Category Archives: Technical Meetings


May 19, 2004

Wednesday May 19, 2004, 6:00 PM at Akzo Nobel’s facility in Dobbs Ferry

William Anzovino of Akzo Nobel


Mr. Anzovino is the Senior Safety Coordinator at Akzo. He has worked at Akzo Noble for 32 years; 18 in the Research Process Development Dept. and 14 years in the Safety Dept. His is the Sr. Safety Coordinator.

Akzo is located at the Lawrence St exit of the Saw Mill River Parkway. (Use the first parking lot on your left – visitors parking.) Dinner will be available after the meeting at Sam’s Restaurant, 128 Main Street, Dobbs Ferry.


March 27, 2004

The North Jersey Section has scheduled a

1-Day Workshop on Pharmaceutical Engineering Fundamentals

Saturday – March 27, 2004


February 18, 2004

(Note: This meeting provided NY State Licensed PEs with 1 PDH of the 36 per triennium required for registration by NYS)



Speaker: Craig Wurzel Business Mgr. and Owner Mikroglas of North America

Abstract: For years, scientists and engineers have been setting up micro scale reaction systems in their laboratories and pilot plants on an individual basis to obtain reaction information and sample material. However, lacking were components such as scalable equipment, sensors, analyzers, safety features, etc suitable for industrial use and design.

Craig Wurzel’s presentation will describe the setting up of micro-reaction modules utilizing the photostructurable glass “FOTURAM” and its combination with pumps, valves, sensors, safety features, process control units, etc. to run a micro-reactor for a rapid exothermic reaction with aggressive chemicals. The “mikrosyn” micro-reaction device will be shown. Craig’s presentation will also include reactor innovations, phase separation components, in-line IR spectrometers, etc.


September 24, 2003

at Pace University, Pleasantville, NY, Gottesman Room, Kessel Campus Center

Closing Indian Point —

What is the Economic and Environmental Impact?

Panelists: (click on “bio” next to the panelists’ names to view the bio they have provided)

Jonathan Falk, National Economic Research Associates

David Gordon, Riverkeeper

Michael Kaplowitz, Westchester County Legislator

Victor Nutter, Entergy Nuclear Northeast

Kyle Rabin, Riverkeeper

David J. Schotts, TRC Environmental Solutions


Brian Coccolicchio, Chair, TZ AIChE

While the debate over whether the Indian Point Nuclear Power Facility should be closed has focused on the topic of safety,there has been less discussion on the economic and environmental impact of closing the facility. We would like to explore such questions as:

What uses could there be for the land that the facility now sits on?

Can the land be used at all?

How will we deal with the waste products from the facility?

What effects would there be on the Hudson River?

How will we replace the energy lost from the facility?

How will we replace the lost tax revenue?

What effect will a closure have on employment in the area?

These and many other questions will be discussed at this meeting. In the end, we hope the meeting will get everyone thinking about what can be done if the Indian Point Facility is closed. The meeting format will be a debate among four panelists evenly divided between those for and against closing the Indian Point facility.

During the first part of the meeting, each panelist will give a 15-minute presentation, answering pre-formulated questions regarding the economic and environmental consequences of closing the facility, followed by a 5-minute rebuttal from opposing panelists. The remaining portion of the meeting will be to cover questions from the audience submitted in writing during the initial presentations.

Co-sponosored by the:

Hudson Valley Council of Technical Societies


June 11, 2003

SPEAKER:    Huk Y. Cheh: Vice President, Technology
Duracell Global Business Management Group
Bethel, CT 06801 USA

ABSTRACT :   The energy content and power capability of a battery depend critically on the chemical nature as well as the structure of the active materials. Basic aspects of battery technology as well as criteria for the choice of active materials in consumer batteries are presented. Two equally valid, but conceptually very different approaches, to the development of new/improved battery active materials are discussed. One approach is to utilize the “Design of Experiments” method to determine an optimal process for synthesizing materials of desired properties; the second approach is to design/modify materials based on a thorough scientific understanding of the chemistry and structural aspects of materials. Practical examples will be given to illustrate these two methods.