Karen Rollins - Best Environmental Practices for Managing Energy, Water and Wastewater at Off-grid Mountain Facilities

Best Environmental Practices for Managing Energy, Water and Wastewater at Off-

grid Mountain Facilities

Karen RollinsBackcountry Energy Environmental Solutions (BEES)

Sustainable Summits July 2014

www.beeshive.org

Approach

• Assimilate information about options for managing:1. Energy 3. Grey water2. Potable water 4. Black water

• Compare the technologies using criteria:– Cost– Reliability– Installation, operation, maintenance– Environment– Cultural value– Health & Safety– Planning & permitting

• Develop recommendations- BEES philosophy:• Reduce environmental impacts• Reduce the use of fossil fuels• Foster energy efficiency

Reduce the Need for Heat Energy

Alpine Club of Canada - Des Poilus Hut

• Energy is needed in the backcountry for heating, cooking, lighting, waste management, ventilation and communications

• Energy options include:– wood burning– propane– micro-hydro– photovoltaics– wind power

1. Energy

Criteria Comments

Installation operation maintenance

Very reliable, logs readily available, easy to operate

Environment Incomplete combustion results in air quality issues.Wood burning produces greenhouse gases.

Cultural value A fire may be desirable, traditional heat source

Health and safety

Some air quality issues, may be a fire hazard

Wood Burning

Criteria Comments


Reliable, readily available, functions well in cold temperatures

Environment Fossil fuel = greenhouse gas emissions, but lower than wood burningSome air quality issues (CO, NO, particulates)

Cultural value None

Health and safety

Lowest flammability rating of all fossil fuels

Propane

Wood Burning Stove vs Propane Stove

• Propane is 25% less expensive than wood burning once you consider transportation costs

• Propane requires half the number of helicopter flights than wood burning

• Propane is less polluting to the indoor and outdoor air quality

• Propane produces 15% less CO2 (greenhouse gas emissions)

Criteria Comments


Newer models are more reliable.Installation requires site assessment.

Environment Affects stream flow and aquatic life.Considered ‘clean’ powerSome visual and noise.

Cultural value May be seen as ‘green’

Health and safety

Normal electrical safety procedures

Planning and permitting

Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Parks Canada Waterpower Initiative, Dominion Water Power Act and Regulations

Micro-hydro

Criteria Comments


Reliable.Weak link = batteries

Environment No issues with soils, air quality, odour, noise, flora & fauna.Some visual impact, some issues with end of life recycling.

Cultural value May be seen as ‘green’

Health and safety

Normal electrical safety procedures

Photovoltaics

Criteria Comments


Choose harsh cold model Steps prior to installationAnnual maintenance

Environment No impact to soils, odour, air quality.Some visual impact, noise, birds & bats.No fossil fuel.

Cultural value May be seen as ‘green’ May be inappropriate invasion of natural surroundings

Health and safety

Normal electrical safety procedures, ice shedding, shadow flicker, helicopter flight path


Environment Canada

Wind Turbine

Recommendations: - Choose a wind turbine with proven success in harsh

cold climates

• Potable water = drinking water• Sources: snowmelt, streams, springs, glacial melt water• Treatment is required to kill or remove disease-causing

microorganisms: bacteria, protozoa, worms, viruses• Other issues: turbidity, heavy metals

2. Potable Water

Method Advantages Disadvantages

Boiling SimpleDoes not alter taste

Takes timeConsumes energyHepatitis not completely inactivated

Chemical treatment

Used anywhereDoes not consume energy

Takes timeTaste may be alteredCold water takes longer to disinfectTurbidity decreases effectiveness

Filtration(ceramic)

Simple procedureDoes not alter tasteDoes no consume energy

Equipment is fragile, needs cleaningDoes not remove viruses

UV treatment

Not as much energy as boilingDoes not alter taste

Reliable power source requiredInactivated micros not removedTurbidity decreases effectiveness

Potable Water Treatment Methods

• Grey water = kitchen waste water• Contains: soap, food particles, oil, grease, nutrients,

bacteria, viruses, chemicals• Objectives of grey water treatment are to:

– Control odours– Not provide an attraction for wildlife– Prevent contamination of groundwater and surface water– Prevent eutrophication of surface waters

3. Grey Water

Grey Water Grease Trap

Grey Water Dispersion Field

• Sieve under the sink to filter out large food particles

• Bucket carried out to drainage field• Mechanical processing: sand and gravel• Biological processing: bacteria on sand

and gravel decompose organic material

• Black water = sewage = urine, fecal waste, toilet paper• Objectives of black water management:

– control pollution on site– prevent disease through human contact

• Options for black water management in use in Canada’s alpine include:– barrel fly-out– incineration– composting– tertiary waste treatment– carry-out

4. Black Water

Criteria Comments


Simple method

Environment Requires sufficient soil, will not decompose under freezing T, can pollute ground and surface water, odours

Cultural value May be seen as having low environmental protection standards

Health and safety

No issues if operating properly


1 meter above ground water, 30 m from surface water

Pit Toilet

Criteria Comments


Reliable, requires access to helicopters and trained staff

Environment Functions in any environment.No local environmental impact to soil and water. Environmental impact from odours, noise, fossil fuel, risk of spill

Cultural value All waste removed is positive, helicopter use is negative

Health and safety

Maintenance staff may come into contact with barrel contents.


A permit is required to fly in the National Parks

Barrel Fly-out

Criteria Comments


Reliability depends on manufacturer, requires a custodian, propane and electric, alpine requires a longer burning time

Environment Odour and air quality depend on the manufacturer, no impact on local water or soils

Cultural value All waste removed - positive, odours and fossil fuels - negative

Health and safety

No issues


Permit may be required to deposit ash on site

Incinerating Toilet

Criteria Comments


Reliability is unpredictable: final product requires further treatment

Environment Requires a heat source, fossil fuels, leachate may pose a risk to ground and surface waters

Cultural value May be seen as ‘green’, warm seat, no odour

Health and safety

Risk to maintenance (respirator)


No regulations

Composting Toilet

Recommendations: - vertical chamber (first in – first out), bigger is better- source of heat – fossil fuels- electrical energy source to run the ventilation fan- knowledgeable staff to operate- end product (hazardous waste) needs further treatment

Vermicomposting

• Process of composting that uses worms and bacteria to convert solid waste into a stabilized and safe end product

Criteria Comments


Reliability varies, requires qualified technician

Environment Requires warm conditions, effluent may contain pharmaceuticals and synthetic hormones

Cultural value May be seen as responsible management, flush toilet is possible

Health and safety

No issues provided effluent is of high quality


Regular monitoring of effluent

Tertiary Waste Treatment

Criteria Comments


Purchase bags, education program and checking action to ensure compliance

Environment Requires 100% compliance, end disposal may have global environmental issues

Cultural value Individuals may feel good about carrying out their own waste and leaving no footprint or they may feel it is a burden

Health and safety

Some risk to the user


Regulations for disposal need to be developed

Carry Out

Urine Diversion (Source Separation)

• Involves separating urine from feces before they are allowed to mix (urine is sterile, feces contain pathogens)

• Urine may be dispersed on site in constructed leach field

• Evaporation of urine is a promising alternative to on site disposal

• May reduce the amount of remaining waste by 80-90%

Dehydrating Toilets

• Urine source separation combined with dehydration of the solids can reduce the amount of waste by 90%

• Pathogen elimination cannot be totally achieved with this method

• Dehydration will cease if the pile freezes• Urine Diversion dehydrating Toilets (UDDT)

– Ecosphere Technologies (France)

• When choosing a black water option consider:– Access– Environmental conditions (soils, temperature, proximity to

surface and ground water)– Amount of use (seasonal, number of visitors)– Energy requirements vs energy availability– Budget– Availability of resources (custodian, access to transportation,

level of skill required to operate the technology)– Health and safety codes– Land manager requirements

Black Water Option Selection

Decision Tree – Black Water

BEES B a c k c o u n t r y E n e r g y E n v i r o n m e n t a l S o l u t i o n s

www.beeshive.org