90 research outputs found

    An environmental evaluation of food waste downstream management options: a hybrid LCA approach

    Get PDF
    Food waste treatment methods have been typically analysed using current energy generation conditions. To correctly evaluate treatment methods, they must be compared under existing and potential decarbonisation scenarios. This paper holistically quantifies the environmental impacts of three food waste downstream management options—incineration, composting, and anaerobic digestion (AD). Methods The assessment was carried out using a novel hybrid input–output-based life cycle assessment method (LCA), for 2014, and in a future decarbonised economy. The method introduces expanded system boundaries which reduced the level of incompleteness, a previous limitation of process-based LCA. Results Using the 2014 UK energy mix, composting achieved the best score for seven of 14 environmental impacts, while AD scored second best for ten. Incineration had the highest environmental burdens in six impacts. Uncertainties in the LCA data made it difficult determine best treatment option. There was significant environmental impact from capital goods, meaning current treatment facilities should be used for their full lifespan. Hybrid IO LCA’s included additional processes and reduced truncation error increasing overall captured environmental impacts of composting, AD, and incineration by 26, 10 and 26%, respectively. Sensitivity and Monte Carlo analysis evaluate the methods robustness and illustrate the uncertainty of current LCA methods. Major implication: hybrid IO-LCA approaches must become the new norm for LCA. Conclusion This study provided a deeper insight of the overall environmental performance of downstream food waste treatment options including ecological burdens associated with capital goods. Keywords Anaerobic digestion Incineration Composting Food waste Hybrid life cycle assessment Capital good

    Policy mixes for incumbency: the destructive recreation of renewable energy, shale gas 'fracking,' and nuclear power in the United Kingdom

    Get PDF
    The notion of a ‘policy mix’ can describe interactions across a wide range of innovation policies, including ‘motors for creation’ as well as for ‘destruction’. This paper focuses on the United Kingdom’s (UK) ‘new policy direction’ that has weakened support for renewables and energy efficiency schemes while strengthening promotion of nuclear power and hydraulic fracturing for natural gas (‘fracking’). The paper argues that a ‘policy apparatus for incumbency’ is emerging which strengthens key regimebased technologies while arguably damaging emerging niche innovations. Basing the discussion around the three technology-based cases of renewable energy and efficiency, fracking, and nuclear power, this paper refers to this process as “destructive recreation”. Our study raises questions over the extent to which policymaking in the energy field is not so much driven by stated aims around sustainability transitions, as by other policy drivers. It investigates different ‘strategies of incumbency’ including ‘securitization’, ‘masking’, ‘reinvention’, and ‘capture.’ It suggests that analytical frameworks should extend beyond the particular sectors in focus, with notions of what counts as a relevant ‘policy maker’ correspondingly also expanded, in order to explore a wider range of nodes and critical junctures as entry points for understanding how relations of incumbency are forged and reproduced

    The discursive politics of ‘fracking’: frames, storylines, and the anticipatory contestation of shale gas development in the United Kingdom

    Get PDF
    How contested sources of energy such as shale gas are perceived in frontier countries considering their development is incredibly important to national and international climate policies. The UK shale development case is of particular interest currently as the Government attempts to position the UK as a pioneer of European, safe, sustainable shale gas development. We conduct a mixed-methods analysis of the UK policy debate on shale gas development involving 30 stakeholder interviews and 1,557 political documents. This empirical focus extends the existing literature by identifying the use of frames in and through the institutions and practices of formal UK politics. We identify nine key frames and their associated storylines, analyse their use over time, and compare these findings with other national case studies. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given most UK Governments within our timeframe have supported shale development, pro-shale development frames dominate in the policy debate; however, we also find a high level of anti-shale development frame use, suggesting a deep and ongoing framing contest in national formal political sites. We find in particular a more prominent focus on land-use issues and impacts on the landscape than other UK studies or other national contexts. Conceptually the study puts forward an integrative approach to the related concepts of frames and storylines, as well as arguments concerning the impotence of storylines in anticipatory political debate and the polyvalence of framing strategies. Questions about governance are raised by the general lack of consensus over the framing of shale development within formal political sites, let alone amongst the broader public; and by the lack of a coherent response from the Government to criticisms of its approach. Finally, we reflect on the apparent lack of evidence for Hajer’s ‘communicative miracle’ in our case, and speculate as to whether the lack of broad-based resonance of the ‘bridge’ storyline signals trouble for the positive-sum thinking of ecological modernisation

    Discharge of Old Crow River 2019

    No full text
    Real-Time Provisional 2019 Hydrometric Data for Water Survey of Canada Station: OLD CROW RIVER NEAR THE MOUTH (09FC001) [YT]
    • …
    corecore