SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

n 0 0 Lngineering 1 A

human face Sustainable development is about ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for generations to come. In achieving this aim a new definition of engineering emerges: it is still about the ‘fun of the impossible’, but the impossible now includes ecological and social responsibilities as well as technical ones

by Roland Clift and Neil Morris

ustainable developmcnt, at least from an engineer’s pcrspective, is about organising S the interactions bctween natural and man-

made systems-to use their resources and meet real human needs in a renewable and cquitable way. One part of sustainable development is the USC of decision proccsses which are much more inclusive, which try to recognise and avoid trends which arc unsustainablc. This demands in turn thc ability to rccognise what is scientifically possible and technically feasiblc; without this ability, decisions could risk descending into magical rcalism. Enginccrs and scientists are the peoplc to provide this knowledge. Thercfore they must take on the new role of representing the implicatioiis of public dcliberation over technological choiccs, as impartial experts rathcr than as advocates of any preferred option. This new rolc could be more challenging and satisfying than mcrely acting as a technician, but it has far-reaching

with

implications for engiiicering decisions. O n thc positivc side, it might cncourage more pcoplc into engincering cducation.

Engineers as actors in the millennium of sustainable development

Most engineers are not heroes. Brunel was a hero, Swampy was a hcro, but we arc not. Why is that? Enrolment figurcs in university engincering courses arc falling. How can we reversc that trend and attract more young people into the profession?

Some say that sustainable development is difficult to define, but it is really a very simple idea. It is about ensuring a better quality of life for everyonc, now and for generations to come. It is not a fixed state, rather a proccss of changc which ensures that invcstment, technological development and institutional change meet thc needs of the prcsent without compromising thc needs of futurc generations. The challenge is not only to usc resources fairly in the present (intra-generational equity), but also to protect the interests of the future (inter-generational equity).

Figure 1 shows how sustainable dcvclop- ment is the intersection between the natural order of ecology and thermodynamics, human society and the modern world of economics and technology. Each of thc three lobcs of Figure 1 represents a set of constraints:

I . Economics and technology: human activi- ties on earth are constrained by the limits of human iiigcnuity and the functioning of our economic systcins.

2. Ecology and thermodynamics: wc are also constrained by the rcsources which the planet provides for us. Thc biospherc is flexible, and can absorb emissions, but it has a limited carrying capacity.

3. Society has expectations, each person want- ing an acceptable quality of life.

If wc can providc for the social needs of everyone while also operating within the

226 ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT JOURNAL OCTOBER 2002

SUSTAINABLE DE VEL 0 PMEN T

Constraints of cconomics, technology, ecology and thermo-dynamics then we have found our way into the place where the threc sets of constraints can all be satisfied: sustainable development. We have to believe that there is an overlap between the threc sets of constraints, or sustainable development is impossible.

Engineering can provide new solutions to old problems. There are some parts of the world where landfill sitcs are being mined for their metal content, which is higher than that which can be obtained from conventional ores. As long as wc know where our waste materials are, wc can always go back and recover them.

We used to think that thc long-term constraint on our use of carbon-based fossil fuels was the availability of that non-renewable eiiergy sourcc. Activities that rely on that resourcc must stop when the oil, gas and coal run out. But scicntific opinion has changed. The Intcrgovernmental Panel on Climatc Changc predictions define a maximum level of C 0 2 in the atmosphere. If we go abovc that level then we risk catastrophic global climate changcs, for example, a reversal of the circulation of currents

in the North Atlantic resulting in the tundra reaching down to London. If we accept the constraint that there is a maximum ceiling percentage of COZ in the atmosphcrc then we find that the amount of carbon-based fuels that we can safely use is a fraction of the current known rcscrvcs.

The engineer as heroic materialist As engineers, we usually see ourselves

operating in the lower left-hand region of Figurc 1. Our activities arc techno-ccntric, building on the discoveries of scientists to invent ncw technology. The origins of modern engineering were in the Industrial Revolutioii of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Civil and mechanical cngiiicering came from a crafts- man basc, clcctrical and chemical cngincering from a scicncc basc, with the ultiinatc fusion of these different approaches into the dcvclop- mcnt of new technologies. Thc grcat cngineers of the time, Watt, Stephenson and Brunel based their designs on the Ncwtonian certainty of classical physics. They were down to carth, practical and of course they were inalc.

ecology and thermodynamics

Table 1

ith the question ‘what can we do?’, with engine includes micro-thermodynamics, making the

d also micro-economics, because a busines

Fig. 1 Sustainable development is the intersection between the natural order of ecology and thermodynamics, human society and the modern world of economics and technology

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT JOUKNAL OCTOBEK 2002 227

SUSTAINABLE DE VE L 0 PMEN T

James Watt

predicted. Factors like climate-change and toxicological impacts are very unccrtain. There are new emerging concerns, for example, endocrine disruptors, whcrc we still do not know whether or not they will provc to be harmful.

The idca that science can eliminate all

Robert Stephenson L-_L

Brunel was a great man, and a very innovative

unccrtainty is dcad. Ncwtonian mechanics has been supcrseded by relativistic and probability- based views of the Universc. At best, scientists can hope to bound uncertainty. Similarly, Zlst century engineers can no longcr all be Brunel. The days of designing ncw products for a grateful and unquestioning public arc gone forever. It is not cnough just to specify and impleincnt the best technical solution to a given problein- there is a broader agenda. Ask yourself, does my project.. .

. . .use the most appropriate

. . .recognisc that scicnce is uncertain? ,..conserve resources, avoiding

, . .maximise social bencfits and

tcch11ology ?

waste and pollution?

public acceptancc?

engineer. He Was right for his times, but he would not be right for this century. H c operated in the lower half of Figure 1. He wanted to improve life for pcople, and wanted his work to bc financially profitable. The idea that there werc resource aiid cnvironinental constraints, which might limit human activities did not emergc until aftcr Bruncl, in the early years of the 20th century.

The engineer as steward of the global commons

Political and public decision-making, with- out engineering input, results in inappro- priate use of technology, a ‘magical realism’. Engineers can avoid this by contributing their advice on what is the most appropriate technology for a given problcin. This can be advising on what is the right level or scale on which to tackle aproblcm. It can be in clarifying which issues are wcll known aiid deterministic, versus those that are unpredictable. Energy use and the cost of rnanufacturc can be accurately

Let’s try to classify the issues, according to our model (Table 1):

A new paradigm While all those changes in the nature of

engineering were happening, a parallel change in the public decision-making proccss also occurred. The politicians of Bnincl’s day simply took the decisions which thcy believcd were necessary. In thc 20th century we developed the notion of public consultation. Government asked cvcryone what they wanted, then simply took the decision bascd on the majority view. This utilitarian approach had its limitations. It was based on the false assumption that peoplc know what they think and want before you ask them. It was not the best way to reach a general consensus.

We have developed new ‘deliberative pro- cesses’, which are now not just reprcscntativc but are participatory:

analysis, liccping everyone informed, allowing.. .

228 ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT JOURNAL OCTOBER 2002

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

deliberation, which leads to.. . synthesis of different views, to achieve.. . acceptance of thc outcome.

Thc final decision may not bc your own personal preferrcd outcome, but you gct thcrc inore quickly, and inore chcaply, and it works because people acccpt it. This is an application of cngineering critcria to public sector activities. The cngineering analysis does not immediatcly result in a decision, the ciigineeriiig feeds into the dcliberative proccss.

As engineers, wc are not very well equipped to fulfil that role. But wc can learn. Something that most non-engincers find surprising is that we have the concept of engincering as fun. Modern enginccring requires both technical aiid personal skills, which is even morc fun.

Management of material flow through the economy

Mobilc phones are an cxccllent example of a rclatively new product where management of the risks has become morc comprehensivc ovcr time. As each risk is climinated, the cost of the product is reduced and its acceptability to all stakeholdcrs increascs. Eiivironmeiital managc- mcnt of the product started by eliminating risks to the workers who inanufacturcd it, and to thc customers. Over time this has grown to address risks to suppliers and distributors, and to encompass ‘design for the environment’. This mcans activcly inanaging thc end-of-life of the material product, or ‘life-cycle engincering’. After usc, the product does not just bccome wastc but has to go back into the supply-chain to bc returned to the manufacturer. For every lrilogram of mobilc phones in USC there are 20 lsg of wastc generated in manufacturing aiid 200 kg of waste geiieratcd in obtaining raw materials. So rcturning thc product to thc manufacturer for reuse or recycling can dramatically reduce the environmental impact of thc manufacturing process.

Another aspect of mobile phone cnviron- mental impact is in energy consumption. The energy needed to operate the phone itself is tiny when comparcd to the encrgy required for its manufacture and distribution. The phone itself has only a very small power requirement, however the charger will USC inuch more energy if it is left plugged in whcn the phone is not attached to it. So thc simplest way to improve thc cnergy cfficicncy of a mobile phone is to design thc charger so that is switches off whcn the phoiic is not connectcd.

By bringiiig ecological, cconomic and social concepts into engineering, we may find that therc arc new solutions that we would not havc deviscd if we had oiily considercd the techiiical issues. Why not get your customers to lcase your product instcad of buying it- you will have a stable, sustainablc revenue-stream and thcy inust evciitually return it to you for reuse or rccycling.

Materials can bc used many times over, as they pass through the economy in a nuinbcr of diffcrent applications. Glass is an cxcellent cxample. Clear glass bottles are used for home delivery of milk, with minimal cxtra transport rcquired as the milkman collccts the empty bottlcs when the full oncs are delivcrcd. This cfficient recovery process allows thc bottle to be reuscd for milk distribution 15 to 20 times ovcr, until it gcts chipped or crackcd. The bottlc can then be rcproccsscd into rccyclcd clear glass. This can bc repeated a few times until thc levels of contamination in thc glass makc it unacccptable for that usc. Then, it can be recycled again for usc in green glass ovcr a few

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT JOURNAL OCTOBER 2002 229

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

performance as well? We can apply our engineering skills and system analysis in new ways, recognising that people are not just passive consumcrs, they are part of the process. Of course, it’s more difficult, but it’s therefore more fun. And it doesn’t have to be rocket science- actually nowadays rocket science is easy, it’s just Newtonian physics!

Brunel said that he wanted ‘to be the first engineer and example for ail future ones’. In his time engineers wcre the newest profession, logical, systematic, unemotional and all male. Women and all their worldly goods were considered to be men’s chattels. We havc come a long way since then: the engineer of the new millennium still uses all the same techniques that Brunel used, but also has emotions. Engineering is still the ‘fun of thc impossible’, but now the impossible includes ecological and social responsibilities as well as technical ones. The ideal engineer of the future has emotions, and she is probably a woman.

230

more recycling iterations. When it becomes too dark for that application it can then go off to be used for the lowest grade of glass, as a brown bottle. The samc material is used over and over again, at progressively lower specifications.

This works very well where the equilibrium of material usagc is well matched and the cyclic transport route for the product can be kept within a small local area. If the demands for the different uses of the material do not match then we have to look at the cconomic issues. In the UK we have a surplus of green glass and a dcficit of clear glass. The UK imports large quantities of green glass (with winc in it) and exports large quantities of clear glass (with whisky in it). The way to gct around this was to export whisky in green bottles. The Department of Trade and Industry encouragcd the creation of a new brand of whisky which is now exported in green glass bottles!

Engineering with a human face The definition of engineering used to be to

construct a new artcfact, considering all the physical and technical constraints, finding an optimum solution that meets all the require- ments. Not only is it good to find the bcst possible tcchnological design for a mobile- phone, or a power station, but why not also optimise it for its ecological and social

~

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT JOURNAL OCTOBER 2002

Further reading 1 Clift, R.: Guideliiics on ‘Engineering and the

Environment’, The Engineering Council, London, 1994

2 Clift, K.: Guidelines on ‘Engineering for Sustain- ability’, The Engineering Council, London, 2000

3 Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., Nogucr, M., van der Linden, P. J. and Xiaosu, D.: Intergovcrninental Panel on Climatc Change Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

4 Vaughan, A,: Isambard Kingdom Brunel, engineering knight errant, John Murray (publishers) Ltd., London, 1991

This article is based on a lecturc entitled ‘Engineer- ing with a human face’ given by Prof Roland Clift at the IEE’s Savoy Place office in London, on 13 December 2001. This was by invitation from the IEE Engineering for a Sustainable Future Profcssional Network (I“), which is very kcen to engage in debate with as many engineers as possible. The P N provides a ‘rapporteur’, a task which in this case fell to Neil Morris, at all events to ensure that those people who could not attend are informed of the proceedings and are able to form thcir own opinions.

0 IEE: 2002 Prof Roland Clift ODE is Profcssor of Environmental Tcchnology and Director of the Centrc for Environmcntal Strategy at the University of Surrey. He is a member of the Royal Commission on Environmcntal Pollution, chairing the working groups of the Engineering Council. Ncil Morris is Vice-chairman of the IEIS Engincering for a Sustainablc Future PN. Ilc works for IBM Storage Systems Group at thcir developnient laboratory in Hurslcy, Winchestcr, UK.