fewnexusalyse

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 8

Module 8 covered the topic of “World Without Oil.” World Without Oil (WWO) is not only a future scenario, but it is also an alternate reality game. Before this lecture, I had never really heard about alternate reality games, but once I learned more I found it fascinating that WWO was such a success because it allowed people from all over the world to change their lives to be more sustainable. By making the topic WWO a fun game, they were able to create an entire global community that discovered ways to live off the grid and less dependent on fossil fuels. 

Dr. Culhane raises the questions: did we even need oil in the first place and would we still be the advanced society we are today if we had never used fossil fuels? Most of society credits fossil fuels with advancements in technology and marks the Industrial Revolution as the beginning of that period. However, science has since proven that all of these luxuries that fossil fuel has given us can also be produced from alternatives. Alternatives such as clean renewable energy that do not have the same detrimental effects on the environment that fossil fuel does.

I was a little shocked when Dr. Culhane showed us a clip from the documentary called Pump. I learned from the short clip that Henry Ford actually designed his cars to run on alcohol, but Rockefeller and the oil companies saw this as a threat so they influenced the passing of the Prohibition amendment to ban alcohol.  Imagine, we could have been running our cars on low emission ethanol that can be made from any plant materials. But ethanol was also knocked down as a primary fuel because of the myth started by a lobbying firm that it increases food prices. Ethanol production actually increases food production because the part of the corn grown that is used for oil is the part we don’t even eat. The corn byproduct of ethanol production is actually used to feed livestock. Oil was always, and continues to be, a dirty money game.

In a way, I became frustrated by this because the food vs. fuel debate does not make any sense now knowing the truth behind oil and ethanol. Sometimes we can underestimate the power of oil companies. But perhaps we should revive the WWO alternate reality game as a way to fight these oil companies and create a grassroots movement of global sustainability activists.

Below is the first part of the lecture that I edited to add visuals:

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 7

The topic of Module 7 is food security. In the first part of the lecture, Dr. Culhane explains how food security is an issue of malnutrition. Malnutrition occurs in both developed and underdeveloped countries. In developed countries, malnutrition is not caused by the lack of food, but rather the lack of nutrient rich foods. Most of society today relies on a nutrient poor diet consisting mostly of corn, potatoes, wheat, soy, and sugar. Consuming these empty calories leads to America’s leading killers heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease (all lifestyle diseases).

So how did it get to this point? The industrial revolution kick started industrialized agriculture to be able to feed the growing population. Corn, potatoes, wheat, soy, and sugar became staples of everyone’s diet. This led to a capitalist driven food industry and food desserts (areas where there is limited access to fresh food). Now there is a crisis where poor income communities develop diseases from poor diets, but can’t afford to treat their illnesses.

As a creative assignment for this module, I have added visuals to the lecture videos parts 1 & 2: 

In class, Dr. Culhane showed us a special edition Superman comic in which Superman gets tired of fighting criminals and decides to fight world hunger instead. However, Superman eventually learns that he can’t solve this crisis by simply distributing food to poor communities, so he decides to become a teacher because he believes the best way to help is to educate youth. We did a class exercise related to this where we illustrated our own comics to answer the question: what would we do if we were superheroes? In the comic I illustrated (pictured below), Laura and I decided that if we had superpowers, we would first like to address the current crisis in Venezuela. In the comic, the superhero VisionVerde uses her ability of turning anything into natural resources, to stop the violent regime of Maduro by turning their weapons into vegetables and turning Maduro into a tree. She then gifts the people of Venezuela with the knowledge and resources of living sustainably. 

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Fat Beet Farm

Instead of an in-class lecture, our class met up at Fat Beet Farm in Oldsmar. Fat Beet farm is a family owned and run urban farm that practices sustainable farming techniques. Dr. T.H. Culhane and fellow students constructed the first known restaurant scale biodigester on site at the farm. It is a unique place that is the perfect center for learning and research. Our mission for the day was to help build a solar hot water heater set up on the roof of the pavilion and test out the new water tank gas storage for the biodigester.

This system uses solar vacuum tubes to heat copper that then heats up water. Solar tubes are more efficient than solar panels because no matter what position the sun is in the sky, sunlight is always hitting the tube at a 90 degree angle to maximize the sunlight absorbed throughout the day. In addition, the roof is white so that any light that passes through the tubes will be reflected off the roof and absorbed by the underside of the tubes.

I enjoyed installing the solar tubes and being able to see how the solar system works up close. It proved to be difficult at times because the copper would bend or the tube wouldn’t quite fit. But it was still fun and rewarding to see it completed. It took a lot of awesome team work to make it happen. The family at Fat Beet Farm was so kind and grateful for our work.

I appreciated having the opportunity to learn hands-on and use problem-solving skills. It allowed me to better understand how these renewable energy systems worked and hopefully gave me some new skills and knowledge that I will use again in the future. It was nice to see how successful a small-scale urban farm could be while using sustainable practices. It was exciting to hear all of the things that Fat Beet Farm has planned including a restaurant/marketplace. I look forward to more opportunities like this during my time at PCGS.

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 5

The subject of this week’s lecture was permaculture. I first heard about permaculture in an undergraduate course on Politics of Sustainability. The course instructor had a large garden on his property where he practiced and taught permaculture. He also told us about Mosswood Farm Store & Bakehouse which is a small store in an historic building in the small town of Micanopy, FL. Behind the store is a small permaculture farm where they grow organic produce used for ingredients in the pizza and other baked goods for the store. Some students from that course did an internship there later on. After that course I started hearing the term permaculture more often as I began to take more sustainability classes for my degree. 

Dr. Culhane’s definition and assessment of permaculture was a little different than what I’ve heard in the past. It was interesting to listen to his perspective on how permaculture would be better if partnered with biodigesters. I also found it interesting when Dr. Culhane pointed out how agriculture is associated as bad and permaculture is associated as good just by the terms the class used to describe them. Before the lecture, I had never thought about permaculture as permanent culture as well as permanent agriculture. I only thought about permaculture as a type of agriculture. But using system thinking shows us that permaculture is a nexus system and a solution for sustainability.

To help define permaculture, I made a Plotagon movie:

Reference for Plotagon: https://permaculturenews.org/what-is-permaculture/

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 4

This week’s module was about systems thinking. Food, energy, and water are all connected through natural processes and human practices. It is simple to see the connections when thinking about necessities for surviving life on Earth. The gradual change in Earth’s climate and the steady rise in population heavily impacts our supply of natural resources. In order to sustain these resources for future generations, it is imperative for policymakers to exercise systems thinking.

The water-energy-food nexus is comprised of complex interconnections among the three sectors. A change in one factor can have significant effects on the other two (Bazilian, et al., 2011). For example, if a water source becomes polluted, then the corn crops that need the water to grow will not survive. As a result, there will be a shortage of corn for ethanol production, which would raise fuel prices. There is a need for a method of decision-making which looks at all relationships and possible outcomes. Systems thinking is a holistic approach to solving problems within a system that emphasizes the connections between each part as opposed to seeing the whole as a sum of its parts. The systems thinking approach uses tools such as iceberg models, stock & flow diagrams, graphic facilitation, and causal loop diagrams to map out all parts of the system (donellameadows.org). Typical linear cause and effect approaches are not adequate in predicting how a system works over a long period of time (Sterman, 2001). Systems thinking allows decision-makers to model and simulate dynamic patterns of the nexus.

As Earth’s population continues to rise exponentially, and the affects of climate change create problems daily, there is an urgent need for systems thinking in the food-energy-water nexus. Sustainability challenges will become more complex as society, technology, and development advances. It is stated in an article titled “Sustainability in the water-energy-food nexus” that, “policy making and decision making for sustainability could benefit from a holistic nexus approach that reduces trade-offs and builds synergies across sectors, and thus helps reduce costs and increase benefits for humans and nature, without compromising the resource basis on which humanity relies” (Bhaduri, Ringler, Dombrowski, Mohtar, & Schuemann, 2015). Research shows that the nexus approach improves resource-use efficiency and limits social & environmental impacts. When all the interconnections among the sectors are considered, the nexus approach can maximize synergies and minimize any further negative consequences.

During the second half of the lecture, Laura and I participated in a systems thinking visual exercise in the form of graphic facilitation (pictured below). Graphic facilitation is defined as “the process of translating complex concepts into a visual language of words and pictures and recording them in real time. This strategy can be a very effective way to summarize and communicate complex ideas and to allow participants to see and internalize the big picture of a discussion or presentation” (donellameadows.org). We got the idea from the PCGS Speaker Series when the artists��Karolina Sobecka and Jamie Allen used graphic facilitation in their presentation. I enjoyed this exercise because it allowed me to illustrate key terms from the lecture and connect them in an expressive, artistic way. At first I wasn’t sure how well it would go, especially since Dr. Culhane talks fast, but as I went a long I was more relaxed and let the ideas flow.

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: FL State Fair

From February 7th-17th The Patel College of Global Sustainability has an informational table set up at the annual Florida State Fair. I volunteered on Monday Feb 11th from 1pm-5pm and on Tuesday Feb 12th from 1pm-4pm. Tabling at the fair was a great experience. First of all, I had never been to a fair before, so I was wowed by the spectacle and the enormity of it all. I had never known that as much as the fair is fun and games, rides and showcases, there is also an educational aspect included. The fairgrounds is a place where businesses and organizations from all across the state can present to the public. Anything from school art projects to chicken farms are brought to one place where the community can be entertained and informed.

At our table in the Florida Center, we were nestled in the horticulture area and neighbors to the Florida Native Plant Society and the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. PCGS partnered with Tampa Bay Kids Kitchen Farm2School and HomeBiogas for our display. The table had informational flyers for Tampa Bay Farm2School, Agrotourism, Access 3D Lab, GLOBE Earth Day, PCGS, and HomeBiogas. The Tampa Bay Kids Kitchen displayed a cardboard cutout of Buddy the Elf (Will Ferrell) which caught many people’s attention. However, the most popular attraction at our table was most definitely the HomeBiogas biodigester.

Many people were intrigued by the biodigester. I enjoyed explaining how the biodigester worked as a way to eliminate food waste, produce sustainable liquid fertilizer and biogas for stove top cooking. Everyone found it interesting and innovative. However, some people expressed concern for why having a biodigester would not work for their household. One reason was restriction by their Homeowners Association which would not allow for a biodigester in their yard. Another reason a woman expressed to me was that she felt that between her and her husband, they would not be able to produce enough food waste to feed into the biodigester enough to get a useable amount of biogas. These were valid barriers that people had and I shared that an ideal place for a biodigester would be a community garden.

In order to engage people in an activity about sustainability, we had people sign a sustainability pledge to get a free reusable metal straw. It was a great activity to get people thinking about how their actions affect the planet. People were able to make a commitment to change everyday actions in order to live a more sustainable lifestyle. Many of the pledges were simple such as recycling or using a reusable bag. Some of my favorite pledges that people wrote included composting, stop using single-use plastics, and teaching their kids to be sustainable. The metal straw prizes were very popular because people love giveaways.

This was not my first tabling experience. In the past I have tabled numerous times for my undergraduate student organization, my internship with the Alachua County Environmental Protection Department, and my internship with the Sea Turtle Conservancy. I was quite comfortable communicating with members of the public of all age ranges. Throughout my tabling experiences, I have learned what techniques work better to attract, engage, and inform people. Our display was successful in attracting people mainly because of the HomeBiogas biodigester. However, I felt as though we had too much information displayed and too many papers spread on the table that intimidated many people from stopping by. To achieve our goal of promoting PCGS projects and programs, advertising the HomeBiogas biodigester, promoting Tampa Bay Farm2School events, and educating on issues of food waste and overall sustainability, it is best if we have 3 tables (1 for each organization). Having all of this information at one table can be confusing and overwhelming. We needed simple, organized visuals instead of several piles of flyers.

Tabling at the FL State Fair was a way to exercise nexus thinking because we communicated facts and ideas about sustainable food, energy, water and waste with the public by using visual information. The biodigester was the perfect tool to help people understand the food, energy, water nexus. I found that explaining the way the biodigester worked and communicating how it was one of the best ways for an individual to live sustainably, helped me to practice nexus thinking. I hope our table sparked others to be more sustainable and I look forward to tabling with PCGS again.

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 3

This module titled “Harnessing the Energy Embedded in Food, Food Waste and Organic Residuals” was focused on food waste in the city.  We know that before industrialization, cities were much cleaner because early civilizations knew how to properly dispose their waste or utilize it for fertilization. In a University of Arkansas paper titled “Historical Perspectives of Urban Drainage,” the authors describe the different drainage infrastructures that many early civilizations built to keep the waste out of the streets. For example, the ruins of Mesopotamian empire states of Assyria and Babylonia “...contain well-constructed storm drainage and sanitary sewer systems.”

Before modern cities, people lived in harmony with animals in the cities. In the book Reordering the Natural World: Humans and Animals in the City author Annabelle Sabloff explains how animals were valuable not only for food and labor, but also used as a form of currency. Therefore, people took good care of their animals and brought them into the cities. The relationship that the Mesopotamian people had with their bulls could be explained in this way. Images of bulls were even painted onto vases/vessels and other Mesopotamian artwork because they symbolized strength and bravery (Looking at Animals in Human History By Linda Kalof).

Furthermore, food was grown within the city walls as well as in the fields surrounding the city. Vegetables were grown close to home and fruit trees became an integral part of cities: ( https://www.historyextra.com/period/ancient-egypt/a-guide-to-ancient-gardening/ ) The Hanging Gardens of Babylon is one of the most famous examples. Below is a 3D recreation/virtual tour of the gardens:

So the question is, how did we get so far from this green version of city life? When did it become so hard to get rid of our waste to where rats and cockroaches moved in and brought their diseases with them? One reason is the sheer population/urbanization boom after cities began industrialization. more and more people moved into the cities to work because farming simply was no longer a fertile job. It is a vicious cycle where the waste we produced was polluting the water and land where we grew our food therefore driving more people into the city to produce more waste. 

It seems that once again, biodigesters are the solution! Dr. Culhane states in the lecture that waste must be turned into fuel and fertilizer. The fuel will be used to provide power for the city. The fertilizer will be used for sustainable urban agriculture such as vertical urban farming and garden roofs to feed the city. In other words a “closed loop industrial ecology process.” These solutions are much more simple and cost effective than it seems. We must continue to use nexus thinking and break any taboo that waste is disgusting and has no value. 

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 15

In this video lecture, Dr. Culhane dives deeper into 3D/5D visualization as a nexus thinking technology. Since my concentration of study is in water, I began to look for examples of how 3D virtual reality techniques are applied to water studies. I came across this YouTube video of a 3D simulation of a wave energy generator:

This YouTube video reminded me of a research paper I wrote in a previous environmental science class. In my paper, I discuss the potential and environmental impacts of oscillating water column wave energy converters which is the same renewable energy technology shown in the video above. I would like to share the paper with you:

Oscillating Water Column Wave Energy Converter

Introduction

As the world’s population continues to climb, it is expected that global energy consumption will also increase exponentially within the next century (Clément et al. 2002). World energy consumption is expected to increase as much as 56% by 2040 (Clément et al. 2002). The proportion of this percentage increase that will be met by advances in renewable energy technologies is the focus topic. Specifically, converting the energy of ocean waves into electricity is a renewable energy technique that can help to meet increasing demands without contributing considerable and detrimental damage to the Earth (Liu 2016). Converting the movement of ocean waves into energy is a generally clean process because after construction, wave energy converters do not emit any greenhouse gases or produce any harmful waste products (Clément et al. 2002). This is favorable as renewable energy has risen to the forefront for many countries. The combination of wave power with innovative modern technologies will need to be further assessed for environmental impact and risks, and further developed to lower expenses before wave energy can be implemented further.

It is estimated that the total potential of all wave power hitting the coastlines globally is around 1 TW (Falnes 2007). Other estimations by the World Energy Council state that wave energy could meet 12 percent of the world’s energy usage (Zabihian and Fung 2011). Wave energy has been and continues to be utilized the most in Europe despite the global potential (Clément et al. 2002). The reason for Europe’s success in wave energy is because of its ideal location where the ocean and wind currents are hitting the coastline at maximum power for longer periods of time throughout the year (Langhamer et al. 2010). The wave power hitting the European west coast alone would produce enough electricity for all of western Europe (Langhamer et al. 2010).

To have the means to harness all this wave power, there must first be sufficient mechanisms of doing so. It was as early as 1799 in which techniques were first used to harness the energy and motion of ocean waves (Clément et al. 2002). There were more than a thousand different patents for wave energy converter designs utilizing around 100 different concepts filed before 1980 (Falcão 2010). Wave energy converters have technologies for implementation both offshore and onshore (Falcão 2010). Over the past three decades, considerable efforts have been made to advance wave energy technologies and adaptations on a global scale (Konispoliatis et al. 2016). At the beginning of this century, commercial wave energy plants already existed in Europe, Australia, and Israel (Clément et al. 2002). More recently, the leading countries in ocean wave energy are Portugal and the U.K. (Zabihian and Fung 2011). However, Australia, Denmark, and Ireland are not far behind because they may surpass Portugal and the U.K. as leaders of wave energy in less than 10 years (Zabihian and Fung 2011).

Compared to other renewable energy sources, waves have the highest energy density which means it has the highest amount of energy stored in a given space per unit of volume (Clément et al. 2002). Wave energy is a combination of both potential energy, from wave height, and kinetic energy from movement of water particles (Zabihian and Fung 2011). Waves are created by wind and can travel thousands of kilometers with very little loss in initial energy (Clément et al. 2002). Further comparing to other renewables, wave energy installations have the same low energy and carbon intensity levels as large wind turbines installations (Uihlein 2016). A limiting factor is that not all coastlines have a high enough concentration of wave energy for this method to be economically feasible for all coastal countries (Clément et al. 2002). In addition, wave energy can vary from season to season, so full-scale operation year-round as a primary energy source is not possible in some places (Falcão 2010).

Discussion

Oscillating Water Column

There are multiple categories of wave energy converters including terminator devices, attenuators, point absorbers, and overtopping devices (Falnes 2007). Falling under the category of terminators is a device called an oscillating water column (Falnes 2007). The first oscillating water column (OWC) was developed in Japan in the 1940’s by Japanese Navy officer Yoshio Masuda, who is also known as “the father of modern wave energy” (Falcão 2010). OWC technology has been developed for longer than other wave energy converters (Zabihian and Fung 2011). It’s long development for an efficient design is a reason why OWCs are the most favored of the wave energy converters (Konispoliatis et al. 2016). Since they are more popular, the OWC device is also the best competitor for the commercialization of wave energy converters (Liu 2016).

Oscillating water columns align perpendicular to the waves to capture the power of the waves and covert it to wind energy (Falnes 2007). OWCs can be constructed to fit on the coast where waves are crashing directly on the shoreline, or floating in open ocean with a mooring to secure it to the sea floor (Konispoliatis et al. 2016). OWCs are essentially comprised of 3 main parts: the chamber, the wind turbine, and the generator (Bouali and Larbi 2017). The chamber is partially submerged and typically made of concrete and steel (Falcão 2010). The chamber is where the waves flow in and traps the air (Bouali and Larbi 2017). The motion of the waves push the pressurized air up in an oscillating motion into the wind turbine (Bouali and Larbi 2017). The air flows through the turbine which powers the generator (Bouali and Larbi 2017).

OWCs range in dimensions from the size of a small car to the size of a small house (Iino et al. 2016). Most wave energy converters are comprised of plastics, concrete, and both ferrous and non-ferrous metals which can be reused and recycled (Uihlein 2016). But around 10% of the leftover materials must go in a landfill (Uihlein 2016). It is important to use materials that can withstand years of sometimes extreme ocean climate conditions to avoid any corrosion and breakdown of the materials into the environment (Tiron et al. 2015). Most wave energy converters are made of an average 55 percent concrete and less than 10 percent plastics and metals (Uihlein 2016). Generally, steel takes up 45 percent of the total weight of the device (Uihlein 2016). OWCs specifically have around 60 percent steel and a little over 30 percent concrete making up their total weight (Uihlein 2016).

The shape of the OWC design is very crucial in order to obtain the maximum wave flow and power (Falcão and Henriques 2016). The goal is to increase the energy absorbed from the waves while decreasing any losses from the process of converting the energy (Liu 2016). OWCs utilize many different shapes including “J,” “U,” and “V” shapes (Falcão and Henriques 2016). The shape influences the physics and hydrodynamics of the waves which plays a huge part in how much and how fast air is pushed through the turbine (Iino et al. 2016). Apart from shape, engineers have experimented with the inclination, size, and many other factors in efforts to find the optimum and most efficient design to harness the most wave energy (Iino et al. 2016). The most common, and one of the simpler designs of off-shore OWCs is a partly submerged vertical cylinder that has an open bottom chamber (Konispoliatis et al. 2016).

Earlier OWCs of the 1980’s -1990’s have a power capacity of 60-500 kW (Falcão 2010). The two most powerful OWCs built to date were constructed in the UK and Australia and had power capacities of 1 MW (Falcão and Henriques 2016). Unfortunately, both were wrecked in deployment due to rough ocean conditions which causes concern in construction, safety, and cost (Falcão and Henriques 2016). For these reasons, less than half of the number of open water (floating) OWCs have been launched compared to shoreline (fixed) OWCs (Falcão 2010). The two cases above are examples demonstrating that offshore OWCs tend to be more expensive, and are harder and more dangerous to install because of open ocean conditions (Falcão 2010). They also require deep-water moorings and long underwater electrical cables (Falcão 2010). Shoreline OWCs are preferred because they are easier to construct and maintain (Falcão and Henriques 2016).

Environmental Impacts

There is insufficient research and a large margin of uncertainty when it comes to the environmental impacts of wave energy converters because they have largely been deployed in short experimental/trial stages (Frid et al. 2012). What is known and presented are mainly estimations and predictions of long-term environmental effects (Frid et al. 2012). Additionally, wave energy devices will have different effects on different ecosystems (Frid et al. 2012). The location and mass of a wave energy converter are important in determining its environmental impact. The total material mass of the device itself should not be an obstruction in the environment where it is constructed and deployed (Uihlein 2016). For example, for offshore devices there are extensive areas that need to be avoided such as shipping lanes, military zones, marine archaeological sites, mining zones, oil fields, conservation areas, and more (Langhamer et al. 2010). And for onshore devices, areas to avoid include highly populated areas, marine life breeding grounds, and conservation zones (Frid et al. 2012).

There are also some unintended positive impacts that wave energy can have on an ecosystem. Positive correlations have been found between the volume of material and environmental impacts (Uihlein 2016). For instance, wave energy converters can protect a marine habitat by blocking commercial fishers from using large trolling nets (Langhamer et al. 2010). This acts as a conservation zone for the marine life in the area increasing fish density and diversity (Langhamer et al. 2010). The presence of wave energy converters may also attract marine life that form artificial reefs on or around the devices as a new habitat (Langhamer et al. 2010). This could be harmless to the device itself if the location of newly formed habitats is around the base of the structure (Langhamer et al. 2010). It is undesirable if the buildup of organic mass is encroaching or limiting the movement of functional parts, or adding extra weight to the device (Tiron et al. 2015). For example, a buildup of mussel, oyster, barnacles, or algae growing on the structure can damage the device itself or block water flow (Tiron et al. 2015). Unwanted biomass buildup, known as biofouling, is likely to occur in some marine ecosystems compared to others especially since maintenance is already difficult and expensive for offshore wave energy converters (Tiron et al. 2015). Similar to the artificial reef effect, it is known that floating structures attract fish because they serve as shelter from predators and areas to spawn (Langhamer et al. 2010). Birds can also be attracted to these devices as resting and feeding spots (Frid et al. 2012). The result of putting floating structures out where there was not before creates new habitat that may introduce new trophic opportunities and change the flow of the food web when new species create new niches (Langhamer et al. 2010).

The moorings and foundation are the portion of the wave energy converters that have the most environmental impact (Uihlein 2016). The moorings of offshore wave energy devices can have harmful effects because they can disturb the seabed and alter the geological surface of the ocean floor when anchored down (Langhamer et al. 2010). Because they jet out perpendicular to the shore, some designs of onshore wave energy devices will change the natural shape and erosion patterns of the coastline which may cause some new topographic features such as sandbars to form (Langhamer et al. 2010). Both situations for offshore and onshore wave energy converters alter sedimentation transport of the sea floor or shoreline which can damage the surrounding natural ecosystems and habitats (Langhamer et al. 2010). Off-shore devices may also interfere with natural ocean current patterns but no significant effects have been documented (Langhamer et al. 2010). Although, many types of fish species depend on ocean currents to transport larvae between spawning grounds and feeding grounds, so wave energy devices, if arranged in a larger field, could adjust the flow of natural ocean currents could have a potential negative impact on fish populations (Frid et al. 2012).

Some concerns over noise pollution have come up because open ocean devices have the potential to interrupt communication of marine mammal species that use echolocation (Langhamer et al. 2010). There is also a hypothesis that noise can interfere with some fish species who use sound to find nursery locations (Frid et al. 2012). The level of noises and vibrations emitted during construction of OWCs would likely exceed the threshold of tolerance for many marine species and can scare them off from their habitats (Frid et al. 2012). Even though a handful of concerns over noise pollution have come up, there is still not sufficient research on the long-term effects of noise from continual operation (Langhamer et al. 2010).

Most of the negative environmental impacts of wave energy converters only happen during the construction and deployment phase (Uihlein 2016). From what is known, the long term negative environmental impacts are minimal (Langhamer et al. 2010). It is estimated that the total carbon emissions of an OWC over 25 years, including construction, installation, operation, and decommissioning is only about 24 grams of carbon dioxide (Uihlein 2016). Wave energy is gaining the continual support of the public as more people are learning of this technology (Uihlein 2016). Wave energy is favorable by the public because unlike solar and wind, it is far away enough from residential areas so that it does not require large areas of land, does not create any visual obstructions, and does not create any sound disturbances to people (Uihlein 2016).

Conclusion

Ocean wave energy is an emerging field in renewable energy. It has many benefits including its overall sustainability and little known environmental impact (Liu 2016). The oscillating wave columns are some of the most dependable wave energy converters because of their relatively simple design (Iino et al. 2016). Despite the simplicity of the concept, high construction costs, little market competition, and little research are some reasons why wave energy has not boomed (Clément et al. 2002). Investigating the long-term environmental effects of wave energy is an ongoing process. Studies of wave energy converters are difficult and costly (Langhamer et al. 2010). Oscillating wave columns and other wave energy technologies need the support of government and long term funding in order for it to reach commercialization at the same level as wind and solar power (Uihlein 2016). But it is possible that wave energy could reach the level of importance that wind and hydropower were at ten years ago (Langhamer et al. 2010).

Another challenge is the fact that waves can be unpredictable. When there is irregularity in the direction and amplitude of the waves, it is difficult to get to maximum efficiency (Clément et al. 2002). Furthermore, if there is an extreme weather event such as a hurricane, the waves might generate a hundred times the average loading which can severely damage the OWC (Clément et al. 2002). Because wave energy is unpredictable by nature, more studies taking wave variability into account are needed to find the most efficient way to harness the power of waves with the least amount of negative environmental impact (Uihlein 2016). However, it is possible that in the future we may find wave energy technologies arranged in vast arrays in wave energy farms (Uihlein 2016). As better technologies are developed over time and more people are investing in renewable energy, wave energy will most likely transition into global commercialization sooner than later (Uihlein 2016).

When I think about the use of the 3D visualization, I wish I had the knowledge and use of 3D technology when I originally wrote that research paper. The 3D virtual reality video of the wave energy converter summarizes the information in my paper and converts it into a format that is much more realistic and immersive than if I just had a slideshow of pictures of one to accompany my paper. I believe more educators should utilize 3D technology in their teaching methods. That’s why I can agree with Dr. Culhane statement, “On the road to that version of reality we still have a lot of work to do, but in my mind it starts with teaching our children (and ourselves) that it is normal to ‘speak 3D’.”

[fewnexusalyse]

Relational Summary: Module 1

To start with all honesty, I was unsure what “FEW Nexus“ exactly meant when I registered for this course. But after an introduction of the course from Dr. Culhane, I have a better understanding of the basis of the food, energy, water, (and really waste too) nexus. So follow along with me this semester as I navigate the FEW nexus, beginning with:

The Dimensions of the FEW Nexus

When problem-solving in sustainability, most often we think from a linear perspective. But there’s more to simply finding an easy solution because there are hidden costs to any benefit. Any sustainability issue involves different nexus combinations, including water, food, energy, trade, climate, and population growth. As Mohtar and Daher put it in their article “The creation of those nexuses comes as a result of realizing the multidimensionality and complexity of the issue.”

 In the video lecture, Dr. Culhane explains nexus thinking as a 3D model. Thinking in 3D space allows you to view the object from all angles. Therefore, nexus thinking helps to find any hidden parameters. Furthermore as our classmate Grace pointed out in the Facebook comments, “Nexus thinking expands your view of a situation, it allows you to address a problem holistically rather than individually, which I believe is more efficient.”

In the video lecture, all these different terms such as “cradle-to-cradle,” “downcycling,” and “praxis” were thrown at us. But what is a real-world application of these terms? The answer: biodigesters! Dr. Culhane stated that “biodigesters are the ultimate nexus technology.” In the biodigestion process, waste is no longer waste and it “closes the loop” by eliminating any step in which food, energy, water, or waste does not have a purpose.  

I had the opportunity to see biodigestion in action on a larger scale when I was in Germany on a study abroad in the summer of 2016. We visited Freiamt (pictured above), a Black Forest community that exports electricity. The community of about 4,300 inhabitants produces 200% of their electricity needs from renewable energy (solar panels, wind turbines, and biodigesters.) We toured a farm with a biogas plant that produces over one million kilowatt hours of electricity annually and delivers heat for 14 apartments as well as the local elementary school. 

In a holistic view of sustainability, we “must meet the needs of present and future generations for its products and services, while ensuring profitability, environmental “ health, and social and economic equity” (FAO 2013, 11). So if a little town in Germany can achieve sustainability, why can’t we? Well as Dr. Culhane explained, it is our job to be advocates of change and to make nexus thinking the new norm because frankly, we are running out of time to educate the human population about the FEW nexus. 

How do we educate others about the FEW nexus? We can start by creating and sharing multimedia sources in this course such as our classmate Rarosue’s website and YouTube channel, or participating in sustainable initiatives outside of the classroom. And in another perspective that our fellow classmate Bonnie presented: “we should work together to solve the common problem: replacing our selfishness with selflessness.”