Abstract: As a response to increasing urbanization and changing weather and climatic patterns, urban green infrastructure (UGI) emerged as a concept to increase resilience within the urban boundaries. Given that implementing these (semi-) natural solutions in practice requires a clear overview of the costs and benefits, valuation becomes ever important. A range of decision-support tools for green infrastructure and ecosystem services exist, developed for various purposes. This paper reviews the potential of 10 shortlisted and existing valuation tools to support investment decisions of urban green infrastructure. In the assessment, the functionality is regarded specifically from the urban planning and decision-making viewpoint. The toolkits were evaluated on 12 different criteria. After analyzing the toolkits on these criteria, the findings are evaluated on the (mis)match with specific requirements in the urban planning and management context. Secondly, recommendations and guidelines are formulated to support the design of simple valuation tools, tailored to support the development of green infrastructure in urban areas. Approaching the valuation toolkits biophysically and (socio-)economically provides an integral overview of the challenges and opportunities of the capacities of each framework. It was found that most tools are not designed for the peculiarities of the urban context. Several elements contribute to the hampering uptake of GI valuation tools. Firstly, the limited effort in the economic case for green infrastructure remains a burden to use toolkits to compare grey and green alternatives. Secondly, tools are currently seldom designed for the peculiarities of cities: urban ecosystem (dis)services, multi-scalability, life-span assessments of co-benefits and the importance of social benefits. Thirdly, toolkits should be the result of co-development between the scientific community and local authorities in order to create toolkits that are tailor made to the specific needs in the urban planning process. It can be concluded that current tools, are not readily applicable to support decision making as such. However, if applied cautiously, they can have an indicative role to pinpoint further targeted and in-depth analyses.

Abstract: In recent decades new recycling technologies for mixed plastic waste have emerged. In pyrolysis, the polymer chains are thermally broken (pyrolyzed) to obtain hydrocarbon materials of different molecular weights such as naphtha, oil or waxes, whose yields can be controlled by varying the reaction parameters. Naphtha represents a closed-loop recycling process as it is a feedstock for (poly)olefins; while the co-production of waxes, having several applications in e.g. the construction industry, exemplifies an open-loop recycling process. This paper compares the economic performance of the pyrolysis of mixed polyolefin waste in a closed-loop and open-loop scheme, including a probabilistic approach to the most important variables. From an economic perspective, open-loop pyrolysis as presented outperforms closed-loop recycling, due to the high prices of wax. However, the results present a high dispersion caused by the volatility of the prices of crude oil and its derivates. Considering the current oil price projections, our case study analysis showed that for open-loop recycling there is a future probability of almost a 98 % of observing positive results and around 57 % of probability in the case of closed-loop recycling, under the assumptions made. Yet, in a future scenario where decarbonized electricity would decrease oil prices, the probability of a positive outcome reduces to 57 % for the open-loop case and to less than 8 % in the case of closed-loop recycling. To make these pathways attractive to investors, the nameplate capacity should be at least 70 kt/year for open-loop recycling and 115 kt/year for closed-loop recycling. A 120 kt/year plant should operate minimally at 80 % of its capacity for open-loop recycling, while closed-loop recycling would demand running close to maximum capacity. Security of feedstock supply therefore is required.

Abstract: The anticipated development of decentralized electricity generation is expected to strengthen the opportunities of prosumers in the residential areas of cities, in line with the predicted establishment of renewable energy generation and storage. Based on academic research and on successful case studies, the opportunity for residential prosumers to organize in microgrids emerges as a viable and promising solution. This paper focuses on microgrids that are planned to generate electricity with a PV unit and use a shared storage system, and that opt to have a connection with the main grid. However, the point of common coupling needs to be agreed first between the microgrid operator and the network operator, and this agreement is determined by several factors and conditions beyond the basic technical and regulatory requirements. A survey of academic literature on the determinant factors for such an agreement exposes the fact that current research either focuses on the integration of individual prosumers in the main grid, or regards the point of common coupling as a given component of microgrids. We argue that neither of the two approaches is helpful in the case of microgrids vs. main grid, seeing as the agreement is not self-evident under just any circumstances, nor can the microgrid be equated to a single, large prosumer. Therefore this short paper compiles a set of determinant factors for the microgrid integration, as they emerge from academic literature, with the aim to document further research needs and support the discussion on microgrid integration.