| Assessing Ecological Enginering 2 |
|
|
Student Term Project 2008: The AJLC is surrounded by countryside which contains different ecosystems that were constructed to simulate native Northern ecosystems. Besides the native plants, there are many endangered species that thrive there. A lot of the materials that were used to build the AJLC were either reused or fabricated out of recycled materials. Another criterion for the selection of the materials was that they were produced with as low an energy impact as possible. The whole AJLC with its sub systems serves as a valuable research laboratory. Around the building a 150 climate sensors have been installed to record the energy flow from the AJLC continuously. 
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the AJLC and its compartments.
The system boundary that was used is indicated by the red rectangle. Reasons for having chosen this case studyThe main reason why the authors have chosen the theme "ecological construction" is its topicality. It is climate change, overused resources, increasing carbon dioxide output and a rapidly growing human population that is forcing mankind to develop new ways of thinking. The construction of buildings offers a lot of opportunities to bring in environmentally friendly innovations. This case study is an interesting example of how an ecological construction method can be used and the AJLC provides an example of a possible future direction for ecological construction methods.Evaluation
1. Begin-of-pipe thinking: partially fulfilled Reason for selection: The reuse or avoidance of waste products is an essential part of the ecological construction method. Evaluation: The wastewater from the building is purified almost immediately by the Living Machine. Afterwards the cleaned water is reused in the building’s toilets and the surrounding land. [1] What happens to other waste products that are produced by the AJLC is unclear. No further particulars were found that give information about how the recycling process at the centre is handled. For this reason we consider the criterion only as partly fulfilled. 2. Focus on sustainability: fulfilled Reason for selection:The principles of ecology are applied to achieve sustainability. Evaluation: Part of the energy that is used by the AJLC is produced by the centre’s own photovoltaic plant. The Living Machine purifies the wastewater in an ecological way. [1] The authors suppose that the costs were much higher than for a conventional college. However, its sustainability will lead to a financial benefit. [4] As the main focus of the AJLC is on sustainability, the criterion is fulfilled. 3. Minimise impact on the enviroment: fulfilled Reason for selection:It was the intention of the designers of the AJLC that the construction of the building does not have any negative impact on humans or the environment. Evaluation: The surrounding landscape of the AJLC features a variety of constructed ecosystems that simulate native Northern Ohio ecosystems preserve endemical plants. All in all, the negative impact through sewage and emissions from the AJLC are relatively low. Additionally, the materials used to construct the building are environmentally friendly materials. [1] So all in all, compared to other buildings the negative impact of the AJLC is very low. 4. Promoting a high degree of recycling: fulfilled Reason for selection: The construction of a building is only ecological when the materials used don't have a negative impact on the environment. Evaluation: A lot of the materials that were used for the construction of the AJLC were being reused and came from the surrounding area. The designers also wanted them to be easily recycled afterwards. Although a lot of the materials that were used for the construction don't fulfil this criterion. The main reasons were that materials that fulfilled those criteria were not available on the market, or it is technically not possible to manufacture them in this way. [1] Keeping in mind this state of technology the authors evaluate the criterion as fulfilled. 5. Focus on multi-functionality: fulfilled Reason for selection: The AJLC has subsystems which manage the various building technology tasks. Evaluation: The building is a remarkable example of ecological construction. Many of the measures implemented during the construction period and the building’s use involve recycling and energy saving, so that the AJLC’s subsystems provide valuable material for research. The subsystems include the following features:
6. Keeping energy and resource consumption low: fulfilled Reason for selection: The regeneration of global ecosystems will only be possible if energy and resource consumption are reduced in future. Evaluation:
7. Solar power as main energy source: fulfilled Reason for selection: One of the philosophies of the designers who planned the AJLC was to power the building by using sunlight. Another goal was to produce more energy than is used. Evaluation: The AJLC’s photovoltaic plant covers 53% of the building’s annual energy use. For this reason we consider the criterion of solar power as the main energy source as fulfilled, but not the designers’ goal. This is because the AJLC relies on the electricity network at night, since the balance of energy provided by the photovoltaic plant cannot be stored. [2] The AJLC uses only 39% of the energy consumed by a “normal” school building. If the energy produced by the photovoltaic plant is included, the energy consumption of the AJLC is 17% that of an average school. [1] 8. High system integration: Partially fulfilled Reason for selection: One sub-goal of the AJLC is to imitate the closed circle of a natural ecosystem and so to purify and reuse the waste water that is produced by the building. The waste products from one sub system are thus being used as feedstock for another. [1] The Living Machine is the only sub system which allows an evaluation of the criterion. Evaluation: The Living Machine purifies the waste water that is produced by the AJLC. Organic waste, nutrients and pathogens are removed by the system. Afterwards the water is reused in the buildings, toilets and the landscape areas where food products are produced. [2] (The number of food products is not clear. It is not clear how much food is produced or how much of it is consumed by the AJLC.) The marsh gas that accumulates in the anaerobic tank exhausts into the atmosphere and is not used. Although the Living Machine is a relatively efficient sub-system, the closed circle of a natural ecosystem is not imitated by it. Therefore we consider the criterion as only partly fulfilled. ConclusionSix of the eight criteria were considered by the authors as fulfilled. The other two criteria were felt to be only partly fulfilled. It is often the case that only one sub system of the AJLC, for example the Living Machine, does not fulfil the criteria. The opinion of the authors is that the philosophy singular from the AJLC that is shown on the homepage (see references) are only partly fulfilled. The AJLC is "only" a pilot project. If there were other buildings involved in the cycle of matter, the authors think that the performance would be better, which would have a positive effect on the evaluation.On the homepage from the AJLC only positive features are mentioned. It would be interesting to see how positive the evaluation would be if the "grey energy" were also involved in the energy balance. All in all, the AJLC is a forward-looking example of the method of ecological construction. References[1] Anon (2008): AJLC, http://www.oberlin.edu/ajlc/ajlcHome.html[2] Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (2008): http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/database/overview.cfm?ProjectID=18 [3] Wikipedia (2008): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_machines [4] Arento AG (2008): http://www.arento.ch/p40000015.html AuthorsSusanne Caluori, Felix Wyss, Nicolas Spahr, Tino Pandiani (students of environmental engineering at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences, ZHAW, www.zhaw.ch )Contact: Tino Pandiani, This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Some remarks about this student term project: This work was written in spring 2008 as part of a student term project in a "Basics in Ecological Engineering" class. The students were 2nd year Bachelor students of environmental engineering at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland. The aim of the project was to help them understand and apply the different sets of criteria used for describing Ecological Engineering projects. The whole assessment was based on freely-available material found in the internet. No field visits were possible. This paper was selected from a total of 27 as one of the best, in spite of some weaknesses. Its value is that it makes obvious how difficult it can be to apply criteria to largely differing types of projects and how important it would be to start developing a set of concise and applicable criteria for Ecological Engineering projects. Andreas Schoenborn, April 24, 2009 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Last Updated ( Friday, 24 April 2009 ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||