Technology and Environment (1989)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Technology and Environment. 1989. Pp. 15~166. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. The Rise and Fall of Environmental Expertise VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL Vanous professions have thrust themselves forward with enthusiasm, pride, and touching self-confidence as the key to saving and managing our natural environment. Physicians, engineers, biologists, and lawyers have all contributed the* talents and prejudices to the cause. Given their differences of New, it is probably not surprising that we are where we are today. Thirty years after the birth of the modern environmental movement, we are still questioning what the real problems are, what technical solutions are appropriate, and most difficult of all, how to make those solutions socially acceptable. Ib our frustration, the public seems to have lost confidence the ability of politicians and professionals to solve the problems. This chapter traces the history of the modern environmental move- ment through the rise and fall of prpes of expertise brought to bear on the problems. Then the relevance of the technical solution to socieW's means for addressing the problems is examined. I=st, the formal methods established to make environmental decisions are examined and contrasted with the ways in which decisions are actually reached. This approach will lead to recommendations on how to proceed in the future. Let us look first at the professions that have been in the forefront of environmental management over the years. Each has discovered problems and offered solutions to them. Unfortunately, some of these solutions have had unforeseen consequences. Almost all have been focused so narrowly that opportunities to do the job right have been lost. I have chosen illustrations from water resource management because that is the 159

160 Y7CTORLA ~ TSCH - =L environmental problem most familiar to me. However, similar examples exist in air pollution and solid waste management. Physicians were first to understand the direct effects of man's activities on water supplies. Their initial efforts were aimed at keeping harmful exposure to a minimum. Sewage was carted away from populated areas, and by 1850 the storm drain was commonly used to dispose of household wastes, thereby drastically reducing the spread of cholera. This solution led to the unforeseen consequence of dumping raw sewage into water bodies used as sources of drinking water. The response to the resulting threat to public health was chlorination of public water supplies to prevent diseases caused by this method of sewage removal By 1930, chlorination had virtually eliminated typhoid in the United States. In a sense, this major achievement completed the contribution of the early public health approach to wastewater management. What have the consequences been? First, the large quantities of sewage that are diluted with water and shunted off to bodies of water cause eutrophication and contamination of our natural surface water bodies. Tremendous quantities of water and nutrients are wasted in this practice. Ironically, it has since been discovered that chlorine itself may be an indirect cause of illness by combining with organics to form trihalomethanes, which are suspected carcinogens. This problem has required attention at 3,000 public drinldng water systems around the country. Despite what appeared to be permanent public commitment to the dis- charge of domestic waste mixed with vast quantities of water, the engineer- ing profession rallied to the task of reducing the nutrients and pathogens entering waterways. By 1970 a vast infrastructure of secondary treatment plants was substantially complete all over the country. Building contin- ues on these facilities. Between 1977 and the present, local and federal governments have invested more than $100 billion to gain 87 percent com- pliance with the standards for secondary treatment. However, by 1980 policymakers and regulators realized that they had been lulled into a false sense of accomplishment. Despite this enormous infrastructure investment, few improvements have occurred in most of our waterways since those achieved by the early 1970s. It is not surprising that the public has lost confidence. As some engineers had warned, slipping by the neatly devised and heroically built system were 37,000 inappropriately designed landfills, hundreds of thousands of leaking gasoline tanks, and millions of tons of untreated nutrients and metals left over from secondary treatment. Worst of all, discharges of storm water, as polluted as raw sewage and laden with heavy metals and exotic chemicals, continue to run untreated into our lakes, rivers, and estuaries. Bizarre new fish diseases are appearing almost weekly around the country, most likely because of long-term bioaccumulation of unregulated pollutants. In Florida, such storm water accounts for all solids,

THE RISE AND FALL OF E~RONME=^ EXPERTISE 161 8~95 percent of the heavy metal loads, and 20 percent of the nutrients polluting our surface waters. Despite the quantities of water treated and wasted in secondary treat- ment plants, new water supplies are continuously being sought. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been active in this area in Florida, and many benefits have resulted. However, there are some sad legacies of the past. One is the Central and South Florida Flood Control project designed to create and protect 750,000 acres of agricultural land, formerly part of the great Everglades, and to provide water in times of drought to the urban areas of south Florida. Ternble by-products of this project have been a 90 percent reduction in the population of wading birds in Everglades Na- tional Park and the eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee, the heart of the freshwater supply to south Florida. For their part, the biologists are waiting in the wings to solve these problems. If more had been known, they say, few of these disasters would have occurred. Absent a clearer understanding of consequences and alternatives, the public is now more respectful of embarking on new projects. However, after 20 years of study on Lake Okeechobee, biologists still cannot describe with any certainty the nutrient regime of the lake. They are similarly confused on issues surrounding the effects of acid rain and other major ecological disturbances. Few in our society believe it would be prudent to wait to intervene in such problems while biologists fully sort out causes and effects. Because causes, effects, and cures are still elusive in many large en- vironmental problems and enormous challenges keep appearing, the con- dition that As developed is obviously one in which the legal profession can flourish. The legal system has produced some of the basic decisions supporting environmental protection, but it has also produced an adver- sarial, combative climate in which it is impossible for people from industry to feel comfortable discussing facts with their colleagues in government or with the public. Many people who are knowledgeable about environmental issues are constantly in litigation and constrained from solving problems by using each other's talents cooperatively. The amount of litigation IS alarming. For those cases that went to trial in federal court, 10 percent of the civil suits overall took longer than 45 months to resolve, and 10 percent of the environmental cases took longer than 67 months to resolve. Most serious is the fact that the legalistic approach has produced a staggering load of regulations, purportedly to cover every conceivable circumstance. This regulatory burden has left little time or incentive for creativity and human judgment, and no time for concentrating on environmental results. It has created a process-oriented, rather than a results-oriented, approach to environmental regulations. The purpose of this review is to underscore the need for humility in

162 VICTORLl ~ TSCHIN=L proposing umversal solutions to individual problems. Regulators have to consult with their colleagues and force themselves to justify carefully the need for action and its probable consequences. OPPORTUNITIES AND OBSTACLES What lessons can engineers learn from these expenences? Engineers will continue to be hampered by a poor understanding of the biological world as reflected in the poor models of it. Research is essential to improve these models. Nevertheless, the engineering profession can move out with confidence and self-respect in developing several technological opportunities. First, because experts are weakest in convincing each other, let alone the public, that they can describe and quantifier the effects of contaminants released into the environment, there is a need for chemists and engineers to work diligently at finding new processes to avoid creation of these by-products. It is no longer possible to make radical improvements in end- of-process treatment. In large measure, the concept of treatment should become passe. Let us not give the biologists and the lawyers anything to worry about. Second, recycling technologies will be required for unavoidable by- products and for reusing or reformatting products that are no longer useful. America generates nvo to three times more garbage than our economic peers do, and one-third of current landfills in the United States will be out of space in 5 to 10 years. New landfills and incinerators are becoming impossible to site. The only silver lining to this situation is that disposal costs have tripled or quadrupled in many locations, making recycling more palatable. The time has come to avoid product or process technologies that create new waste disposal problems in favor of those that reduce the need for ultimate discharge or disposal (see Friedlander, this volume). The developed world will not be allowed much longer to dump used articles on a poorer country in the name of recycling, if the result is to contaminate the land in that country. Third, there is a need to plan for problems that are coming and effects that are unavoidable. It is not necessary to wait for the modelers to describe these effects in detail. The engineering profession can help find ways to reduce the carbon dionde burden in the atmosphere where possible, but also to prepare for rising sea levels. Local coastal effects and the best mitigation for these impacts must be understood before disaster occurs. Fourth, appropriate development of water supplies and efficient use of available resources are going to be of major importance as water becomes increasingly scarce in many parts of the world. It has been estimated that global warming, with an increase of 2°C in temperature and 10 percent

THE RISE AND FALL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE 163 reduction in rainfall, could reduce available water supplies by 50 percent in the drier states of the U.S. Southwest. Finally, although many environments have damaged in the past, there is still time to rehabilitate many of them, including the Everglades and the Chesapeake Bay. It will take our best team efforts to bring these wonderful places back, yet we must because we depend on them economically and culturally and because they are natural wonders. There will be a host of new public works actions needed to correct non-point-source problems and delicate freshwater-saltwater imbalances and to restore the natural hydropenod essential to a balanced fishery. There are exciting and challenging opportunities for engineers in con- serving natural resources, but it is equally important to ensure that these solutions are usable and used. Let us examine for a moment the unrecep- tive atmosphere in which these brilliant and practical new discoveries will struggle to live. First, problem definition is often a major drawback to progress. There are usually deficient or conflicting scientific data defining the problem. The public often disagrees about the causes of problems and the priorities for solutions. This is not surprising because scientists also often disagree, both on sources and fates of contaminants in the environment, and on political aspects of the issues as welt Second, appropriate solutions may elude us because the regulatory system and the market often do not encourage them. For example, we require advanced waste treatment of domestic waste at about 50 percent higher cost than the usual secondary treatment when discharged into a eutrophic water body. Right next to this "gold-plated pipe" is a storm water ditch carrying the equivalent of raw sewage. This water has received absolutely no treatment. Third, some of the toughest environmental issues-ozone pollution from automobiles, climate change, eutrophication of water bodies, and loss of natural habitat due to the growing market for vacation homes are the consequences of large-scale cultural patterns, the summed effects of millions of people making individual decisions. It is easy for people to rally around a common enemy "the smokestack," but ask them to separate their garbage or stop fertilizing their lawn and the commitment to environmental quality becomes less important. Fourth, there Is a common tendency to rely on "high-tech" solutions and use "low-tech" human beings to implement them. Three Mile Island, Bhopal, and Chernobyl all come to mind. This problem has arisen so often that a whole new discipline, "human engineering," has developed to cope with it. Let us not forget that even with a computerized cockpit, experienced pilots still forget to set flaps. Human frailties are here to stay, and design must involve an understanding of human behavior.

164 VICTORIA I TSCHINKE:L Fifth, the regulatory system was largely designed around the outmoded concept of treatment after process completion, rather than avoidance and reuse. This has been a more practical approach for the regulator and keeps government out of the internal workings of the regulated community. It does not encourage the modern approach, which by its nature is highly individualized by location, so that each plan is suited to the individual sensitivites of each natural system. Last, despite a centralized approach to pollution control, one that is highly structured and legalistic, the United States is moving more and more toward negotiated decision making. Still another new profession, the environmental mediator, has leaped into the fray. THE REAL WORLD OF DECISIONS Many times I have heard competent industrial managers say that they are frustrated by expensive regulations which they feel are irrelevant or by local citizens who fail to distinguish between a real risk and what is merely a fear. These managers feel betrayed by local and regional governments that feel compelled to add their own burden of regulation because, somehow, the state and federal governments are not doing their job. Local regulations often conflict with the national approach. This situation is a natural consequence of our lack of hard data and the mistaken demand on all sides for clearly articulated rules so that all parties can tell what is expected of the regulated party. The sheer volume and conflict among all the rules make that clarity a chimera. As a result of this complex regulatory structure and the public's contin- ued distrust, many of the real decisions are actually being made locally with a far broader agenda than that normally encompassed by the regulatory approach. Some people call this the "let's make a deal" approach State and local authorities need to take advantage of this approach to encourage regional solutions to- environmental problems, solutions tailored to the en- vironmental needs of each area and to the causes of those problems. The Washington establishment will not always like this devolution of authority. Although there are many examples of this regulatory approach around the country, I will discuss two that I have participated in. The first concerns a phosphate mining and chemical plant operated by Occidental Chemical Corporation at White Springs, Florida. The company owns mineral rights along the Suwannee River and for several miles inland. In 1984, new management at the plant became frustrated by the constant litigation surrounding every change contemplated. Planning expansion became im- possible because of regulatory uncertainties and mounting public concern. The company decided to open a dialogue with concerned agencies and environmental groups. Although not every issue has been settled, certain

THE RISE AND FALL OF ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE 165 things have become clear to everyone. First, the protection of the Suwan- nee River depends absolutely on developing a long-range plan that includes preservation elements, acquisition elements, and mitigation of damage to wetlands that are to be mined. The need for a long-range environmental plan coincided with the company's view that, to make long-range business plans, they had to know which areas would be allowed to be mined. Many of the items that are central to the agreement lie outside the normal scope of regulation, yet are essential to the well-being of the Suwannee River watershed. Of course, this is a simple example compared with areas that have more than one source of pollution. A second example is the comprehensive basin approach to managing water problems, which was begun in Florida in 1986. In 1987 Florida passed the Surface Water Improvement and Management Act, which designated critical basins. The new aspects of this program are funded at $15 million per year, combined with $20 million per year for land acquisition programs. By contrast, the entire Clean Lakes program (authorized under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500) in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency receives only $15 million. On the St. Johns River near Jacksonville, for example, marsh restoration, land acquisition, water supply, flood control, and enforcement actions are being combined in a massive effort. It has become clear to us in Florida that it is impossible to meet environmental goals on a routine permit-by-permit basis. We can listen carefully to these issues and examples and fashion a newer, better means of dealing with many environmental problems. It must be one that has a sound scientific base, has incentives for doing the right thing, engages people's cooperation early in the process, recognizes that humans are mortals, is relatively site specific and results oriented, and is negotiated and agreed to by all parties. Engineers must now consider such interaction with the agencies and public as part of their job: the public should be the ultimate client for every environmental engineer. It is time again for engineers, as well as representatives of the many other professions with relevant expertise, to step forward and commit themselves to maintaining and enhancing environmental quality. BIBLIOGRAPHY American Water Works Association. 1981. Water Conservation Management. Washington, D.C.: American Waterworks Association. gingham, G. 1986. Resolving Environmental Disputes. Washington, D.C.: Ihe Conservation Foundation. Costanza, R. 1987. Social traps and environmental policy. BioScience 37~6~:407~12.

166 VICTORIA ~ TSCHW=L Elkington, J., and J. Shopboy. 1988. Lee Shrinking Planet: U.S. Information Technology and Sustainable Development. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute. King, J. 1985. Troubled Water. Emmaus, Pa.: Rodale Press. Morgan, A. E. 1971. Dams and Other Disasters. Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers. National Academy of Engineering. 1986. Hazards: Technology and Fairness. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press National Academy of Engineering. 1988. Cities and Their Vital Systems Infrastructure Past, Present, and Future. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press. National Council on Public Works Improvement. 1988. The state of U.S. infrastructure. Urban Land May 2~23. Rabe, B. G. 1986. Fragmentation and Integration in State Environmental Management. Washington, D.C.: The Conservation Foundation. Stokey, E., and R. Zeckhauser. 1978. A Primer for Policy Analysis. New York: W. W. Norton.

Technology and Environment 1989. Pp. 167-181. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Environmental Issues: Implications for Engineering Design and Education . SHELDON K FRIEDLANDER Pollution control in the United States has depended on regulatory action to drive changes in technology. The approach has been to trace the effects of pollutants on receptors (humans, ecological systems, etc.) back to the appropriate pollution sources and then implement control measures. The role of the technological community has been largely reactive. The use of regulatory action to force technological change is often costly and inefficient. It starts on the outermost perimeter of technology where the effects are detected and it encourages end-of-pipe treatment. It is ad hoc, often limited to special classes of pollutants, and leads to a distorted view of industry as a collection of pollution sources.) Despite some successes with the effects-based approach, environmental problems of technological origin and an evermore critical public attitude toward technology continue. Regulatory trends indicate no letup in re- strictions on the environmental side effects of technology. However, both the regulatory agencies and industry appear receptive to a more proactive mode of operation by industry. This calls for the accelerated development of systematic procedures for the design of environmentally compatible tech- nologies. For this purpose, it is necessary to go back to basics and make institutional changes affecting engineering design, research, and education as discussed in this chapter. REGULATORY TRENDS In the short term, the requirement for industry to comply with federal right-to-know laws by disclosing emissions of toxic chemicals will stimulate 167

168 SHELDON K FRIEDLANDER more stringent state and local laws (Wall Street Journal, July 2~, 1988). Pressures on industry to reduce emissions will mount as the levels required for disclosure decrease. For the long term, there is a growing movement toward regulation at an international level: as long as the effects of pollution seemed limited to a scale of a few miles in the vicinity of a source, regulation was the responsibility of local and state governments. Later, overall regulatory responsibility in the United States was assumed by the federal government through the Environmental Protection Agency. A new precedent for regulatory action has been set at the inter- national level by the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (Doniger, 1988; United Nations Environment Program, 1987~. The commercial use of these compounds began in the early 1930s. The common refrigerants at the time- ammonia, methyl chloride, and sulfur dioxide were not suitable for home refrigeration because of their noxious or toxic properties. In the late 1920s, Charles F. Kettering of General Motors asked one of his research staff, Thomas Midgley, Jr., to find a non- toxic, nonflammable substitute for these gases (Kettering, 1947~. Midgley, educated as a mechanical engineer at Cornell Un~versin,r, was self-taught in chemistry. In 1930 he prepared dichlorofluoromethane (Freon 12) and demonstrated its safety at a meeting of the American Chemical Societr by inhaling a deep lungful of the gas and then exhaling it to extinguish a lighted candle. Midgley's discovery laid the foundation for the success of the Frigidaire Division of General Motors. During World War II, freons were used to aerosolize insecticides such as DDT. Later they found widespread use as solvents in the microelectronics industry. Theoretical studies by Mario J. Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland in the early 1970s, subsequently confirmed by large-scale atmospheric observations in the 1980s, indicated that damage to the stratospheric ozone layer resulted from these long-lived substances (Molina and Rowland, 1974~. The Montreal Protocol requires signatory nations to freeze production of five CFCs at 1986 levels and then cut production in half by July 1, 1998 (see Glas, this volume). Provision is made for the state of technological development of the participating nations. Developing nations are allowed a 10-year growth period for CFC and baton use, and producing countries can make extra CFCs and haloes, not counted in their national quotas, for the developing nations. The Soviet Union also receives a catch-up allowance, similar to the developing nations. This accord sets two important precedents: it recognizes the atmo- sphere as a limited, shared resource; and it curtails the right of individual countries to release wastes to the atmosphere. In effect we have agreed to the allocation of rights to release atmospheric emissions on a national basis for CFCs.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING 169 If the Montreal Protocol is used as a model for controlling other types of pollutants with regional and global effects, harder decisions must be faced. It is much more difficult for a modern industrial societr to curtail releases of carbon dioxide and the oxides of nitrogen (NO=), due to burning of fossil fuel than to control CFCs. Currently, the United States and Europe are the major sources of NOR emissions, followed by East Asia (Figure 1~. The developing countries in southerly latitudes, however, as well as East Asia, had the largest percentage increases in NOR emissions from 1966 to 1980 (Figure 2~. These increases portend a substantial spread in NO=-affected areas around the world, with accompanying photochemical smog and acid deposition. Developing nations have a much larger population base and much faster-growing populations than the United States and Europe (Figure 3~. As these nations industrialize, worldwide emissions of all pollutants will grow rapidly with the following consequences: pressure for further regulation at the international level; difficult negotiations between industrialized nations and develop- ing countries in setting national emissions allocations; and a competitive advantage to nations whose engineers are able to design clean, economic technologies. Environmental protection on a global scale will require the industrial- ized nations to transfer low-pollution technologies to developing countries in a timely manner. A CHALLENGE TO ENGINEERING Before discovering Freon, Thomas Midgley had also worked on the problem of engine knock at Ketter~ng's request. In 1921 Midgley and his research team discovered tetraethyl lead. This technological breakthrough led to high-octane gasoline, which permitted the use of more fuel-efficient, high-compression engines. Mid gley went on to develop Freon, was elected to the National Academy of Sciences, and later became president of the American Chemical Society. Midgley did not live to see the controversies surrounding the envi- ronmental effects of his great discovenes. In 1940 he suffered an acute attack of poliomyelitis, which left him crippled. He set up a pulley and harness system to assist him into and out of bed, but tragically strangled himself in the harness in 1944. Midgley's distinguished career, important technological contributions, and tragic death read like a parable- a moral tale about how our marvelous technology designed to satisfy the needs of society may unleash unanticipated harmful effects on the same society.

170 Op -  ~ ~ : ~q~ - .o to CO ._ LL · . o V) to o ~ U) A - c o - o c Ct U2 o - c ._ i_ CO a: o ._ in ._ o A o - .e Or ._ to  _' c o ._ - . - _. ._ oo C oo Q) ·_ Ct ·- I: u: Ct to PS (7 _ ~ 6

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING 171 The engineering profession faces the challenge of satisfying those so- cietal needs while meeting increasingly strict regulations on environmental side effects. Over the long term, this calls for institutional changes affecting engineering design, basic research, and education. Recent efforts to reshape technological approaches to pollution control (National Research Council, 1985; U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, 1986) have focused on process and plant design, which are considered first in this chapter. Consumer products, from automobiles to plastic wrappings, have widespread environ- mental effects and require separate consideration. Finally, the implications of these technological challenges for engineering education are discussed. Structural changes in technology will have profound effects in the context of this discussion. For example, in the chemical industry, there is an anticipated shift from commodity chemicals to high-value, low-volume specialty chemicals. In the field of energy, superconductivity and fusion, now at early stages of development, appear to be clean technologies. As new technologies become familiar, however, nasty surprises tend to occur. Moreover, if new energy technologies are not viable scientifically or economically, and another energy crunch develops, waiting in the wings are coal-derived fuels and nuclear energy, each of which has its own environmental consequences. Efforts to predict structural changes in technology (see Ausubel, this volume) should continue. In my view, however, it is unlikely that we will be able to predict in much detail, very far in advance, the onset of new technologies and their environmental effects. Over the long term, however, institutional changes affecting engineering design, basic research, and education are necessary to shape the development of new technologies with an understanding of potential environmental consequences. DESIGN OF ENVIRONMENTALLY COMPATIBLE PROCESSES AND PLANTS A recent National Research Council report (198%, p. 112) summarizes the challenges faced in the design of environmentally compatible manufac- luring plants as follows: Traditional analyses of process economics might show that inherently safer and less polluting plants are less efficient in terms of energy or raw materials usage. Indeed, chemical plants have been designed in the past principally to maximize reliability, product quality, and profitability. Such issues as chronic emissions, waste disposal, and process safety have often been treated as secondary factors. It has become clear, however, that these considerations are as important as the others and must be addressed during the earliest design stages of the plant. This is in part due to a more realistic calculation of the economics of building and operating a plant. When potential savings from reduced accident frequency, avoidance of generating hazardous waste that must be disposed of, and decreased potential liability are taken into consideration, inherently safer and less polluting

172 09 I;  a: Fly - i: .~ ~: 0£ a: ._ AL o - a: ·_ to 00 0\ o 0\ O 0` ~q _ :: o o ._ C ~ ." ·S  o to e_ ~q Ct ~. C: ~ ·_ c: ~ ~ 3 {'a ·= lo: - _ ~ ~ CY - ~ .=

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING .... :. : :.::. ..... .| 3.021 Asia and Oceania .~.. ~ ~ . , ~_~ ~ 0.623 .: : : 0.497 = 0.499 ..~ 0.429 r Africa 1.497 Europe Latin America 1 4.665 0.711 ~ 1988 (Estimated) 0.286 ~2020 (Projected) .. Soviet Union 0.354 .... 0.272 _ U. 0.327 .S. and Canada 173 FIGURE 3 World population growth (in billions). SOURCE: Population Reference Bureau, Inn plants may prove to cost less overall to build and operate. And in any case, if the American public is not convinced that chemical plants are designed to be safe and environmentally benign, then the fact that they operate economically will be of little consequence to the public's decision on whether to allow their construction and operation. Although chemical plants are singled out, this discussion is applicable to  any type of manufacturing plant. In the past, the design of environmentally compatible manufacturing plants has generally meant the use of end-of-pipe treatment or separation devices through which effluent gases or liquids pass on their way to the environment. These devices are designed to meet government emission standards for particular chemical compounds. However, accompanying nonregulated substances almost always remain in these streams. Ash and other solid wastes must be disposed of separately. Over the past few years, a movement has grown stressing in-plant practices (as opposed to add-on devices or exterior recycling) to reduce or eliminate waste. This movement has been called waste reduction (National Research Council, 1985; U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, 1986) or production-integrated pollution control.

174 SHELDON K FRIEDLANDER This approach is not new. For example, in a pioneering air pollution study, Rupp (1956) wrote: Source control and abatement of formed contaminants are complementary practices in the campaign against air pollution. Source control prevents the emission of contaminants to the atmosphere; abatement renders the emission of contaminants to the atmosphere harmless and ino~ensnre. Waste reduction can be defined ~J.S. Office of Technology Assess- ment, 1986) as "in-plant processes that reduce, avoid and eliminate" the generation of waste. Actions taken away from the manufacturing activity, including out-of-plant waste recycling, or treatment and disposal after the wastes are generated, are not considered waste reduction in this formula- tion, nor is concentrating wastes to reduce their volume. Opinions differ on the exact definition of waste reduction, but the general approach is clear. The case for primacy of waste reduction rests on several factors: avoid- ing formation of a waste eliminates the need for treatment and disposal, both of which carry environmental risk. Control technologies may fail or fluctuate in efficiency. Iteated effluent streams cany nonregulated resid- ual substances that may turn out to be harmful Secured disposal sites eventually discharge to the environment. Five methods of waste reduction were identified in a study by the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (1986, p. 27~. They are listed here in order of decreasing use as reported in an industry survey: 1. in-plant recycling; 2. 3. changes in process technology, changes in plant operation (e.g., suppression of fugitive emissions); substitution of input (raw) materials; and modification of end products to permit the use of less polluting upstream processes. Although waste reduction is an attractive concept, the total elimination of manufacturing wastes is beyond the capability of modern technology. The issue is really how to approach this limiting goal in an expeditious and cost-effective manner. For this purpose, regulatory action will undoubtedly play a role; it is in the national interest for the engineering community to guide such regulation to be sure that it is as rational as possible and cost-effective. From a technical point of view, research and development are of special concern. RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS  Treatment and disposal technologies are generally categorized accord- ing to the scientific or engineering principles on which they are based.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLICA17ONS FOR ENGINEERING 175 For example, chemical destruction methods are based commonly on com- bustion and biochemical (microbial) processes. Separation technologies employ filtration, electrical precipitation, scrubbing, and other recognized physicochemical processes to collect or concentrate wastes before destruc- tion or disposal. Although many technical problems remain, a generally accepted framework exists for guiding research and development to improve the performance of waste destruction and separation technologies. In contrast, the technology of waste reduction as an alternative to treatment and disposal does not have a widely accepted scientific basis. Proponents of this approach (National Research Council, 1985; U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, 1986) have made good use of case studies to illustrate the concept and its application to engineering practice. The chal- lenge in the next phase will be to develop guidelines for basic engineering research underlying waste reduction. As director of the Engineering Research Center for Hazardous Sub- stance Control at the University of California, Los Angeles, I recently consulted with members of our industry-government advisory board on research in waste reduction. Several board members expressed pessimism about academic engineering research in this field. They argued that waste reduction is process specific and that the proprietary nature of the processes makes it too difficult for academic engineers to obtain enough information to make a contribution. Other members of the advisory board believed that increasing regulatory pressures were likely to force disclosures of in- formation on such processes anyway. In my view it is quite possible-in fact, essential to do basic engineer- ing research in support of waste reduction activities. Indeed such research has been done in combustion science for many years. A case in point is the control of NO=: basic research on NOR formation in combustion has been driven by Arie J. Haagen-Smit's discovery of the key role that NOR plays in the generation of photochemical smog (Haagen-Smit, 1952) and by the importance of nitric acid in acid deposition. We now know that in furnaces and boilers, NOR emissions come mostly from fuel-bound nitrogen compounds; NOR emissions from internal combustion engines come mainly from the oxidation of atmospheric nitrogen. Better information on the fundamentals of the combustion process has made it possible to design for lower NOR emissions. Another advance in basic engineering understanding is the dual- mechanism model for particle formation in coal combustion (Figure 4), which Richard C. Flagan and I developed quantitatively (Flagan and Fried- lander, 1978~. Submicron particles form by coagulation of nuclei produced by condensation of a small volatile fraction of the ash; coarse particles result from ash inclusions in the pulverized coat This model, now well

176 Char Particle Mineral Inclusion I eternal Volatile _ Reducing Inorganic Environment Vapors ; (Na, As, Sb) Amp/ ~ Suboxide Vapors Oxidation (Fe, SiO, Mg) Nucleation coo onto ~\o~v ~ j Van- Ash Particle ~ 0 B we, SHELDON K FRIEDLANDER oooo Go Oo° T 0.1,um Fine Particles 1 - 50 him O Coarse Particles FIGURE 4 Dual-mode mechanism for formation of both fine and coarse particles in oval combustion. (A) fine particles enriched in potentially toxic metals form by condensation  of a small amount of volatilized ash; (B) coarse particles result from ash inclusion in the pulverized coal. Analogous processes probably occur in the incineration of municipal and hazardous wastes. SOURCE: Flagan and Fnedlander (1978~. established e~penmentally, offers new possibilities for reducing particu- late emissions by modifying the particle size of pulverized coal and the combustion conditions. A class of generic scientific or engineering principles must be devel- oped, as in the combustion science examples given above, on which a fundamental engineering approach to waste reduction can be based. For this purpose, the following examples can be given: . Chemical manufacturing processes may employ alternative chemi- cal reaction paths and raw materials to reach the desired reaction products. The use of alternate reaction paths as a generic ap- proach to waste reduction has recently been discussed in Fronners in Chemical Engineenng (National Research Council, 1988, p. 112~: A chemical synthesis tree graph with a high-value product at its ap=, lower- value raw materials at the base, and reaction steps as nodes connecting all branches owes a basis for quantitative assessment of feasible and economic process alternatives. It could also serve to define the safety and environmental impact of a pathway and otter a basis for safe designs that produce minimal wastes. This approach offers the possibility of selecting the chemical sys- tem and operating conditions (temperature and pressure) for minimum production of harmful by-products.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLI=UONS FOR ENGINEERING . . 177 The design of in-plant recycling systems optimized to minimize effluent streams is another area of basic engineering research important to waste reduction. At the start it will be desirable to formulate the problem in general terms, perhaps by analyzing net- works of separation units analogous to the heat exchanger network approach developed to minimize industrial energy consumption. General principles must be sought to guide the search for sub- stitutes for certain broad classes of widely used materials with potential environmental effects. For example, solvents and clean- ing agents are used in almost every branch of industry. For the near term, there is a need for substitute solvents to replace halo- genated organic compounds in many applications. This prospect provides an incentive for the synthesis of new types of solvents and for fundamental studies of interracial phenomena involved in solvent action. These few examples are illustrative. By identifying and supporting a broad set of basic research areas underlying waste reduction, more of our best research engineers and scientists can be encouraged to participate in this challenging taste Encouraging university research of this type will ensure that our studen~the next generation of engineers and managers- better understand the issues involved. ENVIRONMENTALLY COMPATIBLE CONSUMER PRODUCTS Some consumer products have major environmental consequences either during use (automobile or aerosol sprays) or after disposal (plastic containers, paints, and solvents). Indeed, there is growing evidence that the environmental consequences of consumer products may be more important than the direct effects of industrial activity: Consumer products are by their nature dispersed widely through the society, and they and their environmental effects remain in close contact with the population at risk. The average consumer has little technical know-how and cannot be expected to deal individually with complex chemical problems. Consumers as a group, when mobilized, have enough political power to limit efforts to control their own pollution-producing  activities. A case in point is plastic products, including containers and wrappings made from polymeric materials. For durability and low toxicity, these products are designed to be less reactive chemically. Plastics now constitute about 7 percent by weight of all municipal waste, and this figure is expected to rise to 10 percent by 2000 (Crawford, 1988~. Plastic products accumulate

178 SHELDON K FRIEDL^ANDER in municipal landfills, on beaches, indeed throughout the environment. Communities in California and New York have already begun to ban certain types of plastic packaging, and about a dozen states are considering restrictions on their use (Wall Street Journal, July 21, 1988~. In response to developing regulatory trends and competition from the paper industry, the chemical industry in the United States and Europe has begun the development of biodegradable plastics much as was done 25 years ago when long-lasting detergents were polluting water supplies. One approach to biodegradable plastics incorporates cornstarch as an oxidizing agent in the polymeric materials. Oxidizing agents react in the presence of metal salts in the soil to degrade the polymers. The plastic becomes porous and brittle in 2 years; and after 10 years, the fragments are too small to see with the naked eye. Degradable plastics carry with them their own nsk Their life may be limited. The degradation products may have harmful effects. The integrity of such products as plastic lumber or piping, which are made from recycled plastics, will be jeopardized if both degradable and nondegradable plastics are mixed during recycling. The market for recycled plastics is currently strong (Crawford, 1988~. The price of virgin resin has increased because U.S. production facilities are operating at capacity. As an example, the recycling of polyethylene terephthalate soft drink bottles has grown from 8 million pounds in 1979 to 130 million pounds in 1986. The potential revenue from plastic recycling is estimated to equal that from the recycling of newspapers, about $300 million annually. 1b what extent will the public participate in the separation and collec- tion steps required to recycle plastics? Few states expect that more than half of their plastic wastes can be recovered in this way. New Jersey has set a goal of 25 percent recovery; the remainder will continue to be incinerated or sent to landfills. The incineration of plastics has two significant disadvantages. First there is the destruction of a reclaimable resource. Second is the possible emission of hazardous air pollutants from incinerators burning chlorine- containing plastics, especially polyvinyl chloride. Thus, plastic consumer products are a part of a complex environmental problem that includes the consumer, the manufacturer, and the government. The relative importance of the environmental effects of consumer producers compared with the direct consequences of industrial activity need to be evaluated systematically to help set environmental priorities (see Ayres, this volume). The ability of industry to design environmentally compatible products will strongly affect the extent of government intrusion into the marketing of such products.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION 179 Not long ago the head of the hazardous substance control program at a large company met with the engineers of one of the production units to ex- plore possibilities for process-integrated pollution control. The production engineers did not take easily to the idea of incorporating pollution control into the original process design. This may be an isolated incident, but my guess is that it is a fairly widespread attitude in industry, one that goes back to the early educational experience of engineers. This underlines the need to incorporate these concepts early, starting with the undergraduate engineering curriculum. How can this best be accomplished? I see no need for a new branch of engineering to deal with the design of environmentally compatible technologies. Indeed, I believe that would be counterproductive for the following reasons. The selection and design of manufacturing processes and products should incorporate environmental constraints from the start, along with thermodynamic and economic factors. This Is best done by the chemical, civil, mechanical, and electrical engineers, and others charged with process and product design in their respective industries. Similarly, concepts related to pollution control should be incorporated into the normal curricula of the separate engineering disciplines. For example, concepts related to NOR emissions can easily be introduced into discussions of power cycles in undergraduate engineering thermodynamics classes. As a part of an education in chemical engineering, courses in separation processes, chemical reaction engineering, and especially, the senior-level design course should all incorporate problems and examples related to minimization of pollution. There should also be a place for a few separate courses in pollution control. At the University of California, Los Angeles, there is a separate chem- ical engineering undergraduate elective course in pollution control, and an option in environmental chemical engineering is being developed as pan of our fully accredited chemical engineering undergraduate program. This course includes not only process and plant design, but also environmental transport and transformation, public health, and ecological effects. As engineers, we naturally focus on technological systems, which are our particular responsibility. At the same time, engineers should have a good understanding of the interaction between the technological and environmental systems. We must be able to meet specialists in public health and ecology halfway to put together as complete a picture as possible of the environmental effects of technological systems. We have a major role to play in relating environmental quality to industrial emissions through receptor and dispersion models. Engineers should have a good understanding of

180 SHELDON K FRIEDI~DER the ecological or health basis of the regulatory standards that apply to the systems they are designing. Students tend to be idealistic and are attracted to the idea of developing environmentally compatible technology, but engineering students are also attentive to the signals sent by industry. Industry has a stake in encouraging students to acquire the skills in engineering design needed to protect the environment. Industry should make clear its commitment to the systematic incorporation of pollution control in engineering education through the professional societies and university curriculum accreditation procedures. SUMMARY The engineering profession faces a challenge to satisfy societal needs with ever-tightening regulation of environmental side effects. This calls for new approaches in engineering education, basic research, and design. En- gineering education should routinely incorporate environmental constraints into the design procedures of existing engineering disciplines, and environ- mental consequences of technology and the basis of regulatory standards should be part of the engineering curriculum. In plant design, there must be a growing emphasis on waste reduction rather than end-of-pipe treatment and disposal However, waste reduction needs a fundamental engineering research base, which is still under development and merits high priority. Finally, systematic improvements in consumer product design are required, especially for items widely dispersed through society. NOTE This attitude has been expressed many times in multidisciplinary conferences and workshops involving public health specialists, ecologists, lawyers, economists, and regulatom REFERENCES Crawford, M. 1988. There's (plastic) gold in them thar landfills. Science 241:411-412. Doniger, D. D. 1988. Politics of the ozone layer. Issues in Science and Technology 4:86 92. Flagan, R. C, and S. K Friedlander. 1978. Particle formation in pulverized coal combustion A review. Pp. 25-29 in Recent Developments in Aerosol Science, D. 1: Shaw, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Haagen-Smit, A. J. 1952. Chemistry and physiology of I=s Angeles smog. Industrial and Engineering Chemistty 44~6~: 1342. Hameed, S., and J. Dignon. 1988. Changes in the geographical distributions of global emissions of NOR and SOL from fossil-fuel combustion between 1966 and 1980. Atmospheric Environment 22~33:441~49. Kettering, C. F. 1947. Thomas Midgley, Jr., 18801944. Pp. 361-376 in Biographical Memoirs, Vol. 24. Washington, D.C: National Academy of Sciences.  Molina, M. J., and F. S. Rowland. 1974. Stratospheric sink for chloroRuoromethanes: Chlorine atom catah~zed destruction of ozone. Nature 249:81~813

E[JVIRONMEN~4L ISSUES: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING 181 National Research Council. 1985. Reducing Hazardous Waste Generation: An Evaluation and a Call for Action. Board on Environmental Studies and Ibxicology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press National Research Council. 1988. Frontiers in Chemical Engineering: Research Needs and Opportunities. Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Rupp, W. H. 1956. Air pollution sources and their control. Pp. 1-2 in Air Pollution Handbook, P. L Magill, F. R. Holden, and L Ackley, eds. New York: McGraw-Hill. United Nations Environment Program. 1987. Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer. Final Act. September 16, 1987. [Repented as appendix to U.S. EPA Proposed Rules for Protection of Stratospheric Ozone, 52 Federal Register (December 14, 1987~:47489 475Z3.] U.S. Otlice of Technology Assessment. 1986. Serious Reduction of Hazardous Waste: For Pollution Prevention and Industrial Efficiency. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wall Street Journal. July 21, 1~8. Back to the lab: Big chemical concerns hasten to develop biodegradable plastics. P. 1.  Wall Street Journal. July 28, 1988. The environment becomes big business as laws get tougher. P. 1.

Technology and Environment 1989. Pp. 182 191. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Engineering Our Way Out of Endless Environmental Crises WALTER R. LYNN In our society, crises play a vital role in the never-ending game of capturing the attention of the public. During the summer of 1988 the news media helped to make everyone who reads or watches television aware of a variety of unpleasant, costly, and disturbing events, all of which reflect the continuing crises of long- and short-term environmental changes. All the environmental news sounded bad and seemed to promise to become worse: droughts, floods, forest fires, solid waste washing up on public beaches, sewage pollution of water supplies, ozone depletion, the "greenhouse effect," acid rain, and more. This chapter argues that, as important as public awareness is to solv- ing problems related to environmental change, public and private energies should be redirected from following crises to opening avenues for more constructive response. Future crises can be averted through timely re- sponses to anticipated and precursor conditions. The most effective control technologies are likely to result from local and regional actions guided by national and international consensus. The leadership to develop these technologies must come from government and industry, supported by sci- ence. We as individuals have important roles to play because, ultimately, technology Is socially constructed, and the interplay of our views will filter, moderate, and determine what is acceptable. ENVIRONMENTAL ENDS, TECHNOLOGICAL MEANS In the spring of 1987 new names invaded the public consciousness- Mobro, Khan Sea, Bark. The Mobro, a modern day "Flying Dutchman," 182

ENGINEERING OUR WAY OUT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES 183 spent two months cruising the Gulf Coast and the Can~bean in search of a final resting place for its unsightly and fragrant cargo of solid waste from Long Island. Other, less well known vessels, such as the Khian Sea and the Bark, wandered the Caribbean and the African coast carrying inciner- ator ash from Philadelphia. After fruitless searches for places that would accept their unsavory cargoes, the vessels returned to their home ports-at least, temporarily.) Other developed countries also have sought less ex- pensive, "simple" solutions to their disposal problems, such as exporting them to poorer countries. Such actions continue even though international groups such-as the Organization of African Unity characterize the export of toxic wastes to their continent as "a crime against Africa and the African people."2 That hapless scow the Mobro triggered an awakening of the public to the long-standirlg solid waste disposal crisis posed by the condition and capacity of sanitary landfills in the United States (National Research Coun- cil, 1984~. Additionally, this disposal option, chosen by most municipalities because of low cost and convenience, no longer appeared to be a viable solution for the future because domestic wastes were often found to con- tain hazardous materials. State and federal requirements for land disposal imposed more stringent and costly controls at these sites. Regrettably, alternative technologies for treatment and processing of solid wastes are not competitive in cost and convenience with former sanitary landfill design and operations. Confronted with the prospect of closing filled or nonconforming land- fills, more stringent federal and state design and operational requirements, and rebellious communities unwilling to tolerate the construction of new ones in their vicinity, public works officials sought other alternatives to land- fills, such as loading garbage on trucks, trains, boats, or barges for shipping to some far-off place or shifting to newer incineration technologies.3~4 Shipping solid wastes someplace else in the United States turned out to be expensive and was not greeted graciously or with much enthusiasm (Public Works, 1988~: Whether it's solid waste from historic Philadelphia, classy garbage from New York City's fifth Avenue, or trash from the finely landscaped lawns of Northern New Jersey, the fact is nobody else wants it. The summer of 1988 was special in the annals of environmental history. The United States experienced relatively severe drought conditions in much of the Midwest and elsewhere, and the drought was charact~enzed by some as evidence of a more significant impending crisis the "greenhouse effect."5 Presidential candidates helped ensure that all Americans became aware that garbage was washing up on East, West; and Gulf Coast beaches. Weekly news magazines presented the story of beachfront pollution while deftly

184 WALTER R. LYNN interweaving other local, national, and global pollution problems such as the hole in the ozone layer, acid rain, and disposal of nuclear wastes. Opinion polls indicated a large majority of public opinion favored stronger actions to preserve or enhance environmental quality. Echoing these themes in an editorial, Harold M. Evans (1988) of US. News and World Report took the National Research Council and its parent Academies to task for their alleged complacency in characterizing concerns about chlorofluorocarbons, carbon dioxide, and acid deposition as "unwarranted and unnecessarily alarmist." Evans concluded that the conservatism of National Research Council panels and committees has consistently "thwarted pollution controls that would have cost millions at the time, but now confront us with costs of untold billions for irreversible consequences that might yet produce global catastrophe." The middle ground on environmental issues appeared to shift toward environmental ,actimsm reminiscent of the early 1970s, with the new element that global concerns matched the traditional ones close to home. The universe of environmental changes, for the purpose of discussion, can be divided into mo classes: global and local. Local changes have the following characteristics: They are often obvious (they can be seen, smelled, felt, etc.~. The factors that cause these changes are reasonably well under- stood. The means to improve environmental conditions and to prevent further environmental degradation are relatively well known. Global environmental change results from the cumulative effects of countless individual and collective actions at the local level. When there are no perceptible local effects, many individuals assume that what they do has no global effects. Where effects are difficult to detect with one's senses, they must be understood in the abstract. Polyethylene wrappers provide an example of how little attention indi- viduals pay to waste flow problems when making decisions. Polyethylene is essentially nonbiodegradable when it is deposited in sanitary landfills, and it is a source of concern when burned in municipal incinerators. Relatively recently a new product appeared in the form of clear polyethylene magazine wrappers. This is a useful product It ensures that publications delivered by the U.S. mail system arrive in good condition. It also ended a long-standing complaint by some of the readers of Science who were annoyed because the mailing label was pasted on what they claimed was the otherwise attractive and useful magazine cover. Although most people were probably content with the delivery sys- tem that existed before this product was introduced, after the fact, the widespread acceptance of this product is evidence of a "consumer demand"

ENGINEERING OUR WAY OUT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES 185 -an unstated, perhaps unknown and obviously unfulfilled need now being met. It is hard to believe that the producers, distnbutors, or ultimate con- sumers of this product gave any consideration to the waste processing and social costs associated with it. Presumably, the improved physical condition of our magazines comes at the cost of increased waste flows and waste treatment. Engineering communities have become painfully aware that such phrases as the "tragedy of the commons" (Hardin, 1968) and the "tyranny of small decisions" (Kahn, 1966) are not only parabolic but also accurate descriptions of reality. The engineer's consciousness about environmental issues was raised in 1970 with passage of the National Environmental Policy Act, which, among other features, established the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. The EIS imposed an obligation on all engineers to consider the short- and long-term environmental consequences of vari- ous projects. The EIS process which now exists in various forms in many states and even at local levels requires those who are advocates of change to evaluate, disclose, and minimize adverse environmental consequences. Those requirements have helped to make environmental consequences as much a part of the overall engineering design process as are considerations of safety, economics, and useful life. Today, no responsible engineer designs anything without giving explicit consideration to its possible impact on the environment. Welfare economists have long tried to convince us that the true costs of environmental consequences-are classic examples of external economic effects and, thus, do not directly influence or play a role in guiding the decisions members of a society routinely make-decisions that may have devastating environmental outcomes. Because market forces do not con- sistently provide the kinds of messages that lead to sensible environmental outcomes, regulation is employed by societies to redress these problems. If one of our objectives is to prevent deterioration of environmental con- ditions for reasons of health and safety, then regulations compelling all producers to include the costs of pollution control in the prices of all goods and services would have a salutary effect on the behavior of organizations and individuals. It is true that regulations reduce our freedom of choice, but so does a deteriorating environment Until recently, it has been difficult to collect compelling scientific evidence to demonstrate that global environmental changes are taking place, and despite the new information, not everyone is convinced. Although there is even less agreement about what could or ought to be done to prevent global environmental change or to reverse changes that have already occurred, mere is little argument that these kinds of changes result from ubiquitous local or regional actions. It seems clear that the only way such global issues can be addressed is if they are properly orchestrated at the

186 WALTER R. LYNN national and international levels guiding and, if necessary, directing local and regional efforts. If mankind has become endangered as a result of significant global environmental changes that have already occurred, whose effects due to past actions are largely irreversible (at least for the next few decades), it is as important to focus on actions that prevent conditions from getting worse in the future as it is to clean up existing conditions. It is difficult to get political bodies to address and resolve environmental issues in their own baclyards. Getting them to make behavioral changes and economic sacrifices in order to come to grips with global issues presents an enormous challenge. Clearly, engineers have a responsibility, if not a duty, to act in ways that help reduce the likelihood of such potentially harmful environmental events. Although engineers are probably thought of as consummate technological optunists, there are things they can and cannot do through technology. Engineers must be constantly aware, and ultimately must convince the public, that technology is a means not an end. Over the past two decades, we have learned a great deal about the limits of "technological fixes." Technological optimism frequently led us to exceed unintentionally our competence and wisdom. Alvin M. Weinberg (1966) argued that some "quick technological fixes" were viable alternatives to "social engineering." Acknowledging that such approaches "do not get to the heart of the problem," are at best "temporary expedients," and "create new problems as they solve old ones," Weinberg claimed that changing people's behavior (i.e., social engineering) was a far more difficult and demanding task Thus, even temporary technological patches were highly desirable because they would buy time and accelerate evolutionary change. Over the past two decades, society has benefited a great deal from its ability to devise technological fixes, whereas the social and political processes have accomplished relatively little by way of "social engineering." However, these short-run solutions have not brought us much closer to confronting successfully the major environmental changes with which we and future generations have to deal. When Weinberg suggested that technological fixes buy time, he im- plied that more long-lasting solutions were identifiable (or knowable) but were inaccessible for a variety of reasons, including costs and lack of scien- tific understanding. Currently, technology provides the only viable means by which our complex, interdependent society is able to address these environmental problems. Until those of us who create and devise these methods are challenged to put much more effort into preventing future ad- verse consequences, much of the engineer's contributions will be perceived as ineffectual in addressing the root causes of environmental degradation.

ENGINEERING OUR WAY OUT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES 187 Regrettably, technological fixes are prescribed primarily to keep e~nst- ing systems working. Little attention is given to determining and developing longer-term solutions, and short-run fixes become the order of the day. The result, as expected, is to move from crisis to cnsis. Long-run solutions do not arise from technology alone; thus, we must look for answers that ar- range decent marriages between social engineering and technology (Gray, this volume). For such marriages to be successful, the following conditions must be met: We must overcome the reluctance to recognize the existence of these environmental problems. We must educate individuals about how their behavior in exercis- mg consumer preferences affects local and global environments. We must be prepared to spend money to develop the lmowledge base needed to expand our understanding of the environment and to develop technological and social means to address these environmental issues. CHAI1~ENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR WASTE TECHNOLOGY Although technology alone cannot provide long-term solutions to the kinds of problems we face, there is much important work to do (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987~. There are opportunities to make significant improvements in solid, gaseous, and liquid waste treatment processes that meet elevated performance requirements. One of the most difficult challenges is to devise methods of treatment and disposal that can cope with smaller and smaller concentrations of impurities in waste streams and to accomplish that end without breaking the bank The relatively easy, inexpensive treatment or disposal methods have already been devised and exploited, and the problems that remain are much more difficult and costly to solve. Research and development are being carried out in places where they have always been done: university engineering and science departments and centers, state and federal research laboratories, and in private indus- t~y. Given the importance placed on competitiveness and productivity, it is distressing that so little attention has been given to the R&D effort needed not only to enhance our "environmental condition," but also to provide the science and technology required to support innovative production technolo- gies and practices, many of which brag with them new hazardous waste problems. The Engineering Research Board of the National Research Council (1987, p. 142) called attention to the need for the federal research support system to recognize that

188 WALTER R LYNN environmental resources are critical to the domestic economy, to national security, and to both human welfare and the quality of life in the United States. These resources are fundamental to other technologies as both inputs . . . and output . . . As such, they form the base on which virtual all other economic activities are built. Although statutorily mandated responsibilities have grown, support for R&D in these areas (identified in the federal budget as resources and environment) has declined to a level that makes one apprehensive about the capacity of the engineering and scientific research communities to sustain a meaningful research agenda to address these problems.6 The record clearly shows that federal support for research in the areas of resources and environment has greatly diminished in the 1980s. The time has come to develop an R&D program that truly represents a national commitment to address the threat, if not the clear and present danger, posed by environmental changes at both local and global levels Without such support it will not be possible to provide the technological base required to cope with the ever-changing and expanding demands to which society must be prepared to respond. A broad range of R&D topics must be explored to gain a better understanding of pollutants and to develop treatment and disposal processes for dealing with them. Increased attention should be given to the following areas (after National Research Council, 1987, pp. 164 168~: . Manufacturing processes and design: research directed toward the cost-effective alleviation of environmental hazards arising from the manufacturing industries Combustion: increased fundamental understanding. of the physics and chemistry of combustion in order to develop improved in-  cinerator technology (involving thermal processes, incineration, pyrolysis, biological and wet combustion processes) and methods for control of hazardous emissions · Microbial transformation: basic knowledge about microorganisms, their physiology, biochemistry, and ecology, to develop further the biotechnology for transforming dilute hazardous waste Assimilative capacity of the global environment: research directed toward understanding the movement, fate, and effects of chemicals in the environment in order to develop control strategies that make more effective use of the ability of the environment itself to deal with contaminants Sensors and measurement methods: development of improved sensors to gather more comprehensive information and of analyt- ical modeling techniques that can integrate this information and identify viable control strategies Several specific areas likely to have significant effects on our ability

ENGINEERING OUR WAY OUT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES 189 to deal with long-term environmental changes relate to energy: electric powered vehicles; reduction of sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, and particulate emissions; improvements in electric energy use; energy storage; reduction of power requirements; and fuel cells. Epics that have long been on the environmental research agenda, such as recycling or reuse and the development of biodegradable materials, remain largely unsolved problems still requiring attention. LEAVING THE END-OF-PIPE APPROACH On the regulatory side, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been properly criticized for strategies or policies used to address pol- lution problems that focus almost exclusively on "end-of-pipe" solutions to pollution problems. Such practices focus almost exclusively on treating what comes out of the pipe or smokestack, ignore broader systems-oriented ap- proaches and the assimilative capacity of the environment, impose lockstep application of the "best available technologies," and thus hinder innova- tion. Embedded in such policies are disincentives that hinder our capacity to address these problems at more efficient and productive levels, such as waste reduction and prevention, recycling and reuse, isolation of wastes, and substitution of materials in manufactured goods. ~ address the global and local changes in the environment, fundamental changes must be made in the strategies we have been pursuing, as an EPA Science Advisory Board Report recently urged (U.S. EPA, 1988~. A careful reexamination of the targets for technology is required, especially if engineering and the applied sciences are to be effective in addressing environmental changes that are already well understood and accepted, as well as those that appear to be emerging. Although one ought to be impressed with the political acumen of those who have used the events of the summer of 1988 to increase the awareness of changes in the global environment, few believe that doomsday is in sight (Solow, 1988~. However, most of us will never know whether they are right or wrong. The consequences to ourselves and, more important, to future generations are so monumental that it would be irresponsible not to face up to these matters. The crisis before us is of a special kind: it demands the rejection of avoidance and denial, and a genuine and complete national commitment to confront the environmental changes that lie before us. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I want to thank James Coulter, the late Abel Wolman, and Daniel Okun for taking the time to read an earlier draft of this chapter and provide me with their thoughtful and helpful comments. I owe special

190 l WALTER R. LYNN thank; to Mike Lynn and Judy Bowers for their editorial help. Needless to say, all of them are absolved from responsibility for the final producL NOTES 1. These kinds of episodes are likely to continue even though Resource Conservation and Recovery Act rules do not permit any waste defined as hazardous to be exported "unless . . . EPA . . . and the government of the country [involved] . . . consent in writing to adopt the waste" (Bernthal, 1988~. Although poorer nations do not relish this kind of trade, they may find the offer of cash for accepting hazardous wastes an acceptable trade-oR in the short run (Shabecoff, 1988~. Incineration is an "old" technology for which there has been some innovation recently, including refuse-derived fuels, improved burning techniques and boiler design, fly ash handling and disposal, etc. It is important to recognize the link between our environmental problems and the quality of our infrastructure. Much of the U.S. urban infrastructure is already recognized as inadequate, and most municipalities face a crisis brought about by decayed, ineffective, and inoperative urban services. Newsweek estimated that it would cost approximately $3 trillion dollars to put these systems back in working order. The difficulties of raising such vast sums of money for sewers, water pipes, roads, budges, and the like, tony represent a crisis of major proportions (National Council on Public Works Improvement, 1988~. A recent report concludes that atmospheric circulation anomalies were the primary cause of the drought of 1988, not greenhouse warming. "Any greenhouse gas effects may have slightly exacerbated these overall conditions . . . but they almost certainly were not a fundamental cause" (I~nberth et al., 1988~. The 1987 budget allocation for resources and the environment decreased by $1= million, or 12 percent, after remaining almost constant in 1986. This category involved expenditures representing 1.5 percent of the total federal R&D budget; expenditures for waste treatment and disposal R&O represent a tiny fraction of that total. REFERENCES Betrothal, F. M. 1988. U.S. views on waste exports. U.S. Department of State, Current Polipy No. 1095. Washington, D.C Evans, H. M. July 11, 1988. Editorial. U.S. News and World Report. P. 67. Hardin, G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 162:124~1248. Kahn, Al E. 1966. The tyranny of small decisions: Market failures, imperfections and the limits of economics. Kyklos 1~.23 24. National Council on Public Works Improvement. 198%. Fragile Foundations: A Report on Amenca's Public Worm Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. National Research Council. 1984. Disposal of Industrial and Domestic Wastes: Land and Sea Alternatives. Board on Ocean Science and Policy, Commission on Physical  Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. National Research Council. 1987. Directions in Engineering Research: An Assessment of Opportunities and Needs. Engineering Research Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems. Washington, I).C.: National Academy Press. Public Works. 1988. Editorial viewpoint. Public Works 118~8~:7. Shabecoff, P. July 5, 1988. Irate and afraid, poor nations fight efforts to use them as toxic dumps. New York Times 13;7:~(N), C4(L3.

ENGINEERING OUR WAY OUT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES 191 Solow, A. R December 28, 1988. Pseudo-scientific hot air The data on climate are inconclusive. New York Times 138:Al5(N), A27(L3. enberth, K E., G. W. Branstator, and P. A. Arkin. 1988. Origins of the 1988 North American drought. Science 242:1644}1645. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of Environmental Problems. Office of Policy Analysis. (NTIS-PB88- 1Z7048~. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. Future Risk: Research Strategies for the l990s. Science Advisory Board. (NTIS SAB-EC-99 040~. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Oflice. Weinberg, ~ M. 1966. Can technology replace social engineering. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 22~10~:4 8.

Technology and Environment 1989. Pp. 192 204. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. The Paradox of Technological Development PAUL E. GRAY Technological development has had profound and permanent effects the way we live and the way we think about the future-what is possible, what is probable, what is to be feared, and what is to be hoped for. It also provides an appropriate introduction to my principal theme, which is a paradox of our time: the mixed blessing of almost every technological development. Technological developments come about as people seek solutions to specific problems and needs, and they often open the way to other innovations and applications that were unimaginable at the outset. Because we have not been able to predict all of their consequences, nearly all such developments carry with them the potential for misuse, and many consequences are rightly regarded as not only unfortunate but also malign in their impact. The new ideas and technologies resulting from the efforts of engineers are, in some respects, like the Golem of the Rabbi of Prague. An artificial creature, created to serve, the Golem exhibited a mind of its own, acting in mischievous ways unanticipated by its maker. New technology will be applied in ways that transcend the intentions and the purposes of its creators, and new technology will reveal consequences that were not anticipated. Consider, for example, the "green revolution." Developments in agri- culture have improved food production around the world. Countries such as India, which for decades was unable) to feed its people, have become net exporters of food. At the same time, growing reliance on insecticides and fertilizers has contributed to widespread chemical pollution of rivers, lakes, 192

THE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT 193 and seas, threatening the food chain itself. Other examples abound: the au- tomobile, mass communications, energy production. All have changed our lives for the better, and all have consequences that threaten our well-being as individuals and as a global society. What is it about technological development today that makes it such a mixed blessing and leads to such widespread wariness on the part of the public? How can this double-edged quality of technological development be understood in ways that will help us avoid some of the pitfalls of the past? What can we do about engineering education, engineering practice, and public policy to help resolve the paradox and reduce the chances of creating new problems in the future? SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT Let me begin with some of the characteristics of technological devel- opment that have caused us problems in the past both in practice and in perception. First, major new technological developments produce changes that deeply affect societr and do so in ways that make it impossible to con- template turning the clock back by rejecting the development. The very power and perceived permanence of new technology surely contribute to the wariness with which it is regarded by many; the green revolution is a good example. Although new technologies can be adapted to address some of the unfortunate consequences of modern agricultural methods, a wholesale abandonment of those methods is now unthinkable; it would lead to malnutrition and starvation on a scale unknown in human history. Second, more recent technological developments are, in many cases, incremental in their intended beneficial consequences. This may have been less frequently the case in the earlier stages of development when the benefits of a new technology, such as electrical energy distn~ution sys- tems, were dramatic in their effect. Increasingly, the positive consequences of a development are, or are understood as, incremental or marginal in character. As a result, the natural human tendency to avoid change, the un- known, and risk becomes more dominant in considering new technological developments. A third characteristic of technological development relates to our steadily improving ability to quantifier very small amounts of potentially hazardous materials in our environment, as well as our continually changing assessment of hazards and degree of risk For example, when DOT was developed a half~entu~y ago, it led to dramatic reductions in the incidence of malaria and was hailed as a great benefit to humankind. Since then, our growing ability to identifier and measure vety small concentrations of this

194 PAUL E. GRAY and other synthetic pesticides has enabled us to recognize the harm they do to our environment as welt Even with our growing capabilities to identify and measure hazards, when it comes to questions of probability, uncertainty, and long-term consequences, scientists disagree among themselves about the bases of risk assessment. Policymakers do the best they can, but when they get many different opinions from experts, it becomes just that much more difficult to know what to do. This certainly does not help public understanding and debate on such issues. Fourth, because we now live on a crowded planet, the consequences of technological development have a more immediate and far-reaching impact and are more readily apparent than in earlier times. For most of human history, the impacts of development were masked and diluted because that development was orders of magnitude away from stretching the capacity of our environment to absorb pollution and other burdens. Our heritage in this respect has roots that go a long way back. The slash- and-burn agriculture of prehistoric humankind required new land every few years, but this was surely never seen as an obstacle or consideration because land was available without apparent limits and the people were so few. Air pollution in industrial England had severe local effects, as in the killing smogs of London, but these problems seemed not to have significant global consequences and were, in any case, largely dealt with locally. The impact of technological development on our environment as reflected in degraded air and water qualibr, warnings of possible global warming and the depletion of stratospheric ozone, and the hazards of tone waste is, in large measure, a consequence of the fact that there are many more of us on this planet. Consequences that were unimportant~ven practically undetectable when the earth sustained 1 billion or 2 billion humans become dangerous, or even intolerable, when there are 5 billion, rapidly heading toward 10 billion. PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY In addition to these characteristics of technology itself, the paradox of technological development is compounded by public perceptions about risk and by the fact that we lack an effective system for developing public policies to help guide technological develoDment. Darticularlv as we face these issues as a global society. -rim --7 I- --A The public perception of risk is sometimes unpredictable and incon- sistent with quantitative risk assessment data. For example, the public tolerates approximately 50,000 deaths a year on our nation's highways with no great outcry, yet there is widespread public concern each time a plane crashes. Although statistics show that air travel is much safer than auto

THE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT 195 travel, the public perception is different. Both scientific literacy and com- munication about risk should be improved so that individuals are better educated and public perception is closer to the quantitative realities. At the same time, we must understand and be sensitive to public perceptions even if they do not appear to be consistent with quantitative evidence. We should also recognize that even a public educated in the most precise and sophisticated risk assessment techniques will distrust polio ymakers and scientists or engineers who dismiss its legitimate fears. As for the development of public policy, government and industry in this country have had a largely adversarial relationship when it comes to policies regarding environmental and economic consequences of technolog- ical development, with a reliance on regulation rather than on cooperation. This stems largely from the lack of clearly articulated and agreed upon standards for safety, cleanliness, or risk. Without such criteria, it is not sur- prising that continual conflict and misunderstanding persist between groups and individuals with differing concerns. This, together with the lack of technical and scientific knowledge at high levels of decision making in the legislative and executive branches of government and in the public itself, has meant that we do not have a consistent, well-thought-out, and clearly articulated set of policies in this domain. Nor do we have processes that allow us to resolve disputes in a reasonable fashion. We are caught in a gridlock of adversarial relations among various special interest groups, a position that exacerbates the problem rather than helps resolve it. Creators of new technological developments and poli~nakers thus have a particular responsibility to explore, as thoroughly and aggressively as possible, the multiple consequences of new developments to make those considerations an integral part of the process of technological development. They need to develop guidelines and policies for sustainable development that reflect concern for the long-term, global implications of large-scale technologies and that support the innovation of less intrusive, more adapt- able technologies at all levels. A CASE IN POINT: THE GREENHOUSE Ells A dramatic and current example of the double-edged quality of techno- logical development and of a problem that will require the most concerted technological, political, economic, and social collaboration on an inter- national basis is the phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect an environmental issue that suddenly moved toward the head of the list of public concerns following the unusual weather conditions in the United States during the summer of 1988. The average temperature of the earth manifests a balance between the heating effects of solar radiation and the cooling associated with infrared

196 PAUL E. GRAY thermal radiation from the earth. The atmosphere's transparency and, therefore, the average global temperature depend on the atmosphere's absorption characteristics and concentrations of carbon dioxide and certain trace gases. Some of these gases are produced by natural processes and have been present in our atmosphere for eons. Because of their presence, the earth is about 30°C warmer than it otherwise would be; this is the phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect. These gases are also produced by industrial processes, particularly (for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) by the burning of wood and fossil fuels, and there is now clear evidence that the concentrations of these greenhouse gases are steadily increasing. As a result, the average temperature of the earth must increase to maintain the heat balance between solar input and infrared output. The growing concentrations of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere due to industrial, agricultural, and other human activities are, in a sense, directly driven by population and by the increasing intensity of development in its present form. The earth has experienced an increase in atmospheric carbon dionde of about 20 percent in less than two centuries. The present rate of increase suggests that the concentration of this greenhouse gas will increase another 10 percent by early in the next century and will double by the second half of the twenty-first century (Bolin et al., 1986; ~abalka, 1985~. Changes in the atmosphere during the past century should, according to theoretical models, have produced about 0.5°C of warming. Whereas the average global temperature has increased by about this amount, the natural variations in temperature are of about the same order of magnitude. Consequently, direct confirmation of the global warming associated with increases in greenhouse gases is not yet in hand, although the observed temperature increases are consistent with theoretical expectations. These theoretical models predict an additional 0.5°C warming in the next 20 years and 2-5°C warming by the middle of the twenty-first century if greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase as energy use increases and as deforestation continues. The warming is buffered and delayed by the oceans, which absorb both carbon dioxide and heat. As a consequence of this, even if production of greenhouse gases could be stopped dead today, global temperatures would continue to increase for several decades. These temperature increases will persist because most of the greenhouse gases have very long lifetimes. Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere by two processes: net photosynthesis in plants and absorption in the oceans, with eventual de- position at the ocean bottom as limestone. The second process is both dominant and extremely slow, with time constants on the order of 1,000 years. . .

THE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DE~:LOPMENT 197 Although direct evidence of global warming attributable to green- house gases has not yet been obtained, our present understanding of the mechanisms and our direct observation of increasing greenhouse gas con- centrations make eventual significant warming a virtual certainty. It is likely that the earth will, by the end of this century, be warmer than it has been in the past 100,000 years. Unless we change course, global temperatures are likely to be higher by the latter half of the twenty-first century than they have been in 2-10 million years. The effects of global warming on climate and thus on the activities of humankind are much harder to predict. Increases in sea level are inescapable as the warming oceans expand and as mountain glaciers and ice caps release water. Patterns of precipitation are likely to change, thus bringing less rainfall in the middle latitudes where much of the world's grain production now occurs; the viability and reproductive capacities of plants of all kinds, particularly unmanaged forests, could diminish. Those extreme natural events, which cause much human misery~rought, heat waves, coastal Booding are likely to become much more frequent. ADDRESSING GLOBAL WARMING AS A GLOBAL PROBLEM What should be done about this? The problem of global warming calls for both human adaptation and the limitation of pollutants. Each requires technological support and engineering development, and both require cooperation not only among those in the engineering profession, industry, and government but also among nations. Adaptation in anticipation of a warmer earth is necessary because the most drastic course of limitation of pollutants will not offset the momentum of past contamination; a significant degree of warming is now unavoidable. Adaptation will require attention to agriculture, including the development of new strains of grain, to water resources, and to protection of low-lying coastal regions where flooding will occure Limitation is essential if we, as a global population, are to avoid even more extreme conditions far into the future. Further, limitation of greenhouse gases can slow the rate of warming, which eases somewhat the task of adaptation. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization recently recommended the following actions to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the face of growing populations and increased economic activity (eager, 1988~: Reduce fossil fuel use by increasing end-use energy efficiency. The experience of the past 15 years in response to the increase in oil prices induced by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting

198 PAUL E. GRAY Countries provides us with an example of the power of conser- vation. The UN study foresees a potential reduction in energy consumption in the industrialized nations of 50 percent with extant technology. Many efficiency improvements can be achieved with net economic savings, and conservation efforts can be undertaken right now, without delay. Shift the fossil fuel mix from high carbon dioxide-emitting fuels to those that produce less carbon dioxide per unit of energy. Natural gas is better than oil, which is better than coat Reverse current trends toward deforestation and encourage refor- estation. · Develop the technology to remove carbon dioxide from stack gases of large, stationary fossil fuel-burning energy converters, such as electric power generating plants, and dispose of it in the deep ocean. Although such an approach would at least double the cost of electricity, these costs are about the same magnitude as those associated with the most stringent pollution control requirements now in place in some nations. Replace fossil fuels with alternative energy sources such as so- lar energy, wind and tidal power, ocean thermal conversion, and nuclear power. This is, to my mind, the only viable long-term ap- proach to offset the forces of continued population and economic growth. It is clear that we are not talking simply about technological solutions. Global warming is, obviously, a global problem; any effort to limit future emissions of greenhouse gases must be global in character if it Is to be effective. The degree of cooperation required is without precedent because it must encompass both the highly industrialized nations, where present energy use is most intensive, and the less developed nations, where hopes for a better future appear to require greater intensity of energy use. For example, what response should the West expect from China if we, who have contributed most of the present carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere, suggest that the Chinese, in the interest of a less degraded environment a century from now, should forgo the exploitation of their enormous reserves of coal? Our traditional political processes tend to deal with near-term issues and immediate problems. We must develop political processes capable of producing sensible responses to problems where the time constants are on the order of a century.

THE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT ONE COURSE OF ACTION: NUCLEAR ENERGY 199 Whereas economic, political, and social forces must be brought to bear on this problem, it seems self-evident that amelioration of this problem requires new engineering creativity and technical developments aimed at the several courses of action described in the UN study. Although this is not the place for a careful exploration of possible future developments and directions, I would lee to comment briefly on one aspect of amelioration, which seems to me to be compelling: the greater use of nuclear energy as an alternative to fossil fuels. It has become a commonplace to assert that the nuclear industry in the United States is now dead, that its death was probably suicide, and that the public is both passionate and unified in its determination to see that it stays buried. The present state of affairs needs no explication. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl cannot be expunged from our collective consciousness. Seabrook and Shoreham are real-time examples of the depth of the conviction held by our political leaders, perhaps even by a majority of the public, about the risks and benefits of nuclear power. Certainly, mistakes have been made in the past, both in technology and in the ways public concerns about nuclear energy have been addressed. We must be willing to learn from these mistakes, to explore different approaches to the design of nuclear energy plants, and to improve public awareness and understanding of these issues if nuclear energy Is to play a role in our future. Let me speak first about reactor design. Light-water reactors (LWRs), which are used in nearly all of the plants in operation or under construction in the United States, place heavy demands on the builders and operators of these plants. The principal safety hazard is a loss-of-cooling accident, which could lead to the melting of fuel elements and subsequent release of radioactivity o prevent such an occurrence, the design and operation of an LWR must provide an absolute guarantee of the presence of adequate quantities of cooling water, and the guarantee must reflect the worst possible scenarios, including rupture of pipes, pump failures, failure of outside electrical power, and operator errors. ~ reduce the probability of loss of coolant to acceptably small levels, LWRs rely on multiple redundant backup systems or "defense in depth." It is the nature of these complex and tremendously costly protective systems that their effectiveness under all accident conditions cannot be demonstrated experimentally. Consequently, questions about modes of failure can be answered, at best, only in analytical and probabilistic terms, which is a major reason for much of the public skepticism about nuclear power in its present form. It is possible to design and build reactors that can survive the failure of components without the possibility of fuel damage or the release of

200 PAUL E. GRAY radioactivity. This can be accomplished by employing forms of fuel able to withstand very high temperatures, by limiting the power density in the core, and by arranging for sufficient heat removal by natural processes to prevent fuel damage. Such "passively safe" reactors can be designed to suffer simultaneous failure of all control and cooling systems without endangering the public (Agnew, 1981; Faltermayer, 1988; Lidsky, 1988~. Reactors designed in this manner produce less power output than light- water reactors: 10~150 megawatts of electrical power output compared with 1,00~1,500 megawatts. A number of individual power-producing modules will be combined on each site to produce the required amount of power. These small, identical modules can be factory built instead of being custom made on-site, as is the case for the much larger, much more complex LWRs. The economy of serial production will replace the economy of large scale. Because the individual reactor modules are identical and centrally built, licensing can be standardized and can be based on full-scale testing of an actual device rather than on detailed review and inspection of the defense in depth required for LWRs. This is an enormous advantage because it permits actual demonstration of the response of the reactor to the most severe and demanding hazards. Reactors of this kind present a vanishingly small operating risk to the public a risk much smaller than that associated with most everyday activities. Coal-fired electric power plants produce and release more low-level radioactivity (carried in fly ash) than do nuclear reactors (Hurley, 1982~. Public attitudes about the acceptability of nuclear power are based as well on concerns about high-level nuclear waste handling and disposal. Decades of temporizing and indecision in the United States have aggravated this problem. What is required here is not simply technical innovation, but political creativity as well, to address the dilemmas posed by the "not in my baclyard" concerns. Several nations in Western Europe have shown that solutions to this problem do indeed exist I am convinced that several undertakings are essential if nuclear power is to have any role in the U.S. energy future: 1. We must make an earnest and sustained effort to educate the public about the risks and benefits of nuclear power in terms that permit quantitative comparison with other energy sources. 2. We must achieve technically, politically, and environmentally ac- ceptable solutions to the problem of nuclear waste handling and disposal- solutions that take into account the associated concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation. 3. We must develop, build, and test radically different reactor designs that pose negligible risks of the accidental release of radioactive materials

THE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT 201 as a result of overheating. Several possibilities exist, including new water- cooled and liquid-metal~ooled designs as well as gas-cooled designs. These designs hold the promise of passively safe operation. Nevertheless, it is clear that none of these designs will be acceptable until such reactors are built at scale and thoroughly tested under the most extreme conditions Murphy's Law can produce. Absolutely risk-free operation cannot, like absolutely anything else, be guaranteed: one can postulate a meteor falling on the reactor, after ale Nevertheless, the degree of risk to the environment and to human life can be driven down below the levels of corresponding risk inherent in the present alternative of fossil fuels. ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND PRACI1CE: WHAT NEXT? Richard de Neufville, chairman of the Technology and Polipy Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has suggested that many people who seek solutions to complex, important issues, such as toxic waste, nuclear power, or global warming, tend to resect one of two perspectives: some assert that every problem has a technical "fix"; others, that each of these same problems has a moral fix. Unfortunately, neither perspective admits to the complexities and to the social, technical, and moral implications of most important, real prob- lems. Silver bullets exist only in myths, and responsible solutions are developed only by knitting together the technical and moral perspectives. Those of us who develop, promote, and apply technological innovation have the moral responsibility to explore arid consider, to the greatest ex- tent possible in the light of our best effort, the full consequences of any innovation. It is both professionally and morally irresponsible to define the problem so narrowly as to leave these considerations to others. What can be done in engineering education and practice, and in the domain of public policy, to recognize this conflict between the potential and the problems of technological development, to deal realistically with public apprehension about the risks attendant on change, and to minimize the degree to which future developments are burdened with unforeseen negative consequences? with regard to engineering education, a number of things could be done: 1. Instruction in the humanities, arts, and social sciences should be structured and undertaken to require the engineering student to gain some understanding of societies and cultures, of the complex relationships between society and technology, and of human values and relationships. ..

202 PAUL E. GRAY Engineering is, obviously, a socially derived and culturally influenced ac- tivity, and engineers cannot function effectively without being steeped in those contexts. This is not the only reason for studying the humanities, arts, and social sciences to make better engineers. However, an engineer who has cultivated an interest in one or more of these fields is, I believe, more likely to bring to his or her practice a sensitivity to the social context of engineering and attention to all the consequences of new technology. 2. Although all engineers should have an appreciation for and sensi- tivity to the social environment in which they operate, some engineers who might be called interface engineers will work directly on issues of appli- cation, impact, and implementation in a broader context. They need direct engagement with these issues in their education. These students should tackle subjects and engage in research on topics that directly address the political, economic, and social considerations integral to scientific and tech- nological developments. 3. Engineering design courses, particularly at the upper level, should move beyond requiring significant individual effort to requiring collabora- tion among teams of students formed to work on problems that are not artificially isolated from their social context. A part of that team effort should bear on the exploration of social consequences and the problems that arise when technology is used for different purposes. Although such projects are inevitably constrained, it is important that engineering students begin to work as engineers in ways that reflect to some degree the way actual engineering work should be done. 4. Finally, students should be prepared for active leadership in the definition and resolution of issues that arise at the intersection of technology and society. Neither we nor they can afford to sit back and expect other professions to imagine, create, and implement the kinds of solutions that are both socially responsible and firmly grounded in technical realities. Engineers do not hold the sole responsibility here, but the profession must consciously prepare and train itself to do its part: effective leadership must be learned. Now this speaks as well to the role of the engineer. Engineering prac- tice must, in the work of the engineer, reflect a broadened role and more comprehensive concerns. The engineer should bring to his or her work not only sound technical knowledge, disciplined technique, and a focused search for creative solutions to novel problems but also a concern for the ecology of technology. Not all consequences of technological development can be anticipated; not all unfortunate extensions can be anticipated. Nev- ertheless, the imperative to understand the implications of a development in its broadest and most encompassing terms is a professional responsibility of the engineer, which must be incorporated into the task from the outset.

IKE PARADOX OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT 203 On the other hand, I am not suggesting that this responsibility rests with me engineer alone. The engineering profession should not only incorporate social and economic considerations into its work but also work together win government, industry, and the public to develop long-term, global strategies for addressing these issues. COOPERATION FOR THE FUTURE The issues raised by the paradox of technological development are profound and difficult. Nonetheless, I am optimistic that, in this era of global interdependence, responsible people will recognize that appropriate public policies to ensure sustainable development can and must be devel- oped from an iIlternationa1 perspective. We should begin now to lay a firm foundation for the future. In particular, the following challenges should be considered: . to educate engineers to consider the far-reaching implications of their work for the social and physical environment, and also to educate those in the humanistic disciplines to fully appreciate the nature of science and engineering; to develop technology for sustainable development, appropriate allocation of resources, and risk management; to advance the art of policymaking at all levels, which includes realistically reflecting the implications of technological innovations in both the substance of decisions and the process of decision making; and to recognize the need for communication, firm resolve, and mutual respect among policymakers, engineers, industrialists, and the public, who will ultimately be responsible for our common future in the democracies. Most important, we should not let the need for adequate preparation be an excuse for inaction. Just as long lines at the gas pumps in the winter of 197~1974 triggered public awareness of the need for conservation and alternative energy sources, the hot, dry summer of 1988 may inspire the search for technologies and public policies that respect the limitations of the environment and allow for economic growth. CONCLUSION Engineers have changed the world we live in. Engineers with vision can provide the means to realize strategies for a viable future in our economically, culturally, and ecologically intertwined world.

204 PAUL E. GRAY The great hope and the great challenge before us are to bring engi- neering education and practice, industrial priorities, and public policy into alignment in ways that eliminate the paradox of technological develop- ment. We have an opportunity now to turn that paradox around and forge a new concept of how the engineer works and views the world. Furthering technological and economic development in a socially and environmentally responsible manner is not only feasible, it is the great challenge we face as engineers, as engineering institutions, and as a society. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to the following persons for discussions that were helpful in the preparation of these remarks: Hermann Hans, Lawrence Iidsky, Kathy Lombardy Richard de Neufirille, Ronald Prinn, Daniel Roos, Walter Rosenblith, Peter Stone, Neil lddreas, Leon Hilling, Robert White, and Gerald Wilson. REFERENCES Agnew, H. M. 1981. Gas cooled nuclear power reactors. Scientific American 244:55 63. Bolin, B., B. R Doos, J. Jager, and R. A. Warrick. 1986. The Greenhouse Effect, Climatic Change, and Ecosystems. New York: John Wiley ~ Sons. Faltermayer, E. 1988. Taking fear out of nuclear power. Fortune 118~1 August):10~118. Hurley, P. M. 1982. Living with Nuclear Radiation. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press. Jager, J. 1988. Developing Policies for Responding to Climatic Change. WCIP-1, WMO/ID- No. 225, April. Geneva: World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment Program. Lidsky, Lo M. January 10, 198~3. A safe atomic plant for the future? Washington Post C3. I~balka, J. R. 1985. Atmosphenc Carbon Dioxide and the Global Carbon Cycle. DOE/ER- 0239. Washington, 13.C.: U.S. Department of Energy.