Answer:
Explanation:
A) install a SEPARATION unit on the output from the reactor and feed the unreacted reagents back to the reactor feed in a RECYCLE stream.
B) Even if one had a perfect separation unit, the 65% or reactant which went to undesirable side reaction is wasted. Recycle is not effective to help poor selectivity of the reactor.
Constitutions and, more specifically, anti-discrimination statutes represent public policy about equal employment opportunity (EEO).
These laws are in place at the federal, state, and local levels in the United States.
In terms of the employers or other entities they cover, the specific groups of people they defend, the transactions they regulate, and the kind and scope of legal remedies they offer, EEO laws differ widely from one location to another. When businesses engage employees, the philosophical idea of EEO is implied, at the very least.
WHAT IS AN "OPPORTUNITY" FOR WORK?
U.S. EEO rules forbid discrimination in terms and circumstances of employment on the basis of specified characteristics. As a result, "opportunities" can be found in a variety of employment circumstances, such as:
- both inside and outside.
- application forms for jobs.
- interviewing potential employees.
- pre-employment examinations
- inquiries into backgrounds.
- Hiring.
- Compensation.
- Benefits.
- Employee services or perks (sometimes known as perquisites).
- working circumstances.
To learn more about equal employment opportunity from the given link.
brainly.com/question/27853265
#SPJ4
Answer:
Assets = Liabilities + Stockholders' Equity = $206,670
Explanation:
Note: See the attached excel file for the analysis of the tabular analysis of the effect of each transaction on the accounting equation.
From the attached excel file, we have:
Assets = = – $172,670 + 68,620 + $310,720 = $206,670
Liabilities = $68,620
Stockholders' Equity = $138,050
Liabilities + Stockholders' Equity = $68,620 + $138,050 = $206,670
Therefore, we have:
Assets = Liabilities + Stockholders' Equity = $206,670
Answer:
A. Jack cannot bring in the evidence of the oral agreement because of the Parol Evidence Rule.
Explanation:
The Parol Evidence rule is a rule in the Anglo-American common law that governs or determines the types or kinds of evidence that parties to a contract dispute can introduce when trying to determine the specific terms of a contract.
The rule also prevents introduction of further evidences by a party after a final written document or agreement has been reached. Things such as the content of oral discussions from earlier in the negotiation process, as evidence of a different intent as to the terms of the contract. The rule states that "extrinsic evidence is inadmissible to vary a written contract". The term " patrol" refers to "word of mouth" hence it is referred to oral pleadings in a court case.
Therefore from the question, Jack cannot bring in evidence of oral agreement into the court for evaluation because of Patrol Evidence Rule.
The answer is C. Increased demand
