Low energy catering strategy: insights from a novel carbon-energy calculator

This paper presents a highly original carbon-energy calculator, designed with the aim of realistically and holistically evaluating the carbon and energy impacts of different food preparation options in delivering a restaurant menu. Its design (based on life-cycle principles) brings the customer demand (number, type and timings of meals served) during typical, peak and special weeks together with the food storage, warewashing, ventilation, cooking and hot holding appliance capacities, carbon emissions and energy usage in various states. An assessment of separate and specific behavioural, equipment maintenance, preparation and cooking strategies are performed. The baseline energy use results were validated to within 0.65% of the findings from an extensive and detailed monitoring study of a leading operator of UK public houses and restaurants [1]. Seven energy reduction scenarios were then assessed using the developed calculator. Potential energy savings of 58% (195 MWh) and emissions savings of 46% (55,224 kgCO2e) per year were indicated from replacing the chargrill, fryers and microwave combi ovens with two combi steam ovens and reducing freezing demand in the case study restaurant. This scenario projects reductions in energy use of 37.77 million kWh (£2 million) per year for the whole restaurant chain and up to 346 million kWh (£18.3 million) if applied to the whole case study organisation

Engaging stakeholders in research to address water-energy-food (WEF) nexus challenges

The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus has become a popular, and potentially powerful, frame through which to analyse interactions and interdependencies between these three systems. Though the case for transdisciplinary research in this space has been made, the extent of stakeholder engagement in research remains limited with stakeholders most commonly incorporated in research as end-users. Yet, stakeholders interact with nexus issues in a variety of ways, consequently there is much that collaboration might offer to develop nexus research and enhance its application. This paper outlines four aspects of nexus research and considers the value and potential challenges for transdisciplinary research in each. We focus on assessing and visualising nexus systems; understanding governance and capacity building; the importance of scale; and the implications of future change. The paper then proceeds to describe a novel mixed-method study that deeply integrates stakeholder knowledge with insights from multiple disciplines. We argue that mixed-method research designs—in this case orientated around a number of cases studies—are best suited to understanding and addressing real-world nexus challenges, with their inevitable complex, non-linear system characteristics. Moreover, integrating multiple forms of knowledge in the manner described in this paper enables research to assess the potential for, and processes of, scaling-up innovations in the nexus space, to contribute insights to policy and decision making

Browne & Hoolohan Response to Second Consultation for Ofwat's Water Efficiency Fund

The key points to our response to the second consultation are as follows. Further evidence for these points is presented in the following section. 1. Need to reduce demand. Important that action has an impact. Limited evidence of communications leading to behaviour change. Not well-justified in spending this scale of investment in communication campaigns.2. Rather than a focus on micro-component use (showers, toilets etc), a focus on practices (personal cleanliness, laundry, garden use, water use for leisure etc) will encourage a more systemic approach to intervention, and invoke a multi-partner approach.3. Similarly, rather than individual water users, recognising a variety of collectives – households, communities, practice clusters (e.g. frequent daily showerers), and social groups to deliver bespoke and sensitive activities.4. The amount spent on WEL versus WEF is disproportionate. A centrally organised communications campaign should not require £75m to deliver, whereas a multi-partner approach to WEL will require considerable investment and deliver more creative approaches to social change.5. Ensuring the vast majority of funds are ringfenced to focus on meaningful, demonstrable change projects is essential. 6. Evaluation: Evaluation of water efficiency activities needs to verify behaviour change, using mixed methods to confirm actual behaviour change (not reported change, or change in attitudes/awareness) and understand how and why change occurred. Longitudinal studies to understand the long-term impact of any intervention would also be worthwhile, and principles of Open Data to ensure lessons are accessible between water companies and beyond the sector.7. Involvement of academics and scientific oversight: Ensuring that there are strong connections to academic bodies (e.g. via an academic steering group) to make the most of recent research in this field. Presently there is a lack of evidence for the scope and framing of the fund, and if it is too late too substantially reframe what the funding can be spent on – then ensuring academic input into the design, conduct and evaluation of activities is needed. This requires organisation and funding.8. There is a need to consult with a wider range of organisations involved in behaviour change (including for example, Natural Environment Social Research Network which is a group of social science researchers within the UK government and devolved authorities). Oversight of the fund needs to be led by organisations experienced in water, as while there are transferable insights from energy and other sectors, water use/demand is fundamentally different to other forms of resource use. <br/

A people-centred perspective on Enabling Water Smart Communities.:Understanding public and professional perspectives on the future of water and housing. Synthesis of University of Manchester research for Enabling Water Smart Communities.

This research, conducted by the University of Manchester for the Enabling Water Smart Communities project, explores the perspectives of potential future residents of water smart communities, and the wider community of practice involved in the design, construction, and long-term governance of water smart housing. Overall, the research highlights (i) that the social and sustainability outcomes of water smart communities are contingent on the everyday lives of residents’, and (ii) there is an extensive multi-sectoral network of stakeholders involved in the delivery and long-term maintenance of water smart communities. In this report we explore how people - professionals involved in the delivery of water smart communities and the people who may come to live in them - imagine and expect water smart homes and communities to affect everyday life; what their social and environmental priorities are for new housing; and what obstacles must be overcome to enable these priorities to be achieved. Communities are at the heart of new housing developments. Whether or not new housing delivers against social and environmental objectives depends on how homes come to be lived in, and the lives they are designed to enable. Delivery of new housing requires a joined-up approach to resolve multiple problems and deliver long-term benefits.<br/

Water smart communities – What are they?:What and who are they for? A review of industry and academic research.

[Enabling Water Smart Communities Project Report]