Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments


SUBJECT: Climate CoLab Judging Results

Proposal: Waste Management: Chemosynthetic Production of Biomass Using Sewage Nutrients


Thank you for participating in the 2015 Climate CoLab Waste Management contest, and for the time you spent in creating and revising your entry.

The Judges have strongly considered your proposal in this second round of evaluation, and have chosen to not advance it as a Finalist for this contest.

We, the Judges and contest Fellows, are truly grateful for your contribution to the Climate CoLab and for your commitment to address climate change.

We encourage you to keep developing your work. Transfer it to the Proposal Workspace to re-open it, make edits, add collaborators, and even submit it into a future contest. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking “Move proposal”.

We hope you will stay involved in the Climate CoLab community. Please support and comment on proposals that have been named Finalists and vote for which proposal you would like to be nominated as the contest’s Popular Choice Winner.

If you have questions, please contact the Climate CoLab staff at admin@climatecolab.org

Keep up the great work. And thank you again for being a part of this mission to harness the world’s collective efforts to develop and share innovative climate change solutions.


2015 Climate CoLab Judges

Additional comments from the Judges


Judge 1: Overall, the presentation needs to be improved in order to accurately communicate what this proposal is and aims to accomplish. The proposal could be improved if it was designed to focus on a specific community/state/nation. That might help the author focus ideas and provide clear examples of how this proposal will impact the environment. More supporting discussion should be used to supplement the current use of citations and graphics.

Judge 2: The proposal is exhaustive in its resources but also expansive. As seen with other proposals, there is a potential to encompass everything possible without focusing on what is most probable (massive ocean-going treatment versus tank-sized treatment programs). While the implementation of large ocean-going treatment facilities is possible in the distant future, a focus on altering current practices at the localized level is more likely. Once that practice is proven and financially viable, larger scale production at sea may be more viable. Lastly, the question of the costs was not directly addressed in a way that is clear.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' ratings


Novelty:
Feasibility:
Impact:
Presentation:

Judges'' comments


Congratulations! Your proposal, Waste Management: Chemosynthetic Production of Biomass Using Sewage Nutrients in the Waste Management contest has been selected to advance to the Semi-Finalists round. You will be able to revise your proposal and add new collaborators if you wish, from July 1st, 2015 until July 14, 2015, midnight Eastern Time.

At the revision deadline listed above, your proposal will be locked and considered in final form. The Judges will undergo another round of evaluation to ensure that Semi-Finalist proposals have addressed the feedback given, and select which proposals will continue to the Finalists round. Finalists are eligible for the contest’s Judges Choice award, as well as for public voting to select the contest’s Popular Choice award.

The Judges' comments are posted below.
Please incorporate answers to these comments in your revisions, or your proposal may not be advanced to the Finalists round.
Judges 1: The proposal is appealing and clear and has the potential for moderate impact on a major issue. However, I question the feasibility of utilizing the existing terrestrial utility infrastructure to implement the plan, either by utilizing existing lines no longer in service (usually for good reason) or by installing new lines along existing ROWs (potentially prohibitively expensive).

The use of ocean-based reactors has promise on a pilot scale level but I fail to see it happening at large scale at this time simply due to political and public opposition to anything based at sea (e.g. windmills, drilling platforms). There is a vast amount of infrastructure required to scale up this proposal. No information was provided with regard to where, cost, timeline, or emissions reduction make it difficult to fully support.

Thank you for your great work and again, congratulations!

2015 Climate CoLab Judges.

4comments
Share conversation: Share via:

Michael Hayes

Jul 14, 2015
04:21

Member


1 |
Share via:
Proposal
creator
To address the Judges comments: A) "I question the feasibility of utilizing the existing terrestrial utility infrastructure to implement the plan, either by utilizing existing lines no longer in service (usually for good reason) or by installing new lines along existing ROWs (potentially prohibitively expensive).". In brief, this technology only needs closed tanks for cultivation and low cost tankage can be found/installed in many forms and locations. The conversion of existing infrastructure would require a system by system evaluation. However, the flexibility of the technology allows the WENN suite of technologies to be shoe-horned into...any....scale of community. B) "The use of ocean-based reactors has promise on a pilot scale level but I fail to see it happening at large scale at this time simply due to political and public opposition to anything based at sea. There is a vast amount of infrastructure required to scale up this proposal. No information was provided with regard to where, cost, timeline, or emissions reduction make it difficult to fully support.". Marine based industrial development is actually well supported on many different levels. The WENN technology suite, as it is related to the marine environment, has the following unique combination of benefits: - self contained/nonpolluting - provides surface cooling for marine ecosystems under thermal stress such as coral forests; - sustainable and scalable critical commodity production (i.e. carbon negative fuel, biochar, food, feed, organic fertilizer, polymers, freshwater etc.); - can/should work well off-shore (no NIMBY factor); - would significantly reduce pressure on local fisheries as the WENN technology can support mariculture as well as provide energy and water; - allows...all....nations to become bio-energy, protein, water and organic fertilizer/biochar etc. independent as the marine commons are open to all nations. The smallest of the land-locked nations can become as productive as the largest nation owning vast ocean access; - offers a new form of territory in the form of artificial islands which allows...all...nations to expand into the oceanic space without displacement of neighbor/nature. Again, the smallest land-locked state can eventually control as much WENN production tools and oceanic space as even the largest nations;

Michael Hayes

Jul 14, 2015
07:21

Member


2 |
Share via:
Proposal
creator
Dear Judges, The CoLab platform has become simply unstable and is completely butchering the text I've worked hard on for days. The above response to your concerns has been expanded in the proposal (maybe...maybe not!!!). I've created a Google Doc as a back-up to my work on your challenge. That backup doc can be found at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DfIYOeo8NjTmJacaY9fKBTbZoGjs1_zBFInUI1Mt2O4/pub Apologies, Michael

Osero Shadrack Tengeya

Jul 17, 2015
01:55

Fellow


3 |
Share via:
Hi Michael, sorry for the technical challenge you experienced. We will forward this link to the Judges for them to fully review your work. Best of luck.

Michael Hayes

Jul 17, 2015
04:52

Member


4 |
Share via:
Proposal
creator
Hello Annalyn, The problem of dropping text/revisions has happened again. In particular, the proposals at: https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301420/planId/1314310 https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301402/planId/1314411 omitted important text changes in multiple sectors. Please compare what I copied and pasted into a...final version.... Google Doc....(which I created as a last chore on that proposal after coordinating all info on both of the above proposals) as opposed to what ended up in the CoLab Docs. Final version of my work on both 'Waste Management' and 'Atypical Ideas for Carbon Neutrality' https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cJW-z8cBZ9akqcpLgLztaPQ6FX-zMtpz-0r2_Hc_oMg/edit#heading=h.p67pwkldmidp Further, I've referenced 'Global Scale: Chemosynthetic Management of the Water/Energy/Nutrient Nexus-WENN' within https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301402/planId/1314411 and the link takes it to 'Energy/Water Nexus' https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1301501/planId/1315115 The numerous faults in accurately portraying my work are becoming almost too numerous for me to check. Please help me properly get the work I've accumulated to the judges on both contests. Please pass on the Final Version Google Doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cJW-z8cBZ9akqcpLgLztaPQ6FX-zMtpz-0r2_Hc_oMg/pub Warmest regards, Michael