| 1. |
- Sundqvist, Jan-Olov, et al.
(författare)
-
Hur skall hushållsavfallet tas om hand? Utvärdering av olika behandlingsmetoder
- 2002
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- I en systemanalys har konsekvenser rörande energiförbrukning, miljöpåverkan och ekonomi studerats för olika system för hantering av kommunalt avfall. I systemanalysen har olika kombinationer av förbränning, deponering, materialåtervinning av utsorterad plast och kartong, och biologisk behandling (rötning och kompostering) av utsorterat lättnedbrytbart organiskt avfall studerats. I studien har en datormodell baserad på livscykelanalysmetodik (ORWARE) använts. Studien baseras på en modellkommun. I en känslighetsanalys har inverkan av olika kommunspecifika parametrar och anläggningsspecifika parametrar studerats. Det slutliga resultatet bedöms täcka ett mycket stort antal kommuntyper. Följande parametrar har använts för att utvärdera olika lösningar: förbrukning av energiråvaror, växthuseffekt, försurning, övergödning, bildning av marknära ozon, tungmetallflöden, företagsekonomi (i livscykelperspektiv) och samhällsekonomi (samhällsekonomi innebär en viktning av företagsekonomi och miljöekonomi) - i grundfallet räknas hushållens arbete inte in i den samhällsekonomiska kalkylen. Vi har kommit fram till följande slutsatser. Deponering bör i allmänhet undvikas för avfall som kan förbrännas, rötas, komposte-ras eller materialåtervinnas. Möjlighet till förbränning av avfall bör alltid finnas. Detta gäller även om avfallet måste transporteras till en regional anläggning. Eftersom det inte går att uppnå 100 % återvinningsgrader för exempelvis plast, kartong och returpapper, kommer det alltid att finnas en viss mängd brännbart avfall som måste tas omhand vid sidan av materialåtervin-ningssystemen och eventuella system för biologisk behandling. Materialåtervinning, rötning och förbränning bör inte ses som konkurrerande metoder, utan mer som kompletterande metoder. Det är svårt att dra entydiga slutsatser om vilken metod som är 'bäst'. Det finns fördelar och nackdelar med alla metoder. I systemperspektivet för en hel kommun ger materialåtervinning eller rötning mycket små skillnader mot förbränning. Kompostering (strängkompostering) av lättnedbrytbart avfall har nästan inga miljömässiga fördelar gentemot förbränning eller gentemot rötning. Om man räknar in hushållens arbete i den samhällsekonomiska kalkylen blir materialåtervinning samhällsekonomiskt dyrare än förbränning. Förbränning, rötning och kompostering kräver ungefär lika mycket arbete av hushållen och skillnaderna mellan dessa påverkas mycket lite av om hushållens arbete räknas in. Transporter av avfall, sedan det väl är insamlat, är av begränsad betydelse vad gäller miljöpåverkan, energiförbrukning och kostnader, under förutsättning att transporterna genomförs på ett effektivt sätt. Hushållens transporter (med personbil) kan påverka både resultatet (i ogynnsam riktning för källsortering). Olika insamlingssystem påverkar det totala resultatet i mycket liten utsträckning beträffande miljöpåverkan och energiförbrukning. En förtätning av återvinningsstationer från områdesnära till återvinningsgårdar som är mer kvartersnära ger ingen avgörande påverkan på miljöpåverkan eller samhällsekonomi (exklusive hushållens arbete) men leder till mindre arbete för hushållen.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mårtensson, Olof
(författare)
-
Lactic acid bacteria fermentations in oat-based suspensions
- 2002
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This thesis deals with the fermentation characteristics of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) in oat-based suspensions, with formulation work of fermented products based on oat and with nutritional studies of these products. Changes in structure in terms of viscosity and ropiness were studied when exopolysaccharide (EPS)-producing LAB strains, namely, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus NCFB 2772, Lactobacillus brevis G-77 and Pediococcus damnosus 2.6 were grown in these oat-based suspensions. Differences in structure were seen after growth of EPS-producing bacteria, resulting in higher viscosity and ropiness in these products. The formulation work of fermented products was carried out by using commercial yoghurt cultures with and without the presence of an EPS-producing strain. The products developed were found to have sensory acceptance and good bacterial survival during storage. The bacterial survival of three probiotic strains, Lactobacillus reuteri ATCC 55730, Lactobacillus acidophilus DSM 20079 and Bifidobacterium bifidum DSM 20456, was also studied in different oat-based suspensions with and without the influence of a yoghurt culture during 30 days of storage. The highest survival was seen for the Lactobacillus reuteri strain. The co-fermentation in the presence of a yoghurt culture gave a lower pH in the final products and decreased the survival rates for all strains. The nutritional effects of fermented, oat-based products were investigated by using germfree and conventional rats and by performing a clinical study on 56 healthy subjects. Physiological parameters such as changes in serum cholesterol, faecal excretion of cholesterol, and amount of faecal short chain fatty acids (SCFA) were studied. In addition, changes in the faecal flora were investigated in the human subjects. No changes in the serum cholesterol levels or faecal excretion of cholesterol were seen in the rat models when the animals were fed on different, fermented oat-based products. A diffeent feacal SCFA pattern was seen in the conventional rats fed on the oat-based diets than in the group fed on rice. A lipid lowering effect was seen in the human subjects eating a fermented, ropy, oat-based product for five weeks, which gave a dietary intake of 3.5 g native beta-glucans from oat per day. An increase in total bacterial count and Bifidobacterium subsp. was also seen in faecal samples from these subjects. In conclusion, there is a potential for the development of fermented, non-dairy, oat-based products with a "ropy" structure containing soluble fibres of both native and microbial origin and with the lipid lowering effect that is generally associated with an intake of oat.
|
|
| 3. |
- Assefa, Getachew, et al.
(författare)
-
Life Cycle Assessment of Thermal Treatment Technologies : An environmental and financial systems analysis of gasification, incineration and landfilling of waste
- 2002
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- A technology which is currently developed by researchers at KTH is catalytic combustion which is one component of a gasification system. Instead of performing the combustion in the gas turbine by a flame, a catalyst is used. When the development of a new technology (as catalytic combustion) reaches a certain step where it is possible to quantify material-, energy- and capital flows, the prerequisites for performing a systems analysis is at hand. The systems analysis can be used to expand the know-how about the potential advantages of the catalytic combustion technology by highlighting its function as a component of a larger system. In this way it may be possible to point out weak points which have to be investigated more, but also strong points to emphasise the importance of further development.The aim of this project was to assess the energy turnover as well as the potential environmental impacts and economic costs of thermal treatment technologies in general and catalytic combustion in particular. By using a holistic assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of catalytic combustion of waste it was possible to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the technology under different conditions. Following different treatment scenarios have been studied: (1) Gasification with catalytic combustion, (2) Gasification with flame combustion, (3) Incineration with energy recovery and (4) Landfilling with gas collection. In the study compensatory district heating is produced by combustion of biofuel. The power used for running the processes in the scenarios is supplied by the waste-to-energy technologies themselves while compensatory power is assumed to be produced from natural gas. The emissions from the system studied were classified and characterised using methodology from Life Cycle Assessment into the following environmental impact categories: Global Warming Potential (also called the green house effect), Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential and finally Formation of Photochemical Oxidants.It is obvious that a decreased use of landfilling in favour of an increased energy recovery from waste is positive from all considered impact categories. Gasification with energy recovery in a combi cycle using catalytic combustion in the gas turbine is the most competitive technology from primarily an environmental point of view. The financial costs are however a bit higher than for incineration with energy recovery. This conclusion depends, however, on the assumption that the gasification and catalyst technologies work as the researchers presume and that the fuel is of high quality. For this, the pelletising unit is vital in the technology chain.A comparison of the catalytic combustion and the flame combustion shows that all impact categories except acidification, eutrophication and photochemical oxidants remain the same. The gasification process is identical between the two alternatives; it is just the combustion technology in the gas turbine that is different. This explains why the fuel consumption and the financial costs are not changed (a minor extra investment is made for the catalyst but is not noticeable in comparison to the total impact). Emissions of greenhouse gases are also identical. For the other impact categories there are differences for several of the emissions involved in the impact assessment but NOX is clearly the dominating one.Gasification with catalytic combustion is competitive to incineration. The small difference for eutrophication is within the error margin and is strongly dependent on the reduction of NOX in the incineration plant. The explanation to this result is that a combi cycle in combination with natural gas as the alternative power generation is a better system solution than incineration with biofuel as compensatory fuel. Financial costs are somewhat higher than for incineration but could also claimed to be within the error margin since the inventory of costs are more uncertain due to the fact that there is no plant with gasification and catalytic combustion in operation.
|
|
