Matching Items (7)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

134550-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
A comprehensive review of the managed retreat literature reveals mixed feelings towards the legality, practicality and cost of the policy action as a way to react to rising sea level and coastal erosion. Existing research shows increasing costs of severe storm damage borne to insurance companies and private citizens, furthering

A comprehensive review of the managed retreat literature reveals mixed feelings towards the legality, practicality and cost of the policy action as a way to react to rising sea level and coastal erosion. Existing research shows increasing costs of severe storm damage borne to insurance companies and private citizens, furthering the need for long-term policy actions that mitigate the negative effects of major storms. Some main policy actions are restricting development, strategically abandoning infrastructure, funding buyout programs, utilizing rolling easements, and implementing a variety of protective structures. These policy actions face various problems regarding their feasibility and practicality as policy tools, including wavering public support and total costs associated with the actions. Managed retreat specifically faces public scrutiny, as many coastal property owners are reluctant to retreat from the shore. This paper will use examples of managed retreat in other countries (Netherlands, Belgium, and France) to develop plans for specific municipalities, using their models, costs and successes to generate in-depth policy plans and proposals. When observing Clatsop County, Oregon and assessing its policy options, its established that the best policy option is a combination of beach nourishment and Controlled Reduced Tides. This paper analyzes several features of the county, such as the importance of its coastal economic activity and its geographical makeup, to decide what policy actions would be best to mitigate its risk from sea level rise and flood damages. The process used to determine the best course of action for Clatsop County can be replicated in other municipalities, although the resulting policies will obviously be unique to the area.
ContributorsBarry, Matthew John (Author) / Wells, David (Thesis director) / Bennett, Ira (Committee member) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
137727-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Plastics continue to benefit society in innumerable ways, even though recent public focus on plastics has centered mostly on human health and environmental concerns, including their endocrine-disrupting properties and the long-term pollution they represent. The benefits of plastics are particularly apparent in medicine and public health. Plastics are versatile, cost-effective,

Plastics continue to benefit society in innumerable ways, even though recent public focus on plastics has centered mostly on human health and environmental concerns, including their endocrine-disrupting properties and the long-term pollution they represent. The benefits of plastics are particularly apparent in medicine and public health. Plastics are versatile, cost-effective, require less energy to produce than alternative materials like metal or glass, and can be manufactured to have many different properties. Due to these characteristics, polymers are used in diverse health applications like disposable syringes and intravenous bags, sterile packaging for medical instruments as well as in joint replacements, tissue engineering, etc. However, not all current uses of plastics are prudent and sustainable, as illustrated by the widespread, unwanted human exposure to endocrine-disrupting bisphenol A (BPA) and di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), problems arising from the large quantities of plastic being disposed of, and depletion of non-renewable petroleum resources as a result of the ever-increasing mass production of plastic consumer articles. Using the health-care sector as example, this review concentrates on the benefits and downsides of plastics and identifies opportunities to change the composition and disposal practices of these invaluable polymers for a more sustainable future consumption. It highlights ongoing efforts to phase out DEHP and BPA in the health-care and food industry and discusses biodegradable options for plastic packaging, opportunities for reducing plastic medical waste, and recycling in medical facilities in the quest to reap a maximum of benefits from polymers without compromising human health or the environment in the process.
ContributorsNorth, Emily Jean (Co-author) / Halden, Rolf (Co-author, Thesis director) / Mikhail, Chester (Committee member) / Hurlbut, Ben (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Chemical Engineering Program (Contributor)
Created2013-05
132294-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Microplastics are defined as small pieces of plastics that are less than five millimeters in size. These microplastics can vary in their appearance, are known to be harmful to aquatic life and can threaten life cycles of marine organisms because of their chemical make-up and the toxic additives used in

Microplastics are defined as small pieces of plastics that are less than five millimeters in size. These microplastics can vary in their appearance, are known to be harmful to aquatic life and can threaten life cycles of marine organisms because of their chemical make-up and the toxic additives used in their manufacture. Although small in size, it is hypothesized that microplastics can serve as an example of how human activities can alter ecosystems near and far. To investigate the implications and determine the potential impact of microplastics on a protected atoll’s ecosystems, red-footed booby (Sula sula) guano samples from six locations on Palmyra Atoll were acquired from North Carolina State University via The Nature Conservancy and were inspected for the presence of microplastics. Each of the guano samples were weighed and prepared via wet oxidation. Microplastic fibers were detected via stereoscope microscopy and analyzed for chemical composition via Raman spectroscopy. All six sampling locations within Palmyra Atoll contained microplastic fibers identified as polyethylene terephthalate, with North-South Causeway and Eastern Island having the highest average number of microplastic fibers found per gram of guano sample (n = 0.611). These data provide evidence that seabirds can serve as vectors for the spread of microplastic pollution. This research lends context to the widespread impact of plastic pollution and states possible implications of its presence in delicate ecosystems.
ContributorsAnderson, Alyssa Cerise (Author) / Lisenbee, Cayle (Thesis director) / Halden, Rolf (Committee member) / Rolsky, Charles (Committee member) / College of Health Solutions (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates

The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates a variety of environmental problems such as substance runoff and ocean pollution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of possible solutions for minimizing micropipette tip and disposable glove waste within laboratory spaces. It was hypothesized that simultaneously implementing the use of micropipette tip washers (MTWs) and energy-from-glove-waste programs (EGWs) would significantly reduce (p < 0.05) the average combined annual single-use plastic micropipette tip and nitrile glove waste (in kg) per square meter of laboratory space in the United States. ASU’s Biodesign Institute (BDI) was used as a case study to inform on the thousands of different laboratory facilities that exist all across the United States. Four separate research laboratories within the largest public university of the U.S. were sampled to assess the volume of plastic waste from single-use micropipette tips and gloves. Resultant data were used to represent the totality of single-use waste from the case study location and then extrapolated to all laboratory space in the United States. With the implementation of EGWs, annual BDI glove waste is reduced by 100% (0.47 ± 0.26 kg/m2; 35.5 ± 19.3 metric tons total) and annual BDI glove-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~5.01% (0.165 ± 0.09 kg/m2; 1.24 ± 0.68 metric tons total). With the implementation of MTWs, annual BDI micropipette tip waste is reduced by 92% (0.117 ± 0.03 kg/m2; 0.88 ± 0.25 metric tons total) and annual BDI tip-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~83.6% (4.04 ± 1.25 kg/m2; 30.5 ± 9.43 metric tons total). There was no significant difference (p = 0.06) observed between the mass of single-use waste (kg) in the sampled laboratory spaces before (x̄ = 47.1; σ = 43.3) and after (x̄ =0.070; σ = 0.033) the implementation of the solutions. When examining both solutions (MTWs & EGWs) implemented in conjunction with one another, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$7.92 ± $9.31/m2 (7,500 m2 of total wet laboratory space) or ~$60,000 ± $70,000 total. These savings represent ~15.77% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The large error margins in these financial estimates create high uncertainty for whether or not BDI would see net savings from implementing both solutions simultaneously. However, when examining the implementation of only MTWs, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$12.01 ± $6.79 kg/m2 or ~$91,000 ± $51,200 total. These savings represent ~23.92% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The lower error margins for this estimate create a much higher likelihood of net savings for BDI. Extrapolating to all laboratory space in the United States, the total annual amount of plastic waste avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 8,130 ± 2,290 tons or 0.023% of all solid plastic waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of nitrile waste avoided with the implementation of the EGWs was identified as 32,800 ± 17,900 tons or 0.36% of all rubber solid waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of carbon emissions avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 281,000 ± 87,000 tons CO2eq or 5.4*10-4 % of all CO2eq GHG emissions produced in the United States in 2020. Both the micropipette tip washer and the glove waste avoidance program solutions can be easily integrated into existing laboratories without compromising the integrity of the activities taking place. Implemented on larger scales, these solutions hold the potential for significant single-use waste reduction.
ContributorsZdrale, Gabriel (Author) / Mahant, Akhil (Co-author) / Halden, Rolf (Thesis director) / Biyani, Nivedita (Committee member) / Driver, Erin (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Harrington Bioengineering Program (Contributor)
Created2022-05
164862-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates

The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates a variety of environmental problems such as substance runoff and ocean pollution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of possible solutions for minimizing micropipette tip and disposable glove waste within laboratory spaces. It was hypothesized that simultaneously implementing the use of micropipette tip washers (MTWs) and energy-from-glove-waste programs (EGWs) would significantly reduce (p < 0.05) the average combined annual single-use plastic micropipette tip and nitrile glove waste (in kg) per square meter of laboratory space in the United States. ASU’s Biodesign Institute (BDI) was used as a case study to inform on the thousands of different laboratory facilities that exist all across the United States. Four separate research laboratories within the largest public university of the U.S. were sampled to assess the volume of plastic waste from single-use micropipette tips and gloves. Resultant data were used to represent the totality of single-use waste from the case study location and then extrapolated to all laboratory space in the United States. With the implementation of EGWs, annual BDI glove waste is reduced by 100% (0.47 ± 0.26 kg/m2; 35.5 ± 19.3 metric tons total) and annual BDI glove-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~5.01% (0.165 ± 0.09 kg/m2; 1.24 ± 0.68 metric tons total). With the implementation of MTWs, annual BDI micropipette tip waste is reduced by 92% (0.117 ± 0.03 kg/m2; 0.88 ± 0.25 metric tons total) and annual BDI tip-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~83.6% (4.04 ± 1.25 kg/m2; 30.5 ± 9.43 metric tons total). There was no significant difference (p = 0.06) observed between the mass of single-use waste (kg) in the sampled laboratory spaces before (x̄ = 47.1; σ = 43.3) and after (x̄ =0.070; σ = 0.033) the implementation of the solutions. When examining both solutions (MTWs & EGWs) implemented in conjunction with one another, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$7.92 ± $9.31/m2 (7,500 m2 of total wet laboratory space) or ~$60,000 ± $70,000 total. These savings represent ~15.77% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The large error margins in these financial estimates create high uncertainty for whether or not BDI would see net savings from implementing both solutions simultaneously. However, when examining the implementation of only MTWs, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$12.01 ± $6.79 kg/m2 or ~$91,000 ± $51,200 total. These savings represent ~23.92% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The lower error margins for this estimate create a much higher likelihood of net savings for BDI. Extrapolating to all laboratory space in the United States, the total annual amount of plastic waste avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 8,130 ± 2,290 tons or 0.023% of all solid plastic waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of nitrile waste avoided with the implementation of the EGWs was identified as 32,800 ± 17,900 tons or 0.36% of all rubber solid waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of carbon emissions avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 281,000 ± 87,000 tons CO2eq or 5.4*10-4 % of all CO2eq GHG emissions produced in the United States in 2020. Both the micropipette tip washer and the glove waste avoidance program solutions can be easily integrated into existing laboratories without compromising the integrity of the activities taking place. Implemented on larger scales, these solutions hold the potential for significant single-use waste reduction.

ContributorsZdrale, Gabriel (Author) / Mahant, Akhil (Co-author) / Halden, Rolf (Thesis director) / Biyani, Nivedita (Committee member) / Driver, Erin (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Harrington Bioengineering Program (Contributor)
Created2022-05
164863-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates

The production and incineration of single-use micropipette tips and disposable gloves, which are heavily used within laboratory facilities, generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) and accelerate climate change. Plastic waste that is not incinerated often is lost in the environment. The long degradation times associated with this waste exacerbates a variety of environmental problems such as substance runoff and ocean pollution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of possible solutions for minimizing micropipette tip and disposable glove waste within laboratory spaces. It was hypothesized that simultaneously implementing the use of micropipette tip washers (MTWs) and energy-from-glove-waste programs (EGWs) would significantly reduce (p < 0.05) the average combined annual single-use plastic micropipette tip and nitrile glove waste (in kg) per square meter of laboratory space in the United States. ASU’s Biodesign Institute (BDI) was used as a case study to inform on the thousands of different laboratory facilities that exist all across the United States. Four separate research laboratories within the largest public university of the U.S. were sampled to assess the volume of plastic waste from single-use micropipette tips and gloves. Resultant data were used to represent the totality of single-use waste from the case study location and then extrapolated to all laboratory space in the United States. With the implementation of EGWs, annual BDI glove waste is reduced by 100% (0.47 ± 0.26 kg/m2; 35.5 ± 19.3 metric tons total) and annual BDI glove-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~5.01% (0.165 ± 0.09 kg/m2; 1.24 ± 0.68 metric tons total). With the implementation of MTWs, annual BDI micropipette tip waste is reduced by 92% (0.117 ± 0.03 kg/m2; 0.88 ± 0.25 metric tons total) and annual BDI tip-related carbon emissions are reduced by ~83.6% (4.04 ± 1.25 kg/m2; 30.5 ± 9.43 metric tons total). There was no significant difference (p = 0.06) observed between the mass of single-use waste (kg) in the sampled laboratory spaces before (x̄ = 47.1; σ = 43.3) and after (x̄ =0.070; σ = 0.033) the implementation of the solutions. When examining both solutions (MTWs & EGWs) implemented in conjunction with one another, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$7.92 ± $9.31/m2 (7,500 m2 of total wet laboratory space) or ~$60,000 ± $70,000 total. These savings represent ~15.77% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The large error margins in these financial estimates create high uncertainty for whether or not BDI would see net savings from implementing both solutions simultaneously. However, when examining the implementation of only MTWs, the annual BDI financial savings (in regard to both purchasing and disposal costs) after the first year were determined to be ~$12.01 ± $6.79 kg/m2 or ~$91,000 ± $51,200 total. These savings represent ~23.92% of annual BDI spending on micropipette tips and nitrile gloves. The lower error margins for this estimate create a much higher likelihood of net savings for BDI. Extrapolating to all laboratory space in the United States, the total annual amount of plastic waste avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 8,130 ± 2,290 tons or 0.023% of all solid plastic waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of nitrile waste avoided with the implementation of the EGWs was identified as 32,800 ± 17,900 tons or 0.36% of all rubber solid waste produced in the United States in 2018. The total amount of carbon emissions avoided with the implementation of the MTWs was identified as 281,000 ± 87,000 tons CO2eq or 5.4*10-4 % of all CO2eq GHG emissions produced in the United States in 2020. Both the micropipette tip washer and the glove waste avoidance program solutions can be easily integrated into existing laboratories without compromising the integrity of the activities taking place. Implemented on larger scales, these solutions hold the potential for significant single-use waste reduction.

ContributorsZdrale, Gabriel (Author) / Mahant, Akhil (Co-author) / Halden, Rolf (Thesis director) / Biyani, Nivedita (Committee member) / Driver, Erin (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Harrington Bioengineering Program (Contributor)
Created2022-05
127819-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The Future of Wastewater Sensing workshop is part of a collaboration between Arizona State University Center for Nanotechnology in Society in the School for the Future of Innovation in Society, the Biodesign Institute’s Center for Environmental Security, LC Nano, and the Nano-enabled Water Treatment (NEWT) Systems NSF Engineering Research Center.

The Future of Wastewater Sensing workshop is part of a collaboration between Arizona State University Center for Nanotechnology in Society in the School for the Future of Innovation in Society, the Biodesign Institute’s Center for Environmental Security, LC Nano, and the Nano-enabled Water Treatment (NEWT) Systems NSF Engineering Research Center. The Future of Wastewater Sensing workshop explores how technologies for studying, monitoring, and mining wastewater and sewage sludge might develop in the future, and what consequences may ensue for public health, law enforcement, private industry, regulations and society at large. The workshop pays particular attention to how wastewater sensing (and accompanying research, technologies, and applications) can be innovated, regulated, and used to maximize societal benefit and minimize the risk of adverse outcomes, when addressing critical social and environmental challenges.

ContributorsWithycombe Keeler, Lauren (Researcher) / Halden, Rolf (Researcher) / Selin, Cynthia (Researcher) / Center for Nanotechnology in Society (Contributor)
Created2015-11-01