By Ankita Singhvi.
After months of studying in classrooms, the Interdisciplinary Project Group (IPG) gives IE students the opportunity to put our knowledge to use in the ‘real world’.
We were commissioned to support the beach pavilions at Scheveningen in aligning themselves with the climate goals of the Haags Klimaatpact. The Haags Klimaatpact (Hague’s Climate Agreement) was formulated as a statement of intent in 2018. It is a document that states that various political parties, local businesses and the municipality aim to operationalise and localise the international climate goals to the context of The Hague. Our aim was to propose collaborative measures that the beach pavilions could take to align themselves with these climate goals, suggest how they could be implemented, and then evaluate their environmental, social and financial impacts. In short, the three resulting measures that we came up with were:
These results, along with a list of individual solutions and funding opportunities for the beach pavilions was presented to the beach pavilions owners.
The main lesson to be taken from our research is that there is no single measure that can be the ‘silver bullet’ for reaching The Hague’s climate goal of net-zero carbon emissions. As with all complex tasks, this transition needs many steps to be taken in parallel. We recommend that the first step is gathering insight: the beach pavilions currently know very little about their own resource use and waste, so they should collect data to understand it better. This data can then be used to understand which collaborative measures would have the most environmental impact, which in turn would have to be supported by municipal and national government in order to spread the risk and initial investments needed. Armed with this knowledge, the next step can be formulated, bringing the beach pavilions closer to the climate goals of the Haags Klimaatpact.
IPG project by: Eva Aarts, Marin Visscher, Tessa Baart, Quirien Reijtenbagh and Ankita Singhvi
Full report can be seen on request 🙂
By Lowik Pieters.
The course Sustainable Innovation and Social Change (SUISCY) gave us the opportunity to investigate the innovative way of making synthetic kerosene from renewable sources in North Holland. Our case study showed the possibilities and limitations of the implementation phase of this sustainable innovation.
Let’s first take a look at how synthetic kerosene is produced. Kerosene is made from hydrocarbons. Synthetic Kerosene is an artificial kerosene from carbon and hydrogen atoms. To make it carbon neutral, CO2 captured from the atmosphere or industrial plants can be a source of carbon atoms (CO2 is split into CO – and O2). The hydrogen comes from water through electrolysis when there is a surplus of wind/solar electricity production. The picture below shows how Synthetic Fuel can be produced.
In 2018, a report called “Carbon Neutral Aviation” was published for synthetic kerosene in The Netherlands. In that scenario, production should be based on carbon sourcing from Tata Steel (yes, the graphite rain company), hydrogen sourcing via water from ‘t IJ / the North Sea, Energy from an offshore windpark near the coast of IJmuiden and transport and storage through the Port of Amsterdam towards Schiphol Airport, the proposed consumer.
To see if this could be an option for The Netherlands, and in particular Schiphol Airport we took four perspectives on the case: starting with 1) the Innovation System Perspective, through which potential actors were identified and the technologies were analyzed in further detail. This analysis was followed by 2) the Niche-Transition Perspective (adapted from Loorbach et al., 2017) that allowed us to make a comparison between the niche of Synthetic Kerosene and current regimes of airplane fueling. Thereafter, we included a 3) Sustainable Business Model Perspective for checking if the value proposition could lead to a viable business case. Lastly, a 4) Visioning and Backcasting (i.e. the opposite of forecasting) Perspective paved transition pathways and scenarios that could be useful to predict future developments.
We concluded that synthetic kerosene developments in The Netherlands are depending on different technolgical aspects and various actors. This can be called a complex sociotechnical system, which can threaten a successful implementation. According to our analysis, traditional oil companies could play a key role, but they need to be willing to change the current regime and infrastructure. However, we see many advantages, since the Fischer-Tropsch process is a well established technique, since synthetic kerosene will – unlike biofuels – not compete with agriculture, and since resources and energy are expected to be widely available in the near future.
This project was carried out by: Martijn van Bodegraven, Nico van Eeden, Joel de Saint-Ours and Lowik Pieters.
The full report can be seen on request.
Dr. Benjamin Sprecher will discuss the (critical) raw materials that are needed for the energy transition, from an Industrial Ecology perspective. The event will take place on Wednesday 16 October 2019 from 17:30 at VVM, 2e Daalsedijk 6A, Utrecht.
Nowadays, it can be considered common knowledge that society needs to drastically change its energy system due to the relation to climate change. But what consequences does this have on global material demands to make this transition happen?
Dr. Benjamin Sprecher will show us this resource perspective, which is often overlooked in energy transition debates. Is there even enough metal, cobalt and neodymium to built all those wind turbines and photovoltaics? Can we mine them fast enough and what geopolitical issues can arise when doing so?
These and other questions will be addressed during this VVM café, as a typical example of the field of Industrial Ecology. It is being co-organised by the student association for Industrial Ecology, IESA Shift, and will be held in English, to ensure non-Dutch speaking students and professionals can also participate.
Please register here (website is in Dutch, but the event will be in English). Note that student members can attend the event for free. Not a member of VVM yet? Use the code ShiftVVM and pay EUR 20 instead of EUR 40 for a membership.
By: Kirsten Steunenberg.
“Graphite rains’ look like little sparkles in the air’, says Kyra, 10 years old, light brown hair, with freckles on her face. ‘It smells really bad. Like something burned.’ After a graphite rain, you can find a dirty layer on the playground equipment of the school’s playground in Wijk aan Zee.
On Tuesday the 4th of June, RIVM (Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) published a report that stated that metals in graphite rains coming from Tata Steel, are posing health threats to children. Metals such as lead, manganese and vanadium were found in particular high amounts. Children who are repeatedly in contact with the metals are under risk of developing ‘neurological development disorders’.
The village of Wijk aan Zee, 2,200 inhabitants, is close to Tata Steel. The inhabitants are familiar to nuisance by the steel manufacturer, through particulate matter, noise, smell and light. According to the town’s mayor, graphite rains fall ‘more than once a month’. The graphite rains come from Harsco, a company operating on Tata Steel’s grounds, processing its rest products. Harsco now operates in the open air, but a huge hall is being built to transfer the activities indoors. The hall will be finished by April 2020.
Meanwhile, the inhabitants of Wijk aan Zee have mixed opinions on the results of the report. A few women are not surprised that the particles are dangerous: ‘I often have burning eyes and the dust irritates my throat.’ They are annoyed that no one is acting: ‘The whole town is talking about it, except for the people who should solve this.’
But someone else sees that differently: ‘The whole issue is a bit exaggerated. People think we have mountains of graphite over here; that is not the case. No, I do not want to justify all this. It is unacceptable and something needs to happen. But if the graphite rains were really that unhealthy, we would have been dead already. And if Tata stops or leaves, this whole town will be gone.’
Tata creates jobs, both in the factory as for the companies surrounding it. And Tata brings full hotels and restaurants. It is doubted if Wijk aan Zee would have existed without Tata Steel.
So Wijk aan Zee is divided. Parents and teachers remain concerned about the situation. So for now, children like Kyra, will have to thoroughly wash their hands after playing outside.
This article was adapted and translated from three different news articles (in Dutch):
More in English can be read here:
And do you want to know more about other solutions to Tata Steel’s environmental problems? Read our article on the SUISCY project of synthetic kerosene!
By Ankita Singhvi.
In order to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, it is generally agreed that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere must remain under 400 ppm. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a climate mitigation strategy that promises to contribute substantially to keeping CO2 under this limit. The IPCC has stated that the costs of regulating climate change will be twice as high without CCS, and the International Energy Agency adds that it is the most important new strategy for a low-carbon society. Nonetheless, implementation of CCS has met many obstacles over the last decade. There has only been one operational CCS facility in the Netherlands (K12-B CO2 Injection Project), and even that was closed in 2017. This begs the question, what is holding back the deployment of CCS in the Netherlands?
We approached this question by analysing stakeholder expectations about CCS and how the Dutch government has translated these expectations into values and actions. Expectations are important because they do political work; they mobilise resources and script actions into the present. We found that there have been five dominant narratives over the last two decades, and that with each one, the Dutch government has reformulated its values to re-align itself to the relevant stakeholders. Values are the government’s attitude or intentions towards CCS, whereas actions are interventions such as policies, laws or funding.
As the table above shows, we found that the main obstacle for CCS has been the government’s value-action gap (also known as an intention-behavior gap). The government has often failed to take concrete actions that accelerate the development of CCS; there have been subsidies, but no clear laws or policies that suggest a commitment to formalising a place for CCS in meeting low-carbon targets. Without this commitment, stakeholders do not trust that their investment in CCS will be worthwhile. Therefore, we conclude that to accelerate the mainstreaming of CCS, the government needs to explicitly signal that emitting carbon will be consistently expensive enough in the future to justify the deployment of CCS technology.
This article is adapted from a report by: Ankita Singhvi and fellow IE students. It was an assignment from the Closed Loop Supply Chains (CLOSCY) course. The original can be viewed on request.
by Martijn van Engelenburg.
The evening of the 9th of April. A gathering took place. It was a gathering of recruits. Starting in their journey to get ready for writing their thesis. It’s a daunting task for most of us, and it is a task filled with struggles. That’s why we gathered in Delft, to share our fears and listen to the heroes who made it out alive. Oh and maybe a few drinks to give us some liquid courage, but mostly for the stories.
Failing forward was the theme of the night and expert heroes about failing forward had gone through the struggle the year before, but they all made it out alive.
Currently in the process of finishing the thesis, Nena started the evening with being the hero of writing the thesis now. It has been a long fight, but there is just so much work to be done that the hardest thing is to determine the point when you are done. Once you get into writing the thesis, there is so much literature out there that it becomes like a rabbit hole. Deeper and deeper you go, but time doesn’t stand still. Luckily she is almost at the point of finishing, so her struggle will soon be over.
Proper preparation prevents poor performance. That’s what this speech reminded me of. Of course not without bumps in the road, but it can be said that Teun’s thesis flow was pretty smooth. That’s what he stated as well, see it as a 9 to 5, like a normal job you will get after you’re done. Make sure to start early, and get the work in each and every day. Also don’t forget to do stuff to get your mind off of the thesis when you need to. Find a hobby people.
An interesting speech this one, for many reasons. Graham took us through the adventure that was her thesis. Filled with emotions and struggles, but in the end also with a great success. The hardest part, was the start. Graham had plenty of ideas at the start of what she wanted to do, but most of those were not found to be matching with ideas of potential supervisors. That’s the lesson from this hero is to find a supervisor first, and then the topic will follow from that expertise. During the studies you will meet plenty of teachers, and there will be some that are more interesting to you than others. Keep track of the interesting ones, and ask them early if they want to supervise you. Your thesis likely won’t be your career, so don’t worry too much on what you do, just do.
Like a proper Leeroy Jenkins, Tom wanted to be done with it. Three months he said for himself, and at the start it looked like it would be three months, but as is thesis life when things go smoothly there will probably be something coming in your way. And as Tom put in many hours, and lots of energy it kind off burns you out on the topic. Motivation will drop, and along with it the energy to work on it. So see it as marathon, not a sprint. Ride the wave of motivation when you have it, but don’t force it.
I hope to join these heroes in the hall of graduates soon with these lessons!
by I.G.P. Photo: Roos van Tongeren.
With this issue we want to introduce projects that IE-ers are working on, either after graduation or during their studies. We hope that this gives an idea about the experiences, working environment, fields of research and interest of our fellow students.
Our first chosen project is Energy for Refugees, a project group building PV-systems for the refugee camps on Lesvos in Greece. Energy for Refugees has received a lot of media attention, but in case you want a recap (or an introduction), check out this video:
We asked some questions to Anurag Bhambhani, one of the initiators and fellow Industrial Ecology student.
Nilli: How was the project initiated in the first place?
Anurag: The TU Energy Club called for applicants who want to work on a project on a refugee camp and they chose us by our applications and motivation letters. Then we started working on a project that was planned on a certain camp in Greece. But it did not really work out because their requirements were different from what could be provided. It was too big for 4 months. So, then we had a talk with the club and said we are going to find our own source, our own contacts. This is how we came in contact with this camp on Lesvos called Pikpa and that’s how we began.
Nilli: What is your specific role and your work?
Anurag: I was selected to be the leader of the club so my basic role was coordinating everything between the teams. Within the team there was a communication team, a technical team and a fundraising team. So, I had to keep track of all these departments and help each team with whatever task they are in and basically assigning work, more like a manager.
Nilli: Who is working together with you? Did you all go to Lesvos together?
Anurag: We were a total of 7, an international team of which most studied sustainable technology. It was interdisciplinary but I was the only one from IE to that time. We all went together leaving around 8th or 9th of July. But while we were on the island our tasks were divided as we worked in shifts and we also had part of the team going around and go finding more sources, more contacts for the next years project. We worked together but not on the same task at the same time.
Nilli: When you were there what was the most emotional moment for you? How was the reaction of the people in the camp?
Anurag: The whole trip was intense emotionally because a lot of things went wrong while we were preparing the 6 months and also while we were there. But of course, as expected the most emotional moment was when we finished. We semi-finished and then we had to leave because our time was over.
The people of the camp were very happy but it is a tricky thing as they did not know that we were going to work there. The reason was that in the last minute we had to change our camp, which was one week after going there. The people who then worked with us from the camp were really interested in this technology and wanted to know more about it, asked questions and supported us with drinks. That was so nice.
Nilli: What kind of problems did you have in the past and how did you manage to overcome these?
Anurag: Communicating with the people in the camp was difficult because none of them had a technical background. We were in contact with an electrician in the old camp, old Pikpa and he didn’t really understand simple things like, ‘what is a flat roof?’. So, when he said flat roof he meant that it is flat but in a triangle form. But he said flat roof so we designed the system based on that idea. But finally, that communication was clarified when we researched through Google Maps.
And then secondly, we were earlier supposed to design a grid connected system, so it could be connected to the grid and whenever the grid power is down it gets power from the panels. But a few months before we figured out that they cannot get a permit. They don’t have any permits. It is tolerated but they cannot get any permits from the municipality or make any connections so we had to shift to an off-grid battery system that increased the costs by 100%.
Thirdly, 10 days before we were supposed to fly we got the news that the camp is being sued and that it had to be closed down. So, we talked to them and they said they could not tell us what was going to happen but the team should just come and they would decide there what should happen. We had 40 panels and 10 batteries so we went anyway had to talk to people and find other camps.
Nilli: What barriers do you see then for future of the project?
Anurag: Barriers will be now less because we have structure, have a name and have experience with problems. Actually, we only have experience with problems. But biggest problem could be communication because when we come from a university we have a fixed mindset of how things should be like specific size or angle etc. but that would often not work out. Even when they say it would, it sometimes does not.
Nilli: Do you mean that your knowledge is now more applied?
Anurag: That is not only the thing with IE but just every university gives you a framework how to act in real life situations but IE allows you a lot of freedom in what you want to study so I took a lot of electives like all electives that were possible for PV technology and solar energy and IE gives you a place to see perspectives for each renewable technology.
Nilli: What else can you think of that gave you a lot of value for the project?
Anurag: Systems thinking is very important in this project but also in any other large-scale environmental protection project where you deal with so many other factors like social factors such as refugee problems or economic factors because you have to raise money. To see these contacts and connect the problems is something you can learn in our program.
Deadline is April 6, 2019.
We would like to ask your feedback on the Industrialn Ecology programme by filling out the NSE survey. By filling out the survey, you can help to improve the programme. In addition, you can help out other students: for every student who fills out the NSE, Leiden University donates 25 cents to the Student Refugee Fund (UAF).
From the 28th of January till the 7th of April the National Student Survey (NSE) is being held. What do you think of your programme, your teachers, your timetable, the buildings? Raise your voice through the National Student Survey, that is offered to every student by Dutch authorities. Via the survey, you can provide your study programme and your university with information on which education and infrastructure can be improved. You can find the link in your uMail box, but if you lost it, you can log in to https://www.studiekeuze123.nl/nse with your uMail address. As said for every student who fills out the NSE, Leiden University donates 25 cents to the Student Refugee Fund (UAF).
Thank you very much on behalf of the staff of IE!
Interested to join one of Shift’s committees? On Thursday March 14 at 17:30 we will tell you everything about them at Bouwpub (first drinks on Shift). Learn more about the Career Committee, Events Committee, Newsletter Committee and the Study Trip Committee and make sure you get on board! This day marks the official start of the committees of 2019/2020.
In order to welcome all our new September students, we have organised a dinner in collaboration with Conscious Kitchen Den Haag on 14 September.
Conscious Kitchen fights food waste by collecting to-be-wasted food and turning it into delicious meals along with volunteers. What better way to get to know your fellow students than by cooking, eating and cleaning together?
Dinner is from 18.30-20.00. Dinner is free if you volunteer to either cook or clean, and 5 euros for everyone else!
In order to join the dinner, you have to sign up here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10VX_Q6jDNW0arGN9KMcJkhDKz7mg5qcCdSiplphYs3M/edit?usp=sharing