover revealed - FIRST LOOK // Interior & Exterior

รีวิว Q&A mg extender pickup truck price

What other use can be done than burning the crops remains (paraali) in the adjoining states of Delhi? If stubble burning causes pollution, then in what other ways can farmers destroy it?

Abstract—Open burning of rice straw causes release of air pollutants, which contributes to enhance climate change related issues. Moreover, the burning practice was a reason of losing carbon content from crop land to the atmosphere. This study focuses on estimation of carbon content loss to the atmosph ere through open burning of rice straw and suggests alternative rice straw management practices to reduce field open burning in Thailand. Field experiments were conducted to collect samples of rice straw to quantify residue to product ratio (RPR) and analyze their carbon content by elemental analysis. Ash sa mples were also collected to analyze their carbon content. Carbon losses to the atmosphere through field burning were then estimated. To better understand traditional practices of open burning in Thailand, statistics related to seasonal rice production/harvesting were also investigated. Finally, economic and environmental benefits associated to alternative rice straw management options were considered and discussed against traditional open burning practices. Index Terms—Rice straw, residue to product ratio, field open burning, carbon released. I. INTRODUCTION Open burning of biomass is a serious problem in Thailand, especially in dry season. In April to May, thick smoke haze could be detected by satellite and the monitoring maximum concentration of 24-hr average PM10 in north region exceeded the National Ambient Standard (120 µg/m3). The government has tried to control this problem by set up National policies and plans to control fire and haze i.e. National Master Plan for Open Burning Control (2005), National Action Plan on Fire and Haze Control (2012-2017), National Fire and Haze Control Plan of Action (2013), and so on. Major sources of smoke and haze problem were forest fire, agricultural fire, and open burning of waste [1]. This study focuses on a source of agricultural fire, which is open burning of rice straw in paddy fields. Following harvesting of rice, there are various practices to clear the land for next cultivation. The common practice is burning, which is the most convenient, cheapest, and fastest way to eliminate rice straw, especially in irrigated paddy field. Burning of rice straw in the field releases pollutants to the atmosphere and contributes to enhance global problems such as climate change. During burning, carbon is released into the air in various forms. Major fractions of carbon released from Manuscript received December 5, 2012; revised February 6, 2013. This work was supported in part by the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, and Petch Phrachomklao King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi. The authors are with the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, Bangkok, Thailand (e-mail: kkanittha@ Yahoo , savitri@jgsee.kmutt.ac.th ). crop burning consist of CO2 (1,515±117 g/kgdm), CO (92±84 g/kgdm), TC (4 g/kgdm), and CH4 (2.7 g/kgdm) [2]. These air pollutants contribute to enhance climate change [3], [4]. Although biogenic carbon is emitted to the atmosphere as a result of open burning, the CO2 fraction is reabsorbed via photosynthesis in the next cultivation in the form carbon biomass. However this is not the case for other forms of carbon such as CO, TC or CH4. Therefore in this study the amount of carbon loss to the atmosphere is also accounted for. In this study, benefits from alternative rice straw management practices are also analyzed to serve as a guideline for good management practices after rice harvesting. II. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Field Experiments in the Paddy Fields Field experiments were conducted in paddy field in irrigated and non-irrigated areas. At the study sites, rice was cultivated by broadcast and harvested by machine. In irrigated areas, rice can be cultivated more than once a year. The cultivation is done during the rainy season, called “major rice” and off-rainy season, called “second rice.” Experiments were carried out for both major rice and second rice. In non-irrigated areas, water from rain is relied upon so that rice can only be cultivated once a year during the rainy season, called “major rice.” However, in areas where there are sufficient resources in natural water, rice can also be planted during the dry season, called “second rice.” Samples of rice straw were collected to determine the residue to product ratio (RPR) which is obtained by dividing the dry weight of rice straw with that of paddy rice. This study focuses on rice straw burning, the top part of residues which mostly burn after harvesting. To quantify dry weight, the samples were dried at 70°C (to remain carbon com ponent) for at least 24 hr until the weight was stable. After burning, samples of ash were collected to consider dry weight and carbon content. Overall, the amount of rice straw in the country was quantified by multiplying the RPR obtained from field experiments with rice production statisti cs in Thailand [5]. The base year of this study is 2010 because cultivation of rice in this year followed normal practice; there was no severe flood or drought in the selected year. B. Analysis of Carbon Content Rice straw and ash samples were analyzed for their carbon content by ultimate analysis. The experiments were conducted by thermal method with El emental Analyzer Alternative Rice Straw Management Practices to Reduce Field Open Burning in Thailand K. Kanokkanjana and S. Garivait International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 2013 119 DOI: 10.7763/IJESD.2013.V4.318 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Model Flash EA 1112 NC Series, UK). Helium was used as carrier gas. The chemical standard was BBOT, containing 6.51%N, 72.53%C, and 6.09%H. Approximate 4 mg of samples were analyzed in each batch with three replicate. Operated temperature of the EA machine was at 950 °C. C. Carbon Released from Open Burning of Rice Straw Results of ultimate analysis were applied in the following equation to determine the amount of carbon released to the atmosphere. ashburnedreleased CCC −= (1) Quantity of carbon released from open burning of rice straw (Creleased) was obtained by subtracting amount of carbon that remain in ash after burning (Cash) from carbon content contained in burned rice straw (Cburned). To obtain Cburned and Cash, percentage of carbon content in rice straw and ash from ultimate analysis results were multiplied with dry weight of rice straw and ash. In order to estimate total amount of Creleased from open burning of rice straw based on season of burning in Thailand, data on quantity of rice straw produced and fraction burned in the field were retrieved from secondary sources [6]. D. Economic Analysis Benefits to farmers from selling rice straw were also investigated in this study. Information on the local price of rice straw was collected via interviews of farmers at the study sites and also based on secondary data. Straw utilization is categorized into two types, loose rice straw and baled rice straw (rectangular shape). III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Total Amount of Rice Straw in Thailand Total amount of rice straw (Table I) was quantified based on results of field experiments, residue-to-production ratio (RPR), and statistics of rice production. For major rice, production data is from 2009/2010, over the period August 2009 to April 2010. For second rice, production data is from 2010/2011, over the period February 2010 to October 2010 [5]. TABLE I: TOTAL AMOUNT OF RICE STRAW IN THAILAND, 2010 Categories RPR Products (million tons/y) Rice straw (million tons/y) Irrigated (major) 1.06±0.55 8.14 8.63±4.48 Irrigated (second) 0.65±0.28 6.64 4.32±1.86 Non-irrigated (major) 0.55±0.11 15.11 8.31±1.66 Non-irrigated (second) - 3.50 1.93±0.39 There are no results for RPR of second rice at the non-irrigated paddy field. Hence the RPR value of major rice at the same area was applied to estimat e the amount of rice straw produced in non-irrigated area (second rice). The total amount of rice straw produced was found to amount to 23 million tons annually, including 13 million tons from irrigated paddy fields and 10 million tons from non-irrigated paddy fields. The RPR in irrigated paddy fields was found to be lower than the RPR in non-irrigated paddy fields mainly because of the lower yield at the study sites. The varieties of rice cultivated in major and second rice were different so periods of planting to harvesting were also different. The major rice varieties required longer period of cultivation than the second rice varieties, consequently, larger amounts of biomass were produced in the paddy fiel ds where major rice varieties were planted. Hence, the largest sources of rice straw were found to be the major rice varieties that are planted in irrigated areas. These are mainly located in the central part of the country. The smallest sources of rice straw were found to be the second rice varieties that are cultivated in non-irrigated areas. As non-irrigated areas rely mainly on natural resources of water, rain essentially, major rice was mostly cultivated; only few areas had second rice. Therefore, areas of second rice plantation in non-irrigated areas were small, another reason for the low amount of straw found to be produced in such areas during the dry season. B. Amount of Burned Rice Straw in the Field The quantity of rice straw burned in paddy fields were estimated based on the quantity of rice straw found to be produced in this study and the fraction that is burned in the field based on secondary information [6]. The results are presented in Table II along with the amount of ash generated from open burning of rice straw. TABLE II: OPEN BURNING OF RICE STRAW IN THE FIELD Categories Fraction of burned rice straw (%) Burned rice straw (million tons/y) % ash in burned straw Ash (thousand tons/y) Irrigated(major) 49±2 4.23±2.20 15.87±0.88 672±348 Irrigated (second) 87±11 3.73 ±1.61 20.61±4.51 770±331 Non-irrigated (major) 20±3 1.65 ±0.33 24.70±3.07 408±82 Non-irrigated (second) 41±8 0.79 ±0.16 - 196±39 From Table II, the amount of rice straw burned in the field after harvesting is found to amount to 10.41 million tons for the year 2010. Major burned areas concern paddy fields located in irrigated areas accounting for 77% of the total amount of rice straw burned, the remaining 23% com ing from burning in non-irrigated areas. Of the 23%, only 8% is contributed by rice straw burning after harvesting second rice. After harvesting rice in irrigated paddy fields, farmers promptly prepare the land for the next cultivation. The fallow period in irrigated paddy fields is therefore quite short, about 1 to 2 weeks. Because of abundant water resources availability, rice in irrigated paddy fields can be cultivated continuously throughout the year. The most convenient, cheapest, and fastest way to eliminate rice straw to clear the land is combustion. Therefore, open burning is mai nly found in irrigated areas. The total amount of ash generated from open burning in paddy fields was found to amount to 2.05±0.80 million tons, which represents 20% of the total amount of rice straw International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 2013 120 burned. Therefore, the quantity of mass lost from the combustion process is 80%, released into the atmosphere in the form of gaseous and particulate matters. Foll owing the assessment of the amount of biomass consumed as a result of rice straw burning, this study focuses on its carbon content as carbon is an important component contributing to climate change. C. Carbon Released from Open Burning in the Paddy Field The results of carbon analysis showed that there were 40%C by mass (±0.7%C, SD) in rice straw and 17%C by mass (±1.5%C, SD) in ash. From the carbon analysis results, the amount of carbon in rice straw, burned rice straw, and ash could be estimated. In addition, the quantity of carbon released from open burning of rice straw was calculated as presented in Table III. TABLE III: CARBON CONTENT IN RICE STRAW, BURNED RICE STRAW, ASH, AND CARBON RELEASED TO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM OPEN BURNING OF RICE STRAW IN THE FIELD Categories C rice straw (million tons/y) C burned (million tons/y) C ash (thousand tons/y) C released (million tons/y) Irrigated (major) 3.47±1.80 1.70±0.88 117±61 1.58±0.82 Irrigated (second) 1.74±0.75 1.50±0.65 135±58 1.37±0.59 Non-irrigated (major) 3.34±0.67 0.66±0.13 71±14 0.59±0.12 Non-irrigated (second) 0.77±0.15 0.32±0.06 34±7 0.29±0.06 Total 9.32±3.37 4.19±1.73 358±140 3.83±1.59 From Table III, total amount of carbon contained in the rice straw was found to amount to 9.32±3.37 million tons C and in burned rice straw to 4.19±1.73 million tons C. The remaining carbon in ash that would be back to the land amounts to 358±140 thousand tons C and the fraction released to the atmosphere to 3.83±1.59 million tons C. As major areas of paddy fields burned were found in irrigated rice fields, consequently, largest amounts of carbon were found to be released from irrigated paddies during major and second rice cultivation, respectively. The fraction of carbon released to the atmosphere that can be recycled via photosynthesis as carbon biomass in the next crop is that corresponding to CO2. According to [7] the corresponding percentage of CCO2 that can be re-incorporated into biomass via such process is 93% translating into 3.56±1.48 million tons C. Therefore, the net amount of carbon released to the atmosphere from open burning of rice straw would amount to 268±111 thousand tons C. Most other forms of carbon released are CO, TC (BC and OC), and CH4 [2]. These gases (CO and CH4) and aerosols (BC and OC) contribute to enhance climate change; however, the problems could be avoided by suitable management practices of rice straw. D. Season of Harvesting in Thailand As observed from Fig. I, period of rice harvesting varies depending on rice varieties. The harvesting season of major rice is mainly found during the dry season, while second ri ce is observed during the wet season. Production of major rice spans over the period August to May of the next year. The highest production is found in November. Lowest production is observed during February - April. Fig. 1. Harvesting season of major and second rice in Thailand, 2009/2010. Second rice is harvested during February - October. The period of major rice and second rice harvesting overlaps over the period February - April, which correspond to the late harvesting season of major rice and early harvesting season of second rice. Although rice harvesting is lower during this period, serious haze problems are usually observed during this time. This is mainly because of open burning from other sources i.e. forest fires, waste incinerations, and open burning of other agricultural residues [1]. February to April i s the period corresponding to the dry season in Thailand, time during which relative humidity is at its l owest and good conditions for ignition of vegetation at their highest. Hence, open burning activities should be carefully monitored and controlled in that time. E. Alternative Rice Straw Management Practices In order to identify suitable management practices of rice straw in Thailand and reduce open field burning, information were collected from farmers via interviews and combined with other data from secondary sources. The prohibited period of open burning in Thailand would be from January to April because of serious smoke and haze problems, especially in the northern region. The National Fire and Haze Control Plan of Action (2013) was announced to control open burning in nine provinces of the northern region of the country during January 21 to April 10, 2013 [1]. Due to dry weather, the quality of straw was good because the straw contained low moisture. There was no problem of fungi in dry straw. In addition, the soil in the paddy field was dried and hard enough for a large machine, a straw baler, to collect straw in the field. Social benefit of collecting straw out of the field was considered. Cost and benefit of selling straw during dry season were analyzed. Most straw was sold by two ways, loose straw and baled straw. The loose straw would be sold directly to the consumer that would collect in the field by themselves and transport by pickup truck. The loose straw was mainly used in agricultural area, i.e. mulching young plants. Price of the straw would be per area (4.17-10.42 USD/ha, 30 THB/USD). Advantage of selling loose straw was no cost of straw collecting. Disadvantage of selling loose straw was only small amount collected because of huge volume of loose straw. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 2013 121 Farmers also sold the baled straw that was collected by the straw baler. The owner of the baler machine is an intermediate merchant that would buy the baled straw from the farmers and sell to the customers. The cost of the baled straw consists of the cost of baling (15-20 THB/pack) and cost of moving baled straw out of the field (3-5 THB/pack). The benefit of selling the baled straw was analyzed per pack. The weight of the baled straw is 10-15 kg/pack. The advantage of selling the baled straw is high benefit. The disadvantage is the lack of straw baler in Thailand. A comparison of cost-benefit between the loose straw and the baled straw is presented in Table IV. TABLE IV: COST AND BENEFIT OF RICE STRAW Categories Cost (USD/thousand tons) Benefit (USD/thousand tons) Loose straw - 1.36-2.05 Baled straw (dry season) 48,000-66,667 109,333-146,667 Baled straw (wet season) 48,000-66,667 66,667-106,667 Note: 30 THB/USD From Table IV, the highest net benefit is form selling the baled straw produced during the dry season. The cost of baling rice straw is the same between wet and dry seasons; however, the benefit is different because abundant grass was available for feedstock during the wet season so the demand for baled straw was low during this time. High dem ands of baled straw were found during the dry season so the price was nearly double. Net benefits (benefit minus cost) from selling straw were found to amount to 1.36-2.05 USD/thousand tons of loose straw, 18,667-40,000 USD/thousand tons of baled straw (wet season), and 61,333-80,000 USD/thousand tons of baled straw (dry season), respectively. Although loose straw gains the lowest net benefit, most farmers sell loose straw as straw baler is scarce in Thailand. Thai engineers could produce straw baler but the baling machine requires labor for manual fastening by rope and so it is not widely used. Most intermedi ate merchants buy second hand automatic machines imported from other countries because they require little labor and operate more quickly [8]. The main reason of burning rice straw in the field instead of selling is that it is difficult to manage and requires transport of large volumes of rice straw. Although straw can be baled into a compressed pack, the volume is still too high for transport by truck without issues of illegal overloading. Although open burning of rice straw contributes to release pollutants to the atmosphere, the combustion also provides some benefits. The open burning may hel p to remove insects and diseases from the field. The remaining ash left in the field after burning may enable to adjust soil pH and i mprove soil texture, useful for rice cultivation. Therefore, open burning could be done during May to October because the released gases and aerosols would be deposited back into the soil through raining. In addition, straw collection by machine during this period is difficult because of wet soil. Moreover, wet straw could not be stored because of fungi problem. The period November to December is the season of major rice harvesting in non-irrigated paddy fields. As the fallow period for the non-irrigated paddy fields is quite long (rice is usually cultivated only once), therefore, the generated straw should be ploughed back into the soil as organic amendment to improve soil quality. The rice straw should be collected for various utilizations i.e. feedstock, material for furniture manufacturer/home building, handicraft, media for mushroom cultivation, mulching in the garden, decorating places, and so on. These utilizations could gain value of rice straw instead of burning that released carbon into the atmosphere for 47.36%. IV. CONCLUSIONS Open burning of rice straw in the paddy fields releases pollutants into the atmosphere that contribute to enhance climate change issues. Alternative manageme nt options for rice straw have been suggested in this study including to collect the straw in dry season (January to April), burn in wet season (May to October), and plow the straw into the soil in non-irrigated paddy fields (November to December). The alternative practices of rice straw management thereby identified could enable reducing the amount of straw burned in the field from 10.41±4.29 million tons to 4.89±2.34 million tons. The released carbon would also be reduced from 3.83±1.59 million tons C to 1.81 ±0.87 million tons C including CCO2 1.69±0.81 million tons C and other carbon forms totaling 0.13±0.06 million tons C. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS K. K. and S.G. Authors express their gratitude to the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi and the Center for Energy Technology and Environment, Ministry of Education Thailand, for financial support. The Earth Systems Science Research and Development Center, Petch Phrachomklao King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, and the Higher Education Research Promotion and National Research University Project of Thailand are highly appreciated for their research fund support. K. K. and S.G. Authors extend further appreciation to Dr. Sebastien Bonnet, the Aerosol from Biomass Burning to the Atmosphere Research Group (ABBA), the field experiment team, and the farmers at the studied sites for their contributions to this work. REFERENCES [1] Pollution Control Department of Thailand, “Thailand Country Report: Land and Forest Fire and Haze Situation in 2012 and Preparations for 2013,” presented at the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, Bangkok, Thailand, December 4, 2012. [2] M. O. Andreae and P. Merlet, “Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning,” Global Biogeochemical Cycles, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 955-966, December 2001. [3] J. S. Levine, Biomass Burning and Global Change, 1st ed., London, England: The MIT Press, Introduction, pp. xxxv-x1iii, 1996. [4] M. O. Andreae and P. J. Crutzen, “Atmospherice Aerosols: Biogeochemical Sources and Role in Atmospheric Chemistry,” Science, vol. 276, pp. 1052-1058, May 1997. [5] Office of Agricultural Economics of Thailand, “Thailand Country Report: Fundamental Agricultural Statistics 2010,” 2011. [6] P. Cheewapongphan and S. Garivait, “Greenhouse gases emission from rice field residues open burning,” Proc. 1st National Carbon Neutral Conf., pp. 501-511, Nonthaburi, Thailand, 2010. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 2013 122 [7] K.. Kanokkanjana and S. Garivait, “Carbon Released from Open Burning of Agricultural Residues in Thailand,” presented at the iLEAPS SC- Science Conference, Garmisch-Partenkirchen Congress Centre, Germany, September 18-23, 2011. [8] A. Bridhikitti and K. Kanokkanjana, “Sustainable rice straw management for urban air pollution reduction in bang Bua Thong Nonthaburi Province, Thailand,” Case Study Series: ADP 5/2009, pp. 1-23, R. Perera, Ed. Thailand: Asian Institute of Technology, 2009. Kanittha K. was born in Bangkok, Thailand on April 6, 1979. Educational backgrounds of K. K. are Master of Science in Environmental Engineering and Management from Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Patumthani, Thailand; Bachelor of Science in Environmental Resources Chemistry from King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (KMITL), Bangkok, Thailand; and Bachelor of Economics from Ramkhamhaeng University (RU), Bangkok, Thailand. Currently, she is a Ph. D. Candidate in Environmental Technology at The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (JGSEE), the Center for Energy Technology and Environment (CEE) located at King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT) in Bangkok, Thailand. Research interests concern atmospheric environment. Current research interest is emissions released from open burning of agricultur al residues. Previous research interest is simulating dispersion air quality models at point sources in industrial areas. Miss Kanittha got First class honored when graduated Bachelor degree, scholarship granted by Her Majesty the Queen during Master degree, Fellowship granted by The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (JGSEE); and research fund granted by Earth System Science (ESS), National Research University (NRU), and Petch Phrachomklao (KMUTT) during Ph.D. candidat Regards Samar Singh

Why are American cars exceedingly bad in retaining value while they have great engineering companies and schools?

The answer is simpler than you may think, but it requires context. In the 1920s, Henry Ford’s factories began rolling off the Model-T, a highly reliable, touch and endurable vehicle that was priced low enough that almost anyone with a steady income could afford one. They came in one color: black. They were simple and utilitarian, lacked amenities, and with the only major enhancement being the removal of the back seat and installation of a cargo box, turning it into a pickup, they became the staple vehicle for the US for a decade. In the thirties, other manufacturers joined the game and upped the ante, producing cheap and affordable vehicles; at the same time, they recognized the demand for more comfortable and sportier cars and a wider variety of types, from sedans and touring cars to coupes and roadsters, as well as larger and more useful trucks of all sorts, as well as status-symbol vehicles. Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick, all arms of General Motors, Mercury, a Ford subsidiary, as well as Studebaker, Hudson, Packard, and many others entered the market with brightly colored vehicles of all kinds of designs, boasting all kinds of extras from radios to actual flower vases mounted on the door posts. Electric starters replaced cranks, engines became more reliable, wheels and tires improved, and upholstery and other comforting amenities, such as clocks and enclosed headlamps followed. Not to be out done, Ford issued the Model-A, and then newer and larger and fancier models as well. But certain brands topped the mark. Cadillac is the most enduring, and the very name of the vehicle has become synonymous with high quality; Cadillac, in a word, was “The Cadillac of the industry.” This upwardly mobile and constantly improving design trend was halted in the 1940s, when World War II all but shuttered the automotive production industry in favor of the production of war machines—tanks and planes and jeeps and armored vehicles and many other products. What cars that were still made were plain and utilitarian, largely useful to the military or essential civilian services, such as police and fire stations. The increasingly sleek and art-deco designs of the thirties were interrupted in their forward march for those years. Orders for 1946 and 1947 models, though, went through the roof, as GIs were mustered out, their pockets full of back pay and personal ambitions on the rise. Sometimes the waiting period for a new model might be as much as six months. Following WWII, the American economy enjoyed a major period of prosperity that elevated the working class to the middle class and made affording a new car quite possible for millions and millions of Americans who, before the war, could only have dreamed of such. The major manufactures tuned into that quickly, and they began a process of releasing new models with entirely new designs, at least in body style, and with additional attractive options each year in a competitive frenzy to dominate the market. There was a make for every pocketbook and purpose, it seemed, and what had been called “agencies” before the war became “dealerships” the used car market also flourished with hundreds of thousands of used car dealers popping up everywhere. It also was a boon for the banking and finance industries, as they carried the notes for these vehicles. Oil companies expanded the old gas pump style garages and stores into full-service filling stations, some with restaurants attached, and tourism became a thing as Americans took to the road, so the motel, hotel, and restaurant industry boomed as well. Highway construction expanded, and by the end of the 1950s the national network of interstate freeways was well underway and growing. American auto engineering was at its peak. Each year saw vehicles with higher style, greater comfort offerings, more luxurious upholstery and options such as air conditioning and automatic transmissions, electric windows ands seats, more powerful engines and sturdier transmissions. All of this made available for those who could afford it, but depending on purchasing ability, there still was a variety of choices in every price range. Improvements in mechanics and rubber for tires, brakes, power steering, more comfortable upholstery, and other devices, much of which was the result of wartime innovation and manufacture, appeared. Better paint, better glass that now could bend, adding to sleekness of design, better electronics all made vehicles safer, easier to operate, and, of course, more expensive to buy. In the meantime, the American auto manufacturing industry boomed. Competition among manufacturers was fierce, and vehicle advertising became a growing industry of its own. It was a given that American cars were the best in the world; everyone knew it. They might not win European races such as Le Mans, but they were competitive, and American cars quickly became status symbols both at home and abroad. German, French, Italian, and British manufacturers struggled to keep up, but they lacked the industrial capacity in the immediate postwar years to compete. There was no appreciable interest in Asian manufacturing, such as it was. Not yet. Smaller American auto companies, eventually, folded, one by one, because they didn’t have the factory infrastructure and the capital to retool entirely on an annual basis to produce new models every twelve months. Still, all was not positive. Built into the scheme was something we all are familiar with: planned obsolescence. The realistic notion was that a car should only last, without significant repairs, for about three years, although with proper maintenance, some could be stretched to five or beyond, although major overhauls and repairs might be required to keep it running. Most owners could do some of this on their own—creating another boon in the tool industry for home auto enthusiasts. Even soo the average vehicle owner would start thinking about a new car or at least a replacement used car about the time his loan for the old one was paid off, roughly thirty-six months, on average, leading many into debt. To enhance the appeal of newer models, the auto companies picked up on the public’s interest in modern technology, designing cars with absolutely useless features that made them look, at least somewhat, like jets, the new aircraft that was all the rage. Tail fins, sleek swept-back profiles, additional but totally visceral body features that were designed to remind folks of modern aircraft, and ultimately spacecraft, were deliberately created to appeal to the popular interest. But the key was a new model each year, and few motorists were insensitive to the emergence of “next year’s models” in the early autumn, especially as the older one wore out, broke down with greater frequency, required more expensive repairs. Often the new designs were kept under wraps until the public reveal to heighten suspense and stimulate further interest. The key word, of course, was “power,” not “economy,” with “comfort” being the second important consideration. Anticipation of the new models dominated a lot of American interest every fall. There were other considerations on the list of new innovations each year, but durability wasn’t one of them. It doesn’t take a degree in finance to figure out that if auto makers build durable, reliable, and trouble-free vehicles, that pretty soon, everyone would be content with the old family jitney, and no one would be looking to buy a new one. This philosophy extended throughout American manufacturing and included household appliances, implements, power tools, radios and televisions, and, of course, tires and other products that would require replacement, rather than repair, sooner rather than later. The capability of building or making products that would last longer, cost less, and provide more efficiency was counter-productive to a capitalist economy that was rapidly moving toward the corporate monopoly structure we have today. It’s not an accident, for example, that, today, any given car in any given class of cars, similarly equipped, costs about the same, no matter who makes it. There are exceptions, of course, but these are usually imported products; among imports, though, within a given class of vehicle, prices are almost always identical, depending on equipment. When Saturn emerged on the market with what was touted to be an affordable and durable vehicle some years back, it could have been a game-changer. But it wasn’t. Saturn never could design a vehicle attractive and exciting enough to capture the romantic imagination of the American motorist, and they also found that keeping cost down meant that sales had to be steady and upward trending. The American consumer is the biggest sucker in the world. People will buy anything that is advertised as being “new and improved,” even when it’s not. Having the latest, glitziest, most advanced, and most expensive that one can afford of anything is the ultimate American status symbol. Today, the emphasis is supposedly on “economy” and “environmentally friendly.” But it’s not, really. That’s all just eyewash, a smoke screen to disguise the darker and more sinister forces that work in the background of the American economy. Financial success and stability depends on a constant upward trend in profit. Maintaining a solid status quo year after year is a sure-fire way for any CEO to be dismissed. In the meantime, though, Japanese, then other nations’ like Korea, started manufacturing automobiles of high quality. The labor practices and management organization of their factories and industries were different from the US’s, which was dominated by unionized labor. The demands of American workers were significantly effective in the consistent raising of prices of new cars. To make up for the shortfall in profits that couldn’t be fully realized through the raising of retail prices, the major manufacturers understood that sales of new product were essential, so they upped their competitive game; at the same time, they began cutting costs by eliminating their emphasis on overall vehicular quality. They sold more style than substance, in a manner of speaking. What remained of the smaller companies—Nash, American Motors, Studebaker, Hudson, Packard all faded away, driven into history by labor demands, rising costs of materials, sinking sales figures, and a general demand for higher quality, more luxury, better amenities, and more attractive designs from year to year. In the meantime, European and British manufacturing increased, with the appearance of Volkswagen, Jaguar, Triumph, MG, BMW, Fiat, Mercedes Benz, and Renault making bids for a chunk of the American market. All of these, of course, were constructed with the same “planned obsolesce” that governed American manufacturing, and with higher-than-usual maintenance costs, to boot. And because they were “imports,” they cost more to purchase. The Japanese had entered the market with Toyota, as well; Datsun came about the same time and then Honda. The Asian imports were notoriously cheaper, plainer, smaller, less comfortable, and less reliable (some said less safe) because their parts were hard to get and most of them were constructed with metric-sized mechanics. American mechanics, for the most part, did not even own metric wrenches. Still, Japanese models and some European models, most especially VW, still had a steady influence on the market, and very quietly, their engineering improved, their quality rose; American vehicles tried to match the foreign competition by reducing their retail prices by cutting frills and reducing overall quality; Asians and Europeans were moving in a solidly opposite direction and improving in these areas while keeping their prices competitive, if slightly higher, than their American counterparts. Foreign manufacturers began to put greater and greater emphasis on engineering. They began accentuating safety features, fuel economy, and while their overall designs were humdrum for a long while, truly the same year after year, and their amenities remained basic, they began eating into the American market where luxury and style even in a mid-level model was the emphasis. Quality engineering in US models was suffering badly by the late 1970s and into the 1980s. Imports were growing in the reputation for quality. When the Japanese introduced the Lexus and Infinity lines and made them truly competitive with Mercedes and Cadillac, they had arrived. The pickup and SUV markets were next for them. And their reputation was that they were more durable, better made, easier to work on, and cheaper and more economical to drive. Even in areas where this wasn’t true—the light truck line, for example—their superior warranties seemed to compensate for it. Today, much assembly of imported brands takes place in the US. Many imports from Europe and Japan are also assembled in Mexico and other countries. Most all American vehicles depend on parts and large assembly elements made abroad; Chinese steel goes into American vehicles. American engineering has rebounded and improved, particularly in the SUV lines and pickups and luxury models, but energy efficiency and required safety devices keep retail prices up. Today, a mid-range, plain sedan with minimum options and few comfort amenities costs as much as did a three-bedroom house forty years ago, and they seem to go up in price each year, although the difference between one model-year and another in terms of appearance is now mimimal; moreover, the distinction between brands of vehicles is also faded into a single blurb. A common observation is “Every car in the lot looks like a Honda” is not much of an exaggeration. Outward appearances are now dictated by required aerodynamics, which effects fuel economy, that in turn, effects the environment. On the whole, it’s safe to say that today, American engineering is not much different in quality from that used by makers of imports. In many cases, the engineers are the same people or people who move from one company to another. The quality control on all new vehicles is about the same across the board, and because of the high price of new cars, the necessity for extended warranties, and the higher quality of technology applied to a vehicle, their durability is probably longer than it’s ever been. Most people wait around seven to nine years before trading up to a new model, today; some push their cars well past 150,000 miles, keeping them closely maintained. There’s more to go wrong with a vehicle today, because there is more in the way of electronic dependency and technology. But the mechanics of a traditional internal combustible gasoline engine are pretty much unchanged from the days of the Model T. We still use ignition spark and pistons and cylinders and driveshafts and differential gears to make the wheels go round. We still burn gas and lubricate with oil. We still need rubber, even if its synthetic and steel-belted, for tires. We still want comfortable seats, durability, and a bit of style in our machines. And there is nothing like that “new car smell.” Even all that said, there is probably no worse decision in the world than buying a new car. The moment a new buyer gets behind the wheel and drives it off the lot, a vehicle loses 25% or more of its value, and that cannot be recovered. Nothing we buy that costs so much depreciates in value so rapidly. That’s because the final price we, as consumers pay for new car, includes so many extraneous charges, fees, taxes, saleman’s commissions, dealership overhead, and other costs, that the amount that the actual vehicle costs and is worth is far below our final negotiated sum. It’s the most foolish purchase anyone ever makes; but we all seem eager to do it, and at least as often as we can afford to do so. So there is a lot to be said for having a new car. Probably few experiences are so satisfying, or, probably, demonstrative of worse judgement. If you have shopped recently, you’ve probably had the experience of the salesperson asking you “what color you want,” as the first question, even before learning what model or even type of vehicle you’re looking for. As the song says, “It’s all about the bass; no treble.”

FAQs ที่เกี่ยวข้อง mg extender pickup truck price

  • Q

    บอกระบบช่วยของMG Extenderหน่อย.

    ซุ้ม ส. เมธาสิทธิ์

    ระบบช่วย ของ MG Extender มีดังนี้

    อ่านเพิ่มเติม
  • Q

    บอกเบรกและล้อของMG Extenderหน่อย.

    มานพ ดอนบุญไทย

    เบรกและล้อ ของ MG Extender มีดังนี้

    อ่านเพิ่มเติม
  • Q

    ช่องปรับอากาศตอนหลังของMG Extenderมีอะไรบ้าง

    ณาตาชา อิอิ

    มีช่องปรับอากาศตอนหลังและรุ่นย่อยของMG Extender ได้แก่

    อ่านเพิ่มเติม

Tags

เพจ & แท็กยอดนิยม

หน้าหลัก