If you are hesitating about which technology would best fit your needs and liking, you should carefully analyze pros and cons and compare what you can get from both. A good starting point may be the type of driving you intend to do. If you plan to spend a lot of time in stop-start traffic, then the electric one might be the right choice.
For electric cars usually the high purchase price is a barrier that will only be overcome if you intend to drive enough kilometers along their useful life. You can counteract your initial investment with the lower price of electricity when compared to diesel or gasoline.
Another barrier is the driving range, which may be around 150 – 200 km under real conditions. Though this should be enough to cover actual everyday driving needs, facts show that this is an important deterrent for most potential buyers. Right now, plug-in cars account for not more than one-tenth of 1% of the global car market, and they are rare in the streets of our cities in most countries (Norway or Netherlands would be an exception). The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries predicts just 1% of electric vehicles in 2040, while other experts don’t foresee a real impact for the next 50 years.
However, some hints suggest that predictions might be different for the short term. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), several carmakers (including Tesla, Chevrolet and Nissan) plan to sell long-range electric cars at around €25.000, while they are investing billions on new models. Moreover, battery prices fell 35% last yearand their related technology is quickly evolving towards higher energy density. According to BNEF the price of long-range electric vehicles is expected to fall below €20.000 by 2040 and 35% of new cars worldwide will be plug-in.
Real facts are that those vehicles achieving the highest number of sales in 2015 were Volkswagen Golf (275.848 sales), followed by Ford Fiesta (173.999 sales). These numbers have been surpassed by the 276.00 pre-orders received by Tesla for their new Tesla 3 model, though they won’t necessarily become actual sales in 2017. The basic Tesla 3 model will have a starting purchase price of €31.000, and a range of at least 346 km per charge. This makes a big difference to all we have seen till now. Tesla has been known worldwide for their luxurious models, only affordable for a few well-off and now they offer their technology to everyone.
So both price and driving range might not be barriers anymore.
Another argument in favour of electric cars is the driving experience, extremely quiet and smooth, with no need of a gearbox, and therefore easier than an internal combustion one.
Costs related to maintenance should be less in electric car than those from conventional ones, due to the absence of gearbox, oils and cooling fluids. Moreover, electric drives have less moving parts.
An important argument against might be battery longevity, which is not 100% reliable and might fail before expected. As this is somehow uncontrollable many manufacturers are offering long warranties to reassure potential customers. Some of them offer battery-leasing schemes as an alternative to acquiring the battery together with the car.
Finally, other obstacles for most potential buyers are the difficulties and additional costs associated with installing a charging point at home for an electric car, where one feels the vehicle will be safely charged at the preferred time (usually overnight).
You can get a pretty good estimation of the total costs associated to your new car, be it conventional or electric, with CEVNE, a tool developed by CARTIF that helps you decidefrom the budgetary point of view.
And if all the previous arguments are not enough to help you make a decision, you should then consider the benefits of electric vehicles for the environment. Tail-pipe emissions are zero, thus helping to improve air quality in our cities and towns, though we know the electricity used for charging must come from somewhere… maybe a coal fired power station. If this were the case we would not be contributing that much to a cleaner environment, though we know the share of renewable sources worldwide is steadily increasing.
Construction and Demolition Waste (C&D Waste or CDW) includes all the waste from the construction of new buildings, demolition of old ones and small refurbishment works. The generation and management of CDW is a serious environmental problem. Neglect or mismanagement produce negative impacts and can cause water, ground and air pollution, contributing to climate change and affecting ecosystems and human health.
Current regulations on CDW management determines the need for an ex-ante estimation of the debris type and volume a project will generate. The level of detail and accuracy should be adequate to allow an effective planning to carry out the management of this waste.
Concern about the amount of CDW generated and its environmental impact is growing. For this reason, governments and public authorities are reviewing their policies on how these wastes should be managed. In order to improve this management, it is necessary to know the composition and magnitude that should be dealt with, as well as some estimating method of waste generated in a project, in a region or a country.
Despite all the problems that CDW may cause, and difficulties on their treatment, when waste is properly managed become resources, or products that contribute to saving raw materials, conservation of natural resources, avoid climate change and thus to sustainable development, in accordance with the principles of the circular economy.
How to estimate the waste generated by construction and demolition activities varies significantly from place to place, as explained below.
America In the United States, USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) estimates the amount of CDW generated in a specific region only from the built-up area, but regardless of whether the building is residential or not, or whether the works are new construction, refurbishment or demolition, which influences the type and amount of produced waste.
Another interesting case is Brazil, because it is an emerging country but CDW legislation is very similar to the European one, particularly the Portuguese. In this country, the civil construction sector is an important waste generator and national laws require manufacturers to take responsibility for the waste generated in their work and planning their management. A very important part of this effort is waste estimate to be generated, differentiating by waste type (brick, wood, glass, etc.) as each need a suitable deposit space and will be treated differently.
Asia The situation in Asia varies greatly from one country to another. Except for Korea and Japan, lack of knowledge and awareness of efficient building practices results in natural resources overuse and generation of large amounts of CDW that is rarely recycled. Approximately 40% of the total generated waste comes from construction and demolition activities. This waste is difficult to manage because it is heavy and bulky and can not be incinerated or used for composting.
Europe The European Union, in the EWC (European Waste Catalogue) provides a classification of the CDW by category. According to statistics, there are huge differences in recycling and recovery rates between EU countries, between less than 10% and over 90%. In Spain, recycling rate is around 65% of generated CDW. Construction companies benefit from the reduced amount of generated waste by reducing landfilling associated costs and reducing raw materials purchasing budget.
CDW Management in Spain Most of not recycled waste, at best, goes to landfills, taking up large discharge spaces and causing faster filling. In Spain, CDW estimation is usually done based on the floor area. To estimate each type of waste amount, a widespread criterion is 20 cm tall mixed waste per m2 built, according to use, with a standard density from 0.50 t/m3 to 1.50 t/m3. In order to obtain the weight by waste type, data based on studies about the composition of the CDW going to landfill could be used.
Summarizing, research in this field has focused in two ways: “hard” methods, measuring waste produced directly on site or through the weight of the trucks leaving the work, and “soft” methods, through questionnaires, interviews and surveys of experts and workers. When dealing with waste generation rates forecast, two approaches have been found. First is sorting waste into different categories, e.g. those established by the EWC. The second is managing waste as a whole and estimating the total volume.
A realistic approach to the problem undertakes to manage the project as a large number of interrelated and different task types (project units), in which each of these works affects differently in waste generation. Similarly, if forecasting models are developed based only on available historical data, without the necessary preliminary analysis and processing, a significant error could be introduced, as this information can come from heterogeneous and unevaluated sources.
“What is the weather like this weekend?”. We ask every week when Friday comes. “Sunny, but we can’t trust on weather” answers our colleague. “You’re right! It’s the climate change fault” both conclude.
In our previous posts, you have been able to know how CARTIF is working to help to mitigate climate change, through the development of new technologies and awareness. And let’s say that, if climate change is responsible even for our change of plans during the weekend, it’s time to know it a little better, to talk about when and by whom was discovered.
Eduard Punset has written an excellent introduction to this issue in his latest book and we have collected here an excerpt:
“The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1995 was awarded jointly to Paul J. Crutzen (Dutch), Mario J. Molina (Mexican) and F. Sherwood Rowland (American), to warn the world of a thinning of the ozone layer surrounding the Earth, between twenty and fifty kilometers above our heads (…). They showed, to the disbelief of many people, that the Earth’s ozone layer was thinning in the region of the poles, especially in the South, over Antarctica, and the cause of this degradation was some gases that don’t exist in nature but, after their discovery, in the early twentieth century, were widely used in the industry as refrigerants and propellants (in aerosol). They are the chlorofluorocarbon gases, also commonly known as CFCs, included in many normal household items like in refrigerators, spray deodorants etc … What Nobel laureates discovered was that, despite being harmless to human health, these gases are so stable and stay in the atmosphere for very long times, long enough to reach the upper atmosphere, where UVB photons turn them into highly reactant catalysts. Ozone depletion is caused by the products of those processes” (extract from Carta a mis nietas: todo lo que he aprendido y me ha conmovido. Eduard Punset, 2015, published by Destino, in Spanish).
And although the alert came in 1974, yet it took a few years for society to become aware of the problemand to increase the knowledge about the possible greenhouse gases. Let’s look back to history.
It’s in Rio de Janeiro, in 1992, where countries joined an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, a frame for international cooperation that outlines how specific international treaties may be negotiated to set binding limits on greenhouse gases.
Three years later, the first Conference of the Parties (COP1) was held in Berlin and in 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, in Japan, with the aim of providing policies and measuring plans for industrialized countries, to reduce emissions by 5 % in the period 2008-2012. In 1999, 84 Parties signed the Kyoto Protocol but to enter into force, the Protocol must be ratified, and this fact was a problem because there was no agreement on how to apply the rules. In 2001, George W. Bush announced that the United States of America was no longer intending to comply with the objectives set out in the Protocol and in 2005, it entered into force without the signature of USA and China, the world’s largest carbon polluters.
But it was necessary to keep on working and the COP15 arrived, in Copenhagen in 2009, a crucial event in the negotiating process, remembered as unsuccessful because it was closed with a minimal agreement that did not commit countries. It was in Doha, in 2012, where a new timetable to reach an effective universal climate agreement was set out, choosing 2015 as the deadline. And with this purpose, COP21 took place last December, in Paris, and it has been the first time that a legally binding and a universal agreement on climate have been achieved, with the aim of limiting their emissions.
“Never too late to do well”, says a Spanish proverb, so we are confident that a successful chapter has begun in climate change history. Let’s cross our fingers.
This is E2REBOT, our neurorehabilitation robot which enables and makes easier the rehabilitation of the upper limbs of people with some kind of neuromotor disability.
On 26 September it was celebrated in Madrid the “4th Meeting point against food waste” organized by AECOC, where the waste problem was analyzed from different perspectives and pooling actual experiences of prevention and reduction.
Social enterprises as “Espigoladors”, which employs people at risk of social exclusion, transferred their experience in preventing waste through the use of fruits and vegetables discarded in the field (by size, defects, appearance) for the production and sale of jams and creams, contributing in a sustainable way to reducing waste, creating jobs and getting an economic benefit.
Innovation in packaging it has also been discussed and how can reduce the waste, or in the case presented by Pepsico, how through a program of valorization of its by-products is achieved zero waste in one of its production plants snacks.
Several posts have been dedicated about food waste in this blog, trying to find solutions for the waste reduction and its valorization. We have discussed the need for prevention as a tool to reduce waste throughout the food chain, but besides preventing, what can it be done to decrease the amount of waste generated by the food industry?
The food industry is one of the main generators of waste organic nature in our country, mainly composed of those parts of the raw materials are not useful in the development process and can represent up to 85% by weight of the raw material received.
Few years ago these organic wastes were leaded to animal feed industry or agronomic valorization. But in recent decades, in the face of need for food industry to value their by-products, the R & D and the work of the research teams, are aimed at finding innovative and tangible solutions with economic return and high value-added .
Companies are slowly changing their outlook towards the environment, gradually transforming its working methods towards more sustainable manufacturing processes, but while optimizing their resources, reduce waste and obtain an economic benefit.
Trends in R & D in terms of the valorization of by-products go in parallel to trends in the food industry in the manufacture of new foods. Thus, many food by-products are source for obtaining compounds with high added value as antioxidants, fiber, essential fatty acids, antimicrobials, minerals, etc., which can later be included in production processes to obtaining new foods of high added value and in many cases with functional properties.
The food industry is not the only one who can benefit from using these products. Currently, there are cosmetics or pharmaceuticals in the market incorporating different compounds such as antioxidants or polyphenols, which have been obtained from by-products valorization.
The CARTIF experience in this research field has been wide, and it has developed several projects where the objective has been to obtain compounds with high added value from by-products of the food industry. The DIANA project led by several companies and accompanied by research centers, where the goal was to obtain from different products like coffee, grape marc, algae, etc., compounds with high added value for their incorporation into different food matrices and provide various improvements, thanks to these compounds.
The LACTISHOE project works in a very different meaning, because from whey as a by-product of the cheese industry and through and hybrid membrane-fermentation reactor, that it will produce lactic acid. Then, it will perform the lactic acid microencapsulation, and then it will be incorporated in the templates and in the lining of shoes, giving them beneficial properties for the foot.
Waste generation by food industries is an inherent consequence of their activity, but the search for sustainable and environmentally friendly alternatives is a necessity that faces all companies, not forgetting that both have an economic benefit through the valorization of their by-products.
Given that the food and beverage industry in Spain comprises about 22% of industrial GDP and is formed by 30.000 companies (of which 96% are SMEs), it is not strange that our country avails one of the most important exhibitions in Europe: Alimentaria.
This biennial meeting is undoubtedly a professional showcase and a benchmark event in the food sector. With nearly 4.000 exhibitors from 63 different countries, it allows to know the news, and current and future trends in food, in addition to doing business.
In ALIMENTARIA 2016, held last week, it highlights the strong internationalization of companies and products as a vector of change (or overcoming of the famous ‘crisis’) and an increase in the market of organic products and food products elaborated through sustainable processes.
Some of the main areas in ALIMENTARIA 2016 are Intercarn, Interlact, Intervin, Multifoods o Restaurama. In them, we have seen many new products, always from our point of view as researchers in food field.
We have found pearls of olive oil, almond oil, vinegar and juice.
Chorizo, Catalan sausage and salami for vegetarians; without meat, but with egg white as a protein source.
Going on with meat, we have found shoulder blade or rack of young lamb semielaborated, which is finished in the oven inside a container without staining and leaving the meat in its point and with crispy crust. Easier and cleaner, ¡impossible!
Omelets stuffed with black pudding, Catalan sausage or goat cheese.
Salt of all flavors and colors.
About drinks, in addition to the multitude of wineries with delicious wines and precious labels and bottles, we have found several drinks based on extracts. Drinks made from beans and strawberries, vegetable drinks, rice drinks with coconut or almonds, craft beer with aloe…
Pizza flour charcoal. That is; black pizza bases in order to stand out the rest of foods. And with the purifying benefits of charcoal, of course.
Wide variety of healthier snacks based on peas, beans, broccoli, mango, banana, pineapple or apple textured. And, as a novelty, snacks based on beef jerky with different flavors (spices, chili, curry).
Sauces and chutneys: carob with dates, apple or pineapple mustard, honey with ginger or cinnamon, cocoa butter or jam with wine, oil or vinegar…
Personally, I want to highlight a delicious mango gazpacho.
And finally, one of the foods with hardest presence was quinoa. Quinoa flour, cereals, biscuits, bars, quinoa ready to eat with vegetables, and a long etcetera.
Today’s consumer looks for pleasure in food, but, without doubt, the trend that marks the development of new products is the health concern. This factor includes feeling good, getting fit, improving health and not growing old.
CARTIF collaborates with several food companies in this field, developing new products, improving existing ones, changing ingredients, valorazing subproducts, in order to suit a demanding and competitive market which is constantly in movement.
