Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: packaging
- All Subjects: Construction and Demolition Waste
- Genre: Masters Thesis
- Creators: Buch, Rajesh
- Creators: Bhaskaran, Rahul
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Resource Type: Text
Description
The built environment is responsible for a significant portion of global waste generation.
Construction and demolition (C&D) waste requires significant landfill areas and costs
billions of dollars. New business models that reduce this waste may prove to be financially
beneficial and generally more sustainable. One such model is referred to as the “Circular
Economy” (CE), which promotes the efficient use of materials to minimize waste
generation and raw material consumption. CE is achieved by maximizing the life of
materials and components and by reclaiming the typically wasted value at the end of their
life. This thesis identifies the potential opportunities for using CE in the built environment.
It first calculates the magnitude of C&D waste and its main streams, highlights the top
C&D materials based on weight and value using data from various regions, identifies the
top C&D materials’ current recycling and reuse rates, and finally estimates a potential
financial benefit of $3.7 billion from redirecting C&D waste using the CE concept in the
United States.
ContributorsAldaaja, Mohammad (Author) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Buch, Rajesh (Committee member) / Kaloush, Kamil (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
ABSTRACT
Historically, Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) guided companies to make better decisions to improve the environmental impacts of their products. However, as new Circular Economy (CE) tools emerge, the usefulness of LCA in assessing linear products grow more and more obsolete. Research Question: How do LCA-based tools account for reuse/multiple life cycles of products verses CE-based tools?
The Kaiteki Innovation Framework (KIF) was used to address the question of circularity of two packaging materials using an Environmental LCA to populate its 12 CE dimensions. Any gaps were evaluated with 2 LCA- based and 2 CE-based tools to see which could address the leftover CE dimensions.
Results showed that to complete the KIF template, LCA data required one of the LCA-based tools: Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and both CE-based tools: Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) and Material Circularity Indicator (MCI) to supplement gaps in the KIF. The LCA addressed 5 of the KIF dimensions: Innovation Category Name, Description, GHG Impact, Other Environmental Impacts, and Value Chain Position. 3 analytical tools addressed 5 more:: Effect on Circularity, Social Impacts, Enabling Technologies, Tier 2 and 3 Requirements, and Value Chain Synergies. None of the tools could address the KIF Dimensions: State of Development or Scale Requirements. All in all, the KIF required both LCA-based and CE-based tools to cover social and socio-economic impacts from a cradle-to-cradle perspective with multiple circular loops in mind. These results can help in the research and development of innovative, circular products that can lead to a more environmentally preferred future.
Historically, Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) guided companies to make better decisions to improve the environmental impacts of their products. However, as new Circular Economy (CE) tools emerge, the usefulness of LCA in assessing linear products grow more and more obsolete. Research Question: How do LCA-based tools account for reuse/multiple life cycles of products verses CE-based tools?
The Kaiteki Innovation Framework (KIF) was used to address the question of circularity of two packaging materials using an Environmental LCA to populate its 12 CE dimensions. Any gaps were evaluated with 2 LCA- based and 2 CE-based tools to see which could address the leftover CE dimensions.
Results showed that to complete the KIF template, LCA data required one of the LCA-based tools: Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) and both CE-based tools: Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) and Material Circularity Indicator (MCI) to supplement gaps in the KIF. The LCA addressed 5 of the KIF dimensions: Innovation Category Name, Description, GHG Impact, Other Environmental Impacts, and Value Chain Position. 3 analytical tools addressed 5 more:: Effect on Circularity, Social Impacts, Enabling Technologies, Tier 2 and 3 Requirements, and Value Chain Synergies. None of the tools could address the KIF Dimensions: State of Development or Scale Requirements. All in all, the KIF required both LCA-based and CE-based tools to cover social and socio-economic impacts from a cradle-to-cradle perspective with multiple circular loops in mind. These results can help in the research and development of innovative, circular products that can lead to a more environmentally preferred future.
ContributorsDe Los Santos, Andrew John (Author) / Seager, Thomas (Thesis advisor) / Dooley, Kevin (Committee member) / Buch, Rajesh (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020
Description
The primary goal of this thesis is to evaluate the influence of ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA) and polyolefin elastomer (POE) encapsulant types on the glass-glass (GG) photovoltaic (PV) module reliability. The influence of these two encapsulant types on the reliability of GG modules was compared with baseline glass-polymer backsheet (GB) modules for a benchmarking purpose. Three sets of modules, with four modules in each set, were constructed with two substrates types i.e. glass-glass (GG) and glass- polymer backsheet (GB); and 2 encapsulants types i.e. ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA) and polyolefin elastomer (POE). Each module set was subjected to the following accelerated tests as specified in the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard and Qualification Plus protocol of NREL: Ultraviolet (UV) 250 kWh/m2; Thermal Cycling (TC) 200 cycles; Damp Heat (DH) 1250 hours. To identify the failure modes and reliability issues of the stressed modules, several module-level non-destructive characterizations were carried out and they include colorimetry, UV-Vis-NIR spectral reflectance, ultraviolet fluorescence (UVF) imaging, electroluminescence (EL) imaging, and infrared (IR) imaging. The above-mentioned characterizations were performed on the front side of the modules both before the stress tests (i.e. pre-stress) and after the stress tests (i.e. post-stress). The UV-250 extended stress results indicated slight changes in the reflectance on the non-cell area of EVA modules probably due to minor adhesion loss at the cell and module edges. From the DH-1250 extended stress tests, significant changes, in both encapsulant types modules, were observed in reflectance and UVF images indicating early stages of delamination. In the case of the TC-200 stress test, practically no changes were observed in all sets of modules. From the above short-term stress tests, it appears although not conclusive at this stage of the analysis, delamination seems to be the only failure mode that could possibly be affecting the module performance, as observed from UV and DH extended stress tests. All these stress tests need to be continued to identify the wear-out failure modes and their impacts on the performance parameters of PV modules.
ContributorsBhaskaran, Rahul (Author) / Tamizhmani, Govindasamy (Thesis advisor) / Phelan, Patrick (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Liping (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020