You are here

Projects Updates for Topic: Uncategorized

Pages

  1. PWR018 iBUY Catalog Modification - Assessment Completed

    The iWG met on 10/21/2019 and started the PWR018 iBUY Catalogue Modification assessment. The assessment was completed on 12/10/2019. Below is the official iWG recommendation which was sent to Gloria Keeley on 12/11/2019.

    "We support this recommendation and suggest Gloria Keeley work directly with Aaron Finder to implement.  Please keep the Zero Waste SWATeam informed of progress, and let iWG know if you have any major questions."

    See attached for the completed assessment of the recommendation. 

    See the original PWR SWATeam recommendation - PWR018 iBUY Catalog Modification

    Attached Files: 
  2. DFA - Project reviews

    Associated Project(s): 

    Hello!
    A reminder that Design for America's second Project Review is this Sunday, December 8th.

    Presentations will be on Sunday, December 8th and go from 1:00 - 2:30pm. The location is Lincoln Hall, RM 1090.

    Please RSVP below to let us know you are attending!

    Again, please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.
    See you there!

     

    RSVP HERE

     

     
     
     
  3. Biochemistry Student working with F&S on an Anaerobic Digester study project

    Following is an email sent by David Rivera-Kohr regarding Biogas on-campus to several faculty and staff at the U of I.

    ------------------------------

    Hello,

     

    My name is David Rivera-Kohr and I’m a student member of the Energy SWATeam. I want to propose using biogas for energy on campus. Since burning biogas for energy is effectively carbon neutral, this would bring us closer to our iCAP goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. 

     

    Biogas is a huge untapped resource for energy production at the U of I. Rather than utilize the methane from animal manure and carcasses and food waste, we allow much of it to escape into the atmosphere. The Sanitary District currently uses municipal waste, restaurant grease, industrial food processing waste and campus dining hall food waste as feedstocks for its own anaerobic digester to produce biogas which is burned to generate 25-30% of the facility's energy. However, the Sanitary District does not want to dedicate digestion capacity to manure due to the need to accommodate growth of the local area (i.e. anticipated growth of student population). Furthermore, the Sanitary District is not a UIUC facility, therefore its use of biogas does not alleviate campus energy demand or contribute to our net-zero emissions objective. 

     

    I have a few ideas for biogas production on campus I would like feedback on:

    1. Add a biogas siphoning system to the manure storage tanks at the Beef & Sheep Farm.

    2. Conduct a study to determine which UIUC facility produces the most methane from animal waste and construct an anaerobic digester there. The 2014 Anaerobic Digester Feasibility Study indicated the Swine Farms collectively had the highest methane output; Miles Redden told me the Beef & Sheep farm is the highest manure-producing farcilty, though ionophore feeding of beef cattle decreases methane output. It may be worthwhile to determine which single facility has the highest methane output in 2019-2020.

     

    Additionally, there are a few options in consideration for how to best use the biogas: 

    1. Burn it on-site in existing natural gas furnaces to meet facility heat demands. This could be used in conjunction with the deep direct-use (DDU) geothermal system that is being studied for the ACES Legacy corridor—the brine solution from the DDU system will bring the facility's hot water to ~110 degrees F and the biogas furnace could increase that temperature to 130 degrees. There would likely be a considerable excess of biogas, which could either be burned on-site to generate electricity for distribution to the local grid (which is less efficient than combined heat & power), transported to nearby facilities to burn in their furnaces, or...

    2. Upgrade the biogas (all or only the excess from idea #1) to pipeline-quality methane and inject it into the pipeline for use at Abbott Power Plant. There is a supply pipeline that runs through the ACES corridor where this methane could be injected. 

    3. Use upgraded biogas for compressed natural gas (CNG) to power F&S vehicle fleets.

     

    The 2014 Feasibility Study also discussed constructing a pressurized pipeline to deliver  waste from multiple facilities to the site of the anaerobic digester. This may be worthwhile if the biogas is to be used on a larger scale i.e. at Abbott Power Plant or some combination of the previous ideas.

     

    Life-cycle cost analysis of the above options should be studied to determine the most cost-effective and, more importantly, the lowest emissions option. If you can, please let me know which of these options for biogas production and use sound most feasible, or if better ideas come to mind.

     

    Finally, we need the support and expertise of faculty and staff to advance this proposal. If you are interested in backing or contributing to this proposal, or you know someone else who may be, please let me know. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you!

     

    --

    Best,

    David A. Rivera-Kohr

    Undergraduate Student 

    University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign

    College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

    Biochemistry

    Dr. Rutilio Fratti's Lab

  4. DFA - scheduling a project update meeting

    Associated Project(s): 

    Hi Morgan, 

    The past couple of weeks we've made progress interviewing and gathering insights for the Plastic Film Waste Project. We are now seeking advice and want to schedule a meeting to give you further updates. What dates and when would you be available to meet? Thank you so much for helping out on this project and we look forward to meeting up with you soon!

     

    Thank you, 

    Elisa

  5. News Gazette article on net square footage on campus

    This article in today’s News-Gazette addresses net square footage on campus, which is squarely in the portfolio of our committee. It has been a concern of iCAP since its inception in 2008. It is also one of two items called out in the charge letter for our committee for this year.

    I consider our obligation as a committee is to address the issue seriously within our committee and within the iCAP process, in order to effect change in campus growth. Any of us may of course, as citizens, engage the public dialogue on this issue. With this email I’d just like to bring everyone up to speed on the work of our committee last year. See slides 2 through 7 in the attachment.

    I don’t know that we need to do anything differently, given the public airing of this issue. I’d like to hear from others on the committee on this matter.

    Bill Rose

     

    Attached Files: 

Pages