Expansion of Sewer, Water and District Heating Networks in Cold Climate Regions: An Integrated Sustainability Assessment
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. System Boundaries
2.2. Case Description
2.3. Alternatives
2.3.1. Choice of Alternatives
2.3.2. Alternative 1: Gravity Sewer and High-Temperature District Heating
2.3.3. Alternative 2: Gravity Sewer and Low-Temperature District Heating
2.3.4. Alternative 3: Low-Pressure Sewer and Low-Temperature District Heating
2.3.5. Alternative 4: Gravity Sewer and Geothermal Heat Pumps
2.3.6. Alternative 5: Low-Pressure Sewer and Geothermal Heat Pumps
2.4. Sustainability Criteria
2.4.1. Environment
2.4.2. Economy
2.4.3. Social
2.4.4. Health and Safety
2.4.5. Technical
2.5. Sustainability Assessment Method
2.5.1. Method Selection
2.5.2. Determination of Weights, Normalisation and Aggregation
2.6. Sensitivity Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Environmental Indicators
3.1.1. Cumulative Exergy Demand
3.1.2. Global Warming Potential
3.1.3. Abiotic Depletion Potential of Elements
3.2. Economic Indicator
3.3. Social Indicator
3.4. Health and Safety Indicator
3.5. Technical Indicators
3.6. Scores, Weights and Overall Weighted Scores
3.7. Sensitivity Analysis
3.7.1. Changes in Criteria Weights
3.7.2. Changes in Input Parameter Values
4. Discussion
4.1. Sustainability Indicators
4.2. Applicability
4.3. Generalisability
4.4. Benefits of Utility Integration with Low-Temperature District Heating
5. Conclusions
- The alternative with traditional deep-buried water services networks and geothermal heat pumps outranked the alternatives with LPS and/or district heating from biomass and peat. This result appeared robust to changes in criteria weights and input parameter values (e.g., urban density, lifespan of heat pumps, linear costs); however, the effects of changing more than one parameter/weight at a time were not investigated.
- The reliability criterion was given the highest weight (29%) by the stakeholders, but more research efforts on the relative reliability of district heating versus heat pumps and gravity versus LPS is needed, especially to model reliability as experienced by the households.
- The integration of LTDH, gravity sewer and drinking water pipes in a single shallow trench was shown to reduce total cost by 15% in comparison to traditional water service and district heating networks. This alternative would top the sustainability ranking if the district heating source was changed from biomass and peat to shallow geothermal energy (made possible by LTDH), or if the weight of the affordability criterion was raised from 24% to 65%.
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Werner, S. District heating and cooling in Sweden. Energy 2017, 126, 419–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frederiksen, S.; Werner, S. District Heating and Cooling; Studentlitteratur AB: Lund, Sweden, 2013; ISBN 9789144085302. [Google Scholar]
- Lund, H.; Werner, S.; Wiltshire, R.; Svendsen, S.; Thorsen, J.E.; Hvelplund, F.; Mathiesen, B.V. 4th Generation District Heating (4GDH). Energy 2014, 68, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lauenburg, P. Technical and Research Overview over Fourth Generation District Heating (Teknik och Forskningsöversikt över Fjärde Generationens Fjärrvärmeteknik, in Swedish); Department of Energy Sciences, Faculty of Engineering, Lund University: Lund, Sweden, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Pericault, Y.; Risberg, M.; Vesterlund, M.; Viklander, M.; Hedström, A. A novel freeze protection strategy for shallow buried sewer pipes: Temperature modelling and field investigation. Water Sci. Technol. 2017, 76, 294–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De la Fuente, A.; Pons, O.; Josa, A.; Aguado, A. Multi-Criteria Decision Making in the sustainability assessment of sewerage pipe systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 4762–4770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Koo, D.H.; Ariaratnam, S.T. Application of a Sustainability Model for Assessing Water Main Replacement Options. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2008, 134, 563–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontu, K.; Rinne, S.; Olkkonen, V.; Lahdelma, R.; Salminen, P. Multicriteria evaluation of heating choices for a new sustainable residential area. Energy Build. 2015, 93, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gällivare Municipality. Housing Provision Plan 2012-2030 (Bostadsförsörjningsplan 2012–2030, in Swedish). Available online: http://www.gellivare.se/PageFiles/14080/Bostadsförsörjningsplan Gällivare kommun 121108.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2018).
- Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI). Normal Annual Average Temperature (Normal årsmedeltemperatur, in Swedish). Available online: http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/temperatur/normal-arsmedeltemperatur-1.3973 (accessed on 13 August 2017).
- Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI). Normal Average Temperature for January (Normal medeltemperatur för januari, in Swedish). Available online: http://www.smhi.se/klimatdata/meteorologi/temperatur/normal-medeltemperatur-for-januari-1.3976 (accessed on 13 August 2017).
- Boverket. Boverket’s Building Regulations—Mandatory Provisions and General Recommendations, BBR. Available online: http://www.boverket.se/globalassets/publikationer/dokument/2016/boverkets-building-regulations--mandatory-provisions-and-general-recommendations-bbr-23.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2018).
- SWWA. P110 Part 1 and 2, Transport of Stormwater and Wastewater (P110 del 1 och 2, Avledning av Dag-, Drän- och Spillvatten, in Swedish); Swedish Water and Wastewater Association: Bromma, Sweden, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Raymond, D.; Scothorn, P.; Zhao, J.Q.; Rajani, B.B.; Daigle, L. A Practical measure to prevent frozen water service lines—The Region of Ottawa Carleton’s experience. In Proceedings of the CSCE 1999 Annual Conference—14th Canadian Hydrotechnical Conference, Regina, SK, Canada, 2–5 June 1999; pp. 421–430. [Google Scholar]
- Swedish Energy Agency. Heatpumps’ Role on the Heating Market (Värmepumparnas roll på Uppvärmningsmarknaden, in Swedish). Available online: https://energimyndigheten.a-w2m.se/FolderContents.mvc/Download?ResourceId=3044 (accessed on 5 February 2018).
- Pericault, Y.; Kärrman, E.; Viklander, M.; Hedström, A. Data supporting the life cycle impact assessment and cost evaluation of technical alternatives for providing water and heating services to a suburban development in Gällivare Sweden. Data Br. J. 2018, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Hellström, D.; Jeppsson, U.; Kärrman, E. A framework for systems analysis of sustainable urban water management. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2000, 20, 311–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanjuan-Delmás, D.; Petit-Boix, A.; Gasol, C.M.; Villalba, G.; Suárez-Ojeda, M.E.; Gabarrell, X.; Josa, A.; Rieradevall, J. Environmental assessment of different pipelines for drinking water transport and distribution network in small to medium cities: A case from Betanzos, Spain. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 66, 588–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghafghazi, S.; Sowlati, T.; Sokhansanj, S.; Melin, S. A multicriteria approach to evaluate district heating system options. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 1134–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bösch, M.E.; Hellweg, S.; Huijbregts, M.A.J.; Frischknecht, R. Applying cumulative exergy demand (CExD) indicators to the ecoinvent database. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2007, 12, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frischknecht, R.; Wyss, F.; Büsser Knöpfel, S.; Lützkendorf, T.; Balouktsi, M. Cumulative energy demand in LCA: The energy harvested approach. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 20, 957–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- VDI. Cumulative Energy Demand Terms, Definitions, Methods of Calculation; VDI-Richtlinien 4600, Verein Deutscher Ingenieure; Beuth: Düsseldorf, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- IPCC. Climate Change 2007, The Physical Basis—Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Van Oers, L.; de Koning, A.; Guinée, J.B.; Huppes, G. Abiotic Resource Depletion in LCA; Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management: Delft, The Netherlands, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- International Organization for Standardization. Standard 14040: Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Nacka Municipality. Comparative Study between LPS and Gravity Sewer System (Jämförelsestudie LTA-Självfallssystem, in Swedish); Nacka Municipality: Nacka, Sweden, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Kärrman, E.; Pettersson, F.; Erlandsson, Å. Costs for Water and Wastewater Systems in Transition Areas—A Guide Book (Kostnader för VA i Omvandlingsområden—en Handledning, in Swedish); Research report 2012-09 of the Swedish Water and Wastewater Association (SVU rapport); Svenskt Vatten AB: Stockholm, Sweden, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Swedish Work Environment Authority (Arbetsmiljöverket). Work Accidents and Sickness Statistics (Arbetsskadestatistik, in Swedish). Available online: http://webbstat.av.se/QvAJAXZfc/opendoc.htm?document=accesspoint%5Carbetsskadestatistik.qvw&host=QVS%40vmextapp02-hk&anonymous=true (accessed on 27 February 2018).
- VASS. Swedish Water and Wastewater Association Statistic System (Svenskt Vattens Statistik System, in Swedish). Available online: http://www.vass-statistik.se/ (accessed on 15 December 2017).
- Lindqvist, B.G.; Lönnbring, J.; Persson, G.; Svensson, H. Low Pressure Sewerage Systems with Lesser Dimater Piping (Tryckavloppssystem av rör med klena dimensioner, in Swedish); Swedish Water and Wastewater Association: Bromma, Sweden, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Haglund Stignor, C.; Larsson, K.; Jensen, S.; Larsson, J.; Berg, J.; Lidbom, P.; Rolfsman, L. Improved Reliability of Heat Pumps in Single Family Homes (Förbättrad driftsäkerhet hos villavärmepumpar, in Swedish); Report SP-RAPP 2012:41; Technical Research Institute of Sweden: Borås, Sweden, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Åkerström, Å. Re-Investment Model for Existing District Heating Networks (Reinvesteringsmodell för befintligt fjärrvärmenät, in Swedish). Master’s Thesis, Technical Faculty of Lund University (LTH), Lund, Sweden, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Lai, E.; Lundie, S.; Ashbolt, N.J. Review of multi-criteria decision aid for integrated sustainability assessment of urban water systems. Urban Water J. 2008, 5, 315–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabir, G.; Sadiq, R.; Tesfamariam, S. A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2014, 10, 1176–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martín-Gamboa, M.; Iribarren, D.; García-Gusano, D.; Dufour, J. A review of life-cycle approaches coupled with data envelopment analysis within multi-criteria decision analysis for sustainability assessment of energy systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 150, 164–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diaz-Balteiro, L.; González-Pachón, J.; Romero, C. Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 258, 607–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rowley, H.V.; Peters, G.M.; Lundie, S.; Moore, S.J. Aggregating sustainability indicators: Beyond the weighted sum. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 111, 24–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lundie, S.; Ashbolt, N.; Lai, E.; Kärrman, E.; Blaikie, J.; Anderson, J. PART A: Methodology for Evaluating the Overall Sustainability of Urban Water Systems; WSAA Occasional Paper No.17; Water Services Association of Australia: Melbourne, Australia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Pollesch, N.L.; Dale, V.H. Normalization in sustainability assessment: Methods and implications. Ecol. Econ. 2016, 130, 195–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nardo, M.; Saisana, M.; Saltelli, A.; Tarantola, S. Tools for Composite Indicators Building; Applied statistics group of the Joint Research Centre—European Commission: Ispra, Italy, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Triantaphyllou, E. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- GEODH. Developing Geothermal District Heating in Europe; European Geothermal Energy Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Klöpffer, W. In defense of the cumulative energy demand. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1997, 2, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frischknecht, R. The seductive effect of identical physical units. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1997, 2, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commision. 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy—Outcome of the October 2014 European Council. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/sites/clima/files/strategies/2030/docs/2030_euco_conclusions_en.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2018).
- Miszta-Kruk, K. Reliability and failure rate analysis of pressure, vacuum and gravity sewer systems based on operating data. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Residential Unit | Annual Heat Demand (kWh) | Daily Water Consumption (L) |
---|---|---|
Single family home | 16,900 | 405 |
Apartment | 8050 | 272 |
Alternative | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Indicator | A1: G+HTDH | A2: G+LTDH | A3: LPS+LTDH | A4: G+GHP | A5: LPS+GHP |
I5: Number of actions to be performed by tenants | 1 a | 1 a | 2 a,d | 2 b,c | 3 b,c,d |
I6: Work accident frequency [accident/worker/year] | 0.016 | 0.012 | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.012 |
I7a: Failure rate-sewer [failure/year/connection] | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.03 | 0.11 |
I7b: Failure rate-heating [failure/year/household] | 0.16 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
Scores | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Criterion | Weight | A1: G+HTDH | A2: G+LTDH | A3: LPS+LTDH | A4: G+GHP | A5: LPS+GHP |
C1. Energy efficiency | 0.24 | 36 | 37 | 37 | 100 | 87 |
C2. Climate preservation | 0.05 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 100 | 88 |
C3. Material efficiency | 0.06 | 100 | 54 | 54 | 35 | 34 |
C4. Affordability | 0.24 | 85 | 100 | 96 | 68 | 70 |
C5. User friendliness | 0.06 | 100 | 100 | 50 | 50 | 33 |
C6. Safety for workers | 0.06 | 75 | 100 | 100 | 75 | 100 |
C7. Reliability | 0.29 | 56 | 55 | 18 | 100 | 63 |
Overall weighted score | 63 | 65 | 50 | 84 | 70 | |
Ranking | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 2 |
Minimum Weight Variation to Replace Top-Ranked Alternative A4 (G+GHP) by Alternative: | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Criterion | Weight | A1: G+HTDH | A2: G+LTDH | A3: LPS+LTDH | A5: LPS+GHP |
C1. Energy efficiency | 0.24 | - | - | - | - |
C2. Climate preservation | 0.05 | - | - | - | - |
C3. Material efficiency | 0.06 | +525% | +1635% | +2832% | - |
C4. Affordability | 0.24 | +524% | +249% | +506% | +2714% |
C5. User friendliness | 0.06 | +721% | +651% | - | - |
C6. Safety for workers | 0.06 | - | +1368% | +2417% | +966% |
C7. Reliability | 0.29 | - | - | - | - |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pericault, Y.; Kärrman, E.; Viklander, M.; Hedström, A. Expansion of Sewer, Water and District Heating Networks in Cold Climate Regions: An Integrated Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103743
Pericault Y, Kärrman E, Viklander M, Hedström A. Expansion of Sewer, Water and District Heating Networks in Cold Climate Regions: An Integrated Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103743
Chicago/Turabian StylePericault, Youen, Erik Kärrman, Maria Viklander, and Annelie Hedström. 2018. "Expansion of Sewer, Water and District Heating Networks in Cold Climate Regions: An Integrated Sustainability Assessment" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103743