It is of utmost importance to collect organic waste from households as a separate waste stream. If collected separately, it could be used optimally to produce compost and biogas, it would not pollute fractions of materials that can be recovered from residual waste streams and it would not deteriorate the quality of some materials in residual waste (e.g. paper). In rural areas with separate organic waste collection systems, large quantities of organic waste are recovered. However, in the larger cities, only a small fraction of organic waste is recovered. In general, citizens dot not have space to store organic waste without nuisances of smell and/or flies. As this has been the cause of low organic waste collection rates, collection schemes have been cut, which created a further negative impact. Hence, additional efforts are required. There are some options to improve the organic waste recovery within the current system. Collection schemes might be improved, waste containers might be adapted to better suit the needs, and additional underground organic waste containers might be installed in residential neighbourhoods. There are persistent stories that separate organic waste collection makes no sense as the collectors just mix all municipal solid waste after collection, and incinerate it. Such stories might be fuelled by the practice that batches of contaminated organic waste are indeed incinerated. Trust in the system is important. Food waste is often regarded as unrein. Users might hate to store food waste in their kitchen that could attract insects, or the household pets. Hence, there is a challenge for socio-psychological research. This might also be supported by technology, e.g. organic waste storage devices and measures to improve waste separation in apartment buildings, such as separate chutes for waste fractions. Several cities have experimented with systems that collect organic wastes by the sewage system. By using a grinder, kitchen waste can be flushed into the sewage system, which in general produces biogas by the fermentation of sewage sludge. This is only a good option if the sewage is separated from the city drainage system, otherwise it might create water pollution. Another option might be to use grinders, that store the organic waste in a tank. This tank could be emptied regularly by a collection truck. Clearly, the preferred option depends on local conditions and culture. Besides, the density of the area, the type of sewage system and its biogas production, and the facilities that are already in place for organic waste collection are important parameters. In the paper, we will discuss the costs and benefits of future organic waste options and by discussing The Hague as an example.
It is of utmost importance to collect organic waste from households as a separate waste stream. If collected separately, it could be used optimally to produce compost and biogas, it would not pollute fractions of materials that can be recovered from residual waste streams and it would not deteriorate the quality of some materials in residual waste (e.g. paper). In rural areas with separate organic waste collection systems, large quantities of organic waste are recovered. However, in the larger cities, only a small fraction of organic waste is recovered. In general, citizens dot not have space to store organic waste without nuisances of smell and/or flies. As this has been the cause of low organic waste collection rates, collection schemes have been cut, which created a further negative impact. Hence, additional efforts are required. There are some options to improve the organic waste recovery within the current system. Collection schemes might be improved, waste containers might be adapted to better suit the needs, and additional underground organic waste containers might be installed in residential neighbourhoods. There are persistent stories that separate organic waste collection makes no sense as the collectors just mix all municipal solid waste after collection, and incinerate it. Such stories might be fuelled by the practice that batches of contaminated organic waste are indeed incinerated. Trust in the system is important. Food waste is often regarded as unrein. Users might hate to store food waste in their kitchen that could attract insects, or the household pets. Hence, there is a challenge for socio-psychological research. This might also be supported by technology, e.g. organic waste storage devices and measures to improve waste separation in apartment buildings, such as separate chutes for waste fractions. Several cities have experimented with systems that collect organic wastes by the sewage system. By using a grinder, kitchen waste can be flushed into the sewage system, which in general produces biogas by the fermentation of sewage sludge. This is only a good option if the sewage is separated from the city drainage system, otherwise it might create water pollution. Another option might be to use grinders, that store the organic waste in a tank. This tank could be emptied regularly by a collection truck. Clearly, the preferred option depends on local conditions and culture. Besides, the density of the area, the type of sewage system and its biogas production, and the facilities that are already in place for organic waste collection are important parameters. In the paper, we will discuss the costs and benefits of future organic waste options and by discussing The Hague as an example.
‘Never waste a good crisis.’ Deze uitspraak schijnt Winston Churchill te hebben gedaan om aan te geven dat het ontstaan van de Verenigde Naties te danken was aan de periode daarvoor: de Tweede Wereldoorlog. De auteurs vatten een aantal conclusies samen die zijn getrokken op basis van diverse studies, waaronder een masterthesis onderzoek (Bronneberg, 2019) naar de historie van Brainport Eindhoven en de geleerde lessen die daaruit zijn op te maken.
LINK
In June 2016, two Dutch SME companies which are active in the area of urban solid waste management approached the International Environmental Sciences department of Avans about the current R&D activities on urban solid waste management in cooperation with the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) Brazil. The companies had interest in developing activities in Brazil, since they are aware of the great potential for exporting both knowledge and technology. Solid waste poses a major problem in Brazil which affects 200 million residents. The Brazilian municipalities collect around 71 million tons solid municipal waste on a yearly basis and only a tiny percentage of this collected waste gets recycled. As such. the overwhelming majority of the collected urban solid waste goes to landfills. Within the State of Minas Gerais there are 850 towns of which 600 have less than 20.000 residents and are agriculturally oriented. Current organic waste composting practices take place under very poor conditions (pathogens and weeds still remain in the compost) and most often the resulting compost product is not well received by its residential and agricultural consumers. As such there is huge room for improvement. The SME companies work with Avans and UFMG to address these challenges. The joint research team consisting of the two Dutch SME companies and the two Research and educational institutes have defined the following research question: What is the current status of organic solid waste management in Minas Gerais and how can cooperation between Brazil and the Netherlands result in a win-win for both countries? Two individual KIEM VANG proposals have been defined in order to address these challenges. The planned activities are a joint effort with professor R. T. de Vasconcelos Barros of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) and are executed within the Living Lab Biobased Brazil program (www.biobasedbrazil.org).
Circular BIOmass CAScade to 100% North Sea Region (NSR) economic activity and growth are mostly found in urban areas. Rural NSR regions experience population decline and negative economic growth. The BIOCAS project expects revitalizing and greening of rural areas go hand in hand. BIOCAS will develop rural areas of the NSR into smart specialized regions for integrated and local valorization of biomass. 13 Commercial running Bio-Cascade-Alliances (BCA’s) will be piloted, evaluated and actively shared in the involved regions. These proven concepts will accelerate adoption of high to low value bio-cascading technologies and businesses in rural regions. The project connects 18 regional initiatives around technologies, processes, businesses for the conversion of biomass streams. The initiatives collaborate in a thematic approach: Through engineering, value chain assessments, BCA’s building, partners tackle challenges that are shared by rural areas. I.e. unsustainable biomass use, a mineral surplus and soil degradation, deprivation of potentially valuable resources, and limited involvement of regional businesses and SMEs in existing bio-economy developments. The 18 partners are strongly embedded in regional settings, connected to many local partners. They will align stakeholders in BCA’s that would not have cooperated without BIOCAS interventions. Triple helix, science, business and governmental input will realize inclusive lasting bio cascade businesses, transforming costly waste to resources and viable business.Interreg IVB North Sea Region Programme: €378,520.00, fEC % 50.00%1/07/17 → 30/06/21
The textile industry contributes over 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 20% of the world's wastewater, exceeding emissions from international flights and shipping combined. In the European Union, textile purchases in 2020 resulted in about 270 kg of CO₂ emissions per person, yet only 1% of used clothes are recycled into new garments.To address these challenges, the Textile Hub Groningen (THG) aims to assist small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and stakeholders in forming circular textile value chains, hence reducing waste. Designing circular value chains is complex due to conflicting interests, lack of shared understanding, knowledge gaps regarding circular design principles and emerging technologies, and inadequate tools for collaborative business model development. The potential key stakeholders in the circular textile value chain find it hard to use existing tools and methods for designing these value chains as they are often abstract, not designed to be used in a collaborative setting that fosters collective sense making, immersive learning and experimentation. Consequently, the idea of circular textile value chain remains abstract and hard to realize.Serious games have been used in the past to learn about, simulate and experiment with complex adaptive systems. In this project we aim to answer the following research:How can serious games be leveraged to design circular textile value chains in the region?The expected outcomes of this project are: • Serious game: Facilitates the design of circular textile value chains• Academic Publication: Publish findings to contribute to scholarly discourse.• Future Funding Preparation: Mobilize partners and prepare proposals for follow-up funding to expand the approach to other domains.By leveraging game-based collaborative circular value chain and business model design experiences, this project aims to overcome barriers in designing viable circular value chains in the textile industry.
