Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
21 February 2018 Photo pixabay
Water-wise expert says Is there a solution to pollution
Next time you want to throw something away, think twice. Look for ways to reuse, recycle, or repurpose.

Dr Cindé Greyling completed her PhD in Disaster Management with DiMTEC (Disaster Management Training and Education Centre for Africa) at the University of the Free State (UFS). Built on prior studies and years of communication experience, she opted to study ways in which to communicate drought mitigation information. Part of the mitigation process included saving water and reducing pollution.

A practical approach

“Look, we are all here now. And we need to eat, live, work, survive, and ultimately thrive using our planet’s resources,” she says. “But I think we’ve become so fixated on thriving, that we don’t consider survival anymore. Of course, some people do! There are wonderful projects around the world aiming at more responsible consuming, ranging from pre-loved baby clothes, to water harvesting for individual dwellings and larger compounds.” However, she understands that people may get so overwhelmed by the vast pollution problem that they consider any of their own efforts as insignificant. “That is not true. Every single bit of plastic (or cloth, glass, iron, etc.) that is recycled or repurposed, and does not end up in a landfill, makes a difference.” And here is why…

The tip of the iceberg
“Whatever you are holding in your hand and aiming for the bin is much larger than what you see. Take a piece of paper, for example. A tree was planted – the process involved fossil fuels, water, fertiliser, time, wages, administration, etc. And many years of that! Once it was felled, the resource usages continued, and expanded to processing plants, wholesalers, retailers, and then you – who also used resources to acquire that piece of paper. Do you see how large the wastage is? The same is true for food waste … that rotten tomato you forgot in the fridge is a grave loss.”

“Whatever you are holding in your hand,
aiming for the bin, is much larger what
you see.”


Little by little  

Fortunately, all is not lost. “Respect stuff,” Dr Greyling says, “it is as simple as that. To survive, we must take from the resources that the Earth provides. Because we became clever, we were able to alter these elements to make, from high-rise buildings to tiny technology. But we simply cannot keep on taking and taking without giving back Start with giving respect. Next time you want to throw something away, think twice. Look for ways to reuse, recycle, or repurpose. Consider that the denim you are wearing possibly used up to 10 000 litres of water to produce.”  

LISTEN: Dr Greyling elaborates on solutions for pollution

 

News Archive

UFS study shows playing time in Super Rugby matches decreasing
2016-12-19

Description: Super Rugby playing time Tags: Super Rugby playing time 

The study by Riaan Schoeman, (left), Prof Robert Schall,
and Prof Derik Coetzee from the University of the Free State
on variables in Super Rugby can provide coaches with
insight on how to approach the game.
Photo: Anja Aucamp

It is better for Super Rugby teams not to have the ball, which also leads to reduced overall playing time in matches.

This observation is from a study by the University of the Free State on the difference between winning and losing teams. Statistics between 2011 and 2015 show that Super Rugby winning teams kick more and their defence is better.

These statistics were applied by Riaan Schoeman, lecturer in Exercise and Sport Sciences, Prof Derik Coetzee, Head of Department: Exercise and Sport Sciences, and Prof Robert Schall, Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Sciences. The purpose of the study, Changes in match variables for winning and losing teams in Super Rugby from 2011 to 2015, was to observe changes. Data on 30 games (four from each team) per season, supplied by the Cheetahs via Verusco TryMaker Pro, were used.

About two minutes less action
“We found that the playing time has decreased. This is the time the ball is in play during 80 minutes,” says Schoeman. In 2011, the average playing time was 34.12 minutes and in 2015 it was 31.95.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball and doesn’t want it. They play more conservatively. They dominate with kicks and then they play,” says Prof Coetzee, who was the conditioning coach for the Springboks in 2007 when they won the World Cup.

Lineouts also more about kicking
As a result, the number of line-outs also increased (from 0.31 per minute in 2011 to 0.34 in 2015) and the winning teams are better in this regard.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball
and doesn’t want it. They play a more conservative
game. They dominate with kicks and then they play.”

Schoeman believes that rule changes could also have contributed to reduced playing time, since something like scrum work nowadays causes more problems. “When a scrum falls, the time thereafter is not playing time.”

According to Prof Coetzee, rucks and mauls have also increased, (rucks from 2.08 per minute in 2011 to 2.16 in 2015 and mauls from 0.07 per minute in 2011 to 0.10 in 2015). “The teams that win, dominate these areas,” he says.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept