Thomas Hartnik
Director
Biography
Education:
Doctoral degree (Dr.scient) in ecotoxicology from the Norwegian University of the Environment and Biosciences in 2008
Areas of expertise:
- management experience
- varied professional background from academia, state administration and private business within circular economy and pollution and climate-related issues.
- Project manager for larger R&D and consulting projects.
- Experience from boards of the Research Council of Norway and professional networks
Authors
Karen Ane Frøyland Skjennum Katinka Muri Krahn Erlend Sørmo Raoul Wolf Aleksandar I. Goranov Patrick G. Hatcher Thomas Hartnik Hans Peter Heinrich Arp Andrew R. Zimmerman Yaxin Zhang Gerard CornelissenAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Erlend Sørmo Katinka Muri Krahn Gudny Øyre Flatabø Thomas Hartnik Hans Peter Heinrich Arp Gerard CornelissenAbstract
Biomass pyrolysis is the anoxic thermal conversion of biomass into a carbon rich, porous solid, often called biochar. This could be a better waste management alternative for contaminated organic wastes than incineration, due to the useful properties of biochar and potential for carbon sequestration. There are, however, concerns about the potential formation/destruction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and furans (PCDD/Fs). Six organic wastes, including digested sewage sludges, wood wastes, and food waste reject, were pyrolyzed (500–800°C) in a full-scale relevant unit (1–5 kg biochar hr−1). Removal efficiencies for PCBs and PCDD/Fs were > 99% in the produced biochars. Biochar PAH-content (2.7–118 mgkg−1) was not significantly correlated to feedstock or temperature. PAHs (2563–8285 mgkg−1), PCBs (22–113 µgkg−1), and PCDD/Fs (1.8–50 ngTEQ kg−1) accumulated in the pyrolysis condensate, making this a hazardous waste best handled as a fuel for high temperature combustion. Emission concentrations for PAHs (0.22–421 µgNm−3) and PCDD/Fs (≤2.7 pgTEQ Nm−3) were mainly associated with particles and were below the European Union’s waste incineration thresholds. Emission factors ranged from 0.0002 to 78 mg tonne−1 biochar for PAHs and 0.002–0.45 µgTEQ tonne−1 biochar for PCDD/Fs. PCDD/F-formation was negligible during high temperature (≥500 °C) biomass pyrolysis (69–90% net loss)
Authors
Sarah Hale John Jensen Lena Jakob Patryk Oleszczuk Thomas Hartnik Thomas Henriksen Gudny Okkenhaug Vegard Martinsen Gerard CornelissenAbstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the secondary ecotoxicological effects of soil amendment materials that can be added to contaminated soils in order to sequester harmful pollutants. To this end, a nonpolluted agricultural soil was amended with 0.5, 2, and 5% of the following four amendments: powder activated carbon (PAC), granular activated carbon, corn stover biochar, and ferric oxyhydroxide powder, which have previously been proven to sequester pollutants in soil. The resulting immediate effects (i.e., without aging the mixtures before carrying out tests) on the springtail Folsomia candida, the earthworm species Aporectodea caliginosa and Eisenia fetida, the marine bacteria Vibrio f ischeri, a suite of ten prokaryotic species, and a eukaryote (the yeast species Pichia anomalia) were investigated. Reproduction of F. candida was significantly increased compared to the unamended soil when 2% biochar was added to it. None of the treatments caused a negative effect on reproduction. All amendments had a deleterious effect on the growth of A. caliginosa when compared to the unamended soil, except the 0.5% amendment of biochar. In avoidance tests, E. fetida preferred biochar compared to all other amendments including the unamended soil. All amendments reduced the inhibition of luminescence to V. f ischeri, i.e., were beneficial for the bacteria, with PAC showing the greatest improvement. The effects of the amendments on the suite of prokaryotic species and the eukaryote were variable, but overall the 2% biochar dose provided the most frequent positive effect on growth. It is concluded that the four soil amendments had variable but never strongly deleterious effects on the bacteria and invertebrates studied here during the respective recommended experimental test periods.