In our school and social lives we exist in a mobile electronic world. Each day we "plug in" and charge our electronic devices and equipment. These electronics may range from small items (cell phones) to large items (electric vehicles). While in our own home, our family is most likely responsible for purchasing the charging equipment, and then paying an electric company/provider for the electricity we use.
Public places are continually expanding the availability of electrical outlets, charging stations, and even electric vehicle charging parking spots. For example, many airports have recently refurbished their parking lots, terminals, and aircraft to allow for electrical charging of everything from portable devices to vehicles. In some locations, these charging ports require a fee, but many public places worldwide offer charging for “free.” But, what is the impact of “plugging in” our electronics at these “free” charging sites in public places such as airports, railway terminals, schools, libraries, shopping malls, coffee shops, and offices? And, who pays for it?
Discuss how has this type of energy consumption has changed over recent years and how it will continue to change. Identify impacts on, and requirements of, public places with these increasing energy (electricity) and charging demands.
Use your identified impacts and requirements to develop a model for the resulting costs of the increased demands and energy usage on public places. Discuss the extent of these costs and how they are paid.
Discuss how your model changes, if at all, for different types of public places (e.g. a school vs. a café/coffee shop vs. an airport vs. a shopping mall, etc.)?
What initiatives should be explored to reduce the cost of this increased energy usage in public places? How would implementation of these initiatives adjust your cost model?
Write a one-page article for your school newspaper describing your findings and recommendations.
Your submission should consist of:
Note: Reference List and any appendices do not count toward the page limit and should appear after your completed solution.
A 题：公共充电在我们的校园和社会生活中，我们生活在一个移动的电子世界里。每天我们都会“插上电源”给我们的电子设备充电。这些电子设备的范围可能从小型设置（手机）到大型设置（电动汽车）。在我们自己家中，通常我们的家庭会自行购买充电设备，并向电力公司或供应商支付我们的电费。
公共场所不断增加电源插座、充电站，甚至电动汽车充电停车场的数量。例如，许多机场最近翻新了停车场、航站楼和飞机，以便为从便携式设备到车辆的所有设备充电。在某些地方，这些充电端口需要收费，但世界各地的许多公共场所都提供“免费”充电。但是，在机场、火车站、学校、图书馆、购物中心、咖啡厅和办公室等公共场所的这些“免费”充电点“接入”我们的电子设备充电会产生什么影响？谁来买单？
讨论近年来这种电力消耗如何变化，以及它将如何继续变化。确定这些不断增长的能源（电力）和充电需求对公共场所的影响和要求。
使用你确定的影响和要求，为公共场所增加的需求和能源使用所产生的成本建立模型。讨论这些费用的范围以及如何支付。
讨论你的模型针对不同类型的公共场所（例如，学校，咖啡厅/咖啡厅，机场，购物中心等）时，（如果有需要的话）应如何改变？
应该探索哪些举措来降低公共场所增加能源使用的成本？这些举措的实施将如何调整你的成本模型？
为你的校报写一篇一页的文章，描述你的发现和建议。
您提交的作品应包括：
注意：参考文献和附录不计入页数限制，参考文献应在论文的正文之后。
A number of communities (campuses, towns, cities, etc.) around the world have proposed and enacted plastic water bottle bans in some form.
In 2013 the small town of Concord, Massachusetts (population approximately 19,000) became the first town or city in the United States to ban the sale of single-serving Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles less than or equal to 1 liter (34 ounces) containing water which is non-sparkling and non-flavored (in other words, plain water). The sale of water in bottles of any size made of other types of plastic or other materials, as well as PET bottles of flavored or sparkling water, soda, tea, juices, and other non-plain water beverages, regardless of size, is allowed [2] . See attached FAQ document.
Concord citizens supporting this action stated various reasons including: concerns of plastic garbage and litter, use of fossil fuels in the production of plastic, product transportation emissions, damage to water-providing aquifers, and beliefs that businesses shouldn’t profit on the sale of a free resource.
Since enactment of Concord’s ban, a handful of other communities in the United States have enacted single-serving water bottle bans, the largest being the city of San Francisco (population approximately 885,000) who banned the sale of single-serving water bottles on city property in 2014 [3] . Just recently, the San Fran Francisco Airport decided to comply with its city’s law and banned the sale of single-serving water bottles, making it the first airport to do so [4] .
Not everyone is in favor of these bans, nor does everyone think that these bans will have any impact on the issues they are trying to address. Opponents include the International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) who, after the San Francisco ban, stated that there are unintended consequences to these bans as they may lead to “more packaging, more additives (e.g., sugar, caffeine), and greater environmental impacts than bottled water [5] .” Additionally, as we have seen in recent world news, in some areas (e.g. unavailability/ inaccessibility of fresh water) and under some circumstances (e.g. natural disasters, compromises in water delivery) bottled water is a necessary and critical resource.
Model the impacts of a ban on the sale of single-serving water bottles in a town or city. Use your model to discuss the impacts of the bans in the Town of Concord and the City of San Francisco.
Address the impacts of a ban on the sale of single-serving water bottles within an airport. How are the impacts similar to and different from a ban in a town or city? How would your initial model for a town or city change, if at all, to model bottle ban impacts within an airport?
Discuss and recommend possible changes to Concord’s water bottle ban, or other related community measures, that would enhance beneficial impacts and reduce adverse impacts. Use your suggested changes to adjust your impact model. Address whether or not your new model is generalizable to larger communities (e.g. large cities, regions, states, countries).
Write a one-page article for your local newspaper reporting your findings and recommendations.
Your submission should consist of:
Note: Reference List and any appendices do not count toward the page limit and should appear after your completed solution.
Attachment:Town of Concord, Massachusetts. Town Bylaws. (Updated January 9, 2013). Frequently asked questions about interpretation and enforcement of the drinking water in single-serve PET bottles bylaw.
References:世界各地的许多社区（校园、城镇、城市等）都以某种方式提出并颁布了塑料水瓶的禁令。
2013年，马萨诸塞州康科德小镇（人口约19,000）成为美国第一个禁止销售一次性PET塑料瓶装小于或等于1升（34盎司）纯净水的城镇 [1]。但允许销售用其他类型的塑料或其他材料制成的任何尺寸的瓶装水，并允许出售由任何尺寸的 PET 塑料瓶装调味饮料（水）、汽水、苏打水、茶、果汁和其他非普通纯净水 [2]。请参阅随附的常见问题解答文档。
支持这一行动的康科德市民陈述了各种理由，这些理由包括：对塑料垃圾和垃圾的担忧、在塑料生产中使用化石燃料、产品运输中的排放物、对供水含水层的破坏，以及认为企业不应通过出售免费资源获利的信念。
自康科德颁布禁令以来，美国其他少数城镇也颁布了一次性塑料瓶装水禁令，最大的是旧金山市（人口约885000），自2014该市禁止在城市中出售一次性塑料瓶装水 [4]。就在不久前，旧金山机场决定遵守该市的法律，并禁止销售一次性塑料瓶装水，使其成为第一个这样做的机场 [4]。
并不是每个人都赞成这些禁令，也不是每个人都认为这些禁令会对他们试图解决的问题产生任何影响。反对者包括国际瓶装水协会（IBWA），在旧金山禁令之后，IBWA 声称这些禁令会带来意想不到的后果，因为它们可能导致“比瓶装水更多的包装，更多的添加剂（例如糖，咖啡因）和更大的环境影响” [5]。此外，正如我们在最近的世界新闻中所看到的那样，在某些地区（例如，淡水的缺乏/无法获得）以及在某些情况下（例如，自然灾害，供水困难），瓶装水是一种必要和关键的资源。
模拟禁止在城镇中销售一次性塑料瓶装水的影响。使用 你的模型来讨论禁令对康科德镇和旧金山市的影响。
讨论禁止在机场内出售一次性塑料瓶的影响。这些影响与城镇或城市禁令有何相似之处和不同之处？如果有的话， 你将如何修改城镇或城市的模型，以模拟机场内禁止瓶装水的影响？
讨论并建议对康科德的水瓶禁令或其他相关城镇措施进行可能的改进，以增强有利影响并减少不利影响。使用改进的建议来调整影响模型。讨论你的新模型是否可以推广到更大的区域（如大城市、地区、州、国家）。
为当地报纸写一篇一页的文章，报道你的发现和建议。
你提交的作品应包括：
注意：参考文献和附录不计入页数限制，参考文献应在论文的正文之后。
附件：马萨诸塞州康科德镇章程（2013 年 1 月 9 日更新）。有关一次性PET瓶装饮用水的解释和执行的常见问题。（该附件见原题 PDF 文档）
参考文件:含水层–含有或运输地下水的地质构造。
| 欢迎光临 数学建模社区-数学中国 (http://www.madio.net/) | Powered by Discuz! X2.5 |