Environ Dev Sustain

DOI 10.1007/s10668-007-9087-2

New frontiers for sustainability: emergy evaluation

of an eco-village

Giuseppe Siracusa Æ Angela D. La Rosa Æ Paolo Palma

Emiliano La Mola

Received: 22 August 2005 / Accepted: 25 January 2007

Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Abstract The emergy analysis was used to evaluate the sustainability of a village
which aims to be ecologically friendly. The choice of focusing on the use of local
resources including agriculture and farm goods, photovoltaic panels, renewable
heating and cooling systems, recycled water from constructed wetlands etc., aims to
obtain a sustainable village. Indices and ratios based on emergy flows have been
calculated and used to evaluate the behaviour of the whole system. Their depen-
dence upon the fraction of renewable and non renewable inputs as well as locally
available versus purchased inputs from outside is stressed. A new index of sustain-
ability (SI) is also applied to the case study.

Keywords Photovoltaic electricity Æ Renewable resources Æ Environmental loading

ratio (ELR) Æ Sustainability

1 Introduction

Eco-villages are urban or rural communities of people striving to integrate a sup-

portive social environment with a low-impact way of life. To achieve this, they
integrate various aspects of ecological design, permaculture, ecological building,
green production, alternative energy, community building practices, and much more.
The concept of sustainability is becoming a guide for communities policy: a sus-
tainable city or village is committed to protecting, preserving and restoring the
natural environment; city decision-making should be guided by a mandate to max-
imize environmental benefits and reduce or eliminate negative environmental
impacts. According to Costanza and Daly in their Natural Capital and Sustainable

Readers should send their comments on this paper to BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of
publication of this issue.

G. Siracusa Æ A. D. La Rosa (&) Æ P. Palma Æ E. La Mola

Department of Physical and Chemical Methodology for Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Catania, Viale A. Doria 8, 95125 Catania, Italy
e-mail: alarosa@dmfci.unict.it
123
 G. Siracusa et al.

Development (Costanza, & Daly, 1982), individual citizens, community-based

groups and businesses must be aware of their impact on the environment, must take
responsibility for reducing or eliminating those impacts, and must take an active part
in community efforts to address environmental concerns.
Eco-villages, by endeavouring to obtain lifestyles which are ‘‘successfully con-
tinuable into the indefinite future’’, aim to become living models of sustainability,
and examples of how action can be taken immediately. They want to represent an
effective, accessible way to contrast the degradation of social, ecological and spiri-
tual environments. The evaluation of sustainability of an eco-village is not an easy
process due to the wide range of parameters that must be taken into account. In the
present paper we describe and design an eco-village and apply the emergy analysis,
as modern methodology, for the evaluation of sustainability. The theoretical and
conceptual basis for the emergy methodology is rooted in thermodynamics and
general system theory. Evolution of the theory during the past 30 years was docu-
mented by Odum in Environmental accounting (Odum, 1996, 2000). Emergy is an
expression of all the energy (and resources) used in the work processes that generate
a product or service and is expressed as units of one type of energy. In the most
general sense, the total emergy driving a process is a measure of the activities
required and converged to make that process possible. It is a measure of work (in
both the past and the present) necessary to provide a given resource or service
(Tiezzi, 1995, 2002; Ulgiati, Brown, Bastianoni, & Marchettini, 1995). To evaluate
the quality of the energy flows, transformities can be calculated and compared with
other energy forms. The solar transformity of services and products generated by the
system under study is obtained by dividing the total emergy input required by
the energy of the product or service.

2 Methods

2.1 Site descriptions

The place under investigation is a country farm located in the south east of Sicily
which covers a broad area of 88 hectares (51 hectares are suitable for agricultural
practice). The remaining 37 hectares are designed to have a wood (mainly consisting
of local fruit trees) and grazing areas (growing shamrock, vetch etc.). Inside the
wood, a lagoon has been planned, to be used as a natural system to purify the
wastewater coming from the village. The village also includes a bakery, a music hall,
a gym, a workroom (for pottery and local handicraft), and a hotel. Table 1 shows
more details regarding the activities of the eco-village. Ecological details featured in
our project also include:
– Use of a photovoltaic system to produce electricity.
– Use of solar panels for domestic hot water heating.
– Low-energy light bulbs throughout.
– Non-toxic organic paints and wood preserves throughout.
– Locally grown and harvested timber from managed forests.
– Local stone (limestone) for skirting, patios and pathways.
– Roofing with natural clay tiles.
– Innovative ‘breathing wall’ construction allowing a controlled exchange of air &
vapour, and eliminating the need for a conventional vapour barrier.
123
New frontiers for sustainability

Table 1 Activities and Zootechny Items Workers

products of the eco-village
Sheep 100 2
Swine 8
Hen 150 1
Rabbit 60
Agricultural products hectares workers
Vetch 18 4
Wheat 15
Barley 5
Olive tree 10
Vegetables 3
Hosting workers
Hotel (16 rooms) 4
Leisure Hall
Restaurant 8
Other activities workers
Bakery 2
Herbalist 2
Olive oil production 2
Handicraft 2
Gym 2
Music hall 1
Shopping centre 2

– Suspended timber floors for underfloor air circulation to avoid any possible
build-up of radon gas.f
– Shared facilities (laundry, kitchens, lounges) avoiding unnecessary duplication
– Water conservation and recycling through the creation of a lagoon as constructed
wetland.
– Locally grown and produced agricultural goods (vegetables, olive-oil, fruits,
wheat etc.)
– Local breeding (sheep, poultry, rabbits, pigs).

2.2 Emergy and sustainability

Emergy is defined as the sum of all inputs of energy directly or indirectly required by
a process to provide a given product when the inputs are expressed in the same form
(or type) of energy, usually solar energy. Most often, inputs to a process are the
result of another process (or a chain of processes), in which energy has been con-
centrated and upgraded (Ulgiati & Brown, 1998). Thus, the total emergy input is
derived by summing up all inputs, as previous defined (expressed in equivalent
energy of a single form; such as solar energy) used in the chain of processes that
yielded the output in question. The total solar emergy of an item can be calculated as
the product of its available energy content by its solar transformity. It is usually
measured in solar emergy joules (sej), while solar transformity is expressed as solar
emergy joules per joule of product (sej/J). When an item is expressed in units dif-
ferent than joules, for instance as grams, the quality factor is emergy/mass (sej/g).
The solar transformity gives a measure of the concentration of solar emergy
through a hierarchy of processes or levels. Transformity can be considered a quality
123
 G. Siracusa et al.

indicator, according to Lotka-Odum’s maximum power principle (Odum & Pink-

erton, 1955).
Once the total number of input flows has been identified and the total emergy
driving a process has been evaluated, a set of indices and ratios can be calculated.
Three main emergy flows can be recognized when evaluating a system : renewable
flows from within (R), nonrenewable flows from within (N), and flows imported from
outside the system (feedback flows, F), sometimes referred to as purchased flow
(other works have widely described these concepts, see Brown and Buranakarn,
2003; Brown and Ulgiati, 2004; Ulgiati and Brown, 1998; Ulgiati, Odum, Bastianoni,
1994).
The renewable flows (R) are: flow limited, free and locally available.
The nonrenewable flows (N) are: stock limited, not always free and locally
available.
The feedback flows (F) may be: stock limited, never free, never locally available,
always imported.
The above characteristics of emergy flows make it possible to calculate different
and useful indices. In the present study we apply three main indicators, that have
been widely discussed elsewhere, and we shortly describe below:
– The environmental loading ratio (ELR) is the ratio of purchased (F) and
nonrenewable indigenous emergy (N) to free environmental emergy (R). It is an
indicator of the pressure of the process on the local ecosystem and can be
considered a measure of the ecosystem stress due to production activity.
– The emergy yield ratio (EYR) is the ratio of the emergy of the output (Y),
divided by the emergy of those inputs (F) to the process that are fed back from
outside the system under study. It is an indicator of the yield compared with
inputs other than local inputs and gives a measure of the ability of the process to
exploit local resources accounting for the difference between local and imported.
The higher the EYR, the higher this ability, which is not a negligible factor in
economic systems;
– The index of sustainability (SI), defined as the ratio of the above EYR to the
ELR, globally indicates if a process provides a suitable contribution to the user
with a low environmental pressure.

2.3 Emergy evaluation of the eco-village

2.3.1 Emergy evaluation of photovoltaic panels

The photovoltaic emergy value depends mainly on the plant cost (Fig. 1). The high
cost of the pv-plant is due to the complexity and to the low diffusion of photovoltaic
technology.
In order to produce the required electricity for the houses and the hotel it is
necessary to install 482 panels onto a surface area of 445 m2.
The number of pv-panels required to supply the electricity to the village were
calculated according to the standard values of electricity consumption shown in
Tables 2a and b and through the following formulations:

Panels number ¼ EðrequiredpowerÞ =Epv

123
New frontiers for sustainability

Fig. 1 Emergy flows diagram of the photovoltaic electricity production

where E(required power) = P.t, P: electric power [W], t: time [h] and

Epv ¼ gBOS
Kpv
gmod

Ppv
It

gbos: efficiency, Kpv: reduction factor depending on overheating phenomenon, gmod:

module efficiency, Ppv: power of the photovoltaic generator, It: solar radiation daily
average [KW/m2]. The minimum value registered in December was used.
The emergy evaluation does not take into account the environmental pollution.
The emergy analysis does not consider the CO2 release which is zero for the pv-
electricity while it is remarkable for thermoelectricity (0,53 Kg of CO2 per 1 kW/h of
produced electricity).

2.3.2 Emergy evaluation of the heating and cooling system using solar panels

Interest in renewable heating and cooling (RES-H) is increasing. Modern RES-H

installations are highly efficient systems which provide thermal energy for various
applications, from domestic hot water and space heating, to industrial process
heating and cooling systems. The solar energy transformed by the panels is calcu-
lated below:

Solar energy ¼ A  It  gpanel ¼ 2:22E12 J=year

123
 G. Siracusa et al.

Table 2 Electricity consumption of the existing building and electricity consumption of the new
building

Existing building Power(Watt) Building 1 Building 2 Working E current

time (h) drain

a. Electricity consumption of the existing building

ITEMS W item item h
Fridge 100 3 3 8 4800
Freezer 300 3 3 8 14400
Oven 1500 3 3 1 9000
Washing machine 600 2 2 3 7200
Television 75 4 4 3 1800
Video recorder 75 2 2 1 300
Radio 50 5 5 2 1000
Computer 150 0 5 4 3000
Lights 11 30 30 6 3960
Total (daily average KW) 45.46
Total (yearly average KW) 16592.9
b. Electricity consumption of the new building
New building Power hotel time houses time E current drain
ITEMS W h h
Fridge 100 0 0 7 8 5600
Freezer 300 0 0 7 8 16800
Oven 1500 0 0 7 1 10500
Washing machine 600 3 3 3 3 10800
Television 75 14 1 8 3 4950
Video recorder 75 0 0 4 1 300
Radio 50 0 0 5 2 500
Computer 150 0 0 2 4 1200
Lights 11 30 3 46 6 5016
Total (daily average KW) 55.666
Total (yearly average KW) 20318.09

A = 400 m2 (surface area), It = 6.95E9 J/m2 (total yearly average radiation with
body angle of 321’), gt = 80% (solar panel solahart k efficiency)
In the case of a heating and cooling plant working only through methane com-
bustion, without solar panels, the methane request is 30% more than the combined
system (solar panels and methane reactor) and the plant costs are lower. The
transformity value (2.88E4 sej/J), reported in Fig. 2 case 2 is lower than the value of
the combined system (7.34E4 sej/J) reported in Fig. 2 case 1. This means that the
environmental cost of solar panels is high, due to the scarce diffusion of technology.
However the main advantage of using solar panels remains the reduction of CO2
released into the atmosphere.

2.3.3 Emergy evaluation of the lagoon

Figure 3 is a diagram of emergy flows of the wastewater treatment lagoon coupled

with the septic tank. Renewable and non-renewable resources are supposed to act in
the system where the wastewaters enter from the left of the diagram, transforma-
tions occur inside and products are obtained on the right. The obtained product
(clean water for reuse) is a very valuable benefit as it belongs to the natural capital
(Siracusa & La Rosa, 2006). Its preservation is extremely important if we consider
that, according to Odum previsions, the replacement time is 200 years for fresh
water (Odum, 1996).
123
New frontiers for sustainability

Fig. 2 Emergy flows diagram of the heating/cooling system

2.3.4 Emergy evaluation of local renewable and non renewable resources

Local renewable resources of the eco-village also include the solar energy con-
sumption for the agricultural fields and the woodland and the rain (see Table 3).
Their emergy evaluation is reported below:
– Solar energy ¼ Area  I  ð1  qÞ (Handbook of Emergy evaluation (3)
M.T.Brown, E.Bardi, pag.59). A = surface area of the woodland (3.7E5 m2)
and the agricultural fields (5.1E5 m2), q = That fraction of the total light incident
123
 G. Siracusa et al.

Fig. 3 Emergy flows diagram of the lagoon coupled with septic tanks as wastewater cleaning system

on a reflecting surface. For the woodland q = 0.6 for the agricultural fields
q = 0.26, I = Average solar radiation of Priolo (SR) = 101.5 W/m2 (average
summer insolation 137.7 W/m2; average winter insolation 65.3 W/m2, CIPA),
I = 101.5 W/m2 = (101.5*3.6)KJ/h*m2 corresponding to (101.5*3.6*1000*8760)
J/year*m2 = 3.2E9 J/year*m2 .Evaluation of solar energy consumption for:
– the agricultural fields (5.1E5 m2) · (3.2E9J/m2) · 0.26 = 1.21E15 J
– the woodland (3.7E5 m2) · (3.2E9 J/m2) · 0.6 = 4.74E14 J. Total solar en-
ergy = 1.68E15 J.
– Rain, chemical potential energy ¼ A  p  d  DG, A = 8.0E5 m2, DG = Gibbs
free energy (4,94 J/g) (Environmental Accounting H.T.Odum pag 42) p = yearly
precipitation (0.34 m for year 2004), d = water density (1E6 g/m3)

Energy evaluation = 8E5 m2* 0.34 m/year* 1E6 g/m3* 4.94 J/g = 1.48E12 J/year
transformity is 1.82E4 sej/J (Handbook of Emergy Evaluation, Mark T.Brown,and
Eliana Bardi, 2001).
Water from the local well is considered a non renewable resource, together with
the water from the lagoon, and is calculated as follows:
– Water = It was considered that the average water consumption for agricultural
practice is 350 mm per day corresponding to 1.98E7 litres per year (the
agronomist handbook).
123
New frontiers for sustainability

Table 3 Emergy evaluation Item Quantity Solar Emergy

of the eco-village per year transformity flow
(g,J,e) sej/unit sej/year

Renewable (R)
Solar energy 1.68E15 J 1 sei/J 1.68E15
Rain 1.48E12 J 1.82E4 sei/J 2.69E16
pv-electricity 1.36E11 J 7.07E4 sei/J 9.62E15
Human labour 8.20E10 J 7.38E6 sej/J 6.05E17
Total renewable 6.43E17
Non renewable (N)
Water 3.93E9 g 1.95E6 sei/g 7.66E15
Lagoon 9.85E9 g 7.65E5 sei/g 7.53E15
Total non renewable 1.52E16
Imported (F)
Heating/cooling 2.71E11 J 7.34E4 sej/J 1.99E16
Fuel 2.09E9 J 1.11E5 sei/J 2.32E14
Fish 2.05E1 J 2.27E8 sej/J 4.65E9
Sugar 1.15E2 J 5.47E5 sej/J 6.28E7
Wine and beverage 2.42E1 J 2.52E9 sej/J 6.09E10
Machines 7.08E3e 1.4E12 sej/e 9.91E15
Dressing 6.43E4e 1.4E12 sej/e 9.00E16
Goods and services 5.80E4e 1.4E12 sej/e 8.12E16
Health and medicines 4.12E4e 1.4E12 sej/e 5.77E16
School 7.49E3e 1.4E12 sej/e 1.05E16
Communications 2.00E4e 1.4E12 sej/e 2.80E16
Total imported 2.97E17
Exported
Agriculture goods
Wheat 2.98E3 J 2.67E5 sej/J 7.97E8
Barley 2.00E3 J 2.67E5 sej/J 5.33E8
Olive 9.93E2 J 2.67E5 sej/J 2.65E8
Fruit and vegetables 2.49E2 J 4.82E5 sej/J 1.20E8
Farm goods
Cheese 1.39E2 J 5.33E6 sej/J 7.40E8
Milk 1.51E2 J 5.33E6 sej/J 8.04E8
Meat 2.03E2 J 5.33E6 sej/J 1.08E9
Eggs 1.84E2 J 5.33E6 sej/J 9.78E8
Human labour 8.20E10 J 7.38E6 sej/J 6.05E17
Total exported 6.05E17

Water use for animal breeding was calculated considering the size of the animal:
for small size a water consumption value of 764,400 litres per year was considered,
while for big size the value is 3144,960 litres per year.
Total water consumption = 3.3E9 g
The transformity is 1.95E6 sej/g (Analisi di sostenibilità per la provincia di Pescara).

Table 4 Emergy indices Emergy local renewable (sej year–1) R 6.43E17

Emergy local not renewable (sej year–1) N 1.52E16
Emergy local resources (sej year–1) L(R + N) 6.58E17
Imported Emergy (sej year–1) F 2.97E17
Exported Emergy (sej year–1) E 6.05E17
Yield Y = R + N + F 9.55E17
Emergy Yield Ratio (EYR) =Y/F 3.21
Environmental loading ratio (ELR) = (F + N)/R 0.48
Emergy sustainability index (SI) = EYR/ELR 6.68

123
 G. Siracusa et al.

3 Results and discussion

In this paper we argue that the total emergy flow required by the eco-village (Y) in
one year is 9.55E17 sej/year.
As shown in Table 3, this value results from an evaluation of local renewable
emergy (R), local non renewable emergy (N) and imported emergy (F). The local
renewable emergy (R) is 6.43E17 sej/year and represents 67% of the total (Y)
according to the aim of the village to mainly use local resources. R value also
includes the emergy derived from pv-electricity and human labour. Non local
renewable emergy (N) results from water consumption, lagooning and soil erosion.
In Table 4 are reported the values of the main emergy indices calculated:
– the Environmental Loading Ratio (ELR) which is an indicator of the anthropic
pressure on the environment: ELR ¼ (non renewable resources ðN þ FÞÞ=
(renewable resources ðRÞÞ ¼ 0:48
– The Emergy Yield Ratio (EYR) which is a measure of the actual exploitation of
local resources, renewable or not, compared with the input from outside:
EYR ¼ (total Emergy ðYÞÞ=(Imported ðFÞÞ ¼ 3:21
– The Sustainability Index (SI) which provide a multi-dimensional measure of long
term sustainability: SI ¼ EYR=ELR ¼ 6:68

The SI was studied and proposed by Ulgiati and Brown, (Ulgiati & Brown, 1998).
According with their results, an SI < 1 appears to be indicative of consumer products
or processes, and an SI > 1 is indicative of products that have net contributions to
society. A low SI (< 1) is indicative of highly developed consumer oriented econo-
mies, and high SI (>10) is indicative of economies that have been termed undevel-
oped. SI ratios between 1 and 10 are indicative of developing economies. The SI
calculated for Italy in 1989 (Ulgiati et al., 1994) was SI = 0.17. This indicates a
massive use of non-renewable energy, large imports of purchased energy and
materials, and large environmental stress. In contrast, the value of the sustainability
index for the village under study (SI = 6.68) is indicative that the eco-village econ-
omy is a model to pursue for a more sustainable development.
Emergy is an appropriate methodology to evaluate this system, because each type
of flow, such as monetary or information flows could be taken into account for the
evaluation. It could be useful to compare the results obtained with other common
methodologies, such as exergy, Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA) or embodied energy
(NRE index) that are often used to evaluate materials flows, but not services or
information.

References

Brown, M. T, & Buranakarn, V. (2003). Emergy indices and ratios for sustainable material cycles and
recycle options. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 38, 1–22.
Brown, M. T., & Ulgiati, S. (2004). Energy quality, emergy and transformity: H.T. Odum’s contri-
butions to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecological Modelling, 178, 201–213.
Costanza, R., & Daly, H. (1982). Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biol-
ogy, 6, 1.

123
New frontiers for sustainability

Odum, H. T. (1996). Environmental accounting: Emergy and environmental decision making. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.
Odum, H. T. (2000). Emergy accounting, environmental engineering sciences. Gainesville, Florida,
USA: University of Florida.
Odum, H. T., & Pinkerton, R. C. (1955). Time’s speed regulator: The optimum efficiency for
maximum power output in physical and biological systems. American Scientist, 43, 331–343.
Siracusa, G., & La Rosa, A. D. (2006). Design of a constructed wetland for wastewater treatment in a
Sicilian town and environmental evaluation using the emergy analysis. Ecological Modelling,
197, 490–497.
Tiezzi, E. (1995). Verso uno sviluppo sostenibile. Oikos-Ekoblub, 1, 4–6.
Tiezzi, E. (2002). Analisi emergetica della Provincia di Bologna, Provincia di Bologna settore
Ambiente.
Ulgiati, S., Brown, M. T., Bastianoni, S., & Marchettini, N. (1995). Emergy-based indices and ratios
to evaluate the sustainable use of resources. Ecological engineering, 5, 519–531.
Ulgiati, S., & Brown, M. T. (1998). Monitoring patterns of sustainability in natural and man-made
ecosystems. Ecological Modelling, 108, 23–36.
Ulgiati, S., Odum, H. T., & Bastianoni, S. (1994). Emergy use, environmental loading and sustain-
ability. An emergy analysis of Italy. Ecological Modelling, 73, 215–268.

123