National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$74.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals (1996)
Policy Division (PD)

Citation Manager

. "Use a Systems Engineering and Ecological Approach to Reduce Resource Use." Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1996.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
74
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals
  1. Develop a closed-loop system in which no resources are depleted, all materials are perpetually reused, and no waste is produced or discarded.

  2. Ensure that the environment left to each succeeding generation is healthier and more ecologically sound than before.

  3. Ensure that every human has equal access to the use and enjoyment of the natural world and that the practices of one group, nation, or race do not infringe on or diminish the access or enjoyment of any other.

—Forum Participant Comment

Industrial ecology includes thinking about ways to manage wastes and effluents; to prevent the use of materials that are toxic1 or otherwise dangerous or difficult to use and handle, so that they are not released into the environment; and to use wastes and effluents products themselves. It envisions an economic system whose processes and products lead to outputs that are reusable and recyclable. Waste is waste. Having purchased material at the front end of a plant, only to throw part of it away at the back end suggests that efficiency of material use might be improved; having a product that embodies the energy and effort needed to produce it go out of the plant door forever suggests that reusing the material and embodied energy at the end of the useful life of the product might be more efficient than disposing of the product.

We do not "consume" materials; we use energy to transform materials, to create materials from other materials. Many of our materials, particularly metals, are neither changed nor consumed in use, but merely stored (e.g., copper wire in walls and iron in automobile engine blocks). Even the contents of landfills, particularly if they were so designed, could be considered to be materials-inventory sites.

Material products generally and many wastes and effluents specifically embody energy and effort that make them potentially less expensive to use to make new products than starting from dispersed virgin raw materials. But systems must be appropriately designed. We must include in the economics the energy and effort that would be required to dispose of otherwise-discarded wastes, effluents, and products in an environmentally benign and acceptable manner.

Products Seen as Services

A further dimension of new possibilities is a re-examination of what is really being provided to customers as the product. Is the customer interested in cleaning

1  

Two kinds of toxicants need to be considered: (1) wastes that contain toxic elements, such as heavy metals, which cannot be eliminated by means of chemical transformation alone; (2) toxic organic chemicals that can eventually be transformed into nontoxic components when sufficiently treated by incineration, biodigestion, chemical reaction, or some other means.

Page
74
Front Matter (R1-R12)
Part I: Committee Report (1-2)
Summary (3-14)
Society's Environmental Goals (15-26)
Use Social Science and Risk Assessment to Make Better Societal Choices (27-36)
Focus on Monitoring to Build Better Understanding of Our Ecological Systems (37-50)
Reduce the Adverse Impacts of Chemicals in the Environment (51-60)
Develop Environmental Options for the Energy System (61-72)
Use a Systems Engineering and Ecological Approach to Reduce Resource Use (73-80)
Improve Understanding of the Relationship Between Population and Consumption as a Means to Reducing the Environmental Impacts of Population Growth (81-86)
Set Environmental Goals Via Rates and Directions of Change (87-90)
Bibliography (91-94)
Part II: Commissioned Papers (95-96)
National Environmental Goals: Implementing the Laws, Visions of the Future, and Research (97-134)
Measurement of Environmental Quality in the United States (135-178)
Attitudes Toward the Environment Twenty-Five Years After Earth Day (179-190)
Environmental Goals and Science Policy: A Review of Selected Countries (191-242)
Can States Make a Market for Environmental Goals? (243-280)
Setting Environmental Goals: The View from Industry. A Review of Practices from the 1960s (281-326)
Status of Ecological Knowledge Related to Policy Decision-Making Needs in the Area of (327-344)
The Federal Budget and Environmental Priorities (345-398)
Part III: Keynote Addresses and Presentations (399-400)
D. James Baker, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (401-406)
Thomas Grumbly, U.S. Department of Energy (407-412)
Barry Gold, U.S. Department of the Interior (413-418)
Harlan Watson, House Committee on Science (419-422)
David Garman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (423-430)
John Wise and Peter Truitt, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (431-436)
Judith Espinosa and Peggy Duxbury, President's Council on (437-448)
Gilbert S. Omenn, University of Washington (449-462)
Part IV: Appendixes (463-464)
A Committee Member and Staff Biographical Information (465-470)
B Forum Agenda (471-474)
C Forum Participants (475-482)
D Summary of Responses to Call for Comments (483-488)
E Respondents to Call for Comments (489-496)
F Summary of Breakout-Group Discussions (497-500)
G Detecting Changes in Time and Space (501-504)
H Contents and Executive Summary of a Report of the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government (505-516)
Index (517-530)