The Experts below are selected from a list of 175749 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Djavan De Clercq - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
innovation hotspots in food Waste Treatment biogas and anaerobic digestion technology a natural language processing approach
Science of The Total Environment, 2019Co-Authors: Djavan De Clercq, Zongguo Wen, Qingbin SongAbstract:The objective of this study is to apply natural language processing to identifying innovative technology trends related to food Waste Treatment, biogas, and anaerobic digestion. The methodology used involved analyzing large volumes of text data mined from 3186 patents related to these three fields. Latent Dirichlet Allocation and the perplexity method were used to identify the main topics which the patent corpora were comprised of and which technological concepts were most associated with each topic. In addition, term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) was used to gauge the "emergingness" of certain technical concepts across the patent corpora in various years. The key results were as follows: (1) perplexity computations showed that a 20 topic models were feasible for these patent corpora; (2) topics were identified, providing an accurate picture of the patenting landscape in the analyzed fields; (3) TF-IDF analysis on unigrams, bigrams, and trigrams, supplemented with network graph analysis, revealed emerging technology trends in each year. This study has important implications for governments who need to decide where to invest resources in anaerobic food Waste Treatment.
-
what is the true value of food Waste a case study of technology integration in urban food Waste Treatment in suzhou city china
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016Co-Authors: Zongguo Wen, Yuanjia Wang, Djavan De ClercqAbstract:Abstract Food Waste has the potential to be a valuable resource if disposed of correctly, meaning that Treatment technology and the utilization of the recycled product based on sustainable criteria are important. There is a need to build up a comprehensive technology assessment method to find a reasonable management approach for developing countries such as China. Much of the food Waste produced in China is disposed of via landfills, processed into animal feed, or re-processed into Waste oil. In response, the Chinese government has established food Waste Treatment pilot projects in 100 cities. This study evaluates the economics and environmental performance of one such pilot project in Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, from a technology integration perspective. By integrating multiple food Waste Treatment technologies, this project had an average daily energy output of 27,500 m3 of biogas and 30 tonnes per day (tpd) of biodiesel in 2013, and can reach a daily net profit of 82,055 Chinese Yuan under normal operation.
Roland Clift - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Life cycle assessment of conventional and two-stage advanced energy-from-Waste technologies for municipal solid Waste Treatment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014Co-Authors: Robert Clift, Roland CliftAbstract:The EU landfill and Waste Framework directives are driving new approaches to Waste management in the UK, away from landfilling and mass-burn incineration, which has been regarded as the main alternative to landfilling. The objective of this study is to compare the environmental impacts of three dual-stage advanced energy-from-Waste technologies, i.e. gasification and plasma gas cleaning, fast pyrolysis and combustion and gasification with syngas combustion, with those associated with conventional Treatments for municipal solid Waste, i.e. landfill with electricity production and incineration with electricity production. Results show that the two-stage gasification and plasma process has a significantly better overall environmental performance than the conventional Waste Treatment technologies and somewhat better than a more modern incineration plant, exemplified by a plant under commissioning in Lincolnshire in the UK. The benefits of the gasification and plasma process arise primarily from its higher net electrical efficiency.
E Roca - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ranking municipal solid Waste Treatment alternatives based on ecological footprint and multi criteria analysis
Ecological Indicators, 2013Co-Authors: Marta Herva, E RocaAbstract:Abstract The selection of a municipal solid Waste (MSW) Treatment alternative is a complex task in which a widespread set of criteria must be taken into account. Additionally to economic or social aspects, the decision process should consider the environmental perspective. With the purpose of quantifying the environmental burdens, a wide variety of environmental and sustainability indicators have been developed in the last years. Furthermore, integrative frameworks have been highlighted as the best option to achieve more comprehensive assessments. In this work, four different options of MSW Treatment were ranked from an environmental point of view applying two methods: (1) the ecological footprint (EF) as single composite indicator and (2) multi-criteria analysis (MCA) integrating the EF together with other material flow indicators related to water consumption, emissions to air and water and occupied landfill volume. The MCA methods selected were a combination of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE) aided by Geometrical Analysis for Interactive Aid (GAIA). The objective was twofold: on the one side, the identification of the most beneficial Waste Treatment alternative (including thermal plasma gasification which as yet has not been assessed systematically) from an environmental perspective and, on the other side, the comparison of the results yielded by the two ranking methods proposed. The ranking obtained in both cases was (from best to worst): thermal plasma gasification, biological Treatment of organic fraction with energy recovery from refuse derived fuel, incineration with energy recovery and landfilling. Hence, the EF proved to be a good screening indicator although it did not provide a comprehensive measure of environmental impacts associated to the Waste Treatment options considered. Besides, the combined application of AHP and PROMETHEE/GAIA as MCA methodology was found to be a suitable way, not very complex at user level, to integrate the information provided by a set of environmental criteria and to aid decision making.
Amimul Ahsan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
environmental performance and energy recovery potential of five processes for municipal solid Waste Treatment
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2015Co-Authors: Hassan A Arafat, Kenan Jijakli, Amimul AhsanAbstract:In this study, the environmental impacts were assessed for five municipal solid Waste (MSW) Treatment processes with energy recovery potential. The life cycle assessment (LCA) tool was used to quantify the environmental impacts. The five processes considered are incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion, bio-landfills, and composting. In addition, these processes were compared to recycling where applicable. In addition to environmental impacts quantification, the energy production potentials for the five processes were compared to provide a thorough assessment. To maximize the future applicability of our findings, the analyses were based on the Waste Treatment technologies as they apply to individual Waste streams, but not for a specific MSW mixture at a particular location. Six MSW streams were considered; food, yard, plastic, paper, wood and textile Wastes. From an energy recovery viewpoint, it was found that it is best to recycle paper, wood and plastics; to anaerobically digest food and yard Wastes; and to incinerate textile Waste. On the other hand, the level of environmental impact for each process depends on the considered impact category. Generally, anaerobic digestion and gasification were found to perform better environmentally than the other processes, while composting had the least environmental benefit.
Gregg J. Lumetta - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
advanced separation techniques for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment
2011Co-Authors: Kenneth L. Nash, Gregg J. LumettaAbstract:Part 1 Fundamentals of radioactive materials separations processes: chemistry, engineering and safeguards: Chemistry of radioactive materials in the nuclear fuel cycle Physical and chemical properties of actinides in nuclear fuel reprocessing Chemical engineering for advanced aqueous radioactive material separations Spectroscopic on-line monitoring for process control and safeguarding of radiochemical streams in nuclear fuel reprocessing Safeguards technology for radioactive materials processing and nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities. Part 2 Separation and extraction processes for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment: Standard and advanced separation: PUREX processes for nuclear fuel reprocessing Alternative separation and extraction: UREX+ processes for actinide and targeted fission product recovery Advanced reprocessing for fission product separation and extraction Combined processes for high level radioactive Waste separations: UNEX and other extraction processes. Part 3 Emerging and innovative techniques in nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment: Nuclear engineering for pyrochemical Treatment of spent nuclear fuels Development of highly selective compounds and processes for solvent extraction of long-lived radionuclides from spent nuclear fuels Developments in the partitioning and transmutation of radioactive Waste Solid-phase extraction technology for actinide and lanthanide separations in nuclear fuel reprocessing Supercritical fluid and ionic liquid extraction techniques for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment Development of biological Treatment processes for the separation and recovery of radioactive Wastes.
-
advanced separation techniques for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment
2011Co-Authors: Kenneth L. Nash, Gregg J. LumettaAbstract:Contributor contact details Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy Preface Part I: Fundamentals of radioactive materials separations processes: chemistry, engineering and safeguards Chapter 1: Chemistry of radioactive materials in the nuclear fuel cycle Abstract: 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Chemical features of important fission products and actinides 1.3 Relevant actinide chemistry in the nuclear fuel cycle 1.4 Essential features of solvent extraction separations in the nuclear fuel cycle 1.5 Behavior in molten salts/molten metals/ionic liquids/alternative media 1.6 Interactions at interfaces significant to the nuclear fuel cycle 1.7 Future trends Chapter 2: Physical and chemical properties of actinides in nuclear fuel reprocessing Abstract: 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Thermodynamic properties of compounds 2.3 Speciation, complexation and reactivity in solution of actinides 2.4 Irradiation effects 2.5 Future trends 2.6 Sources of further information and advice Chapter 3: Chemical engineering for advanced aqueous radioactive materials separations Abstract: 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Containment concepts 3.3 Separations equipment 3.4 Equipment materials considerations 3.5 Future trends 3.6 Sources of further information and advice Chapter 4: Spectroscopic on-line monitoring for process control and safeguarding of radiochemical streams in nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities Abstract: 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Static spectroscopic measurements 4.3 Demonstration of spectroscopic methods 4.4 Conclusions 4.5 Acknowledgments 4.7 Appendix: acronyms Chapter 5: Safeguards technology for radioactive materials processing and nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities Abstract: 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Requirements 5.3 Safeguards technology 5.4 Safeguards applications for aqueous separations 5.5 Safeguards applications for pyrochemical separations 5.6 Acknowledgement Part II: Separation and extraction processes for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment Chapter 6: Standard and advanced separation: PUREX processes for nuclear fuel reprocessing Abstract: 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Process chemistry 6.3 Current industrial application of PUREX 6.4 Future industrial uses of PUREX 6.5 Conclusions Chapter 7: Alternative separation and extraction: UREX+ processes for actinide and targeted fission product recovery Abstract: 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Separation strategy 7.3 UREX + LWR SNF GNEP application: separation strategy 7.4 Benefits of using models to design flowsheets 7.5 Advantages and disadvantages of techniques 7.6 Future trends Chapter 8: Advanced reprocessing for fission product separation and extraction Abstract: 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Separation methods, advantages/disadvantages, and future trends 8.3 Conclusions and future trends Chapter 9: Combined processes for high level radioactive Waste separations: UNEX and other extraction processes Abstract: 9.1 Introduction to universal extraction process (UNEX) and other processes 9.2 Universal processes for recovery of long-lived radionuclides 9.3 Development and testing of the universal extraction (UNEX) process and its modifications 9.4 Conclusions Part III: Emerging and innovative techniques in nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment Chapter 10: Nuclear engineering for pyrochemical Treatment of spent nuclear fuels Abstract: 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Process chemistry and flowsheet of pyrochemical processing 10.3 Design and installation of process equipment 10.4 Materials behaviour and interactions 10.5 Developments in monitoring and control for pyrochemical processing 10.6 Techniques for safe and effective interoperation of equipment 10.7 Future trends 10.8 Sources of further information and advice Chapter 11: Development of highly selective compounds for solvent extraction processes: partitioning and transmutation of long-lived radionuclides from spent nuclear fuels Abstract: 11.1 Introduction 11.2 Which long-lived radionuclides to partition and why? 11.3 How to develop selective ligands and extractants? 11.4 Examples of development of highly selective compounds in European partitioning and transmutation (P&T) strategy 11.5 Future trends 11.6 Conclusions 11.7 Sources of further information and advice 11.8 Acknowledgment Chapter 12: Developments in the partitioning and transmutation of radioactive Waste Abstract: 12.1 Introduction to transmutation 12.2 Modelling transmutation processes and effects 12.3 Systems for transmutation: design and safety 12.4 Transmutation fuel development 12.5 Future trends Chapter 13: Solid-phase extraction technology for actinide and lanthanide separations in nuclear fuel reprocessing Abstract: 13.1 Introduction 13.2 Basic methodology of solid-phase extraction 13.3 Solid-phase extraction sorbents for actinides and lanthnides 13.4 Modeling of solid-phase extraction systems 13.5 Advantages and disadvantages of solid-phase extraction in Treatment processes for nuclear fuel reprocessing streams 13.6 Future trends in solid-phase extraction technology for nuclear fuel reprocessing applications 13.7 Sources of further information and advice 13.8 Acknowledgment Chapter 14: Emerging separation techniques: supercritical fluid and ionic liquid extraction techniques for nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive Waste Treatment Abstract: 14.1 Introduction 14.2 Supercritical fluid extraction of lanthanides and actinides 14.3 Direct dissolution of uranium oxides in supercritical carbon dioxide 14.4 Current industrial demonstrations of supercritical fluid extraction technology for nuclear Waste Treatment and for reprocessing spent fuel 14.5 Ionic liquid and supercritical fluid coupled extraction of lanthanides and actinides 14.6 Future trends Chapter 15: Development of biological Treatment processes for the separation and recovery of radioactive Wastes Abstract: 15.1 Introduction 15.2 Classification of Waste 15.3 Waste from high temperature fast reactors 15.4 Treatment options 15.5 Biological removal of metal oxyions 15.6 Biosorption and recovery 15.7 Biofilm processes 15.8 Future trends 15.11 Engineering dimensions (units) Index