WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.000 That should be from… Dr. Benolis, I think you're… camera is already on so we must be ready 00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:08.000 Yeah, can you hear me? Yeah, great. 00:00:08.000 --> 00:00:11.000 Perfect, yes. 00:00:11.000 --> 00:00:23.000 So welcome, everybody. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to present our sustainability studies for ILC, Qlik and also the linear collider facility at CERN. 00:00:23.000 --> 00:00:34.000 Very briefly, I think most of you will know this, ILC is a proposal for a future collider linear collider in Japan, 20 kilometers long. 00:00:34.000 --> 00:00:58.000 Based on superconducting technology, Qlik is the compact linear collider proposal for CERN, initially 11 kilometers long based on a two beam acceleration scheme with normal conducting copper cavities. And out of these two projects, actually a new project has a new proposal has emerged recently 00:00:58.000 --> 00:01:11.000 Called the linear collider facility that would be a facility 30 kilometers long at CERN. It would be based on ILC technology, at least initially. 00:01:11.000 --> 00:01:19.000 But it would later on be upgradable with other technologies like c-cubed or the Qlik technology. 00:01:19.000 --> 00:01:26.000 I ate and Qlik have been working together for quite some time on sustainability issues. 00:01:26.000 --> 00:01:46.000 And we both think that You know, accelerators have always been at the leading edge of technology in terms of beam energy intensity luminosity. So we always have tried to make the most out of resources, be that money, be that 00:01:46.000 --> 00:02:02.000 Time and get the most out of the energy that we need to run these machines. Now, of course, sustainability adds new cost measures like, for instance, the CO2 that we produce in setting up these machines. 00:02:02.000 --> 00:02:11.000 Or using rare materials. Be in order to reduce resource consumption. 00:02:11.000 --> 00:02:34.000 We think it's important to have an overall system design which is compact, which is energy efficient, which is effective, to look at subsystems and components and optimize them and also look at the operation use as little energy as possible, but also look at ways, for instance, to use energy in a way that is compatible with regenerative resources. 00:02:34.000 --> 00:02:51.000 Lifecycle assessment is a very important tool to quantify the impact, and that is the first step to optimization. And therefore, I will concentrate on this aspect here in this presentation and show what we have done in that respect recently. 00:02:51.000 --> 00:03:11.000 So we have several years ago started our lifecycle assessment efforts With an LCA of the civil engineering infrastructure, so the tunnels And a growth tunnels, shafts, caverns, and later on then also surface buildings. 00:03:11.000 --> 00:03:36.000 These results have been around for some time. For Qlik, for instance, we evaluated that the 11 kilometer underground tunnels would lead to a CO2 emission of 127 kilotons CO2 equivalent, a glyestron based solution would more than double this because the 00:03:36.000 --> 00:03:44.000 Dimensions would increase. And for ILC, it's a longer tunnel, but with a different tunneling technology. 00:03:44.000 --> 00:04:09.000 Have you evaluated 266 kilotons. This was done together with an external professional consulting company arab What is important is that the LCA also identifies a reduction potential The company told us we could use a lower carbon cement, which would save like 20% of emissions 00:04:09.000 --> 00:04:18.000 They could reduce possibly the lining thickness And possibly also if in future electricity is less carbon intensive. 00:04:18.000 --> 00:04:35.000 That would also reduce the overall impact. I think we were very happy that in this study we did not only evaluate global warming potential, but we also looked at the full set of recipe 2060 midpoint indicators. 00:04:35.000 --> 00:04:51.000 Which is shown in the lower panel. Now we have progressed and done a new study, a lifecycle assessment of the whole accelerator. This, of course, is much more demanding in the sense that we have a lot of different components. We have very 00:04:51.000 --> 00:05:12.000 Different and unusual materials So this is why we did the second. We again worked together with Arab in this Corresponding studies almost completed. And once it is finalized, you will find it on the link given here. 00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:20.000 So one of the issues that we had to address is that some of the materials, in particular naobium used for superconducting cavities. 00:05:20.000 --> 00:05:47.000 For those, we could not find good life cycle impact data. So we went through the literature, we found a lot of data and together with the company, we did an assessment also of the impact of the impact of this particular material, we found that the greenhouse impact is mostly dominated by the amount of electricity that you need 00:05:47.000 --> 00:06:02.000 To refine the material so you are very much dependent on where you do the refining when you do it and so so we found in the end that this is a very high carbon intensity material. Unfortunately, if you produce it in China. 00:06:02.000 --> 00:06:09.000 Today, it would be around 100 kilograms co2 equivalent per kilogram. 00:06:09.000 --> 00:06:13.000 These kind of studies are very important. They take a lot of time. 00:06:13.000 --> 00:06:26.000 But there are also very helpful so one does not need to go back and let's say, ask ChatGPT for data, which is much less reliable for obvious reasons. 00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:41.000 Then we went on and we made a very detailed study of the cavity production process for the ILC cavities and also the cryomodule production processes. I cannot go through this for time reasons. 00:06:41.000 --> 00:06:49.000 But we looked really at the true material consumption as opposed to just adding up the net weight of the cavities. 00:06:49.000 --> 00:06:56.000 We looked at the amount of scrap that would be produced. And we also looked at least to some extent. 00:06:56.000 --> 00:07:12.000 On the additional material and waste that you have, for instance, from processes like the treatment of cavities with acids in chemical polishing or electro polishing Another very important impact factor are the magnets. 00:07:12.000 --> 00:07:19.000 For both accelerators, we have a catalog of the magnet types, the approximate sizes. 00:07:19.000 --> 00:07:39.000 The number of magnets, we looked in particular on the yolks and the coils. We also looked at the materials again. Either you have a soft iron, which is a relatively low carbon intensity material, but we also studied one example material, vacuum flux 00:07:39.000 --> 00:07:49.000 Which is actually half 50% cobalt we found that this raises the CO2 intensity by a factor of five. 00:07:49.000 --> 00:08:03.000 We see overall the yolk material still dominates the carbon intensity over the copper. And we see also that using these high heat magnets with cobalt rich materials. 00:08:03.000 --> 00:08:24.000 Has a larger impact than otherwise. Detectors. For detectors we made a very cost analysis. Essentially, we looked at the net rate of detector materials What we see is that iron dominates the impact by far simply because it is such an 00:08:24.000 --> 00:08:38.000 Enormous amount of steel that you need. Ild weighs 13,000 tons SIDs, almost 7,000 tons, and that is mostly steel. And that dominates over other materials. 00:08:38.000 --> 00:08:56.000 Used, for instance, for the kilometers. We also assume that in the future we will avoid usage of problematic coolants like CFCs Which, as we heard, are a big problem or a big impact factor today at CERN. 00:08:56.000 --> 00:09:03.000 But this also shows that if you do these kind of analyses and you see that this is a problem. 00:09:03.000 --> 00:09:09.000 It shows you the way to reduce the impact. So this is the main results which we had for the ILC. 00:09:09.000 --> 00:09:24.000 You'll see that overall. The impact is dominated mostly by steel and the steel is dominated comes predominantly from the magnet yolks that we have. 00:09:24.000 --> 00:09:34.000 Other important materials are niobium, as I discussed, like 10% copper and aluminum also play a role. 00:09:34.000 --> 00:09:56.000 All these raw materials have a high dependency on where they are produced, how they are produced. So the procurement policy is an important issue in the impact that you have. For Qlik, we did a very similar study. We studied in particular the true beam acceleration module 00:09:56.000 --> 00:10:19.000 You'll see here the breakdown of the different components that we considered Again, here we have a material oxygen-free copper, which plays a very important role intensity of about 10 kilograms of CO2 per kilogram And then if we do the overall tally for the whole 00:10:19.000 --> 00:10:31.000 Accelerator again we see steel from the magnet still dominates the CO2 impact. And the second most important material for click would be copper. 00:10:31.000 --> 00:10:43.000 And also copper being an energy intensive material with a lot of refinement, also using electricity offers also a number of reduction potentials. 00:10:43.000 --> 00:11:10.000 Again. Arab did run the full lifecycle results for all the recipe 2016 indicators. You see that here they gave us an analysis which looks at better's impact comes from. It comes mostly from production. So from the raw material only in certain cases the use and use would be the CO2 from electricity mostly. 00:11:10.000 --> 00:11:18.000 Is a dominant source. Disposal, we try to consider is generally much less. 00:11:18.000 --> 00:11:26.000 Okay, and you can also look at the materials and you see copper is important, steel is important. 00:11:26.000 --> 00:11:35.000 Electricity is important. But of course, when you look at these 16 indicators, you wonder which of them are really important, which are maybe less important. 00:11:35.000 --> 00:11:42.000 So we try to consider this. There are these famous endpoint categories. That would be one. 00:11:42.000 --> 00:12:08.000 Point to measure that another way is weighting this by comparing the overall impact that we have with the average impact that humanity or people have And this was done and what really sticks out is in these recipe indicators is toxicity, human carcass inorganic toxicity sticks out, but also marine and freshwater 00:12:08.000 --> 00:12:32.000 Ecotoxicity so we went on, made a hotspot analysis where does this toxicity come from Again, we see it comes from stainless steel Second is operation, which is electricity If you drill down further, you see the toxicity impact comes actually from the so-called electric arc furnace slack, which is you know just an 00:12:32.000 --> 00:12:39.000 Byproduct of steel production, which then goes into landfill and that is a problematic thing. 00:12:39.000 --> 00:12:57.000 So again, this shows you that this kind of analysis shows you a pathway to reduce your impact. It tells you where the problems lie and then you can attack them. You can discuss with producers, for instance, can you do something about it? Do you have 00:12:57.000 --> 00:13:18.000 A management policy to cope with these kind of things. And that is, I think, the really important thing of these analysis It points you to where you can improve things. It's not so much measuring the absolute amount of problematic stuff. It's really seeing where you can improve things. 00:13:18.000 --> 00:13:40.000 We looked at the scope two emissions from the operation, which is electricity I will not go through the details, but what we did is we have defined different operational phases and operational statae of the accelerators like shutdown, downtime, data taking at full power commissioning. 00:13:40.000 --> 00:13:59.000 We have a recipe to see how much time that occupies over the course of a year and what the electricity consumption in relation to the nominal 100% consumption at nominal running is running from this we can from this reduce the amount of total energy 00:13:59.000 --> 00:14:10.000 We consume over the course of the year and then an important ingredient, obviously, are the emission factors. What is the CO2 emissions from electricity? 00:14:10.000 --> 00:14:34.000 We projected that CERN in 2015 would have an electricity within a CO2 intensity of around 16 grams co2 per kilowatt hour Japan would be about five times more because they they still have quite different electricity mix. 00:14:34.000 --> 00:14:51.000 So in the end, we assembled and reported the overall results for ILC and ATF and click in this reporting format that was introduced by the LDG group that I think was also mentioned today. 00:14:51.000 --> 00:15:01.000 Already so we have these numbers and we can provide them to the LDG report. So this brings me to my conclusions. 00:15:01.000 --> 00:15:13.000 We do generally optimize our accelerators anyway for our performance, for costs for schedule. And now we have added a new dimension, which is the sustainability. 00:15:13.000 --> 00:15:38.000 To attack this, we look at the lifecycle approach we look at the carbon footprint, but also on other impact parameters And in order to have a sustainability facility, we think, of course, you try to reduce the overall size, you reduce the power consumption, you understand and select all your materials that you use carefully. 00:15:38.000 --> 00:15:42.000 Integrate with the local communities. I did not have time to go through that. 00:15:42.000 --> 00:15:59.000 And you use low carbon and renewable power or if necessary you do also CO2 compensation And of course, use the facility for a long time and understand its life cycle so that per year. 00:15:59.000 --> 00:16:08.000 You still get away with a reasonable footprint. Thank you very much. 00:16:08.000 --> 00:16:15.000 Thank you so much. It was a very comprehensive talk. And we are welcoming for questions. 00:16:15.000 --> 00:16:19.000 Okay, there is already one in the chat and they might not have one. 00:16:19.000 --> 00:16:28.000 There is a question from Rakhi. Do you have any estimates for how the suggested reduction measures would affect the cost of the infrastructure? 00:16:28.000 --> 00:16:33.000 Yeah, that's a very good question. 00:16:33.000 --> 00:16:40.000 We have not evaluated this um In terms of money. 00:16:40.000 --> 00:16:51.000 But I think it is. Very important because obviously if you use CO2 reduced materials, CO2 reduced steel or cement. 00:16:51.000 --> 00:17:08.000 That is bound to cost you something. And I think that is that is let's say the next step in the optimization i mean what for once Of course, if you do your cost estimates, you should be honest and you should say either I do my cost estimate based 00:17:08.000 --> 00:17:16.000 On using normal materials, but then you should also not assume that you have a very low carbon footprint. 00:17:16.000 --> 00:17:27.000 Or you should really say, okay, I am prepared to spend like, let's say 10% additional project cost in order to improve my CO2 footprint for this facility. 00:17:27.000 --> 00:17:34.000 And that needs to be taken into account and that is very important yes 00:17:34.000 --> 00:17:40.000 Thank you so much. Are there any other questions? 00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:56.000 I'm not seeing any, but since I also have just a small curiosity also related to the previous question, I don't have much knowledge about this but I think it's also very interesting to see how you can foster responsible, sustainable practices at all levels of building a facility 00:17:56.000 --> 00:18:16.000 But I was just wondering like on the side of the market do you also have like suppliers and um to procure the materials that you are having in mind, the ones that are low carbon are they supplying all of these materials at a reasonable not necessarily at reasonable prices, but is there the availability for them 00:18:16.000 --> 00:18:30.000 Yeah, I think so. I think so. And I mean, this, I think, is on several levels yeah i mean you start with the procurement policy where first of all, you ask your suppliers, can you tell me how much CO2 00:18:30.000 --> 00:18:59.000 Your components really need. And In the sense, you should incentivize them. You should say, okay, if I make a call for tender, then maybe products which do have a defined CO2 footprint get a bonus compared to products which do not give that information. And then the same goes for CO2 reduced things. You should give them a bonus. 00:18:59.000 --> 00:19:14.000 It's difficult to set a threshold. And you have to weigh this with the price and everything. But you need to implement measures like this. And I think Soren is very advanced in this and really steers into that direction. 00:19:14.000 --> 00:19:32.000 To also use the market power of a large laboratory like CERN to bring the industry into a direction where they do these things. I mean, for them, for the industry, it also costs money to do lifecycle assessments, to do these kind of evaluations. 00:19:32.000 --> 00:19:40.000 And you have to incentivize them. And that is beneficial for everybody. 00:19:40.000 --> 00:19:43.000 And create a demand exactly Okay, thank you so much then. 00:19:43.000 --> 00:19:51.000 I think