Latest news with #reducing
Fashion Value Chain
21 hours ago
- Business
- Fashion Value Chain
Archroma Launches CYCLANON® XC-W e for Reactive Dyeing
Archroma Unveils Breakthrough Washing-Off Auxiliary for Outstanding Color Fastness and Resource Efficiency in Reactive Dyeing Archroma, a global leader in specialty chemicals, has announced the launch of CYCLANON® XC-W e, a next-generation washing-off auxiliary designed to boost both color fastness and resource efficiency in the reactive dyeing of cellulosic fibers. Engineered with Archroma's innovative trio-polymer chemistry, this solution delivers superior performance—even under demanding high-electrolyte or hard water conditions. 'With CYCLANON® XC-W e, we are building on our proven trio-polymer platform to give mills a way to meet rising brand expectations for durable, high-quality casual wear with a lower environmental footprint – all at a cost profile comparable to conventional washing-off agents,' said Dhirendra Gautam, VP Global Marketing and Strategy, Archroma. Overcoming the Limitations of Conventional Agents Traditional polyacrylate or copolymer-based washing-off agents often fail to remove residual unfixed dye efficiently, particularly in environments with high salt concentration or hard water. This can result in excessive rinsing, increased water and energy use, and subpar product quality due to backstaining or uneven dyeing. Designed for Performance and Efficiency The trio-polymer chemistry behind CYCLANON® XC-W e directly addresses these pain points by reducing the affinity of unfixed dyes for the fiber. This improves dye removal efficiency, enhances color fastness—especially in darker shades—and minimizes backstaining. Exceptional Results with Verified Resource Savings Mills using CYCLANON® XC-W e benefit from shorter wash cycles and reduced chemical input, delivering significant cost and environmental benefits: Up to 15% shorter dyeing process times Up to 20% less water consumption in washing-off Up to 20% lower CO₂ emissions due to reduced energy use Up to 20% less chemical input Maximized Throughput Without Extra Equipment These operational gains can significantly boost productivity: Up to 15% increase in fabric throughput with existing machinery Example: A knit dyeing plant producing 10 MT/day could increase output by 1 MT/day—without additional infrastructure—by eliminating two washing baths and lowering rework rates. Part of Archroma's SUPER SYSTEMS+ Portfolio CYCLANON® XC-W e is integrated into Archroma's SUPER SYSTEMS+ platform and aligns with its IMPACT+ category—offering maximum resource efficiency, enhanced wash durability, and superior compliance beyond standard chemical protocols. For a complete solution, it can be combined with Archroma's Blue Magic pretreatment and NOVACRON® EC/S reactive dyes for optimal results in dyeing 100% cotton fabrics. The formulation meets evolving regulatory and brand demands and is currently being registered for bluesign®, ZDHC Level 3, and GOTS 7.0 certifications, reinforcing Archroma's commitment to safe, sustainable innovation.
Time of India
a day ago
- Health
- Time of India
SC directs FSSAI to implement Front-of-Pack nutrition labels on packaged foods
The Supreme Court of India has directed Food Safety and Standards Authority of India ( FSSAI ) to execute the Front-of-pack nutrition labels on packaged food, Shiv Sena MP Milind Deora and chair of Parliamentary Committee on Subordinate Legislation, posted on the social media platform 'X'. "The Supreme Court has directed @fssaiindia to implement simple front-of-pack nutrition labels on packaged food. As Chair of Parliament's Subordinate Legislation Committee, I've recommended studying Singapore's clear A-to-D Nutri-Grade system," Milind Deora posted on 'X'. According to the post by Milind Deora, this move will assist FSSAI to "comply without further delays & empower Indian consumers to make healthier choices, reversing India's rising #obesity crisis." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like I Tried the $0.87 Generic Viagra and Here's What Happened! fridayplans Learn More Undo — milinddeora (@milinddeora) The Union health ministry has also recently proposed displaying sugar and oil boards as an initiative to promote healthier dietary habits in various settings. Live Events According to the ministry's proposal, these boards will serve as visual behavioural nudges in schools, offices, public institutions etc. displaying key information about hidden fats and sugars in everyday foods. On Monday, Deora told that India should regulate unhealthy foods sold by multinational companies, along with Indian snacks such as jalebis and samosas, to deal with rising obesity problems. "Placing greater stringent regulations on unhealthy foods like jalebi, like samosa, this is a welcome step," Deora said." "As chairman of the Parliament Subordinate Legislation Committee, which has members of parliament from all parties, we are at present examining this very issue. Along with the agency called the FSSAI which is the food regulator in our country," the Rajya Sabha MP said on Monday. The move is part of the Union Health ministry's flagship initiatives under National Programme for Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (NP-NCD) to promote sustainable behavioural changes in workplaces. These include reducing excessive consumption of oil and sugar, both of which are key contributors to rising rates of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other lifestyle-related disorders. (ANI)
Scoop
a day ago
- Business
- Scoop
Employment Relations Amendment Bill Passes First Reading
Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden welcomes the successful first reading of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill, calling it a major milestone in helping businesses employ and contract with confidence. The Employment Relations Amendment Bill will now be considered by the Education and Workforce Select Committee where people can have their say on the proposed changes. 'This Bill reflects the Government's commitment to supporting New Zealand businesses and creating more and better opportunities for workers.' The legislation delivers on key commitments from the ACT–National Coalition Agreement, including: Clarifying the distinction between employment and contracting arrangements, giving greater certainty to both businesses and workers. Simplifying the personal grievance process, including the introduction of an income threshold of $180,000, above which unjustified dismissal claims cannot be pursued. This Bill also proposes removing the 30-day rule, allowing employers and employees to negotiate mutually beneficial terms from the start of employment, reducing compliance burden and increasing flexibility. 'I encourage all interested New Zealanders to have their say on the Bill, and I see the Select Committee process as an important way of strengthening the final Bill and making sure it works for a wide variety of working relationships and situations. 'I am particularly interested in hearing feedback on whether the gateway test criteria are workable and whether the test covers a variety of genuine contracting relationships. I am also interested in hearing feedback on the high-income threshold for personal grievances, both from those who may use it as an employer and those who would be affected as a worker. 'I am looking forward to hearing what New Zealanders have to say about the Bill during the Select Committee process,' says Ms van Velden. Notes:
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Health
- Hindustan Times
Fitness coach shares 5 tips to 'stay on track with fat loss when life gets busy': Track less, plan more
Bec Gibbs is an online weight loss coach who shares tips and hacks for women, especially, on how to shed the extra kilos. From workout tips to diet hacks, Bec shares it all on her Instagram profile on a regular basis. On July 10, Bec shared how to stay on track with weight loss consistently. Bec added that while life might get busy, with the right habits, we can still continue with our fat loss journeys. Also read | Overeating derailing your weight loss plans? Dietician suggests 3 hacks to control your cravings While life might get busy, with the right habits, we can still continue with our fat loss journeys. (Freepik) 'How to stay on track with fat loss when life gets busy. Let's be honest, life isn't going to slow down. So, the key is learning how to stay consistent through the chaos,' she wrote. Here are 5 tips she suggested: Plan your weight loss meals in advance.(Shutterstock) 1. Lower your expectations, not your standards Some days it's not the perfect workout or 10/10 nutrition. It's a 20-min walk, a high-protein wrap, and water. That still counts. 2. Have go-to meals ready Keep 2–3 quick meals in rotation you can make without thinking. (E.g. protein toast + eggs, stir-fry, high-protein pasta bowl) 3. Stop aiming for perfect Missing 1 workout or eating a slice of cake isn't a failure. What you do next matters way more than what just happened. 4. Track less, plan more When time is tight, following a meal plan takes decision fatigue off your plate. 5. Remind yourself why you started You don't need motivation every day — you need a reason to keep showing up. In an earlier interview with HT Lifestyle, Dr Jaison Paul Sharma, MBBS, MD (Internal Medicine) - consultant diabetologist at Sharma Hospital in Garhdiwala suggested, 'Focus on whole, unprocessed, fibre-rich foods while reducing intake of ultra-processed carbohydrates and sugary beverages.' he also added that sleep is an underrated weight loss habit which should be taken more seriously. 'Sleep is another powerful metabolic lever; poor sleep raises ghrelin and cortisol levels, promoting fat gain. Aim for 7–9 hours of quality sleep per night,' he added. Also read | Woman who dropped 11 kg shares 6 'unpopular' weight loss hacks: Don't cut out any food, stop cheat days Note to readers: This article is for informational purposes only and not a substitute for professional medical advice. Always seek the advice of your doctor with any questions about a medical condition.
Atlantic
2 days ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
The Biggest Myth About the YIMBY Movement
Over the past year, the conversation about housing affordability went national. Unfortunately, it brought with it all the contentiousness of a local-zoning-board meeting. The Democratic YIMBY ('yes in my backyard') movement argues for reducing restrictions on building in order to increase the number of homes and lower housing prices. This has inspired a furious backlash within the liberal coalition. These critics paint the YIMBY vision as a centrist, pro-business scheme that betrays progressive values. Some of the loudest complaints have come from anti-monopoly advocates, who warn that the abundance agenda is a stalking horse for libertarianism. The fight has been framed in a way that is almost perfectly designed to split the Democratic coalition. But this fight shouldn't even be happening. Antitrust policy and housing abundance are natural allies. Although the pro-housing movement does want to remove a specific set of regulations, this ambition is best understood in the populist, trust-busting mold: as an attack aimed at breaking up a powerful group's capture of the regulatory regime. There is nothing centrist about that. In fact, NIMBY activists and their allies are the ones engaged in a fundamentally conservative project: helping a landowning elite hoard wealth by preserving an unfair status quo. As a progressive YIMBY advocate myself (and a former city-council candidate in Seattle), I have witnessed this dynamic directly. This is more than a mere debate about words. The failure to build homes fuels the cost-of-living crisis, worsens climate outcomes, reinforces geographic segregation, and drives migration of people and political power from blue states to red ones—just as the GOP has veered into authoritarianism. It also fuels the nation's record-high homelessness numbers. Research shows that low housing supply, not drug use or poverty, is the strongest predictor of regional homelessness. People who claim to be progressives but resist efforts to solve the housing problem are hurting their own stated values—and risking their descent into political irrelevance. How did a project revolving around expanding access to affordable housing come to be seen by some on the left as centrist, even conservative? It's partly a matter of historical contingency. The front line of the housing fight has long been in the San Francisco Bay Area, where an old guard of otherwise lefty landowners happens to be the group resisting change. There, the YIMBY movement has allied with a younger, less hippy-coded generation of techies. This has created a misleading impression that NIMBYs are inherently to the left of YIMBYs. If the tech boom had instead started in, say, Dallas, the political tenor of the debate would likely look quite different. The fact that someone who is otherwise on the political left opposes a reform doesn't make their opposition itself progressive. A recent successful legislative change to exempt most new-housing development from the California Environmental Quality Act is a great example. The law has been used to block housing production in California's cities. Yet YIMBY reformers had to overcome pushback from labor-union leaders, who should have recognized that more housing would help their workers. These unions opposed the law's reform because their ability to file frivolous CEQA suits gave them bargaining leverage over builders. Whether reasonable or not, their decision makes it clear that 'opposition from the left' can have less to do with progressive values than with narrow self-interest. Adding to the confusion over where the push for housing abundance falls on the political spectrum is the fact YIMBYs often talk about the need to cut 'red tape,' such as restrictive zoning and procedural rules, to make building homes easier. This rhetoric, along with the movement's focus on supply, can, to some ears, evoke Reagan-era trickle-down economics. Many on the left naturally bristle at this kind of language. 'YIMBY policies satisfied elite consensus, promising workforce housing for tech-sector donors while scratching a deregulatory itch that libertarians had long been trying to reach,' Michael Friedrich wrote last year in The New Republic. But abundance liberals aren't fighting against regulation per se. They're fighting against a specific set of regulations that rich people exploit to rig the housing market against people of more modest means. Their aim is to eliminate these specific tools, not to deregulate in general. Progressive anti-monopoly advocates, for their part, accuse YIMBYs of ignoring the problem of corporate power. Because these critics see corporations as the primary villains in American economic life, they're suspicious of any movement that focuses its energies elsewhere. For example, in a review of Abundance, the discourse-defining book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, the anti-monopolist Sandeep Vaheesan laments the lack of attention to 'anti-monopoly policies that would rein in the power of the affluent' and criticizes the authors' supposed 'deference to private capital and hostility to public governance.' Jonathan Chait: The coming Democratic civil war In reality, the pro-housing movement aims to unrig the housing market, expand access, bring down prices for consumers, and redistribute power and wealth from the rich to everyone else. In antitrust terms, YIMBYs seek to break the housing cartel's chokehold on supply by using political power to restore market competition. Anti-monopoly thinkers should, if anything, be leading the housing fight, not opposing it. The basic insight of antitrust law is that powerful actors will, if left to their own devices, manipulate markets to kill off competition and enrich themselves. One of the most common ways they do this is by restricting supply to keep prices artificially high. When the global oil cartel OPEC cuts oil production, for example, prices at the pump spike. And when wealthy homeowners use local zoning and other land-use laws to block the addition of apartments, townhomes, and subsidized housing in desirable neighborhoods—in other words, to prevent new competition from entering the housing market—they do the same thing: create artificial scarcity, thereby propping up their property values. Anti-monopolists are not wrong that corporate power tends to be behind the deformations in the modern American economy. And in some cases, corporate wrongdoers really might be part of the housing problem; this is why the Department of Justice and state attorneys general are currently suing the algorithmic price-setting company RealPage for colluding with landlords to raise rents. In general, however, it's landowners who've rigged this particular market, not through private collusion, which is illegal, but through 'regulatory capture,' which is when private groups shape government policy to serve their own economic aims. Sometimes working together, sometimes working separately, NIMBYs have manipulated a web of local laws and requirements—such as exclusionary zoning, minimum lot sizes, and parking minimums—to reduce production of homes. As with any production cap, the result is higher prices for new residents and higher profits for incumbents, and a transfer of wealth and power from buyers and renters to existing owners. Because the First Amendment protects private citizens' right to advocate for government policy, the courts can't stop homeowners from using their power in this way. The only remedy is political pushback. In Northern California, the legacy faction of the left is the problem. But in places as varied as Connecticut and Ohio, or Charlotte and Portland, the housing movement is largely led by progressives. I work in the housing movement in Washington State. This past legislative session, my job was to put together a coalition of nonprofits to push for perhaps the nation's most ambitious rollback of off-street-parking requirements. I worked alongside progressive sponsors in the state Senate and House. The bill that ultimately passed swept away thousands of local rules that had throttled housing-supply growth. From the March 2025 issue: How progressives froze the American dream A similar coalition also helped pass other pro-housing reforms to land-use law in Washington (for example, allowing denser development near public transit). These changes won't solve our state's housing crisis on their own, but they are real, material wins. A few GOP-friendly real-estate-industry groups joined in support, but the backbone of the coalition was progressive: big labor, statewide and local environmental groups, tenants'-rights advocates, and justice-focused nonprofits. Almost all of the same groups have also backed a cap on egregious rent gouging, stricter climate standards for new buildings, and more funding for public and nonprofit housing—hardly a libertarian wish list. This is what a populist antitrust effort in housing looks like: undoing regulatory capture, breaking up economic gatekeeping, and creating a fairer market. And yet, in a spectacular act of projection, NIMBYs accuse housing advocates of conservatism even as they defend the interests of wealthy landowners protecting their cultural and economic turf. This smear campaign is meant to freeze blue-state efforts to help people struggling to afford a place to live. And if the broader left fails to recognize this NIMBY misinformation for what it is, it might work.
