Hemcrete is an alternative, environmentally‐friendly building material gaining adherents in Great Britain and other European countries. It is an attractive choice as a building material because it is made from a renewable resource, hemp, a hardy plant that is a close, but non‐hallucinogenic relative of marijuana. This plant is relatively easy to cultivate, requires little in the way of pesticides or fertilizers, and almost all parts can be used for various products from paper to textiles to food.
Hemcrete is made from a mixture of lime, water, and the fibrous outer portion of the hemp plant called the “hurd” or “shive”. When mixed, it is worked and placed much like conventional concrete ‐ hence the name. However, that is where the similarities with concrete end. Hemcrete is not comparable to concrete on a strength basis, and is better described as an alternative insulation product. When built into walls of sufficient thickness, Hemcrete offers high thermal efficiency, and has strong claims to being carbon negative. The purpose of this study
was to evaluate this claim of carbon negativity, and to compare these environmentally friendly qualities against conventional fiberglass batt insulation.
Our model was constructed using two identically sized “walls” measuring eight feet square by one foot in depth, one insulated using Hemcrete, and the other using fiberglass. Our study focused on three areas: water usage, cost, and carbon dioxide emissions. We chose water
usage because we wanted to determine the feasibility of using Hemcrete in the Phoenix metropolitan region where water is a troubled resource. Secondly, we wished to evaluate the claim on carbon negativity, so CO2 equivalents throughout the production process were measured. Finally, we wished to know whether Hemcrete could compete on a cost basis with more conventional insulation methods, so we also built in a price comparison.
Since the cultivation of hemp is currently unlawful in the United States, this study can help determine whether these restrictions should be relaxed in order to allow the construction of buildings insulated with Hemcrete.
To gauge interest in the TTR, a stated preference survey was developed and distributed throughout the Phoenix-metropolitan area. Over 2,200 responses were gathered with about 805 being completed. Exploratory data analysis of the data included a descriptive analysis regarding individual and household demographic variables, HOV usage and satisfaction levels, HOT usage and interests, and TTR interests. Cross-tabulation analysis is further conducted to examine trends and correlations between variables, if any.
Because most survey takers were in Arizona, the majority (53%) of respondents were unfamiliar with HOT lanes and their practices. This may have had an impact on the interest in the TTR, although it was not apparent when looking at the cross-tabulation between HOT knowledge and TTR interest. The concept of the HOT lane and “paying to travel” itself may have turned people away from the TTR option. Therefore, similar surveys implementing new HOT pricing strategies should be deployed where current HOT practices are already in existence. Moreover, introducing the TTR concept to current HOT users may also receive valuable feedback in its future deployment.
Further analysis will include the weighting of data to account for sample bias, an exploration of the stated preference scenarios to determine what factors were significant in peoples’ choices, and a predictive model of those choices based on demographic information.
Phoenix is the sixth most populated city in the United States and the 12th largest metropolitan area by population, with about 4.4 million people. As the region continues to grow, the demand for housing and jobs within the metropolitan area is projected to rise under uncertain climate conditions.
Undergraduate and graduate students from Engineering, Sustainability, and Urban Planning in ASU’s Urban Infrastructure Anatomy and Sustainable Development course evaluated the water, energy, and infrastructure changes that result from smart growth in Phoenix, Arizona. The Maricopa Association of Government's Sustainable Transportation and Land Use Integration Study identified a market for 485,000 residential dwelling units in the urban core. Household water and energy use changes, changes in infrastructure needs, and financial and economic savings are assessed along with associated energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.
The course project has produced data on sustainable development in Phoenix and the findings will be made available through ASU’s Urban Sustainability Lab.
Here I plan to use CLCA to evaluate the environmental impact (and economy by using MFA??) by changing traditional crop to AVP1 GM crop. In this study I will compare wild type (WT) and AVP1 transgenic romaine lettuce (Lactuca sativa cv. conquistador). This is a study of P fertilizer being applied on romaine lettuce from gate to grave and making a comparison between WT and AVP1 romaine lettuce. The system boundary would be commercial P fertilizers applied on all lettuce in the U.S. The lettuce includes head lettuce, leaf lettuce, and romaine lettuce. The amount of P fertilizers such as inorganic, organic, and imported, will be identified and quantified. The amount of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers will also be quantified along with P fertilizer. The amount of water will be compared between the two different lettuces as the AVP1 lettuce grows faster and the amount of days of watering would be fewer. Eutrophication will be assessed as well as N2O emission. As AVP1 lettuce has a bigger root system, I will try to quantify the extra amount of CO2 fixed into the soil via AVP1 lettuce. I will also try to project the impact of AVP1 lettuce on market price. The functional unit of LCA portion is kg usage of N and P2O5 per ton of lettuce and the functional unit of MFA is kg/ha.
Global climate models predict increases in precipitation events in the Phoenix-metropolitan area and with the proposition of more flooding new insights are needed for protecting roadways and the services they provide. Students from engineering, sustainability, and planning worked together in ASU’s Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Spring 2016 course to assess:
1. How historical floods changed roadway designs.
2. Precipitation forecasts to mid-century.
3. The vulnerability of roadways to more frequent precipitation.
4. Adaptation strategies focusing on safe-to-fail thinking.
5. Strategies for overcoming institutional barriers to enable transitions.
The students designed an EPA Storm Water Management Model for the City of Phoenix and forced it with future precipitation forecasts. Vulnerability indexes were created for infrastructure performance and social outcomes. A multi-criteria decision analysis framework was created to prioritize infrastructure adaptation strategies.