2 resultados para food restriction and refeeding cycle
em Digital Commons - Michigan Tech
Resumo:
Power distribution systems are susceptible to extreme damage from natural hazards especially hurricanes. Hurricane winds can knock down distribution poles thereby causing damage to the system and power outages which can result in millions of dollars in lost revenue and restoration costs. Timber has been the dominant material used to support overhead lines in distribution systems. Recently however, utility companies have been searching for a cost-effective alternative to timber poles due to environmental concerns, durability, high cost of maintenance and need for improved aesthetics. Steel has emerged as a viable alternative to timber due to its advantages such as relatively lower maintenance cost, light weight, consistent performance, and invulnerability to wood-pecker attacks. Both timber and steel poles are prone to deterioration over time due to decay in the timber and corrosion of the steel. This research proposes a framework for conducting fragility analysis of timber and steel poles subjected to hurricane winds considering deterioration of the poles over time. Monte Carlo simulation was used to develop the fragility curves considering uncertainties in strength, geometry and wind loads. A framework for life-cycle cost analysis is also proposed to compare the steel and timber poles. The results show that steel poles can have superior reliability and lower life-cycle cost compared to timber poles, which makes them suitable substitutes.
Resumo:
Universities in the United States are applying more sustainable approaches to their dining service operations. "The increase in social consciousness and environmental stewardship on college campuses has spurred an array of new and innovative sustainability programs"(ARAMARK Higher Education 2008). University residence dining is typically cafeteria style, with students using trays to carry food. Studies report that food served without trays substantially reduces food waste and water and electrical consumption associated with washing trays. Commonly, these reported results are estimates and not measurements taken under actual operating conditions. This study utilizes measurements recorded under actual dining service conditions in student residence halls at Michigan Technological University to develop the following: 1) operational-specific data on the issues and potential savings associated with a conversion to trayless dining and 2) life cycle assessment (LCA) cost and environmental impact analyses comparing dining with and without trays. For the LCA, the entire life cycle of the system is considered, from the manufacturing to the usage and disposal phases. The study shows that trayless dining reduces food waste because diners carry less food. The total savings for the diner shifts when not using trays for the standard academic year (205 days), with an average number of 700 diners, is 7,032 pounds of food waste from the pre-rinse area (33% reduction) and 3,157 pounds of food waste from the pan washing area (39% reduction). In addition, for each day of the study, the diners consumed more food during the trayless portion of the experiment. One possible explanation for the increased food consumption during this short duration study could be that the diners found it more convenient to eat the extra food on their plate rather than carrying it back for disposal. The trayless dining experiment shows a reduction in dishwasher water, steam, and electrical consumption for each day of the study. The average reduction of dishwasher water, steam, and electrical consumption over the duration of the study were 10.7%, 9.5%, and 6.4% respectively. Trayless dining implementation would result in a decrease of 4,305 gallons of consumption and wastewater discharge, 2.87 mm BTU of steam consumption, and 158 kWh of electrical consumption for the dinner shift over the academic year. Results of the LCA indicate a total savings of $190.4 when trays are not used during the dinner shift. Trayless dining requires zero CO2 eq and cumulative energy demand in the manufacturing stage, reductions of 1005 kg CO2 eq and 861 MJ eq in the usage phase, and reductions of 6458 kg CO2 eq and 1821 MJ eq in the end of the life cycle.