Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 74

MA0100

Environmental

Sustainability

MP4D06

(C) S G Lee

School of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering

1

Learning Objectives

Provide an overview of the significance of environmental sustainability, the factors leading to environmental degradation, and the degree of contribution by human activities to the environmental degradation.

Provide an introduction to the developments of

various engineering solutions for environmental

sustainability. To be offered to MAE 3 students as a core course under breadth.

Course outline

Industrial Ecology and Environmental

Degradation, Waste Recovery (Prof Lye SW)

Environmental Degradation, Waste Recovery (Prof Lye SW) Sustainable Materials, Energy Eff. , Renewable, Clean

Sustainable Materials, Energy Eff. , Renewable, Clean Energy(Adj Prof Kang KH)

Energy Eff. , Renewable, Clean Energy(Adj Prof Kang KH) Global Landscape of Environmental Policies; Life Cycle

Global Landscape of Environmental Policies; Life

Cycle Assessment (LCA) - (A/Prof Stephen Lee)

Policies; Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) - (A/Prof Stephen Lee) Air Pollution (Prof Lua AC) MA0100 (C)

Air Pollution (Prof Lua AC)

Topics to be covered

Topic

Instructor

Environmental Degradation and Industrial Ecology Greenhouse

 

gases, ozone depletion and climate change. The industrial eco-system. World views of industrial ecology. Global energy and material flow.

LYE Sun Woh

Waste and Recovery Re-use, re-make, re-cycle. Extended producer responsibility. Product-services systems. Issues, challenges, limitations.

Energy efficiency, Renewable, Clean Energy Efficiency of energy

KANG Kok Hin

conversion systems (heat engines, fuel cells). Renewable energy.

Global Landscape of Environmental Policies Carbon economy.

 

Standards. Organizations.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Methodology. LCA examples. LCA of eco-materials. Exercises. Proxy indicators. Benefits and limitations. Issues. Trends.

Stephen LEE

Air Pollution Industrial, power plant and automobile exhaust emissions. Air pollution abatement technologies.

LUA Aik Chong

Course instructors

Kang Kok Hin, Co-ordinator Lye, Sun Woh Lee Siang Guan, Stephen Lua, Aik Chong Contacts
Kang Kok Hin, Co-ordinator Lye, Sun Woh Lee Siang Guan, Stephen Lua, Aik Chong Contacts
Kang Kok Hin, Co-ordinator Lye, Sun Woh Lee Siang Guan, Stephen Lua, Aik Chong Contacts
Kang Kok Hin, Co-ordinator Lye, Sun Woh Lee Siang Guan, Stephen Lua, Aik Chong Contacts

Kang Kok Hin, Co-ordinator

Lye, Sun Woh

Lee Siang Guan, Stephen

Lua, Aik Chong

Contacts

Contacts

Contacts

Contacts

Email:

Email:

Email:

Email:

khkang@ntu.edu.sg Phone: 6790 4957 Office: N3-02c-113a

mswlye@ntu.edu.sg Phone: 6513 8690 Office: N3-02b-40

msglee@ntu.edu.sg Phone: 6790 5580 Office: N3-02c-74

maclua@ntu.edu.sg Phone: 6790 5535 Office: N3-02b-56

Course Expectations

Contents

Wide

reference materials will be provided. Qualitative (Descriptive) cum Quantitative (Calculations)

coverage.

No

textbook.

Lecture

notes

and

Assessment

Continuous Assessments 40% (2 Quizzes: Quiz 1: 12% Lye SW; 8% Kang KH; Quiz 2: 10% Kang KH; 10% Lee SSG)

Examinations 60% [1Q (LSW); 0.5Q (Lee SSG); 1.5Q (Kang

KH); 1Q (Lua AC)]

MA0100 (C) S W Lye 7

3

3 MA0100 (C) S W Lye 8

MA0100

(C) S W Lye

8

References

http://www.scribd.com/doc/48989767/Overpopul

ation-Vs-Global-Environment-How-much-is-too-

much U Ayres & L W Ayres. (2002). A handbook of industrial ecology . Cheltenham, UK. T E Graedel & B R Allenby. (2003). Industrial ecology . 2 nd ed., New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

D L Goetsch & S B Davis. (2001). ISO 14000 Environment Management . New Jersey:

Prentice Hall Inc.

Top 10 Environmental Issues according to Planet Earth Herald - 2016 MA0100 (C) S W

Top 10 Environmental Issues according to Planet Earth Herald - 2016

Top 10 Environmental Issues according to Planet Earth Herald - 2016

1.

Over Population

2.

Environmental Damage owing to Climate Change

3.

Eco-system upset

resulting in Loss of Bio- diversity

4.

Environmental Impact by Phosphorus and Nitrogen Cycles

http://planetearthherald.com/top-10-environmental-issues

Source: Worldometers (5 Jan 2017) 12

Source: Worldometers (5 Jan 2017)

Changing Faces about WildLife Habitat 2016 Loss of Biodiversity 149,642 Forest Loss (Hectares) 83,134 Productive
Changing Faces about WildLife Habitat 2016 Loss of Biodiversity 149,642 Forest Loss (Hectares) 83,134 Productive

Changing Faces

about WildLife Habitat 2016

Loss of Biodiversity

149,642 Forest Loss (Hectares)

83,134 Productive Land Loss through Soil Erosion (Hectares)

310,714631 Topsoil Erosion from

Farmlands (Metric Tons)

195,366 Desert Land formed due to Mismanagement

1,713,876 Tons of Live Being’s Biological Waste

15

Top 10 Environmental Issues according to Planet Earth Herald - 2016

1.

Over Population

5. Shortage of Clean Water

2.

Environmental Damage owing to Climate Change

6. Ocean Acidification on Marine Life

3.

Eco-system upset

7. Pollution

resulting in Loss of Bio- diversity

8. Ozone Layer Depletion

9. Over Fishing / Harvesting

4.

Environmental Impact by Phosphorus and Nitrogen Cycles

10. Deforestation

http://planetearthherald.com/top-10-environmental-issues

Facts about Water

Water: Planet earth has ample amounts of water present on the surface. However, in terms of

usable water, only 3% is useful. That means

97% of the water on the planet is too salty to drink or use in agriculture. The 3% freshwater

can be found in some lakes and rivers across

the globe. (Nature Resource and Waste Production)

The distribution is varied across the globe see

water footprint.

A Global Crisis?

A Global Crisis? 1,205,448 Tons of Fish Caught 19

1,205,448 Tons of Fish Caught

294,295,597 Carbon Dioxide Emissions (Metric Tons)

Lesson 1

Understanding Environmental Sustainability

A

Assessment

Model

for

Environmental

Impact

Environment Sustainability

Environment Sustainability Concerns with preserving the integrity of the physical environment exposed to the impacts

Concerns with preserving the

integrity of the physical environment exposed to the impacts of human activities.

Why the great concern?

- Some Common Reasons

Why the great concern? - Some Common Reasons Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues
Why the great concern? - Some Common Reasons Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues
Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues Economic Impact Pollution / Devastation
Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues Economic Impact Pollution / Devastation
Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues Economic Impact Pollution / Devastation

Over Extraction / Harvest

Wastage / Disposal Issues

Economic Impact

Pollution / Devastation

Common Reasons Over Extraction / Harvest Wastage / Disposal Issues Economic Impact Pollution / Devastation 23

Concerns: Link to Earth

Carrying Capacity

Concerns: Link to Earth Carrying Capacity  “Carrying capacity refers to the number of individuals who

“Carrying capacity refers to the number of individuals

who can be supported in a given area within natural

resource limits, and without degrading the natural social, cultural and economic environment for present and future generations” - GDRC Org.

Earth Carrying Capacity is dynamic. Earliest estimates

during the early 18th century put the number being around 12 billion. Current studies state slightly over 3 billion people noting changing environment and

people’s aspirations.

What factors affect it?
What
factors
affect it?

25

Industrialisation and Gas Emissions: Utrecht University, Netherlands Study Report

From around 1800, there was a surge in methane emissions, and most of the gas emitted today is man- made, says the study. "This footprint of the surge is

visible on a global level. That's what surprised us," said

Ms Sapart, Utrecht investigator.

The verdict: Unbridled gas emission is greatly affecting and destroying our eco-system via pollution and global

warming. It is harmful to humans, animals and plants.

Current industrialisation processes need to be refined and more environmental friendly processes be adopted.

+ Growth

Intrinsic Quality for Sustainable Living

(Eg. Air, Water, Wildlife)

- Degradation

Resources

(Renewable, Non-Renewable)

Ecological Cycles (Eg. Air, Water)

Earth’s Carrying Capacity

Environmental Impact:

3 Scenarios

Environment Degradation: Consumption of

renewable resources > Nature’s ability to replenish

leading to unsustainability.

Environment Equilibrium: Consumption of renewable resources = Nature’s ability to replenish

resulting in steady state.

Environment Sustainability: Consumption of

renewable resources < Nature’s ability to replenish

leading to environmental sustainability.

+ Growth

Intrinsic Quality for Sustainable Living

(Eg. Air, Water, Wildlife)

- Degradation

Resources

(Renewable, Non-Renewable)

Ecological Cycles (Eg. Air, Water)

Sphere of Environment

Sustainability

IPAT: Environmental Impact Model

I = ( P, A,T)

Where: I = Environmental impact, P = Population, A = Affluence (GDP/Person), T = Technology (Impact/Unit of GDP)

Population Factors of Consideration

Size or Number of People

Demographics

Rate of Population Change

MA0100 (C) S W Lye 32
MA0100 (C) S W Lye 32

Rate of Population Change, R

R = (B – D) + (I – E)  B = Birth Rate; D
R = (B – D) + (I – E)
 B = Birth Rate; D = Death Rate
 I = Immigration Rate; E = Emigration Rate
Example:
In 1990, a country has the following rate of change per

1000; birth rate is 15; 8.1 for death rate; 5.0 for immigration

and 3.6 for emigration. Comment on the rate of population

change. R = (15 8.1) + (5.0 - 3.6) = 6.9 + 1.4 = 8.3 per 1000

Population rate of change would increase.

Environmental Impact: Expected rate to increase*

* Other factors hold constant

Population Forecast

A country has a population of 4 million in 1990.

From 1990 to 2005, it grew at a stable annual rate of 3%.

What would be the population number in 2005 and expected number in 2020?

Solution:

2005 Population: 4 * 1.03 15 = 6.23 million 2020 Population: 4 * 1.03 30 = 7.22 million (assuming the same rate of population growth)

Demographics

On demographics:

Relates to gender and age distribution

Different gender and age groups consume different

resources and rates.

Profile of gender and age groups

change over time

gender and age groups consume different resources and rates.  Profile of gender and age groups
36
36

Concept of Equivalent Person

Gender and age groups impact the environment

differently. A measure of its impact is to base it on a

particular age group / gender. All other age / gender groups are measured with respect to this group.

Age Group

Equivalent Person

0-14

0.8

15-30

0.9

Base

31-45

1.0

31-45 1.0 Age

Age

46-60

1.0

Group

61-75

1.1

75+

1.15

Gender: Neutral

Equivalent Person Calculation

Age

Equivalent

Number of People

Number of Equivalent People

Group

Person

0-14

0.8

50,000

 

15-30

0.9

60,000

54,000

31-45

1.0

100,000

100,000

46-60

1.0

110,000

110,000

61-75

1.1

80,000

 

75+

1.15

150,000

172,500

 

Total

550,000

564,500

Gender: Neutral

Changing Population

Country

2015

2020

% Population Change

Population

Population

(per million)

(per million)

 

A

150

170

+13.3

B

1100

1000

-9.1

C

850

900

5.9

D

100

120

+20.0

E

250

280

+12.0

Country B is the most populous but its population is however declining. Country D is the least populous but experiences the largest growth increase.

IPAT: Environmental Impact Model

I = (P, A,T)

Greater Environmental Impact: Larger Equivalent

Population Size, Population Rate of Increase

Population on Environmental Impact (EI)

Measures

Amount of Vital Resources* Available or

Extracted (Now or Future) within a Region

Amount of Vital Resources* Available or Extracted per Person (Nominal or

Equivalent) within a Region

* Resources deemed to be critical such as owing to lack, sustenance or economic usefulness

*Assuming

factors

are

Population on Resource Availability

Country

Population (per

Resource

Resource

million)

Availability

per person

(per 1000 kg)

(kg)

A

150

400,000

2.67

B

1100

200,000

0.18

C

850

60,000

0.07

D

100

280,000

2.80

scalable and equal.

E

250

50,000

0.20

Country A has the most amount of resources and E the least. Hence, for the same amount of resource used, this

would impact country E more than A*.

For resource per person, country D is the most and country C the least. If every person uses 0.1kg more of the resource, country C would be greatly affected whereas D be

MA0100

(C) S W Lye

42

the least*.

Population on Resource

Availability (Now and 2020)

Country

2015

2015

2020

2020

Population (per million)

Resource

Population (per million)

Resource

Availability

Availability

 

(per 1000 kg)

 

(per 1000 kg)

A

150

400,000

170

320,000

B

1100

200,000

1000

160,000

C

850

60,000

900

36,000

D

100

280,000

120

224,000

E

250

50,000

280

40,000

Country A has the most amount of resources (2015 and

2020). Country E is least in 2015 but expected to be

replaced by C. Like all other countries, its resources are dwindling. If

MA100

(C) S W Lye

43

nothing is done, this resource would be exhausted.

Population on Resource Availability Rate

Per Person (Now and 2020)

Country

2015

2015

2020

2020

Population (per million)

Resource per person (kg)

Population (per million)

Resource per person (kg)

A

150

 

170

1.88

B

1100

0.18

1000

0.16

C

850

0.07

900

0.04

D

100

2.80

120

1.87

E

250

0.20

280

0.14

Country D has the most amount of resources available per person (2015) but nearly on par with country A in 2020. Country C is least in 2015 and remains so in 2020.

Population on Resource Availability Rate of Change (Now and 2020)

Country

2015

2020

% Resource Change

Resource per

Resource per

person (kg)

person (kg)

 

A

2.67

1.88

-29.6%

B

0.18

0.16

-11.1%

C

0.07

0.04

-42.9%

D

2.80

1.87

-33.2%

E

0.20

0.14

-30.0%

Between 2015 and 2020, all other countries register decline in its resource availability per person with country C accounting for the most decline. Country B seems to fare better than the rest.

MA100

(C) S W Lye

45

IPAT: Environmental Impact Model

I = (P, A,T)

Greater Environmental Impact: Larger Equivalent

Population Size, Population Rate of

Increase (Present and Future)

Over Equilibrium point between population consumption and environment replenishment population
Over
Equilibrium point between
population consumption and
environment replenishment
population

(a state when a group of

people, or any living organisms for that matter, surpass

Over-Population

the

natural

load

sustainability

of

its

environment)

47

Affluence: Wealth and

Material Comfort

Gross Domestic

Product:

Affluence within a Region

A

Measure

of

Gross Domestic Product is an indicator used to gauge the health of a country's economy or size of its economy. It represents the total dollar value of all goods and services produced over a specific time period. The bigger the GDP, the

bigger the size of the economy, the larger the

total dollar value produced

Affluence: Wealth and Material

Comfort (Gross Domestic Product over Population) within a Region

Country

Population (per million)

GDP (per million)

GDP/Capita million $

A

150

430,000

286.7

B

1100

400,000

363.6

C

850

260,000

305.9

D

100

28,000

 

E

250

5,000000

20000

Assuming factors are scalable and equal, country E is the

most affluent in terms of absolute and per capita

Affluence: Wealth and

Material Comfort

Affluence on Environment Impact

Resource Use

Growth in Affluence

Affluence on Resource Use Resource Use => Consumption and Wastes United States Developed Countries Undeveloped

Affluence on Resource Use

Resource Use => Consumption and Wastes

on Resource Use Resource Use => Consumption and Wastes United States Developed Countries Undeveloped Countries 51
on Resource Use Resource Use => Consumption and Wastes United States Developed Countries Undeveloped Countries 51
on Resource Use Resource Use => Consumption and Wastes United States Developed Countries Undeveloped Countries 51

United States

Developed

Countries

Undeveloped

Countries

Affluence on Resource Use

Affluence

Population

Waste (%

Energy (%

Country

(%)

Waste Generated per capital %)

Energy Consumed per capita %)

Very

5

72

(14.4)

24 (4.8)

Affluent

 

Affluent

16

18

(1.13)

51

(3.19)

Less

79

10

(0.13)

25

(0.32)

Affluent

   
Consumption per Person Earth Carrying Capacity per Person ConsumptionExpected
Consumption
per Person
Earth Carrying
Capacity per
Person
ConsumptionExpected

Rising Affluence

GDP Growth in developing countries is expected to increase. Such developing countries have large population

GDP Growth in developing countries is expected

to increase. Such developing countries have large population concentration. More intense demands

and competition for Earth’s resources are

expected.

MA0100

(C) S W Lye

54

Affluence: Wealth and

Material Comfort

I = ( P, A ,T)

Growth in Affluence; Increase Resource Use

or Consumpion

Future: Grossly Unchecked Resource Use

(Consumption and Waste Generated) can

greatly deplete and degrade Earth’s Resources and its Carry Capacity

Technology

Process to convert

materials for product

use or services Technology

Adoption Outcomes:

Higher Resource

Consumption, Higher

Process by-products

and Waste

use or services  Technology Adoption Outcomes: Higher Resource Consumption, Higher Process by-products and Waste 56

Process By-Products and Waste

Process

by-products:

Toxic

Materials

and Gas Emissions (Carbon Dioxide)

Process Inefficiency: Process Waste -

Materials used in production but not sold

Subject of Waste: Would look into it in

greater depth in later lessons

IPAT: Environmental Impact Model

I = ( P, A, T )

Increase Gas emissions and Wastes owing to use of technology (all other factors hold constant)

iPAT Factor Evaluation

Country

Population (per million)

GDP (per million)

% Global CO 2 Emissions

A

150

430,000

4

B

1100

400,000

9

C

850

260,000

4

D

100

28,000

1

E

250

5,000000

18

Types of Measures

Absolute Measures Comparative Measures Weightage Index Measures

iPAT Single Factor Evaluation

Country Population GDP (per (per million) million) % Global CO 2 Emissions A 150 430,000
Country
Population
GDP (per
(per million)
million)
% Global CO 2
Emissions
A
150
430,000
4
B
1100
400,000
9
C
850
260,000
4
D
100
28,000
1
E
250
5,000000
18

Absolute Measures:

On Population: Country B On GDP: Country E

On Technology: Country E since it emits the largest % of

global CO 2 emissions. Assuming carbon monoxide, a

undesirable by-product is produced owing to technology.

MA0100

(C) S W Lye

60

iPAT Single Factor Evaluation

Country Population GDP (per (per million) million) % Global CO 2 Emissions A 150 430,000
Country
Population
GDP (per
(per million)
million)
% Global CO 2
Emissions
A
150
430,000
4
B
1100
400,000
9
C
850
260,000
4
D
100
28,000
1
E
250
5,000000
18

Is this a fair measure to

evaluate these countries on

environmental impact?

Absolute Measures:

On Population: Country B On GDP: Country E

On Technology: Country E since it emits the largest % of global CO 2 emissions. Assuming carbon monoxide, a

undesirable by-product is produced owing to technology.

MA0100

(C) S W Lye

61

Comparative Measures

Technology vs Population Technology vs Affluence per capita

Technology vs Population

Country

Population

% Global CO

% / Per Cap

(per million)

Emissions

(per million)

A

150

4

0.0267

B

1100

9

0.0082

C

850

4

0.0047

D

100

1

0.0100

E

250

18

0.0720

Assuming carbon monoxide, a undesirable by-product is

produced owing to technology. All factors are scalable and

equal. Country E employed of technology seemed to be most problematic as it emits the largest % of global CO 2 emissions (both in terms of absolute and per capita).

63

Technology vs Affluence per

capita

Country

GDP/Capita

% Global CO

A/B *10 6

million $, (A)

Emissions (B)

A

286.7

4

71.7

B

363.6

9

40.4

C

305.9

4

76.5

D

280

1

280

E

20000

18

1111.1

A/B equates to affluence per unit of CO emission. Country E employs the technology most effectively to generate the greatest level of affluence. Country B faired the worst.

Affluence (held constant) vs

Technology

Country

GDP/Capital million $, (A)

% Global CO Emissions (B)

B/A *10 -6

A

286.7

4

0.014

B

363.6

9

0.025

C

305.9

4

0.013

D

280

1

0.0036

E

20000

18

0.0009

B/A equates to CO emission per unit affluence. Country E seems to deploy its technology most effectively to attain a certain level of affluence whereas

IPAT: Conflicting Factor Trends

? I = ( P, A, T)

No proper deduction can be made unless the relationships between the factors can be

established. One approach is to make use of

weighted index. This converting set values into indices.

iPAT Factor Evaluation (Index)

Ctry Pop. (per million) Pop. Index A 150 5.0 B 1100 100.0 C 850 75.0
Ctry
Pop. (per
million)
Pop.
Index
A
150
5.0
B
1100
100.0
C
850
75.0
D
100
0.0
E
250
15.0
Range
100-1100
0 - 100

(150-100) *1000

-------------------- = 5

100

(850-100) *1000

-------------------- = 75

100

iPAT Factor Evaluation (Index)

Ctry

Pop.

Pop.

GDP (per

GDP

%

Tech.

Total

(per

Index

million)

Index

Global

Index

Index

million)

CO 2

Emissi

ons

 

A 150

5.0

430,000

8.09

4

17.65

30.7

 

B 1100

100.0

400,000

7.48

9

47.06

154.5

 

C 850

75.0

260,000

4.67

4

17.65

97.3

 

D 100

0.0

28,000

0.0

1

0.00

0.0

 

E 250

15.0

5,000,000

100.0

18

100.00

215.0

Range

100-

0-100

28,000-

0-100

1-18

0-100

 

1100

5,000,000

Country E has the largest environmental impact index

IPAT World Trend Summary

World iPAT assessment

I↑ = P↑, A↑, T↑

Growing Population: Likely to +50% over the next 50 years affecting Earth’s ability to replenish itself. (2015: 7.33 billion, 2014: 7.25 billion. +1.1% faster than long term growth)

Increasing Gross Domestic Product per

capital: Likely to +300% to +500%. Resource availability would a potential problem.

Moderate Technology: Likely to +50% +90%

leading to greater waste and gas emissions.

Globally, environmental impact is on the increase

Singapore iPAT assessment

I↑ = P↑, A↑, T↑

Population = Plan to increase to 6 million or more from 5.5 million Affluence = GDP/per capita expected to grow

Technology = Use of technology to enhance

productivity

Nationally, environmental impact would have more pronounced on the population if nothing is done

The Poser Is there anything we can do?

If so, what would it be?

Would explore that in the weeks

that follow

Lesson 1: Summary

What is environmental sustainability?

Concerns with preserving the integrity of the physical environment exposed to the impacts of

human activities

Why is it of great concern? Ability of the Earth to carry its load or capacity thereby unable to meet human needs

What are the key factors affecting environmental impact? Environmental impact is affected by population,

affluence and technology deployment. Current

trends seem to suggest that the impact cost on the environment is expected to increase. If it is not address, this could have dire consequences.

Thank You

End of Lesson 1