[MUSIC PLAYING]
Humanity is facing a crisis.
If we continue on our current
path of over-consumption
of products and services, Earth
will run out of resources,
thousands of species will
be driven to extinction,
and our planet's climate
will be dramatically altered.
So how do we prevent
devastation from occurring?
How do we meet the
needs of the present
without compromising the
ability of future generations
to meet their own needs?
As we saw in our
previous video, it's
evident that
improving a product's
environmental footprint,
or eco-efficiency,
is not enough to
solve the problem.
We need to move away from
the idea of trading off
the three interacting
dimensions-- that
is, the environment, the
economy, and society.
This triple bottom
line approach will not
address the
sustainability crisis.
Therefore, our concept
of sustainability
needs to change from
relative to absolute.
Understanding the
drivers of impact.
Environmental impact, or I, can
be represented mathematically
as a function of population,
affluence, and technology.
In the field of
sustainability, this
is known as the
IPAT equation. That
is, I equals P times A times T.
An engineer's involvement falls
within the domain of
developing technologies.
However, as we've already
seen, improvements
made in the technology
area may be wiped out
because of the population growth
and the associated affluence
growth.
In addition, it's well-known
that affluence and technology
are coupled, meaning the
eco-efficient technologies we
have developed have
led to us using them
in greater numbers and
larger physical sizes,
as we previously saw in the
examples of LED lights and LCD
TVs.
Therefore, there's a need
for a stronger definition
of sustainability,
one that respects
the planetary boundaries
and other species on Earth.
This can be achieved by
using a sustainability
model in which our
society and its economy
are nested inside Earth's
life support system.
The role of engineers.
We need to understand the
challenge ahead of us.
To begin with, the United
Nations' sustainability goals
have been introduced
as a target.
We also need to understand the
magnitude of the challenge.
First, let's revisit the
IPAT equation and rewrite it
as impact equals population--
the number of people--
multiplied by affluence-- the
number of products per person--
multiplied by technology--
the environmental impact
per product.
According to the UN,
the world's population
is predicted to reach 11.2
billion in the year 2100
and will level off
shortly thereafter.
Material standards of
living will grow strongly
in newly industrialised
countries
such as China and India.
However, environmental
impact has already
exceeded sustainable
levels in many dimensions,
such as greenhouse
gas emissions.
So what exactly
is the challenge?
It turns out that in
order to counterbalance
for the expected growth in
population and affluence,
the technology factor
or environmental impact
per product must decrease
by a factor of up to 20.
Life cycle engineering.
We need a new
engineering paradigm,
or to develop new products and
product technologies-- hence,
life engineering, or LCE, a
set of sustainability-oriented
product development activities
within the scope of one
to several product life cycles.
The aim of these activities
is to achieve sustainable
manufacturing in order
to fulfil the needs
of both present and
future generations
without exceeding the boundaries
of Earth's life support
systems.
A product's life cycle
concerns everything
from its design, manufacturing
process, after-sales usage,
and end-of-life.
In order to initiate
life cycle engineering,
a framework is first introduced.
The main aim of the framework
is to position life cycle
engineering in relation
to sustainability
and other disciplines.
The framework has two
main dimensions, namely,
the scope of
environmental concern
and the scope of
temporal concern,
represented on the y and
x-axes, respectively.
Sustainable development
can be represented
in this graph as an
overarching platform
with a focus on societies
on the environmental scale
and human generations
on the temporal scale.
For instance, industrial
ecology as a discipline
can be represented in this graph
within the scope of economies
and human generations.
In this context, concepts
such as the circular economy
and industrial symbiosis are
also represented at this level.
However, these are
all top-down concepts.
And although they are relevant,
it's not the core function
of what industrial organisations
do as part of their operations.
Below industrial ecology
is life cycle management,
a bottom-up approach
which encompasses
the scope of one company and
a generation of products.
Life cycle management is a
business management approach
that can be used by all types
of businesses and organisations
to improve their
products and services,
and thus the sustainability
performance of the companies
and associated value chains.
Similar to life cycle
management, life cycle
engineering is a
bottom-up approach.
As a function of an
industrial organisation,
it sits in the middle of
the framework with the scope
of environmental concern
of one or multiple products
on the y-axis and the scope
of temporal concern of one
or multiple products
on the x-axis.
Life cycle engineering
allows us to develop products
and services like taking
into account volume growth
and technology changes in
order to systematically reduce
their environmental impact along
each stage of their life cycle.
This ensures that any
problems concerning
environmental sustainability do
not shift from one life cycle
stage to another.
Life cycle engineering
promotes a long-term solution
by addressing the sustainability
problems at their root cause.
This is particularly
important during the designing
of a product where up to 80%
of its environmental footprint
is determined.
By using the tools of
life cycle engineering,
we can identify areas for
improvement in the product's
life cycle, and ultimately
develop environmentally
sustainable products.
The most common life
cycle engineering tools
and techniques include
eco-design, life cycle
assessment, life cycle
costing, and material flow cost
accounting.
Such tools allow for
the quantification
of the environmental
impacts of products
and their associated
costs in order
to identify the
highest improvement
potential along the product life
cycle, also known as hotspots.
For example, if a
product's main footprint
is during the
manufacturing phase
as a result of excessive
energy consumption,
the same product can be
re-engineered by developing
alternative manufacturing
processes that
require less energy
input, thus reducing
the product's associated
environmental impact.
But what is the role of
life cycle engineering
in the use phase
after a product has
been designed and manufactured?
By employing tools
such as eco-labelling
and eco-profiling, customers
can be encouraged to buy more
environmentally friendly
products or minimise
their energy and water
consumption after purchase.
Finally, at the end
of their life cycle,
products need to be managed
in an environmentally friendly
manner.
For this to happen,
products need
to be designed with
an end-of-life view.
Therefore, life
cycle engineering
tries to develop products that
are easy to collect, separate,
reuse, re-manufacture,
and recycle in order
to reduce the number
that end up in landfill.
Is this the solution
to our problems?
On its own, life
cycle engineering
isn't enough to solve the
sustainability crisis.
However, when applied within the
sustainability framework, which
takes into account the
planetary boundaries,
we can develop more sustainable
products and services
that allow us to meet
the needs of the present
without compromising the
ability of future generations
to meet their own needs.
So as you complete your
studies and start your careers,
keep in mind the role you will
play in the IPAT equation.
And always remember this--
there is no Planet
B. This video series
was supported by UNSW Sydney's
Inspired Learning Initiative
and produced by Dr James
Vassie with the engineering
advice of Professor Sami
Kara and Dr Shiva Abdoli.
