Drinking water pond: Difference between revisions
1st System |
2nd system |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
=== Life Cycle Assessment – Initial Setup === |
=== Life Cycle Assessment – Initial Setup === |
||
This system uses more materials than the LDPE system. |
|||
=== Durability === |
=== Durability === |
||
This System has a longer service life than the LDPE system (approx. 40 years) but has poorer recyclability. |
|||
=== Microplastics === |
|||
=== Susceptibility to problems and repairability === |
|||
This system has a better impact on microplastics in water than the LPDE system has. |
|||
=== Water conservation === |
=== Water conservation === |
||
This system has the best water conservation of all the systems presented here. On the EduFarm field it would only have a surface of 1100m². |
|||
=== Impact on water quality === |
=== Impact on water quality === |
||
This system has the most positive impact on water quality of all the presented systems: no leaching of nutrients, and easy to clean. |
|||
=== Miscellaneous === |
=== Miscellaneous === |
||
In this system, underground extraction and purification are possible. |
|||
=== Cost === |
=== Cost === |
||
Pure film is roughly twice as expensive as LDPE and more complex to install. |
|||
== 3.Geo fleece, Clay slabs and Geo fleece == |
== 3.Geo fleece, Clay slabs and Geo fleece == |
||
| Line 46: | Line 53: | ||
=== Durability === |
=== Durability === |
||
=== Microplastics === |
|||
=== Susceptibility to problems and repairability === |
=== Susceptibility to problems and repairability === |
||
| Line 62: | Line 71: | ||
=== Durability === |
=== Durability === |
||
=== Microplastics === |
|||
=== Susceptibility to problems and repairability === |
=== Susceptibility to problems and repairability === |
||
Revision as of 11:14, 26 June 2026
1.Geo fleece, LDPE and Wall protection
Life Cycle Assessment – Initial Setup
LDPE is very thin, there is an outgassing of methane and ethylene upon exposure to sunlight and material supply is the least energy-intensive.
Durability
This system can last around 20 years and the recycling is easier than with only LDPE.
Microplastics
This system has the most negative impact on the microplastics in the water than all the other systems presented on this page.
Susceptibility to problems and repairability
This System can still be welded even after 20 years.
Water conservation
This system has the best water conservation of all the systems presented here. On the EduFarm field it would only have a surface of 1100m².
Impact on water quality
This system has the most positive impact on water quality of all the presented systems: no leaching of nutrients, and easy to clean.
Miscellaneous
In this system, underground extraction and purification are possible.
Cost
The most cost-effective option, although the liner may need to be replaced sooner than with EPDM.
2.Geo fleece, EPDM and Wall protection
Life Cycle Assessment – Initial Setup
This system uses more materials than the LDPE system.
Durability
This System has a longer service life than the LDPE system (approx. 40 years) but has poorer recyclability.
Microplastics
This system has a better impact on microplastics in water than the LPDE system has.
Water conservation
This system has the best water conservation of all the systems presented here. On the EduFarm field it would only have a surface of 1100m².
Impact on water quality
This system has the most positive impact on water quality of all the presented systems: no leaching of nutrients, and easy to clean.
Miscellaneous
In this system, underground extraction and purification are possible.
Cost
Pure film is roughly twice as expensive as LDPE and more complex to install.
