Abstract: To sustain human deep space exploration or extra-terrestrial settlements where no resupply from the Earth or other planets is possible, technologies for in situ food production, water, air, and waste recovery need to be developed. The Micro-Ecological Life Support System Alternative (MELiSSA) is such a Regenerative Life Support System (RLSS) and it builds on several bacterial bioprocesses. However, alterations in gravity, temperature, and radiation associated with the space environment can affect survival and functionality of the microorganisms. In this study, representative strains of different carbon and nitrogen metabolisms with application in the MELiSSA were selected for launch and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) exposure. An edible photoautotrophic strain (Arthrospira sp. PCC 8005), a photoheterotrophic strain (Rhodospirillum rubrum S1H), a ureolytic heterotrophic strain (Cupriavidus pinatubonensis 1245), and combinations of C. pinatubonensis 1245 and autotrophic ammonia and nitrite oxidizing strains (Nitrosomonas europaea ATCC19718, Nitrosomonas ureae Nm10, and Nitrobacter winogradskyi Nb255) were sent to the International Space Station (ISS) for 7 days. There, the samples were exposed to 2.8 mGy, a dose 140 times higher than on the Earth, and a temperature of 22 degrees C +/- 1 degrees C. On return to the Earth, the cultures were reactivated and their growth and activity were compared with terrestrial controls stored under refrigerated (5 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C) or room temperature (22 degrees C +/- 1 degrees C and 21 degrees C +/- 0 degrees C) conditions. Overall, no difference was observed between terrestrial and ISS samples. Most cultures presented lower cell viability after the test, regardless of the type of exposure, indicating a harsher effect of the storage and sample preparation than the spaceflight itself. Postmission analysis revealed the successful survival and proliferation of all cultures except for Arthrospira, which suffered from the premission depressurization test. These observations validate the possibility of launching, storing, and reactivating bacteria with essential functionalities for microbial bioprocesses in RLSS.

Abstract: Landfill owners, governmental institutions, technology providers, academia and local communities are important stakeholders involved in Enhanced Landfill Mining (ELFM). This concept of excavating and processing historical waste streams to higher added values can be seen as a continuation of traditional landfill mining (LFM) and seems to be an innovative and promising idea for potential environmental and societal benefits. However, ELFM's profitability is still under debate, and environmental as well as societal impacts have to be further investigated. This study provides a first step towards an anticipatory approach, assessing ELFM through stakeholder integration. In the study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with various stakeholders, involved in a case study in Flanders, Belgium. Participants were selected across a quadruple helix (QH) framework, i.e. industrial, governmental, scientific, and local community actors. The research comprises 13 interviews conducted with an aim to elicit stakeholder needs for ELFM implementation using a general inductive approach. In total 18 different stakeholder needs were identified. The paper explains how the stakeholder needs refer to the different dimensions of sustainability, which groups of stakeholders they primarily affect, and what types of uncertainty could be influenced by their implementation. The stakeholder needs are structured into societal, environmental, regulatory and techno-economic needs. Results show additional economic, environmental, and societal aspects of ELFM to be integrated into ELFM research, as well as a need for the dynamic modeling of impacts. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract: Europe has somewhere between 150,000 and 500,000 landfill sites, with an estimated 90% of them being “non-sanitary” landfills, predating the EU Landfill Directive of 1999/31/EC. These older landfills tend to be filled with municipal solid waste and often lack any environmental protection technology. “ Doing nothing”, state-of-theart aftercare or remediating them depends largely on technical, societal and economic conditions which vary between countries. Beside “ doing nothing' and landfill aftercare, there are different scenarios in landfill mining, from re-landfilling the waste into ”sanitary landfills" to seizing the opportunity for a combined resource-recovery and remediation strategy. This review article addresses present and future issues and potential opportunities for landfill mining as an embedded strategy in current waste management systems through a multi-disciplinary approach. In particular, three general landfill mining strategies are addressed with varying extents of resource recovery. These are discussed in relation to the main targets of landfill mining: (i) reduction of the landfill volume (technical), (ii) reduction of risks and impacts (environmental) and (iii) increase in resource recovery and overall profitability (economic). Geophysical methods could be used to determine the characteristics of the landfilled waste and subsurface structures without the need of an invasive exploration, which could greatly reduce exploration costs and time, as well as be useful to develop a procedure to either discard or select the most appropriate sites for (E)LFM. Material and energy recovery from land-filled waste can be achieved through mechanical processing coupled with thermochemical valorization technologies and residues upcycling techniques. Gasification could enable the upcycling of residues after thermal treatment into a new range of eco-friendly construction materials based on inorganic polymers and glass-ceramics. The multi-criteria assessment is directly influenced by waste- and technology related factors, which together with site-specific conditions, market and regulatory aspects, influence the environmental, economic and societal impacts of (E)LFM projects.

Abstract: As landfill mining (LFM) gains public attention, systematic assessment of its economic potential is deemed necessary. The aim of this review is to critically analyze the usefulness and validity of previous economic assessments of LFM. Following the life cycle costing (LCC) framework, (i) the employed methods based on goal and scope, technical parameters and data inventory, and modelling choices were contrasted with respect to (ii) the synthesized main findings based on net profitability and economic performance drivers. Results showed that the selected studies (n=15) are mostly case study-specific and concluded that LFM has a weak economic potential, hinting at the importance of favorable market and regulation settings. However, several method issues are apparent as costs and revenues are accounted at different levels of aggregation, scope and scale-from process to sub-process level, from private to societal economics, and from laboratory to pilot-scale, respectively. Moreover, despite the inherent large uncertainties, more than half of the studies did not perform any uncertainty or sensitivity analyses posing validity issues. Consequently, this also limits the usefulness of results as individual case studies and as a collective, towards a generic understanding of LFM economics. Irrespective of case study-specific or generic aims, this review recommends that future assessments should be learning-oriented. That is, uncovering granular information about what builds up the net profitability of LFM, to be able to systematically determine promising paths for the development of cost-efficient projects.