Gold sponsors:
Sustainable Process Integration: Simultaneous Minimisation of Resource Intake and Emissions
Moderators: Dr. Petar Varbanov, Prof. Jiří Jaromír Klemeš
Considering the alarming levels of greenhouse gases (CO2 CH4, NOx) in the atmosphere, a lot of research and technology development is focused on minimising the greenhouse, nitrogen, energy and water footprints (Čuček et al., 2015) in the search for a comprehensive solution in the area of energy savings. This also includes improving the efficiency of fossil fuel installations (Wang et al., 2015).
Energy generation from various sources, as well as the intake of other resources for producing goods and services is clearly measured by the related costs, revenues and profits (Nemet et al., 2015), describing the economic part of the sustainability picture. The various environmental impacts of industrial, commercial and residential activities, measured by the cited footprints (Hoekstra and Tomas, 2014), are the most obvious ones, adding the environmental part of the picture in terms of sustainability. Other key part is the social sustainability – incorporating human health and societal stability.
What can experts in natural sciences and engineering do for providing the appropriate system models and supporting efficiently decision making on sustainability issues? They are several topics that can be researched with maximal impact:
Environmental models set constraints on and define frameworks for process and system optimization. The more reliable the models, the more accurate the optimization results. If constraints and goals set by the environmental models are only roughly known, serious risks of insufficient performances or of unnecessary over-optimization can turn up. If large systems are considered, a flawed decision making procedure can be the consequence.
Indeed, the identification of environmental models possesses some unique features that make their validation particularly burdensome and error-prone. In particular, they are:
a) very complex, including a large number of equations, frequently only approximately defined
b) dependent on a set of unknown mathematical entities (variables, parameters, functions, operators)
c) non-replicable on the scale required by a sensible modelling
In very general terms, identification problems contain functions of unknown variables, such as boundary conditions, unknown functions of time, such as initial conditions and parameters subject to uncertainty. The only tool for their determination is the condition that, when included in a model,
they are consistent with the data available.
This gives rise to three main problems:
1) the assessment of “consistency” criteria, i.e. the determination of the probability distribution of errors in the data, especially when the data is sparse or of limited accuracy, especially when considering past period data (or even data from the far past). The presence of a few outliers (“black swans”) could jeopardize the whole estimation procedure.
2) the omission of significant variables in the model used for predicting the data. The relevant endogeneity problem might under/overrate the importance of other variables and thus lead to inefficient (and occasionally counterproductive) decisions.
3) the presence of several functions and parameters consistent with the set of data, due to the fact that inverse models are typically ill-posed and additional information is needed to “pick the right one”.
Taking into consideration these limitations, examining different scenarios and possibly identifying a new metric capable of combining goals, uncertainties and precautionary criteria capable of obtaining a wide consensus might help improving the overall system optimization process.
Panel2SPI
Transition to decarbonised energy systems is becoming more attractive with fall of investment costs of renewables and volatile prices and political insecurity of fossil fuels. The renewable energy resources are bountiful, especially wind and solar, while integrating them into current energy systems is proving to be a challenge. The limit of cheap and easy integration for wind is 20% of yearly electricity generation, while a combined wind and solar may reach 30%, while still pending on improving transmission capacities and flexibilization of conventional power plants. Going any further asks for implementation of really free energy markets (involving day ahead, intraday and various reserve and ancillary services markets, as well as coupling with neighbouring markets through PCR mechanism), demand response, coupling of wholesale and retail energy prices, and it involves integration between electricity, heat, water and transport systems. The cheapest and simplest way of increasing further the penetration of renewables is integrating power and heating/cooling systems through the use of district heating and cooling (which may be centrally controlled and may have significant heat storage capacity), since power to heat technologies are excellent for demand response. In countries with low heat demand water supply system may be used to increase the penetration of renewables, by using water at higher potential energy as storage media, or in dry climates desalination and stored water may be used for those purposes, and reversible hydro may be used as balancing technology. Electrification of personal car transport allows not only for huge increase of energy efficiency, but also, electric cars due to low daily use may be excellent for demand response and even for storage potential, through vehicle to grid technology. That will allow reaching 80% renewable in energy system, but the remaining 20% may be more an uphill battle without technology breakthrough. Integration is discussed at different time levels, day ahead, hour ahead, 15 min ahead, secondary and primary reserve level, as well as capacity markets and balancing.
Panel2SPI
Greenhouse emissions footprint and global warming potential are widely-used for the environmental impact study of air emission. The transportation sector is one of the largest contributors to GHG emission. It represents 26% of the total US GHG emissions, 23.2% of EU-28 and responsible for other negative externalities. These emissions contribute to the formation of ozone and particles, the deposition of acids and visibility impairment. The concern on the smog related components which pose the instantaneous impact on human health is relatively less established. GHG are subject to global agreements, whereas air pollutants are more usually limited locally by legislation. The environmental related research, especially dealing with the air pollution issues of transportation, has been mainly focusing on land transportation, the road vehicles. More than 80% of world trade is carried by shipping industry. Shipping emissions are very likely continuing to increase in the future (business as usual) due to the increasingly global scale trade. The emission from sea transport is generally lower than road transport in term of CO2 eq and CO2 as well as from the angle of emissions per t-km. However, it did not represent the ship emission need no further study for minimisation. Shipping has been contributing to the considerable amount of NOx (15%), SOx (13%) emission and solid particles (11%) of the global anthropogenic sources of emissions. The following standpoints should be discussed and considered as some of the needs as well as the gaps of assessment in ship industry:
The presentation offers a basic statistic of pollutants and the ship emissions, followed by the limitation/challenges in measurement. The environmental sustainability (smog/haze footprint) of the sea transportation compared to the other means of transportation should be possibly discussed by the panel as well
Panel2SPI
Writing a review paper for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews can cause many problems for authors in industry, academia and the well- and less- experienced researcher alike. The first task when considering a review is to ask oneself what is the purpose of the review? To self-inform, to teach or to share knowledge or to discuss an issue or highlight a problem. A review to self-inform or to teach or to share knowledge about a widely researched technology or process is not a suitable review for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews as such an article is in essence already well published. Such a review is essence a book chapter. However, a review of a new technology or process with little information reported in a single source may be of interest to the journal. A misunderstanding by many is that the journal publish reviews only, this is not the case. The journal publishes review papers, original research, case studies and new technology analyses that have a significant review element, which may take the form of a critique, comparison, or analysis, but all as ‘Review Articles.’ Common issues with submissions are that the authors 1) do NOT read the mission, aim and scope of the journal, 2) do NOT read the journal ‘Guidelines for Authors,’ policy on plagiarism and details in ‘Track Your Paper’ and 3) do NOT use the tools available on Elsevier’s webpages and or 4) do NOT read or follow the instructions when they submit their review article. This can lead to unnecessary queries, papers that are not suitable and out of scope and plagiarised in part. So the second task is to read the instructions, guidance and policy. Other issues include poor reviews, poorly written in English, a lack of reviewers and submitting a paper to multiple journals. So the third task is to check your article multiple times to ensure it adheres to the scope, aim and objectives, guidelines and policy, arrange numerous proof reading by others and be collegiate to others. Remember you will get back from the system what you receive based on your effort and homework. This ten minute presentation gives a warts and all overview of the do’s, the don’ts and the pitfalls and positives of writing a review paper worthy of publication in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. It also provides a few tongue in cheek examples of the clowns, chancers and the pure arrogant who waste the journals, reviewers and editors time. Remember this journal is focused on renewable and sustainable energy! Ironically many articles are received that forget this simple central premise……………………………………….
Panel2SPI
Reducing greenhouse gases (GHG) (CO2 CH4, NOx) in the atmosphere through using less fossil fuels for energy production is one of the major challenges of our time. How each country meets the challenge will depend on the array of natural energy resources they have available, and on the skills of their leaders to convince the voting public to support the changes. Certainly the direction countries follow to reduce emissions is open to intense political debate and in certain instances popular opinion can swing widely to populous leaders who are happy to keep the status quo. In such situations where is the voice of the scientists and the engineer?
As engineering researchers we have a key role to play in providing technical solutions that can mitigate trends and guide society towards a more sustainable future. However, as educators we also have a responsibility to share our findings in a way that the community at large can understand our message. How are we going with this mandate?
In this presentation I will introduce a number of energy ratios that can be used to help us explain to the public the trade-offs involved in choosing between energy systems or technologies. The energy ratios have been derived using a common energy analysis frame work. They may be used in energy planning and in sustainability metrics for evaluating common electricity generation methods or liquid fuels generation options. The energy ratios highlight that thermodynamics or the science of energy governs the constraints we are working under and that Thermodynamic principals need to be understood, respected and worked with.
Panel2SPI
The role of Sustainable Systems Engineering in the sustainable development, especially those related to the chemical and energy supply chains, will be discussed. Some powerful principles will be stressed out in order to facilitate more efficient sustainable development. The use of appropriate sustainability measurements such as Sustainability Profit (SP) or Sustainability Net Present Value (SNPV) enables to obtain solutions yielding appropriate trade-offs between economic efficiency, environmental (un)burdening and social justice e.g. new jobs created. It should be noted that many alternatives besides burdening exhibit also unburdening effects on the environment. Considering also unburdening effects using appropriate sustainability measurements, e.g. total footprints, total LCA indexes, and SP and SNPV, would facilitate achieving the sustainable development faster because it would enable identifying solutions comprising unburdening alternatives first and then those burdening the environment the least. Even win-win solutions can be obtained if right green alternatives are proposed and embedded into systems being optimized. A i) two-step superstructure approach to the sustainable synthesis to help identifying those win-win solutions and ii) sustainable synthesis of system-wide supply networks using SP or SPNV will be discussed briefly and illustrated by some case studies.
Panel2SPI
Getting published in an International Journal, perspectives of the publisher and the editors-in-chief
Moderator: Ms. Fernanda Ogochi
As researchers, you want to get publish to disseminate your ideas, to uncover potential research collaborations, to progress in your academic career and to secure research funding. The panel will provide background information on scholarly publishing and outline the various important steps authors need to follow in preparing their manuscript for a successful publication in an international journal. The lecture is suitable for PhD and Post Docs students, as well as for academics which have been already involved in dissemination their research results.
The importance of authors to learn the specific aspects of the publishing cycle has become ever more crucial as the number of submissions, and as a consequence the number of rejections continues to rise. Increase your chances to get published and stand out in crowd, by understand the process and the expectations of editors when they receive your manuscript.
The panel, which consists of the editors-in-chief of leading partner journals to the SDEWES Conference and the publisher of Energy & Power Journals at Elsevier, will share their perspective on the process and will highlight the key aspects authors should take into account when submitting their papers to journals.
Writing a review paper for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews can cause many problems for authors in industry, academia and the well- and less- experienced researcher alike. The first task when considering a review is to ask oneself what is the purpose of the review? To self-inform, to teach or to share knowledge or to discuss an issue or highlight a problem. A review to self-inform or to teach or to share knowledge about a widely researched technology or process is not a suitable review for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews as such an article is in essence already well published. Such a review is essence a book chapter. However, a review of a new technology or process with little information reported in a single source may be of interest to the journal. A misunderstanding by many is that the journal publish reviews only, this is not the case. The journal publishes review papers, original research, case studies and new technology analyses that have a significant review element, which may take the form of a critique, comparison, or analysis, but all as ‘Review Articles.’ Common issues with submissions are that the authors 1) do NOT read the mission, aim and scope of the journal, 2) do NOT read the journal ‘Guidelines for Authors,’ policy on plagiarism and details in ‘Track Your Paper’ and 3) do NOT use the tools available on Elsevier’s webpages and or 4) do NOT read or follow the instructions when they submit their review article. This can lead to unnecessary queries, papers that are not suitable and out of scope and plagiarised in part. So the second task is to read the instructions, guidance and policy. Other issues include poor reviews, poorly written in English, a lack of reviewers and submitting a paper to multiple journals. So the third task is to check your article multiple times to ensure it adheres to the scope, aim and objectives, guidelines and policy, arrange numerous proof reading by others and be collegiate to others. Remember you will get back from the system what you receive based on your effort and homework. This ten minute presentation gives a warts and all overview of the do’s, the don’ts and the pitfalls and positives of writing a review paper worthy of publication in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. It also provides a few tongue in cheek examples of the clowns, chancers and the pure arrogant who waste the journals, reviewers and editors time. Remember this journal is focused on renewable and sustainable energy! Ironically many articles are received that forget this simple central premise……………………………………….
Panel1Editors
This presentation is related to ethics that researchers, authors and reviewers should apply in publishing papers in international journals. It is indicated how important is to cite appropriately material taken from various sources and the plagiarism problem, even self-plagiarism which has an increasing trend since people do not pay the appropriate attention in using own, previously published material. Nowadays all submissions to journals pass through a similarity check and papers are rejected if the similarity index is high. The way this index is interpreted by the editors is presented through various examples but it should be noted that the total similarity index is not so much important but the percentage copied from a single source and also even with low index the type of material copied. Then the consequences of ethical problems are presented which usually lead to retraction of papers, the way this is done in practice and what are the consequences. Finally, some other ethical problems are presented such as the use of inappropriate data, authorship problems, salami publishing, submission of the same paper in more than one journal at the same time and cases where the similarity index is very low but most of the tables and figures were copied. Finally, ethical problems related to the review process are presented like the demand of reviewers to cite their own papers – most of the times not relevant to the paper under evaluation and the writing of a discussion paper just to reduce the credit of an author or to publish a paper even in this way.
Panel1Editors
To promote the impact of a researcher contribution to the scientific community has been very important for most of the authors.
They are two main impacts: (a)research/scientific and (b)administrative.
(a) This is a key impact which everybody of us has been looking for. To be recognised and known as a contributor to the knowledge inside our research community and possibly as much as outside. This can be reached by high research, original and novel publishing in reputable journals with good circulation. This can be very much supported by attending and presenting at the right conferences and recently also supported by electronic and web media
(b) The administrative impact is required as a formal measurement of research results. It is usually based on data bases as www.sciencedirect.com, www.scopus.com, Web of Science, Web of Knowledge and similar. The most known indicators are Impact Factor, SJR, CIteScore and especially h-index.
The panel discussion should exchange ideas how to increase both those impacts in a way that is fair and beneficial for research. One issue which has been more and more recognised is the multidisciplinarity of the research. This naturally expands the pool of researchers who may be interested in the research results and increases the impact. It should be supported by as much as possible wide networking by personal contacts and with the development of electronic communication also contact facilitated by media. Making the publications more understandable and attractive as e.g. using colours; in a proper way not using the Disneyland style, additional material, videos and animation (Klemeš et al., 2013).
Key issues to consider are: (i) the topic relevance and popularity – including its development in time; (ii) direct or indirect usability of the published research; (iii) reproducibility of the procedures and results; clarity and consistency of presentation.
The review papers are more likely to be cited and recognised. Very good reviews are most welcome and valuable. However, the administrative pressure can divert the attention from the original research papers to reviews predominantly. A right balance should be encouraged.
Those issues are numerous and panel participants are much encouraged to share their ideas.
Regretfully, the pressure which is imposed on researchers does increase the administrative impact caused also the rise of bogus journals and conferences. This issue has been becoming recently disturbing and should be probably discussed by the panel as well.
Klemeš, J.J., Kravanja, Z, Varbanov P.S. Lam H. L., Advanced multimedia engineering education in energy, process integration and optimisation. Applied Energy (2013), 101, 33-40
Panel1Editors
This presentation shows what is a detailed peer review process for a journal. A handling editor may invite 3-5 reviewers, at last get at least 3 review results. Based upon the review comments and suggestion, a decision could thus be made as accept, minor revision, major revision, rejecteion. For most manuscripts, a major revision or minor revision are usually required. Some manuscript may need 2nd or 3rd review processes. The selection of reviewers are usually based on their expertises which could be found by references or crossref check or find reviers based on keywords of the manuscript. Only careful review comments are taken seriously for the decision. For those topics who have very limitted researches, the suggested reviewers could be also considered. Recently each high impact journals have defined the scope very detaily, as there are so many "out of the scope" submissions. This process as initial screening has been enforced.
Panel1Editors
