Newsletter - May 2001

An ASCE/ASEE Newsletter

May 2001

From Global Warming to Green Buildings

This issue of the Forum Newsletter ranges across the sustainability spectrum. In the global warming area, articles include the findings of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the Metropolitan East Coast Region Climate Change Assessment. In the green building area, there is a report on the summit held on “Sustainable Federal Facilities”, and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s new award-winning environmental center building. And, in between, in the energy area, is a summary of the U.N. Panel on Energy Efficiency, and an update on the EPA Energy Star Program.

The next meeting of the Forum will be held on Friday, June 1, 2001 from 9:00 a.m. to Noon, at the National Academy of Engineering, Room 150, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.The agenda will include a fresh look at nuclear as a sustainable energy source, an update on the EPA Energy Star Programs and reports on a number of other sustainability activities. The complete agenda will be distributed by e-mail prior to the meeting.

Further information about the Forum and its newsletters can be found on the ASEE Website or by contacting William Kelly, ASEE, by e-mail at publicaffairs@asee.org

Al Grant, Forum Chair

"USACE Environmental Strategy" by Robert Flowers

(Editors Note: This article is the third in a series of guest articles to be featured in the Forum Newsletter. LTG Robert B. Flowers is Chief of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These remarks are drawn from a talk he gave at the USACE Environmental Conference in Portland, Oregon on April 17, 2001.)

 

"One of the most important aspects of the Corps environmental mission is found in the operation of our many projects. The Corps is responsible for stewardship of nearly 12 million acres of public land and water. We are participating in the recovery of at least 73 federally listed endangered, or threatened species, through responsible stewardship and management of our lands and waters."

There are two new initiatives that I am announcing here today for the first time. I want to start a dialogue on development of key principles emphasizing our environmental awareness. My intent is to develop doctrine that will encompass all USACE environmental operations, both civil works and military programs.

Here are the basic principles:

  • Environmental Sustainability - All Corps work will be based upon the need for people and nature to co-exist in a healthy, supportive, diverse, and sustainable condition.
  • Recognize interdependence of activities - We will recognize interdependence with nature. We will consider the possibility of second and third order effects of our projects.
  • Be responsible for cumulative impacts - The Corps will accept responsibility for the consequences of planning, design, and construction decisions upon the continued viability of natural systems and human life.
  • Be committed to long-term public safety - The Corps will create only safe, engineered objects of long-term value.
  • Support a systems approach - In all aspects of our design and construction, the Corps will evaluate and optimize the life cycle of products and processes so that, as much as possible, we approach the state of natural systems, in which there is no waste.
  • Understand and utilize the dynamic nature of the environment - Our projects will rely to the fullest extent possible on renewable energy sources and recyclable products.
  • And finally ... See continuous improvements - As public servants, we will seek constant improvements by sharing, promoting, collaborating, and integrating knowledge.

USACE Environmenal Strategy

I also want to set a corporate strategy for environmental issues. It will be applicable to both civil works and military programs and will serve as a guidepost for our environmental research. We will apply synergy at all levels of the Corps and develop a global strategy for the environment. I expect multiple benefits from these two efforts.

Environmental Sustainability

Environmental sustainability is not a new concept and reflects an achievement of both economic and environmental goals. Environmental sustainability incoporates many of the ideas that are already part of the Corps planning procedures. I believe that an emphasis on environmental sustainability will produce greater balance, collaboration and transparency in our programs.

How will this be done on a practical basis? For example, in our water resources work we will search for environmentally sustainable alternatives. Thoughtful development does not damage the environment. The Jennings Randolph Reservoir in the Baltimore District is an excellent example of a project where environmental benefit was built into the original project. The construction of selective withdrawal structures, where water quality parameters are monitored at various elevations, enables the reservoir manager to release high-quality water for acquatic habitat. We now have a blue-ribbon trout fishery in an area that was adversely affected by acid mine drainage. This project is a testimonial to the ecosystem benefits which can be gained by the appropriate use of technology.

System Approaches

Integrated Water Resources Management is one of the recurring themes that we heard in our nationwide series of listening sessions. It will become a part of our environmental doctrine. Our stakeholders want to see a more holistic approach to planning and management. That's what we heard, and that's what we're going to do. Issues such as land use, environmental management, and water resources management are all linked at the regional level

Hazardous Waste Cleanup

Turning now to our environmental remediation work - The Corps executes over a billion dollars every year in hazardous waste cleanups. This work ranges from Base Realignment and Closure cleanups and Formerly Used Defense Sites, work performed on active military installations, to projects performed for the Environmental Protection Agency under the Superfund Program.

This work is never easy. The sites represent complex scientific and engineering challenges. There is always a significant amount of federal, state, and local regulatory involvement, and public interest groups are rightly concerned with the work we do. Our keys to success will be implemention of new technology and synergy. Advances in areas such as rapid site characterization have saved millions of dollars and accelerated cleanups at many sites.

Installation Support for the Future

Our work in hazardous waste remediation is over 20 years old. We have served the Army and the nation in this area and we will continue to do so in the future. We will also position overselves to support the future environmental management needs of our installations. Environmental compliance, pollution prevention, and conservation are the three pillars of installation environmental management. We will be responsive to our Army's Public Works Directorates and provide them the services they need. "

U.N. Panel Issues Findings on Climate Change

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a report in February, 2001 which includes the following findings:

  • Recent regional climate changes already have had adverse effects, from shrinkage of glaciers and thawing of permafrost to unusually early breakup of ice on rivers and lakes and the decline of some plant and animal populations.
  • Long-term dangers worldwide include reduction in crop yields, decreased availability of water for populations in drought-prone regions, increase in the number of people exposed to cholera and malaria and widespread risk of flooding in populous areas.
  • Natural systems are at risk, including glaciers, coral reefs and atolls, alpine ecosystems and prairie wetlands.
  • Global warming left unabated could unleash large-scale and possibly irreversible changes in Earth's ecosystem, from a significant slowing of the ocean circulation that transports warm water to the North Atlantic to large reductions in the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets.
  • Poor countries would bear the brunt of devastating changes as a result of global warming, but wealthier countries including the United States would likely be lashed by storms and rising sea levels.

Metropolitan East Coast Region Does Climate Change Assessment

At the annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board in Washington, DC in January, 2001, a report was given on an assessment of the Metropolitan East Coast Region. The assessment is part of the U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Impacts of Climate Variability and Change. Highlights of the report follow:
"The Metropolitan East Coast (MEC) Regional Assesment is one of the eighteen regional components of the U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change, organized by the U.S. Global Change Research Program. The goal of each regional assessment is to investigate potential impacts of climate variability and change on the natural systems and human activities of a specific geographical area of the United States

The Assessment covers the 31 counties of the New York City metropolitan region. The area consists of 13,000 square miles, with jurisdictions involving 1,600 cities, towns, and villages in the three states of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. The last U.S. Census (1990) numbered the total regional population at 19.6 million, of which 7.3 million live in New York City.
The MEC Regional Assessment examines how three interacting elements of large cities react and respond to climate variability and change. The three elements are: people (i.e.) socio-demographic conditions, place (ie. physical and ecological systems) and pulse (i.e. decision-making and economic activities). Seven sector studies form the core of the interacting elements: Coasts, Infrastructure, Wetlands, Water Supply, Public Health, Energy Demand, and Institutional Decision-Making. The sector studies address climate impacts through analysis of historical climate trends, responses to extreme climatic events, and scenario projections. Key to the assessment process is the focus on identifying vulnerabilities, adaptation strategies, policy recommendations, and gaps in knowledge. Each sector of the MEC Assessment collaborates with representatives of one or more stakeholder institutions.

The assessment notes that:

  • There is still considerable uncertainty about the rate and magnitude of projected climate changes.
  • There is substantial potential for surprises as gradual changes could be punctuated by extreme events such as intense precipitation events, floods, and droughts.
  • Key urban impacts of climate variability and change are likely to occur simultaneously at the intersection of sectors, such as heat stress during energy blackouts.

Other selected findings include the following:

Sea Level Rise and Coasts

  • With projected climate change, sea level in the MEC region may rise 4.3-11.7 inches by the 2020s, 6.9 to 23.7 inches by the 2050s and 9.5 to 42.5 inches by the 2080s.
  • Future sea-level rise would lead to more damaging storm floods and a marked reduction in the flood return period in coastal regions.
  • Rates of beach erosion would double or triple at sites within the region by the 2020s, increasing 3 to 6 times by the 2050s, and 4 to 10 times by the 2080s, relative to the 2000s.

Infrastructure

  • Most of the region's low-elevation (below 15ft) transportation infrastructure will be at risk to flooding in the 21st century. By the end of the century, for two-thirds of facilities with elevations at or below 10 ft. above sea level, flooding may occur at least once every decade, and at some facilities every few years.

Human Health

  • The most direct health effect to be associated with warming and a more variable climate is an increase in summer-season heat stress morbidity and mortality, particularly among the elderly poor.
  • Climate change in the MEC region will contribute to at least three classes of indirect health outcomes: incidence of certain vector-borne diseases may rise; water-borne disease organisms may become more prevalent; and increased formation of photochemical pollutants may be fostered.

Energy Demand

  • A warming climate will raise the demand for electricity because the increase in summer cooling outweighs the decrease in winter needs. Because peak summer electricity loads already far exceed winter peaks, the electric system will be increasingly stressed during summer heat waves.
  • The urban heat island already causes cities to be warmer than the surrounding countryside due to the absorption of sunlight by buildings during the day and reradiation at night. Under a warming climate, the urban heat island effect will increasingly become an issue of regional concern in regard to energy demand and air quality
  • Adaptation measures to increased demand include: emphasis on energy effeciency, particularly to reduce summer peak loads; construction of local power plants to keep up with rising demand; construction of additional transmission lines to bring more power into the metropolitan area; upgrading of local lines that distribute electricity to customers; and passive cooling in buildings and communities."

Summit Held on "Sustainable Federal Facilities"

"Sustainable Federal Facilities: From Theory to Practice" was the fifth annual summit cosponsored by the U.S. Green Building Council (www.usgbc.org) and the Federal Facilities Council of the National Academies (www.nationalacademies.org/ffc). About three hundred attendees, who were mostly federal employees responsible for the acquisition or operation of sustainable federal facilities, received and discussed the new report of the Federal Facilities Council, "Sustainable Federal Facilities: A Guide to Integrating Value Engineering, Life Cycle Costing and Sustainable Development." Attendees also discussed the application of the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) energy performance rating system to the design of federal facilities.

Sustainable development as an integrated concept for buildings seeks to reverse the trends in the architectural and engineering communities that focus on first costs and treat each discipline's contribution to the whole building as separate, independent efforts. Sustainable development integrates all of the design disciplines so that limited resources are efficiently directed toward the goal of meeting user needs without setting one program against another. The precepts for sustainability are that all resources are limited and it is less expensive, short and long term, to build in harmony with the environment.

On June 3, 1999, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13123, "Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy Management," which established goals for greenhouse gases reduction, energy efficiency improvement, industrial and laboratory facilities, renewable energy, petroleum, source energy and water conservation. To achieve these goals, the executive order addresses sustainable development and the development of sustainable development principles, and states that agencies shall apply such principles to the siting, design, and construction of new facilities.

The LEED Green Building Rating System is a priority program of the US Green Building Council. It is a voluntary, consensus-based market-driven building rating system based on existing proven technology. It evaluates environmental performance from a "whole building" perspective over a building's life cycle, providing a definitive standard for what constitutes a "green building."

LEED is based on accepted energy and environmental principles and strikes a balance between known effective practices and emerging concepts. Unlike other rating systems currently in existence, the development of the LEED Green Building Rating System was instigated by the US Green Council Membership, representing all segments of the building industry, and has been open to public scrutiny.

LEED is a self-assessing system designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings. It is a feature-oriented system where credits are earned for satisfying each criterion. Different levels of green building certification are awarded based on the total credits earned. The system is designed to be comprehensive in scope, yet simple in operation.

(Contact: For further information, visit the web sites shown in the first paragraph of this article)

CBF's New Environmental Center Reduces Energy Costs by 70%

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation's (CBF) Philip Merrill Environmental Center is the first to receive the U.S. Green Building Council's Platinum rating for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). Located on the Bay at 162 Prince George St., Annapolis, MD, the Center uses a variety of recycled and renewable materials throughout the facility.

The timbers that form the building's framework are beams made by laminating short pieces of second-growth wood. Using these beams eliminates the need to cut old-growth trees, preserving prime forests.

Recycled materials in the Center include galvanized steel siding, galvanized roofing, and medium density fiberboard. The sun louvers on the front of the building were made of salvaged barrel staves from a pickle factory on the Eastern Shore's Nanticoke River. The flooring is cork, which insulates and damps out sound while providing a cushioned walking surface. It is also a renewable resource because it can be stripped from a living tree without harm, allowing the tree to grow another layer.

Other renewable materials include cork tack-boards, natural linoleum, and bamboo flooring. Using these recycled and natural, renewable materials eliminates the need for manufacture of virgin materials from petroleum and other natural resources. In addition, the Center's decking is pressure-treated without the use of toxics like arsenic, and all paints, sealants, and adhesives were chosen for low contents of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which contribute to air pollution.

In the place of flush toilets, the Center has waterless composting toilets that convert human waste into fertile garden soil over the course of three years. They are major factors in the ultra-low water usage level of the Center, which is less than 10 percent that of a conventional office building.

To reduce the Center's need for electricity, the architects placed the building carefully on its site to achieve the optimum angle to take advantage of the sun for heat and light and the wind for ventilation. On the south side of the building, a "daylighting" system of windows, blinds, and the pickle-barrel sun louvers optimizes shading in the summer and heating in the winter.

The walls and roof are constructed of thermally efficient Structural Insulated Panels, providing a tight, "super-insulated" building envelope that further reduces energy consumption. The panels used in the Merrill Center were manufactured without chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)s or other ozone depleting chemicals. CBF estimates that the center will use less than one-third the energy of a conventional office building of similar size.

Reduced energy consumption lowers the need for electricity generated from nonrenewable fossil fuels in the region's power plants, which in turn reduces the air pollutants produced by these plants. The lack of CFCs and HCFs improves air quality both in the panel's manufacturing plant and in the Center. Fewer pollutants in the air means less pollution "washed " from the air into the Bay by rain.

To assist in cooling the Center's interior in warm weather and heating it in cold weather, geothermal wells drilled into the earth reach below the frost line to take advantage of the constant termperature there (about 50 degrees F.) A silica gel desiccant system connected to the geothermal system removes humidity efficiently on hot days.

Photovoltaic panels on the roof produce renewable electric power to reduce further the Center's dependence on commercially generated electricity. Meanwhile, roof-mounted solar panels connected to a heat exchanger provide hot water for the building, cutting the need to operate a conventional electric water heater. Collectively, these three renewable energy systems provide one-third of the Center's energy needs.

A total energy management system monitors the Center's energy use and controls it for maximum efficiency. The system maintains a remarkably uniform temperature (plus or minus 2 degrees F.) throughout the building. The comfortable working environment enhances staff productivity.

(Contact: For futher information and visiting times, call 410-268-8816 or visit www.savethebay.cbf.org)

AAES and WFEO Sponsor U.N. Panel on Energy Efficiency

On April 17, 2001, the American Association of Engineering Societies and the World Federation of Engineering Organizations presented an engineering panel on simple technologies using renewable energy resources. The panel was presented in conjunction with the Spring meeeing of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development in New York at the United Nations. The panel was chaired by James W. Poirot, President of Comtech, WFEO. A brief summary of the four panel presentations follow:

 

Mr. Paul M. Munsen of Sun Ovens International, Inc. discussed the "Micro-Sun Bakeries: The Bright Alternative." The Micro-Sun Bakery in Minas de Oro, Honduras has existed since 1966 and is operated by a women's co-op. It was developed to work toward alleviating poverty and enhancing the quality of life by empowering women to raise their standard of living through self-sustaining micro-enterprise. The location of the bakery to its market area, and the use of the sun as the primary fuel source, allows baked goods to be sold for 20% less.

Mr. Rie Masaki of the Masaki Corporation spoke on "The Water Beetle: Using the Sun to Purify Water." At the Nishiyama Dam in Japan, the Water Beetle, powered by a solar energy panel, works to improve the quality of water in land-locked areas. Using less than one-sixth the amount of energy than other systems, the currents created by the Water Beetle lift water to the surface where it is exposed to the sun's ultraviolet rays and sterilized.

Mr. Hilel Legmann of Ormat Industries, Ltd., described the "Geothermal Energy Plant Commissioned by Maori." The 60 megawatt (MW) geothermal power station near Taupo on New Zealand's North Island was developed and is owned by the Tauropaki Trust. It is the first such project to be developed by indigenous Maori landowners. The project was planned and constructed to avoid negative impact on the environment. The geothermal field has an estimated generation capacity of between 250 and 450 MW from deep high pressure, high temperature steam.

Mrs. Aurilie Fabre of the Vergnet Dipartement Eilen discussed "Wind Energy Opportunities in Least Developed Nations." Medium-sized wind turbines, specially designed for hard contexts such as potential hurricane areas, provide opportunities for least developed nations.

(Contact: For futher information, contact Jane Alspach, AAES at 202-296-2237 or at
jalspach @aaes.org)

Energy Star Program Gains Momentum in Energy Crisis

The Energy Star program was launched in 1991 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and is now a joint effort of the EPA and the Department of Energy (DOE) to promote energy efficiency and protect the environment. The growing number of voluntary partnerships the program has established with U.S. companies, state and local governments, and other organizations has made Energy Star a success.

According to the Climate Protection Division of the EPA , in 1999 the Energy Star program achieved large decreases in greenhouse gas and nitrogen oxides emissions. More than 20 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (equal to the emissions from about 18 million cars) and more than 100,000 tons of nitrogren oxides (equal to the emissions from 70 power plants) were not released into the atmosphere.

The Energy Star program is also one of the most effective programs sponsored by the federal government. In 1999, consumers purchased Energy Star products worth more than $100 million, and use of these products saved 29 billion kilowatt hours. Each federal dollar invested in partnership programs through 1999 has reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 3.7 tons, saved $75 in energy bills for partners and consumers, created $15 in private sector investment, and added $60 to the economy. And these benefits are expected to continue. Over the next decade, the Energy Star program anticipates energy bill savings of $4 billion. Currently, about 30 percent of the population recognize the Energy Star label, and understand what it represents. People can choose from more than 7,000 products in 30 categories, produced by more than a thousand manufacturers.

At a Congressional briefing on the Energy Star Program in March, 2001, four Energy Star partners reported on their accomplishments.

An Energy Star partner since 1998, Sears, Roebuck & Company promotes a wide range of Energy Star products, from appliances, office equipment, and home electronics to HVAC equipment and window products. Sears' Kenmore Elite (Calypso) clothes washer uses about 65 percent less energy and 46 percent less water than a traditional washer. Sears' new Kenmore Elite refrigerator is an Energy Star appliance that exceeds the new 2001 efficiency standard by more than 10 percent. In 2000, Sears sold more than one million Energy Star appliances.

Hines, one of the largest real estate organizations in the world, is a Texas-based, privately-owned firm involved in developing, managing, leasing, and acquiring real estate. Since joining Energy Star in 1999, Hines has benchmarked the energy performance of 83 percent of its office building square footage and achieved the Energy Star label for 37 percent of its eligible office portfolio. On average, Hines properties use 24 percent less energy than the average office building, providing a significant competitive advantage in real estate market.

In 2000, the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP), representing 26 utilities, launched a consumer education campaign to increase both consumer awareness and sales of Energy Star labeled products, encourage retailer and manufacturer support, and position Energy Star as a preferred brand. NEEP's integrated successful multimedia marketing campaign reached a broad audience, producing 116 million impressions and increasing awareness by 65 percent in 2000.

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) is the sixth largest municipal electric utility in the United States, generating, transmitting and distributing energy to over 500,000 customers within the Sacramento area. To help its customers reduce energy use and electricity bills, SMUD's Energy Star campaign in 2000 targeted resdential customers, small businesses, large buildings and schools. It included print and radio advertising, point-of purchase materials, events, media outreach, financial incentives and sales training. An estimated 6.5 million impressions were made through this campaign. Last October, SMUD sponsored a Lighting Change Out as a part of the national Great Energy Star Lighting Change Out. As a result, SMUD succeeded in getting 1,004 trade-ins and 1,115 new Energy Star products sold.

Because Energy Star products are in the top 10-25 percent of the market in energy efficiency, consumers and businesses who purchase these products can quickly reduce their energy consumption and costs and greatly improve the energy efficiency of their buildings, homes and appliances. Energy Star:

  • Has already reduced peak power needs across the United States by about 10 gigawatts (about 1 gigawatt in California alone), the equivalent of providing power to 2 million homes.
  • Will save $60 billion through 2010 in cumulative energy bill savings for consumers and businesses from investments made to date.
  • Spurred investments of more than $11 billion in more energy efficient technologies.
  • Prevented millions of tons of pollution associated with acid rain, urban smog and greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Spans more than 7,000 organizations and is actively promoted by states and utilities that serve nearly 50 percent of U.S. consumers.

(Contact: For more information, contact Beth Bleil of ESSI at (202) 662-1885 or by e-mail at bbleil@essi.org)

VA Tech "Green" Engineering Conference Planned

Virginia Tech's College of Engineering has scheduled a "green" engineering conference on "Sustainable and Environmentally Conscious Engineering," July 29-August 1, 2001, at the Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center.

Virginia Tech's Green Engineering Program seeks to sensitize the entire engineering curriculum to green engineering to introduce environmental consciousness and case studies into existing courses; to incorporate green engineering philosophies at the freshman level; to foster green engineering and environmental economics as part of engineering design; and to serve the global community through the sharing and dissemination of this information.

This conference is an an opportunity for scientists, engineers, regulators, managers, designers and other professionals and interested parties to participate in an exchange of ideas, techniques, philosophies and common interests. The somewhat non-traditional agenda has a different keynote speaker each morning. The keynote speakers represent industry, government, and academic or public interest areas, thereby kicking off each day with a slightly different perspective. Each day's technical sessions are followed by a roundtable discussion of the topics presented. Breakfasts and lunches are provided by the conference, as is a Sunday evening social.

Contact: Additional information is available from Michael H. Gregg, Director, Green Engineering Program, College of Engineering, Mail Code 0218, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, Phone: 540-231-9544; Fax: 540-231-6903; e-mail: greggmh@vt.edu.
The conference home page is located at www.eng.vt.edu/eng/green/Conference.html

New ASCE Group to Promote Sustainable Development

ASCE's Technical Activities Committee (TAC) has organized a subcommittee on sustainability to incorporate this concept into the planning and implementation of engineering projects, one of the objectives of the Society's action plan for 2001.

ASCE has sustainability activities in many of its technical units as well as the institutes and the Civil Engineering Research Foundation. This new subcommittee is charged with identifying, pulling together, and publicizing the total involvement of ASCE in promoting sustainable development.

This subcommittee is pursuing an agressive program of activities. It will conduct a survey of all ASCE units with interests and activities related to sustainability. The information gathered will be used to build a comprehensive picture of ASCE's involvement and to establish effective processes for exchanging information.

The subcommittee will be sponsoring two sessions on sustainability at this year's civil engineering conference and exposition, which will be held in Houston in October. One will focus on U.S. issues pertaining to sustainable communities, buildings and technology. The other will address the international dimensions of sustainability, including infrastructure financing and alleviating the effects of natural disasters through better structures.

In addition, the subcommittee is beginning work on guidelines that will provide an underpinning for sustainable engineering practice. The principles that are set forth in these guidelines are expected to help guide the development of ASCE's Center for Excellence for Sustainable Development.

The guidelines will contain two major sections. The first will cover the major principles, concepts, and challenges of sustainability. In addition to checklists and case studies, descriptions will be given of the procedures to be followed in planning and implementing sustainability. The second section will constitute a comprehensive reference source and will have a resource "road map" to facilitate access to key documents and information.

In addition to Al Grant, chair of the new subcommittee and a former president of ASCE, the new subcommittee's members are Hank Hatch, Miriam Heller, Bill Kelly, Mike Sanio, Howard Schirmer, Jorge Vanegas, and Dick Wright. The ASCE staff contact is Walter W. Hays, the senior program manager for a sustainable built environment.

(Contact: For more information, contact Hays at 703-295-6054, E-mail: whays@asce.org)

 

Overview of World Water Forum Presented

At the last Engineer's Forum, David W. Moody, Chair of the Renewable Natural Resources Foundation, reported on the plans and progress of the World Water Forum.

The World Water Council's Second World Water Forum and Ministerial Conference, held on March 17-22, 2000 in The Hague, The Netherlands, attracted over 5,800 people from more than 150 countries, making it one of the largest meetings ever held on the subject of water policy. The chief purpose of the meeting was to present and discuss the World Water Vision, an attempt to develop a consensus on what water management world-wide should look like in the year 2025.

At present, the WWC characterizes itself as an "international water policy think tank" that promotes awareness of critical water issues to "faciliatate efficient conservation, protection, development, planning, management, and use of water on an environmentally sustainable basis for the benefit of all life on earth." Over 290 members from 40 countries currently make up the WWC. Members include public institutions, private sector firms, United Nations organizations, and non-governmental organizations.

The World Water Vision was conceived as a means of developing knowledge about the current state of the world's resources and of raising awareness of policymakers as to the severity of water problems in many parts of the world. Such awareness should help foster the political will and leadership to take action. Similarly, the organizers felt that a vision of what water management should look like in the year 2025 would help support the needed actions.

The concept of the World Water Vision was introduced during the WWC's First World Water Forum in Marrakech, Morocco, in 1997. Eventually, the World Water Vision involved thousands of people all over the world in the development of thematic panels to look at possible futures in key areas (energy production, information technology, biotechnology, and institutions), development of three global scenarios for 2025, regional vision consultations, sectorial vision consultations (for example, water for food, water for people, and water for nature), and consultations through water networks. By the end of the Second World Water Forum the water vision process had produced 14 regional vision reports, 27 sector and topical reports, and two major works:

  • World Water Vision Commission Report: A Water Secure World (World Commision on Water for the 21st Century, 2000)
  • World Water Vision: Making Water Everybody's Business (William J. Cosgrove and Frank R. Rijsberman, 2000)

The World Water Vision statement presented in The Hague was as follows:

"Our vision is a world in which all people have access to safe and sufficient water resources to meet their needs, including food, in ways that maintain the integrity of freshwater ecosystems. The Vision exercise's ultimate purpose is to generate global awareness of the water crisis that women and men face and of the possible solutions for addressing it. This awareness will lead to the development of new policies and legislative and institutional frameworks. The world's freshwater resources will be managed in an integrated manner at all levels, from the individual to the international, to serve the interests of humankind and planet earth-effectively, efficiently, and equitably."

The World water Vision noted that the global community faces numerous resource challenges as a result of growing population and mismanagement of existing resources: water scarcity, lack of access to adequate water supplies, deteriorating water quality, degradation of land, fragmentation of water management, and a decline of financial resources all contribute to the crisis. To address these and other challenges, the World Water Vision calls for an holistic approach to management that recognizes the interdependence of land and water use decisions, that economic and social decisions made on a sectorial and fragmented basis affect ecosystems and the hydrologic cycle, and that decisions made at the national, regional and local levels are interrelated.

The actions called for by the World Water Vision include (1) involving all stakeholders in integrated water resources management, (2) moving to full-cost pricing of water services, (3) increasing public funding for research and innovation, (4) increasing cooperation in the management of international river basins, and (5) massively increasing investments in water.


The Third World Water Forum will be held in Kyoto, Japan on March 16-23, 2003. ( See www. world.water-forum3.com.) The goals of this Forum are to build on the World Water Vision and gain commitments of concrete actions. The organizers are already working to set up regional meetings to better define regional problems and solutions and to monitor progress in implementing commitments already made. A Virtual World Water Forum has been established on the Internet and will be launched at the "Kickoff Meeting" of the Forum in early June 2001. The Third World Water Forum will provide an opportunity for technical and regional organizations to present their perspectives. The impacts of climate change are among the issues that the organizers would like to discuss as it was not covered at the Second Forum.

During the next two years there will be a number of regional and global meetings that will make statements on water resources. These include, among many others, the Fourth Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management (Foz do Iguacu, Brazil, September 2001, International Meeting on Freshwater ("Dublin + 10") (Bonn, Germany, November, 2001, and the World Summit on Sustainable Development ("Rio + 10) (South Africa, late 2002). The coordination and reporting of results from these meetings in a form useful to the Third World Water Forum is a formidable task but one which must be done.

EPA Defines Green Engineering

Dr. Barbara Karn of the U.S EPA, Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Research, Environmental Engineering Research Division, presented EPA's perspective on green engineering at the last meeting of the Engineers Forum for Sustainable Development.

Dr. Karn defined green engineering as follows: "Green engineering is the design, commercialization, and use of processes and products, which are feasible and economical, while minimizing: (1) generation of pollution at the source; and (2) risk to human health and the environment. The discipline embraces the concept that decisions to protect human health and the environment can have the greatest impact and cost effectiveness when applied early to the design and development phase of a process or product.

She noted that green engineering has some common principles that pertain to all engineering disciplines (mechanical, electrical, chemical, civil, etc.) "Green" engineers, for example:

  • Design a service rather than a product.
  • Design processes that use no mutagens, carcinogens, heavy metals, endocrine disrupters, persistent toxic substances, or bio-accumulative substances.
  • Determine the composition of our solid waste and where the constituents come from in order to minimize waste.
  • Develop buildings that use less energy and take into account the impacts of materials. In general, these principles include, by design, materials/energy minimization, hazard removal, waste minimization, and concern for the future.

Dr. Karn added that there are four major topics in EPA's Green Engineering program:

  • Education - textbook: Green Engineering: Environmentally Conscious Design of Chemical Processes , and academic workshops;
  • Software - Provides chemical engineers with an integrated risk-based suite of tools for assessing chemical hazards in process design;
  • Industry - Continuing education courses for new and practicing engineers from the conversion of academic materials, methodologies, and case studies.
  • Outreach - Sources, which promote and disseminate green engineering approaches to academia and industry facilitating a continuous flow of information and ideas for new and existing courses, case studies, and process design methodologies are presented.

Ms. Karn also identified six dimensions of industrial ecology. They are: (1) the creation of industrial ecosystems involves closing loops by recycling; (2) balancing industrial input and output to natural ecosystem capacity; (3) dematerialization of industrial output; (4) improving the metabolic pathways of industrial processes and materials use; (5) systemic patterns of energy use; and (6) policy realignment with long-term perspective of industrial ecology (i.e. the role of government with industrial ecology).

She also described the industrial ecology approach to green engineering

  • integrate the individual components to understand total flows and the total system;
  • consider socio-economic components;
  • use environmental accounting techniques;
  • incorporate techniques such as LCA, DfE, I/O

(Contact: Barbara Karn, Ph.D., by phone at 202-564-6824, by e-mail at Karn.barbara@epa.gov, or to to the website at www.epa.gov/ncerqa)