1.3 Physical Resource Flows
-
Upload
ethan-young -
Category
Documents
-
view
39 -
download
5
description
Transcript of 1.3 Physical Resource Flows
1.3 Physical Resource Flows
From where do resources come, and where do they end up?
versus
Learning objective: to grasp how resource
flows are created and manipulated, and to
become familiar with methods of analysing
resource flows and the challenges they pose .
Linear flow
Lo
op
Loop
What comes in ……
Water 20-200 kg/p/day
Food 2 kg/p/day
Energy > 1 kg/p/day
Consumer goods
1- ? kg/p/day
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
house- hold
… must go out
Greywater 20-200 kg/p/day
Solid waste1 - ? Kg/d/p
Faeces 0.3 kg/d/p
Urine1.5-3 kg/d/p
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
house- hold
pollutants
The trick is to bend today´s many linear resource flows
• Solid waste is the most visible output. It may be discarded or sorted and recycled. Scavengers perform an important service
• Faecal matter is very small in volume, but is a major health threat unless treated and used wisely
• Urine (urine) volumes are small. Smells may be a problem unless urine is returned to the soil
• Grey water is voluminous and a major challenge in dense areas but can be a useful product if handled well
• Storm water may be a serious problem or it can augment household and irrigation supplies
• Energy is invisible but heat may be recovered Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Water and nutrient ’kretslopp’
Rural home
City with linear flows
Sorting
city
food
Wastewater = (grey water, urine, and faeces)
WWTPwastewater
food
chemicals
J-O Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Leaking pipes
water
Three examples of ’kretslopp’ thinking
Fraction:
Solid ‘waste’
Organic ‘waste’
Faecal matter
Urine (urine)
Grey water
Storm water
In Stockholm
sorted in 8 fractions, collected and reused
organics composted together with hygien-ised dry faecal material
collected and trucked to farm
in situ after biological treatment
infiltration (no heavy rains)
In Kimberley
No sorting, collected and put on landfills
dried and composted
used in situ or by truck to council gardens
Grey water to pond after biological treatment, and rainwater to the same pond. Little rain.
In Kampala
No sorting, burnt in situ, the rest to landfill
banana peels etc to animal feed
dried and composted
in situ or collected
Infiltrated in situ and to drains
In drains but flooding due to heavy rains
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Provides heating/energy
Provides soil conditioner
Liquid fertiliser
Irrigation water and biogas
Groundwater recharge
Soil conditioner
Liquid fertiliser
Soil conditioner
Liquid fertiliser
Soil conditioner
Material Flow Analysis for human settlements
MFA uses the principle of balance:
input = output + accumulated stock in the system
and provides a systematic description of the flow of goods, materials or substances through various processes and out of the system.
Process 1
Process 2
input Process 3
output
output
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
A resource flow model for a hamlet
8
Courtesy of Jenny Aragundy, Ecuador
9
The Stockholm model to improve sustainability
Courtesy of Stockholm Water Company
food
hydrosphere
wastehandlingconsumption
deposit/ landfill
livestockagriculture
urinefaeces
Modelling the situation (MFA)
• Select the material, product or chemical you are interested in
• Include all the flows, uses, losses and disposals
• Find estimates for all flows and stocks
4 STEPS in modelling:
(1) Description of the system (2) Formulation of model equations, (3) Calibration, and (4) Simulation incl. sensitivity and uncertainty analysis
• Decide the boundaries of your system (dashed line)
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Example 1: Actual reuse of nutrientsfrom households in urban agriculture
100%
50%
1870 1910 1950 2000waste pits +urine diversion +WC only WC +WWTP stop
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Proportion being reused
Heavy metals
Glass, tins, ceramics
Table 1: Data for the primary and secondary waste treatment for Linköping, 1870-2000
Sources:
Year No of inhabitants
Primary waste treatment/ toilet system
Comments Secondary waste treatment or storage
Comments
1870 7 300 0% WC 10% water-tight buckets 90% dug pit/outhouse
Level 3 based on (1)
70-90% to soil 10-30% to animal
fodder
1885 10 700
2% WC 5% urine separation 30% water-tight buckets 63% dug pit or equiv.
Level 3 bases on (1)
80-100% to soil 0-20% to animal
fodder
1900 14 500
8% WC 16% urine separation 76% water-tight buckets 0% pit latrine or equiv.
Level 3 based on (1)
80-100% to soil 0-20% to animal
fodder
1920 26 900 20% WC 10% urine separation 70% water-tight buckets
Level 3 based on (2)
95-100% to soil 0-5% to animal
fodder
1940 38 650 50% WC 0% urine separation 50% water-tight buckets
Level 2 (3)
40-60% to soil 40-60 % to landfill
1950 54 500 90% WC 10% water-tight buckets
Level 2 (4)
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), no P
reduction unit
60% of W C connected to WWTP
1975 78 000 100% W C (6), (7) WWTP with 90% of
P to sludge; 0-20% to plant/soil
All W C connected to WWTP
1990 82 600 100% W C (5), (6), (9)
WWTP with 95% of P to sludge;
20-30 % reused (of which 2/3 to
energy forest and 1/3 to farmers)
70-80% to landfill
same assumptions as for the year 2000
2000 94 000 100% W C (5), (8), (9)
WWTP with 97% of P to sludge;
21% reused (10-40%) (of which 2/3 to
energy forest and 1/3 to farmers)
79% to landfill
Ex. 1 con´t Examples of ranges for parameters
Neset and Drangert, 2010
Ex. 1 con´t Sensitivity analysis
The filled curves represent calculated averages, while coloured areas between the dotted curves indicate uncertainty ranges due to estimated input data(in kg phosphorus per capita per year)
Source: Neset and Drangert, 2010
Phosphorus reuse and phosphorus losses 1870-2000
Example 2: Eutrophication of Lake Dianchi, China
55% of TP
45% of TP
Kunming city
Farmland P leakage
river downstream
385 tonnes
33 tonnes
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden
Dianchi
faeces flush
urine flush
laundry
kitchen
bath
industrialdischarge
HH
denitrificationstreet runoffroof runoff
runoff
comb. sewer
infiltration incl. river water
exfiltration
wrong connection
storm sewer
separate storm water drainage
treated wastewater
overflow out of CSO tank
overflow out of combined sewer
WWTP
sludge
CSO tank
Ex. 2 Cont Urban P flow to Dianchi Lake, China
Source: Huang et al., 2007
Ex 2 Con´t Outcome to guide a new strategy
1. Even with the best available treatment technology (BAT with 98% P removal etc.) the discharge would still be twice what the lake can accommodate.
2. A major problem is that during heavy rains the wastewater bypasses the WWTP and washes all wastewater straight into the lake.
3. Groundwater and stormwater enter the poor-quality sewers and make up a large portion of the water coming to the WWTP
4. Source-control measures such as urine-diversion toilets and P-free detergents and body care products are necessary to avoid discharging untreated wastewater downstream the lake and just moving the environmental problems.
Source: Huang et al., 2007
Example 3 : P flows through Hanoi City
Source: Montangero et al., 2004
Ex. 3 con´t Phosphorus flows in Hanoi City
Courtesy of Agnes Montangero, 2007
CompostingAgricultureMarket
Sewerage & drainage
Landfill
Organic wastecollection
On-sitesanitationHouse-
holds
Watersupply
Ex. 3 cont Feeding the people of Hanoi - a sensitivity analysis
Source: Montangero et al., 2007
2007(3 M)
Business as usual
2015 (5 M residents)
No septic tanks
No-meat diet
Example 4: Nutrients and food security – a global view
Only 1/5 of the P in mined rock reaches the food on our forks!
Ex 4 cont. Securing a sustainable phosphorus future
The future is not all dark!
Source: Cordell, N
eset, White &
Drangert 2009
Principle:
• Organic ≠ other solid waste
• Stormwater ≠ sewage
• Industrial ≠ household wastewater
• Black toilet water ≠ greywater
• Faeces ≠ urine
Strategies for sanitation improvements
Jan-Olof Drangert, Linköping University, Sweden