[스크랩] 생태자급자족퀴즈 218번 퀴즈 정답 - 빌딩내 오폐수를 100％ 생태적으로 정화하여 중수로 재활용하는 비법은?

빌딩내 오폐수를 100% 생태적으로 정화하여 중수로 재활용하는 비법의 정답은 미국에 있는 (주)Worrel Water Technologies 의 생태오폐정화시스템(리빙머신)입니다.

 

2011년2월 발표된 내용으로는 신축예정인 13층 높이에 277,500 평방피트 규모의 San Fransisco Public Utilites Commisson 샌프란시스코 공중시설관리위원회 빌딩에  위 회사가  생태오폐수 정화시스템인 Living Machine을 실내에 시공하기로 발표되었습니다

 

년간 절수량은 75만갤런과 추가로 90만갤런을 저장 보간용으로 절수된답니다.

하루 처리량은  5천갤런(18,925리터)이며 리빙머신 사이즈는 1천평방피트(92.9평방미터)입니다.

 

악취와 모기발생, 위생불안이 없으며 핵심적인 비법 1은 2층 저장수로로 설계되어 있으며

비법 2는 오폐수를 지하 저장소에서 바이오필름막에 서식하는 미생물이 오폐수의 유기물을 먹어치운후 2차 저장소에 오폐수가 이동되면 대기중 산소에 의해 급속히 정화된후 화장실수, 관개용수,  기타 쿨링타워같은 관리용수로 100% 재활용하게 됩니다. 

비법 3은 전자동 컴퓨터 조절입니다.

 

대한민국 정부도 모든 빌딩의 신축과 재건축때 이런 사례를 참고하여 관련법령을 개정하여 의무적으로 이런 리빙머신을 시공하게 하여 대한민국의 4대강과 도심하천, 연근해 및 지구촌 환경보호와 막대한 수자원절약에 선도적인 국가의 대열에 참가하길 바랍니다^^

 

이외 참고로 세계적으로 저명한 생태 건축가인 윌리엄 맥도너

Willian McDonough 가 환경법 준수로 고민하고 있던 포드 공장의 오폐수를 생태적으로 처리한 사례도 모범사례라 할수 있습니다.

 

 

펌글 1:

Wastewater Treatment Plant In San Francisco

 

 Is a Gorgeous Indoor Wetland

 

by Jessica Dailey, 02/21/11

filed under: Sustainable Building, Water Issues Read more: Wastewater Treatment Plant In San Francisco Is a Gorgeous Indoor Wetland | Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

 

 

When you think of a wastewater treatment plant, you probable picture a vast, unsightly pool surrounded by a concrete facility. You probably do not picture a serene wetland in the lobby of an office building, but that’s exactly how sewage will be treated in the new building of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Design by Worrell Water Technologies, http://www.worrellwater.com the constructed wetland, called Living Machine, will clean the building’s wastewater to make it suitable for reused in

toilets, irrigation, and maintenance.

 

 

The constructed wetland will be integrated into the building’s lobby and outside landscaping, using Worrell’s advance ecological engineering to clean all of the building’s black and gray water. The system can treat up to 5,000 gallons of watewater each day and requires only 1,000 square feet. Wastewater will flow into watertight basins below the wetlands’ surface so there is no smell, no mosquitos, and no health hazards. The end result is a lush green space and natural habitat that will save the Public Utilities Company up to 750,000 gallons of water every year. An additional 900,000 gallons will be saved for nonpotable future uses.

A Living Machine system mimics a tidal wetland, one of nature’s most productive ecosystems. The computer-controlled system treats wastewater in a more energy-efficient and cost-effective way than traditional wastewater plants. Inside the watertight basins, a biofilm grows on a special gravel. When the basins fill, the microorganisms in the biofilm begin eating the nutrients in the wastewater. The water is then drained and the basins are filled with atmospheric oxygen, which rapidly consumes and converts any remaining nutrients.

The constructed wetland is just one of many green technologies that the San Franscisco Public Utilities Commission will be implementing in its new 13-story building. The structure will also generate its own energy through solar panels and wind turbines.

Via Environmental Protection

Photo credit: Living Machine, Worrell Water Technologies

 

 

 

Read more: Wastewater Treatment Plant In San Francisco Is a Gorgeous Indoor Wetland | Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

 

3 Responses to “Wastewater Treatment Plant In San Francisco Is a Gorgeous Indoor Wetland”

lazyreader says:

February 23, 2011 at 8:15 am

Real Utilities have to deal with hundreds of billions of gallons a year, pardon the pun but these devices are just a drop in the bucket. I agree it’s interesting if applied to every commercial building in the city. But this is more aesthetically pleasing than it is useful.

Other devices like membrane bio-reactors and thermal de-polymerization offer useful industrial scale applications to deal with wastewater.

http://inhabitat.com/researchers-use-algae-to-treat-wastewater-and-generate-biofuel/

waterexpert says:

March 2, 2011 at 8:33 am

This is just a gimmick with no technical (scientific), environmental or economical benefit. The vegetation would look beautiful, no doubt. But if that’s what you are after why not just plant them without running the risk of exposing the public to sewage! There are other methods for treating sewage on a small scale that are far more efficient and economical.

cho says:

July 4, 2011 at 11:24 pm

I don’t really understand former comments. How do you know this garden doens’t work technically? It’s an idea that has been developed for half a century. Even living machine has practiced for 10 years already. Constructed wetland has been involved in industrial scale waste water treatment plant already. Here, living machine tried to present a different idea, treating waste water locally in a more natural way. It’s a LOCAL water solution reducing the stress on city infrastructure. That’s what LEED aims for. Membrane bio-readors or thermal de-polymerization are available only in industrial scale. It’s different concept. Also, it’s actually an energy solution, not for water.

Read more: Wastewater Treatment Plant In San Francisco Is a Gorgeous Indoor Wetland EcoCentre Living Machine – Inhabitat - Green Design Will Save the World

 

 

펌글 2:

CRADLE TO CRADLE: Remaking the Way We

 

 Make Things

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Imagine buildings that generate more energy than they consume and factories whose waste water is clean enough to drink.

Renowned ecological architect Willian McDonough has actually built these things and made them work. This week’s Newsweek has an interview with McDonough, who is bext known for his Cradle-to-cradle philosophy – a vision to to overhaul the Industrial Revolution and the current Cradle-to-Grave model of design and production.

McDonough’ utopianism is finally starting to be taken seriously, as companies start to realize that his philosophy makes good economic sense. McDonough has been hired by numerous Fortune 500 companies, the government of China, and has received three U.S. presidential honors. In 1999, Time magazine recognized him as a “Hero for the Planet”, stating that “his utopianism is grounded in a unified philosophy that in demonstrable and practical ways is changing the design of the world”.

CRADLE TO CRADLE: Remaking the Way We Make Things

Designing the Future, Newsweek Interviews William McDonough Post under WILLIAM MCDONOUGH on Sunday, August 08, 2010

Imagine buildings that generate more energy than they consume and factories whose waste water is clean enough to drink. William McDonough has accomplished these tasks and more. Architect, industrial designer and founder of McDonough Braungart Design Chemistry in Charlottesville, Va., he's not your traditional environmentalist. Others may expend their energy fighting for stricter environmental regulations and repeating the mantra "reduce, reuse, recycle." McDonough's vision for the future includes factories so safe they need no regulation, and novel, safe materials that can be totally reprocessed into new goods, so there's no reason to scale back consumption (or lose jobs). In short, he wants to overhaul the Industrial Revolution—which would sound crazy if he weren't working with Fortune 500 companies and the government of China to make it happen. The recipient of two U.S. presidential honors and the National Design Award, McDonough is the former dean of architecture at the University of Virginia and co-chair of the China-U.S. Center for Sustainable Development. He spoke in New York recently with NEWSWEEK's Anne Underwood.

UNDERWOOD: Why do we need a new industrial revolution?

MCDONOUGH: The Industrial Revolution as a whole was not designed. It took shape gradually as industrialists and engineers figured out how to make things. The result is that we put billions of pounds of toxic materials in the air, water and soil every year and generate gigantic amounts of waste. If our goal is to destroy the world—to produce global warming and toxicity and endocrine disruption—we're doing great. But if the goal isn't global warming, what is? I want to crank the wheel of industry in a different direction to produce a world of abundance and good design—a delightful, safe world that our children can play in.

You say that recycling, as it's currently practiced, is "downcycling."

What we call recycling is typically the product losing its quality. Paper gets mixed with other papers, re-chlorinated and contaminated with toxic inks. The fiber length gets shorter, allowing more particles to abrade into the air, where they get into your lungs and nasal passages, and cause irritation. And you end up with gray, fuzzy stuff that doesn't really work for you. That's downcycling.

[My mentor and colleague] Michael Braungart and I coined the term upcycling, meaning that the product could actually get better as it comes through the system. For example, some plastic bottles contain the resi-dues of heavy-metal catalysts. We can remove those residues as the bottles come back to be upcycled.

Not all products lend themselves to that.

Most manufacturers take resources out of the ground and convert them to products that are designed to be thrown away or incinerated within months. We call these "cradle to grave" product flows. Our answer to that is "cradle to cradle" design. Everything is reused—either returned to the soil as nontoxic "biological nutrients" that will biodegrade safely, or returned to industry as "technical nutrients" that can be infinitely recycled. Aluminum is a technical nutrient. It takes tremendous energy to make, but it's easy to recapture and reuse. Since 1880, the human species has made 660 million tons of it. We still know where 440 million tons are today.

Are there products already that meet cradle-to-cradle goals? If so, how do we find them?

Within the month, we will be branding cradle to cradle. Products that meet our criteria for biological and technical nutrients can be certified to use our logo. A note on the packaging will tell you how to recycle it. You'll know: this one goes into my tomato plot when I'm finished or this one goes back to industry forever. We have already approved a nylon, some polyester textiles, running tracks, window shades, chairs from Herman Miller and Steelcase, and carpets from Shaw, which is part of Berkshire Hathaway. The first was a Steelcase fabric that can go back to the soil. We're now working on electronics on a global scale.

How do paper products like magazines fit into this picture?

Why take something as exquisite as a tree and knock it down? Trees make oxygen, sequester carbon, distill water, build soils, convert solar energy to fuel, change colors with the seasons, create microclimates and provide habitat.

My book "Cradle to Cradle," which I wrote with Michael Braungart, is printed on pages made of plastic resins and inorganic fillers that are infinitely recyclable. They're too heavy, but we're working with companies now to develop lightweight plastic papers. We have safe, lightweight inks designed to float off the paper in a bath of 180 degrees—hotter than you would encounter under normal circumstances. We can recapture the inks and reuse them without adding chlorine and dioxins to the environment. And the pages are clean, smooth and white.

So we can keep our trees and have newspapers, too.

Most environmentalists feel guilty about how society behaves, so they say we should make longer-lasting products—for example, a car that lasts 25 years. That car will still use compound epoxies and toxic adhesives, but the ecological footprint is reduced because you've amortized it over a longer time. But what's the result? You lose jobs because people aren't buying as much, and you're using the wrong technology longer. I want five-year cars. Then you can always be getting the newest car—more solar-powered, cleaner, with the newest air bags and safety features. The old car gets upcycled into new cars, so there are still plenty of jobs. And you don't feel guilty about throwing the old one away. People want new technology. You're not typing on an Underwood, if you know what I mean.

So growth is good?

Yes, if you use nature as a model and mentor, if you use modern designs and chemicals that are safe. Growth is destructive if you use energy not from the sun and a system of chemicals that is toxic, so it's anti-life.

Given that industry today fits your definition of anti-life, why aren't you fighting for stricter environmental regulations?

If coal plants release mercury—and mercury is a neurotoxin that damages children's brains—then reducing the amount of mercury in emissions doesn't stop that. It just says, "We'll tell you at what rate you can dispense death." Being less bad is not being good. Our idea is to make production so clean, there's nothing bad left to regulate. This is extremely interesting to people of all political persuasions—those who love the environment and those who want commerce free of regulation.

Can you really have industry so clean it requires no controls?

[At the Rohner textile plant in Switzerland] we designed a fabric safe enough to eat. The manufacturing process uses no mutagens, carcinogens, endocrine disrupters, heavy-metal contaminants or chemicals that cause ozone depletion, allergies, skin desensitization or plant and fish toxicity. We screened 8,000 commonly used chemicals and ended up with 38. When inspectors measured the effluent water, they thought their instruments were broken. The water was as clean as Swiss drinking water. A garden club started using the waste trimmings as mulch. Workers no longer had to wear protective clothing. And it eliminated regulatory paperwork, so they've reduced the cost of production by 20 percent. Why spend money on paperwork, when you can spend it delivering service or paying your workers a living wage?

Where would I find this fabric?

It was selected for upholstery on the new Airbus 380. It's made of worsted wool to keep you at the right temperature—cool when it's hot and warm when it's cold—and [a plant fiber called] ramie to wick away moisture. It's a high-performance-design product. Going ecological doesn't mean downgrading performance criteria.

How do you get more industries to adopt these ideals?

Industries don't change unless they have to or there's some commercial benefit. At Herman Miller [the furniture company], we designed a factory full of daylight and fresh air. Productivity soared. And because of all the natural light, they cut lighting costs by 50 percent—overall energy by 30 percent. We've been doing this a long time. But now that China has taken it up, it portends exciting things.

What are you doing in China?

The China Housing Industry Association has the responsibility for building housing for 400 million people in the next 12 years. We're working with them to design seven new cities. We're identifying building materials of the future, such as a new polystyrene from BASF [with no noxious chemicals]. It can be used to build walls that are strong, lightweight and superinsulating. The building can be heated and cooled for next to nothing. And it's silent. If there are 13 people in the apartment upstairs, you won't hear them.

We've designed a luxurious new toilet. The bowl is like a lotus leaf—so smooth, axle grease slips right off. Nothing sticks to it, including bacteria. A light mist when you're done will be enough to flush it, so you won't use lots of water. We'll have bamboo wetlands nearby to purify the waste—and the bamboo, which grows a foot a day, can be harvested and used for wood.

The Chinese are afraid urbanization will reduce productive farmland, so we'll move farms onto rooftops. At least, that's what I'm proposing. The farmers can live downstairs. And when you look at the city from a distance, it will look like part of the landscape.

Is it practical to put farms on roofs?

Traditional roofs aren't practical. They degrade from thermal shock and ultraviolet radiation and have to be replaced in 20 years. For the Gap's corporate campus in San Bruno, Calif., we planted a "green roof" of ancient grasses. The roof now damps the sounds of jets from the San Francisco airport. It absorbs storm water, which is important because they have serious issues with storm water there. It makes oxygen, provides habitat, and it's beautiful. We also made a green roof for Ford Motor Co.'s River Rouge plant. It saved Ford millions of dollars in storm-water equipment.

How will you fuel the Chinese cities?

I want to see solar power cheaper than coal, but to get the speed and scale to do that fast, you need a place like China. We're not talking about dinky solar collectors on roofs. Think of square miles of marginal land covered with them. This could drop the cost of solar energy an order of magnitude. And for every job making solar panels, there are four jobs putting them in place and maintaining them. We could import these panels, and for every job the Chinese give themselves, we get four. What a gift. And I guarantee you, China will never be able to capture an American photon. We would have indigenous energy and energy security. And we wouldn't be throwing our money into holes in the ground.

And we wouldn't need nuclear energy.

I love nuclear energy. I just want to make sure it stays where God put it—93 million miles away, in the sun.

Your ideas are really catching on.

It's an amazing moment in history. We also have two huge new projects in England—working with the cities of Greenwich and Wembley. The developer, Adrian Wyatt, has asked us to conceive the meta-framework for the project.

We won't get everything right the first time. Change requires experimentation. But no problem can be solved by the same consciousness that created it. Our job is to dream—and to make those dreams happen.

Ford Rouge Center Description

The restoration of the Ford Rouge Center transformed the historic manufacturing complex into a model of 21st Century industrial sustainability. As Ford Motor Co. made plans to expand the manufacturing facility at the Rouge, they were faced with an estimated $50 million to cleanup the toxic stormwater that flowed across the vast area of impervious surfaces into the Rouge River in order to meet new water quality mandates from the US EPA. William McDonough + Partners develop a master plan for the renovation and expansion of new manufacturing facilities that integrated a new form of storm water management infrastructure within the landscape. A 10-acre green roof atop a 1.1 million square foot trunk manufacturing plant lies at the heart of a system of wet meadow gardens, porous paving, hedgerows and bio-swales that attenuates, cleanses, and conveys storm water across the site. By relying on a landscape-based infrastructure requiring a minimum use of pipes, the new stormwater system was implemented for $15 million. This innovative and sustainable design solution, costing less than one-third that of conventional practices, created a powerful and highly-acclaimed business case model for sustainable design. The Ford Rouge Center has won numerous awards from the design, business, and construction industries. It is now recognized as having the one of the most iconic green roof installation in the United States that has helped to transform the green roof industry.

Linearity and scale shape an “industrial strength” landscape that knits buildings and site together in a tightly woven fabric. Hedgerows lined with swales provide infiltration for rainwater, block the cold winter winds, and frame views of the awe-inspiring coke ovens and blast furnaces, juxtaposing the natural and the industrial and making the presence of these structures more keenly felt from the public areas of the site.

 

 

출처 : 로드넷

글쓴이 : 비결 원글보기

메모 :