This dissertation is focused on highlighting the importance of end of life on the life-cycle of biopolymers, identifying how compostable biopolymer products are entering waste streams, improving collection and waste processing, and quantifying the impacts that result from the disposal of biopolymers. Biopolymers, while somewhat available to residential consumers, are primarily being used by various food service organizations trying to achieve a variety of goals such as zero waste, green advertising, and providing more consumer options. While compostable biopolymers may be able to help reduce wastes to landfill they do result in environmental tradeoffs associated with agriculture during the production phase. Biopolymers may improve the management for compostable waste streams by enabling streamlined services and reducing non-compostable fossil-based plastic contamination. The concerns about incomplete degradation of biopolymers in composting facilities may be ameliorated using alkaline amendments sourced from waste streams of other industries. While recycling still yields major benefits for traditional resins, bio-based equivalents may provide addition benefits and compostable biopolymers offer benefits with regards to global warming and fossil fuel depletion. The research presented here represents two published studies, two studies which have been accepted for publication, and a life-cycle assessment that will be submitted for publication.
Two main strategies have emerged for integrating sustainability grand challenges. In the stand-alone course method, engineering programs establish one or two distinct courses that address sustainability grand challenges in depth. In the module method, engineering programs integrate sustainability grand challenges throughout existing courses. Neither method has been assessed in the literature.
This thesis aimed to develop sustainability modules, to create methods for evaluating the modules’ effectiveness on student cognitive and affective outcomes, to create methods for evaluating students’ cumulative sustainability knowledge, and to evaluate the stand-alone course method to integrate sustainability grand challenges into engineering curricula via active and experiential learning.
The Sustainable Metrics Module for teaching sustainability concepts and engaging and motivating diverse sets of students revealed that the activity portion of the module had the greatest impact on learning outcome retention.
The Game Design Module addressed methods for assessing student mastery of course content with student-developed games indicated that using board game design improved student performance and increased student satisfaction.
Evaluation of senior design capstone projects via novel comprehensive rubric to assess sustainability learned over students’ curriculum revealed that students’ performance is primarily driven by their instructor’s expectations. The rubric provided a universal tool for assessing students’ sustainability knowledge and could also be applied to sustainability-focused projects.
With this in mind, engineering educators should pursue modules that connect sustainability grand challenges to engineering concepts, because student performance improves and students report higher satisfaction. Instructors should utilize pedagogies that engage diverse students and impact concept retention, such as active and experiential learning. When evaluating the impact of sustainability in the curriculum, innovative assessment methods should be employed to understand student mastery and application of course concepts and the impacts that topics and experiences have on student satisfaction.
In this dissertation, I have synthesized the present state of knowledge and application of uncertainty and variability in ‘attributional’ LCA, and contribute to its quantitative assessment.
Firstly, the present state of addressment of uncertainty and variability in LCA is consolidated and reviewed. It is evident that sources of uncertainty and variability exist in the following areas: ISO standards, supplementary guides, software tools, life cycle inventory (LCI) databases, all four methodological phases of LCA, and use of LCA information. One source of uncertainty and variability, each, is identified, selected, quantified, and its implications discussed.
The use of surrogate LCI data in lieu of missing dataset(s) or data-gaps is a source of uncertainty. Despite the widespread use of surrogate data, there has been no effort to (1) establish any form of guidance for the appropriate selection of surrogate data and, (2) estimate the uncertainty associated with the choice and use of surrogate data. A formal expert elicitation-based methodology to select the most appropriate surrogates and to quantify the associated uncertainty was proposed and implemented.
Product-evolution in a non-uniform manner is a source of temporal variability that is presently not considered in LCA modeling. The resulting use of outdated LCA information will lead to misguided decisions affecting the issue at concern and eventually the environment. In order to demonstrate product-evolution within the scope of ISO 14044, and given that variability cannot be reduced, the sources of product-evolution were identified, generalized, analyzed and their implications (individual and coupled) on LCA results are quantified.
Finally, recommendations were provided for the advancement of robustness of 'attributional' LCA, with respect to uncertainty and variability.
Three dilemmas plague governance of scientific research and technological
innovation: the dilemma of orientation, the dilemma of legitimacy, and the dilemma of control. The dilemma of orientation risks innovation heedless of long-term implications. The dilemma of legitimacy grapples with delegation of authority in democracies, often at the expense of broader public interest. The dilemma of control poses that the undesirable implications of new technologies are hard to grasp, yet once grasped, all too difficult to remedy. That humanity has innovated itself into the sustainability crisis is a prime manifestation of these dilemmas.
Responsible innovation (RI), with foci on anticipation, inclusion, reflection, coordination, and adaptation, aims to mitigate dilemmas of orientation, legitimacy, and control. The aspiration of RI is to bend the processes of technology development toward more just, sustainable, and societally desirable outcomes. Despite the potential for fruitful interaction across RI’s constitutive domains—sustainability science and social studies of science and technology—most sustainability scientists under-theorize the sociopolitical dimensions of technological systems and most science and technology scholars hesitate to take a normative, solutions-oriented stance. Efforts to advance RI, although notable, entail one-off projects that do not lend themselves to comparative analysis for learning.
In this dissertation, I offer an intervention research framework to aid systematic study of intentional programs of change to advance responsible innovation. Two empirical studies demonstrate the framework in application. An evaluation of Science Outside the Lab presents a program to help early-career scientists and engineers understand the complexities of science policy. An evaluation of a Community Engagement Workshop presents a program to help engineers better look beyond technology, listen to and learn from people, and empower communities. Each program is efficacious in helping scientists and engineers more thoughtfully engage with mediators of science and technology governance dilemmas: Science Outside the Lab in revealing the dilemmas of orientation and legitimacy; Community Engagement Workshop in offering reflexive and inclusive approaches to control. As part of a larger intervention research portfolio, these and other projects hold promise for aiding governance of science and technology through responsible innovation.
Chapter 2 discusses the historical management of US air pollution, why CO2 is regulated as an air pollutant, and how the current political framing of climate change as an air pollution problem promotes the use of market-based solutions to reduce emissions but ignores CO2 concentrations. Chapter 3 argues for the need to reframe climate change solutions to include reducing CO2 concentrations along with emissions. It presents the scientific reasoning and technological needs for reducing CO2 concentrations, why direct air capture (DAC) is the most effective NET to do so, and existing regulatory systems that can inform future CO2 removal policy. Chapter 4 explores whether Responsible Innovation (RI), a framework that includes society in the innovation process of emerging technologies, is effective for the ethical research and deployment of DAC; reveals the need for increased DAC governance strategies, and suggests how RI can be expanded to allow continued research of controversial emerging technologies in case of a climate change emergency. Overall, this dissertation argues that climate change must be reframed as a two-part problem: preventing new CO2 emissions and reducing concentrations, which demands increased investment in DAC research, development, and deployment. However, without a national or global governance strategy for DAC, it will remain difficult to include CO2 concentration reduction as an essential piece to the climate change solution.