Educating Undergraduate Engineering Students on Sustainability Current Status and a Body of Knowledge Michael Robinson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Abstract The engineering community, both professionals and educators, have an ethical responsibility to address sustainable development in their practice and in the education of future engineers. The American Society of Civil Engineers through the first Fundamental Canon in its Code of Ethics creates an ethical responsibility for civil engineers : Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties. The American Society for Engineering Education creates an ethical responsibility for engineering faculty by stating that Engineering students should learn about sustainable development and sustainability in the general education component of the curriculum as they are preparing for the major design experience. Many educational leaders through endorsement of either the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (426 signatories) or the Talloires Declaration (350 signatories) have created an ethical responsibility upon their institutions to incorporate sustainability into their curriculum. Although a noble goal, the devil is in the details. Sustainability within a curriculum can range from creating student awareness (knowledge of the problem) to providing students sufficient knowledge to incorporate sustainability into their decision making process (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of solutions to the problem). There is no consensus as to what level of student learning on sustainability is optimal. Within engineering programs there may be significant differences among various disciplines. Several attempts have been made by organizations over the last few years to determine the status of sustainability within the engineering curriculum. Despite this there has been increased activity, especially at the graduate level, to provide students educational and research opportunities related to sustainability. However, at the undergraduate level there is much less activity. This paper will provide a review of the current status of sustainability within engineering curriculums in both undergraduate and graduate programs and research programs / centers. More importantly, the paper will provide discussion of a proposed body of knowledge for sustainable engineering at the undergraduate level. A body of knowledge defines both student learning outcomes and associated cognitive levels of learning for each outcome. The idea of defining a body of knowledge for an engineering discipline has seen increasing interest among many engineering disciplines. By proposing a body of knowledge for sustainability in engineering, perhaps better termed sustainable engineering, a more systematic view of what engineering faculty need to do to meet their ethical responsibility to educate tomorrows engineers on sustainability will be achieved.

Key Words Educating for Sustainable Energy, Engineering Curricula

Educating Undergraduate Engineering Students on Sustainability

Current Status and a Body of Knowledge

Michael A. Robinson, Ph.D., P.E.

Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Introduction

Sustainable development is in its broadest sense economic prosperity with social equity

and environmental stewardship. Sustainable development, or the shorter term

sustainability, has received broad support from the engineering community as an essential

component of an engineering curriculum. Incorporating the constraint of sustainable

development into the engineering design process requires a trans-disciplinary systems

approach.1 Consequently, teaching sustainable development within an undergraduate

engineering curriculum presents many significant challenges. The first challenge to an

individual faculty, a department, or to a college in addressing sustainable development

will be to accept an applicable definition of sustainable development. This definition

should specify both the role of the engineer in sustainable development and the role of

sustainable development in the engineering design process.

With a clarifying definition, the next challenge is to define the knowledge and skills

necessary to apply the principles of sustainable development to the engineering design

process. The creation of these educational outcomes, what an engineering student is

expected to know and be able to do, is critical to successfully adding sustainable

development to a curriculum. Unfortunately, within the engineering disciplines the

knowledge and skills of sustainable development are not well characterized. With its

broadest definition of economic prosperity with social equity and environmental

stewardship, sustainable development draws from all the traditional disciplines:

humanities, social sciences, physical sciences, and engineering. So broad is this required

knowledge that the argument for the creation of a new meta-discipline in sustainable

science and engineering has been put forth.2

Inherent in the educational outcomes is an associated level of cognitive achievement

what should an engineering student be able to do with the principles of sustainable

development. Blooms taxonomy of the cognitive learning domain provides a convenient

hierarchy of learning.3 In the development of its body of knowledge, the American

Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has adopted Blooms taxonomy to describe the level

of cognitive achievement within each of its educational outcomes.4 At the lowest of the

six levels within the taxonomy is knowledge a student can recognize, list, and define

the principles of sustainable development. Each additional level requires increases

student learning. For example, the next level within the domain, comprehension, requires

a student to not only recognize and list the principles but to also be able to discuss and

explain them. Identifying the level of cognitive achievement attained within the

undergraduate curriculum is important but may be ultimately be beyond the control of an

individual faculty, department, or college desiring to teach sustainable development.

Client demand, governmental regulation, or limited physical resources may all be more

important in determining what role sustainability has in the undergraduate engineering

curriculum.

Support within the Engineering Community

There is broad support within the academic and engineering community for the inclusion

of sustainable development into the engineering curriculum. The presidents of over 460

American colleges and universities are signatories to the American College and

University Presidents Climate Commitment.5 As signatories they have obligated their

campuses to pursuing climate neutrality for the purpose of re-stabilizing the earths

climate as it relates to global climate change (global warming). For many signatories,

global climate change is the defining challenge for this generation of college students. As

leaders in higher education, the signatories believe colleges and universities have an

ethical responsibility to exercise a leadership role in addressing global climate change.

As a signatory university to the Climate Commitment, a universitys facilities and

activities must be climate neutral, that is create no net greenhouse gas emissions.

Receiving less attention than the campus climate neutrality aspect of the Climate

Commitment is the obligation of signatory schools to integrate sustainability into their

schools curriculum and to make it part of their students educational experience. This

aspect of the Climate Commitment has significant implications on a schools educational

mission in that faculty must provide their students the skills and knowledge needed to

address the challenges of sustainability.6

We believe colleges and universities must exercise leadership in their

communities and throughout society by modeling ways to minimize global warming

emissions, and by providing the knowledge and the educated graduates to achieve

climate neutrality. Campuses that address the climate challenge by reducing global

warming emissions and by integrating sustainability into their curriculum will

better serve their students and meet their social mandate to help create a thriving,

ethical and civil society. These colleges and universities will be providing students

with the knowledge and skills needed to address the critical, systemic challenges

faced by the world in this new century and enable them to benefit from the

economic opportunities that will arise as a result of solutions they develop.

The American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment is not the only

organization advocating the inclusion of sustainable development into the engineering

curriculum. Most professional engineering societies have policy statements, many within

their code of ethics, requiring their members to adhere to the principles of sustainable

development, Table 1. Similar to the Climate Commitment, the American Society for

Engineering Education (ASEE) calls for the inclusion of sustainable development into the

curriculum. Engineering faculty, as members of these engineering societies, have an

ethical obligation to prepare their students to practice engineering within the code of

ethics established by their respective engineering society.

Although neither the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) nor the Institute

for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) specifically address sustainable

development within their code of ethics, they both require protection of the environment.

As sustainable development is established within the engineering profession, the

principles of sustainable development will become the default standard processes by

which engineers protect the environment.

Table 1. Statements relating to sustainable development by various professional

engineering societies.

Engineering Society Statement on Sustainable Development / Sustainability American Society of Civil

Engineers (ASCE)

Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the

public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable

development in the performance of their professional duties. 7

American Society of Mechanical

Engineers (ASME)

Engineers shall consider environmental impact and sustainable

development in the performance of their professional duties. 8

American Institute of Chemical

Engineers (AIChE)

Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and

protect the environment in performance of their professional duties.9

Institute for Electrical and

Electronic Engineers (IEEE)

to accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the

safety, health and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly

factors that might endanger the public or the environment10

National Society of Professional

Engineers (NSPE)

Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable

development in order to protect the environment for future

generations.11

American Society for

Engineering Education (ASEE)

Engineering students should learn about sustainable development

and sustainability in the general education component of the

curriculum as they are preparing for the major design experience. 12

ABET, the national accreditation entity for engineering programs, in its 2007 2008

criteria for accrediting engineering programs includes sustainability as a program

outcome for all engineering programs.13

Criterion 3 part (c) states that a student by the

time of graduation should have an ability to design a system, component, or process to

meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social,

political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.

A Definition of Sustainable Development

The first challenge to teaching sustainable development is the acceptance of a definition

from which the necessary skills and knowledge can be built upon. Sustainable

development as an international issue came to predominance with the issuance in 1987 of

the United Nation report entitled Report of the World Commission on Environment and

Development: Our Common Future.14

The report, commonly referred to as the

Bruntland Report after the Commissions chairman Gro Harlan Bruntland - former Prime

Minister of Norway, introduced the most widely used definition of sustainable

development: Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it

meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to

meet their own needs. The definition, although inspirational as seen by its widespread

adoption, provides no context by which one can interpret the meaning or requirements of

sustainable development.

The report provides further narrative, but with little additional context, on the definition

of sustainable development: sustainable development is not a fixed state of harmony,

but rather a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of

investments, the orientation of technological development, and institutional change are

made consistent with future as well as present needs. And finally within the report the

definition greatly expands upon the intergenerational concept of sustainable development

to meeting the basic needs of all humanity: Sustainable development requires meeting

the basic needs of all and extending to all the opportunity to satisfy their aspirations for a

better life.

The ambiguity and lack of specificity in this definition has challenged many

organizations, including academia, to determine how best to address sustainable

development.

In response to the ambiguity, many organizations have developed alternate definitions of

sustainable development. A definition of sustainable development applicable to

engineering should specify both the role of the engineer in sustainable development and

the role of sustainable development in the engineering design process. The American

Association of Engineering Societies (AAES) proposed an answer to the role of engineers

in sustainable development15

:

1. Engineers must be trained and engaged more actively in political, economic, technical and social discussions and processes to help set a new direction for the

world and its development.

2. Engineers need to use environmentally sensitive and responsive economic tools, in order to integrate environment and social conditions into market economics.

3. In planning for sustainable economic development, engineering should become a unifying, not a partitioning, discipline. Engineers need to look at systems as a

whole, as opposed to looking at fragmented or single parts.

4. Engineers and scientists must work together to adapt existing technologies and create and disseminate new technologies that will facilitate the practice of

sustainable engineering, meet societal needs, improve resource use (including

energy resources) and minimize waste generation.

5. The knowledge, skills and insights of the physical as well as the social sciences, together with all engineering disciplines must be brought together in a new

collaborative partnership.

6. Engineers must cultivate an understanding of environmental issues, problems, risks and potential impacts of what they do.

The civil engineering profession, perhaps more than any other engineering profession,

has addressed the importance of sustainability to the profession. In defining what

sustainable development is to the civil engineering profession, the ASCE adopted the

following definition:

Sustainable Development is the challenge of meeting human needs for natural

resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective

waste management while conserving and protecting environmental quality and the

natural resource base essential for future development.7

In an effort to encourage strengthening and broadening the education of civil engineers in

the principles of sustainable development the ASCE further clarified the role of the civil

engineer in sustainable development. The statement begins to address both the role of the

civil engineer in sustainable development and the role of sustainable development in the

civil engineering design process.

Promote broad understanding of political, economic, social and technical issues

and processes as related to sustainable development. Advance the skills, knowledge

and information to facilitate a sustainable future; including habitats, natural

systems, system flows, and the effects of all phases of the life cycle of projects on

the ecosystem. Advocate economic approaches that recognize natural resources

and our environment as capital assets. Promote multidisciplinary, whole system,

integrated and multi-objective goals in all phases of project planning, design,

construction, operations, and decommissioning. Promote reduction of vulnerability

to natural, accidental, and willful hazards to be part of sustainable development.

Promote performance based standards and guidelines as bases for voluntary

actions and for regulations, in sustainable development for new and existing

infrastructure.16

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in partnership with the AIChE introduced

the concept of green engineering.16

With a much narrower focus than sustainable

development, the EPA and AIChE are focused on educating the next generation of

chemical engineers with the knowledge and skills to design environmentally beneficial

processes. Green engineering is defined as: the design, commercialization, and use of

processes and products that are feasible and economical while reducing the generation of

pollution at the source and minimizing the risk to human health and the environment.17

More recently the definition of green engineering was more broadly defined as green

engineering is transforming existing engineering disciplines and practices to those that

lead to sustainability.18

Perhaps due to the narrower focus of green engineering, the principles of green

engineering have been somewhat formally established: 18

1. Engineer processes and products holistically, use systems analysis, and integrate environmental impact assessment tools.

2. Conserve and improve natural ecosystems while protecting human health and well-being.

3. Use life-cycle thinking in all engineering activities. 4. Ensure that all material and energy inputs and outputs are as inherently safe and

benign as possible.

5. Minimize depletion of natural resources. 6. Strive to prevent waste. 7. Develop and apply engineering solutions, while being cognizant of local

geography, aspirations, and cultures.

8. Create engineering solutions beyond current or dominant technologies; improve, innovate, and invent (technologies) to achieve sustainability.

9. Actively engage communities and stakeholders in development of engineering solutions.

The distinction between the principles of green engineering and of sustainable

development is subtle. Green engineering is seen as a design protocol for engineers to

utilize in moving towards sustainability.19

Although there is a convergence among many constituencies on the importance of

sustainable development the challenge of developing a concise, global definition of

sustainable development remains. This may be expected as the concept is comparatively

new, complex, abstract, and is based on both factual and ethical components. Not

surprisingly, a study of engineering faculty in Australia found significant differences in

the interpretation of sustainability and the importance of the environmental, social, and

economic aspects20

. The authors of the study argue that such differences are inherent in

the concept of sustainable development and can be used within an undergraduate

curriculum to engage students awareness of how and why a diversity of values,

viewpoints and actions might assist them in developing as flexible, creative practitioners,

with the capacity to enact sustainability in the diverse array of professional contexts.20

As with the civil engineering profession, it may be necessary for each engineering

discipline to develop an appropriate definition onto which that discipline can define the

essential skills and knowledge of sustainable development and how they are integrated

into the profession. Because of the varied definitions and how engineering faculty

interpret sustainable development, there is a need to identify a core body of knowledge

that is appropriate to incorporate into the undergraduate engineering curriculum.

A Body of Knowledge for Sustainable Development

A body of knowledge is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that define a discipline.

Within the engineering profession, the effort of the ASCE to develop a body of

knowledge required for professional civil engineering licensure is well recognized. The

ASCE body of knowledge consists of a series of outcomes and an associated level of

cognitive achievement for each outcome. Because sustainable development is a very

broad concept and only recently entered into the engineering curriculum, a body of

knowledge will aid engineering faculty who wish to teach sustainable development.

The draft of a second version of the ASCE body of knowledge includes an outcome on

sustainability, Table 2.21

As currently proposed, an undergraduate civil engineering

curriculum would need to prepare students to apply the principles of sustainability to the

design of traditional and emergent engineering systems. Although the principles of

sustainability are not stated within the body of knowledge, a cognitive level of

achievement is specified. An engineering student must not only be able to recognize, list,

and define the principles of sustainable they must be able to apply those principles to the

design process. An additional achievement level is required for professional licensure,

analysis; this is achieved through work experience.

Table 2. Description of Level of Achievements for Sustainability Outcome in ASCE

BOK 2

Level of Cognitive

Achievement

Knowledge

(achieved in undergraduate

curriculum)

Define key aspects of sustainability relative to

engineering phenomena, society at large, and its

dependence on natural resources; and relative to the

ethical obligation of the professional engineer.

Comprehension

(achieved in undergraduate

curriculum)

Explain key properties of sustainability, and their

scientific bases, as they pertain to engineered works and

services.

Application (achieved in

undergraduate curriculum)

Apply the principles of sustainability to the design of

traditional and emergent engineering systems.

Analysis (achieved through

work experience)

Analyze systems of engineered works, whether

traditional or emergent, for sustainable performance.

The broad definition of sustainable development as economic prosperity with social

equity and environmental stewardship creates the broadest body of knowledge

encompassing much of the liberal arts and sciences. A former president of Cornell

University argues for sustainability as the ultimate liberal art (and science) and

contends that students should have significant exposure to the sciences of geology,

natural resources, ecology, and climatology; some understanding of social interaction,

sociology, economics, and history; some extensive familiarity with the issues of human

inquiry, self-reflection, and moral consideration; and some review of the practical arts of

technical discovery and invention.22

This view moves sustainable development away

from an educational objective in the engineering curriculum and towards its own

engineering discipline.

Over time sustainable engineering may grow into its own engineering discipline. Amid

increasing citizen concern over the impact pollution was having on the environment, the

creation and growth of the EPA and the development of federal environmental

regulations, environmental engineering emerged as a distinct engineering profession.

Within the field the masters degree has always been considered the first professional

degree traditionally building upon an undergraduate education in civil engineering. Until

recently, there were few programs that offered a bachelors degree in environmental

engineering but within the profession there is an effort for an undergraduate degree in

environmental engineering being the preferred path into the graduate degree. This will

further solidify environmental engineering as its own discipline. Within the field of

sustainable development, sustainable engineering may follow a similar path and emerge

as a distinct engineering discipline.

Sustainable development in its ambiguity and its emphasis on social equity creates a

significant challenge to engineering education. Much of what many view as sustainable

development is based on values open to valid ideological interpretation. For example, for

some sustainable development is synonymous with limiting consumption of resources or

providing access to humanitys basic needs. This social equity aspect of sustainable

development is present in how engineering programs address sustainable development.

Engineering programs emphasizing a project-based learning to sustainable development

often partner with organizations such as Engineers Without Borders.23,24,25

These projects

in developing countries are tremendously rewarding and should be highly recommended

for what they can offer: a cultural awakening to the lack of basic human needs that a

large percentage of the worlds population experience daily. They do not provide, in most

cases, a rigorous background in the principles of sustainable development.

The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering addressed the need

to include sustainable development within the engineering curriculum.26

Their

recommended changes and key issues agree with many other such efforts and are

provided as a summary work. Among their recommendations were to modify the general

undergraduate engineering curriculum to:

include additional environmental studies.

broaden conventional engineering education by introducing relevant subjects from other disciplines such as the social sciences, economics, law, and even politics.

make life cycle analysis and design the basis for sustainable engineering practice.

adapt conventional economics and traditional system analysis courses to be more applicable to sustainable development.

Among the key issues they recommended to be covered were:

resource constraints and conservation

environmental management and policy

waste prevention and minimization environmental economics and law

alternative resources and approaches

political and social impacts

cleaner production knowledge based alternatives

Recognizing the practicality of limited credit hours in most engineering curriculums the

Academy concluded that Some of this material can only be touched upon and detailed

studies have to be left for development at post-graduate level.27

To better define the body of knowledge a review of existing programs promoting

sustainable development was completed. This review is not comprehensive and indeed

the golden nugget may have been overlooked in this review. In addition, claims of

incorporating sustainable development into engineering curriculums can be overstated

based on the broad and vague definition of sustainable development. For example, a

southwest university claims to have over 160 sustainability-relevant courses across 27

departments in 10 colleges with over 19 centers and programs working on sustainability

research.28

The review provides a glimpse into the approaches engineering programs have

adopted to introduce sustainable development into the curriculum and the topics

considered to be relevant to those efforts.

Several efforts to integrate sustainable development across an undergraduate engineering

curriculum have been documented. An initiative at the University of Texas-El Paso (El

Paso, Texas) sought to permeate the existing curriculum with the concepts of sustainable

engineering so as to educate students with minimal additional credit-hour graduation

requirements.29

Faculty of selected courses were asked to incorporate sustainable

engineering into their courses through class examples, course projects, special topics,

team projects, or homework. The objective of the initiative was to increase students

understanding of 1) environmental issues and the global impact of engineering solutions;

2) the legal framework that guides engineering solutions and protects the environment

and resources; and 3) the need for efficient and effective resource conservation and

energy utilization. Such an approach would be classified in level 1 - knowledge in

Blooms taxonomy of cognitive achievement. Beyond this two specialized elective

courses, Environmental Regulations and Life Cycle Analysis, can be taken to earn a

certificate in green engineering. Unfortunately, a recent search of the Universitys

website found minimal information on the success of this initiative.

Rowan University (Glasboro, New Jersey) has integrated sustainable development into its

unique curriculum by introducing the concept into specific required courses using a

project based learning approach and a capstone international design experience.23

The

freshman course, Issues in Sustainable Development, is intended to increase awareness

about sustainability, to explore appropriate frameworks for thinking about the

institutional foundations of sustainability, to understand different institutional actors

involved in and to understand the environmental impacts of development and the role of

appropriate technologies. The sophomore course, Sophomore Clinic II, is focused on

engineering practice and design through a project to develop a plan to reduce the

universitys greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide) emissions predominantly through energy

analysis. In the junior and senior years sustainability is emphasized through an Engineers

Without Borders project.

Although students graduate with a significant awareness of sustainability (level 1 -

knowledge in Blooms taxonomy) there appears to be no course where students apply the

principles of sustainability to the design of traditional and emergent engineering systems

(level 3 application in Blooms taxonomy). Although the sophomore level course

directly addresses an important aspect of sustainable development it is but an application

of energy and mass balances. As discussed previously within this paper, international

projects as offered in the junior and senior years offer significant educational experiences

to students but often provide little in regards to the technical aspects of sustainable

development.

Within the chemical engineering program at Rowan university additional emphasis has

been placed on the concept of green engineering by integrating the topic throughout the

four-year chemical engineering curriculum. 30

As with the effort at the University of

Texas El Paso the approach was to introduce specific green engineering concepts into

existing courses. In addition to the courses described earlier the students are exposed to a

broader range of topics including life cycle assessment, pollution prevention strategies,

green chemistry, pollution prevention strategies, risk assessment, and pollution

prevention modeling and control.

Stevens Institute of Technology (Hoboken, New Jersey) has developed a Green

Engineering Minor. Courses within the minor include Sustainable Engineering,

Sustainable Energy, and Sustainability: Economics, Ethics and Policy.31

The stated

objectives of the minor are to:

Provide a holistic, systems perspective to the impact of human activity on the environment, including the role of engineering.

Educate students in the concepts of sustainable development and industrial ecology.

Provide insight into sustainability tools and metrics such as life cycle analysis and ecological footprint.

Show how engineering decisions, particular with regard to design, can support sustainability goals.

Develop awareness of the ethical, economic, social and political dimensions that influence sustainability.

Arizona State University (Tempe , Arizona) has developed sustainability into its own

discipline offering through its School of Sustainability a Bachelor of Science in

Sustainability beginning in Fall 2008.32

In addition, the school currently offers graduate

degrees (Masters and Doctorate) in sustainability. The learning outcomes for the

undergraduate program include:

Understand the concepts and methods of environmental economics, ecology, environmental biology, hydrology, environmental chemistry, engineering, earth-

systems management, and other disciplines relevant to the sustainable use of

environmental resources

Apply these concepts and methods to developing sustainable strategies for water, land, air, and urban management at the local to global level.

Evaluate the sustainability of technology, the built environment, and their environmental regulations and policy

Several additional schools are developing graduate programs that address sustainable

development. Rochester Institute of Technology (Rochester, NY) is developing a

Doctorate in Sustainable Production through its Golisano Institute for Sustainability, a

research center focusing on research, education, and technology transfer. Beginning Fall

2008, the program will be a mixture of new courses, such as industrial ecology and

sustainable design, with existing courses in public policy, environmental management,

business, and engineering. The program, target at engineering students, will cover topics

such as life cycle assessment, environmental risk and impact assessment, design for the

environment, pollution prevention, closed loop supply chain management, and product

life assessment.33

Proposed Body of Knowledge

Given the ambiguity and lack of specificity in the definition of sustainable development a

body of knowledge suitable for undergraduate engineering curriculums would prove

useful. The level of achievement specified in the ASCE body of knowledge, students are

able to apply the principles of sustainability to the design of traditional and emergent

engineering systems, is the correct level expected by many of the organizations

advocating the inclusion of sustainability into the engineering curriculum. This initial

effort to develop a body of knowledge is a broad net approach pulling best practices from

many different programs. The body of knowledge should address three themes: the

humanities and social sciences, the physical sciences, and the sustainability sciences.

As previously discussed in this paper, the humanities and social sciences are necessary to

provide students an understanding of the social component of sustainable development.

Humanity courses at many engineering programs often do not directly compliment the

technical component of the curriculum. Students often fulfill their humanities and social

science requirements by completing a hodge-podge of courses that are taken with

minimal thought to their long-term usefulness. A more useful approach to the general

education component would be to thematically link the humanities and social science

courses to the technical curriculum; that thematic link being sustainability. 34

Emory University through its Piedmont Project35

has brought Emory faculty from

multiple disciplines together in a workshop format to develop new courses or modify

existing courses with environmental and sustainability themes. Departments represented

by faculty participation include anthropology, biology, chemistry, environmental studies,

Russian and East Asian languages and cultures, philosophy, religion, English, art history,

mathematics, history, music, women's studies, physical education and dance, economics,

visual arts, neuroscience and behavioral biology, and sociology. This diversity fosters the

merging of the social, economic and environmental aspects of sustainable development.

Courses drawn from the participants in the Piedmont Project are provided as examples of

how sustainable development can be thematically integrated into the humanities, Table 3.

Table 3. Example courses developed through the Piedmont Project at Emory University.

Department Course /

English & ILA:

Romanticism

The Ecological Imagination

English Thoreau for the Twenty-First Century

Utopian literature in environmental perspective

Philosophy Water: In Science, Philosophy and Literature

Spanish / Portuguese The Brazilian Rain Forest:

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Environmental Issues

Visual Arts Sculpture: Ecologically based sculpture and contemporary

environmental art

The underpinning sciences of the environment are the physical sciences: chemistry,

biology, and geoscience. Fundamental to understanding sustainable development is

knowledge of the natural ecological systems and the interconnected complexities of the

natural and built environments. Unfortunately, many engineers graduate with no other

science course except chemistry. Exposure to the sciences should be expanded to include

geoscience and biology. A rigorous course in environmental science could serve as a

substitute to individual courses. Topics students should learn include ecological systems,

biogeochemical cycles (carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous), the hydrologic cycle, and

species interactions and biodiversity.

The sustainability sciences are the areas of knowledge that constitute the principles of

sustainable development. Among the topics within the sustainability sciences are

contextual sustainable development, environmental impact assessment, environmental

economics and accounting, environmental management and indicators, natural resource

accounting, evaluation of environmental impacts, and environmental and social

assessments and methodologies and life cycle assessments.

Many of the programs previously reviewed in this paper include, as they should, some

exposure to life cycle assessment. Environmental life cycle assessment is a systematic

analysis of the environmental burdens associated with a product, process, or activity by

determining the energy, materials, and wastes from cradle-to-cradle (recyclability) and to

evaluate and implement opportunities for improvement. Life cycle assessments are

necessary to prevent environmental impacts from being shifted upstream to raw material

suppliers or downstream to customers, that is to other stages of its life cycle.

Life cycle assessment, or alternatively analysis, is a critical tool used in industry to

measure environmental performance and increasingly to determine sustainability. A life

cycle assessment consists of four components:36

1. Goal Definition and Scoping - Define and describe the product, process or activity. Establish the context in which the assessment is to be made and identify

the boundaries and environmental effects to be reviewed for the assessment.

2. Inventory Analysis - Identify and quantify energy, water and materials usage and environmental releases (e.g., air emissions, solid waste disposal, waste water

discharges).

3. Impact Assessment - Assess the potential human and ecological effects of energy, water, and material usage and the environmental releases identified in the

inventory analysis.

4. Interpretation - Evaluate the results of the inventory analysis and impact assessment to select the preferred product, process or service with a clear

understanding of the uncertainty and the assumptions used to generate the results.

Common topics covered in a course on life cycle assessment (LCA) are shown in Table

4.37

The topics are from a 15-week multidisciplinary environmental life cycle analysis

course taught at Virginia Tech. Because of their complexity and extensive data

requirements, most life cycle assessments of multi-dimensional engineering problems

require the use of commercial software. The instructors at Virginia Tech made use of

SimaPro, the most widely used commercial life cycle software. Unfortunately, the

software requires significant up-front learning by students and presented a challenge to

the course instructors. However, the use of such software is essential to engineering

students understanding LCA.

Table 4. Topics covered in upper-level engineering course on life cycle analysis at

Virginia Tech during the Spring 2006 semester.

Introduction

Week 1

Product Life Cycle, Materials

Selection and Design

Weeks 2 through 7

Life Cycle Analysis

Week 8 through 15

product life cycle

life cycle analysis

environmental impacts

extraction

manufacturing/processing

packaging

transportation/distribution

use

end-of-life / recycling / landfill / incineration

materials selection

product design

process design

design for environment

life cycle analysis framework

life cycle methods and software

inventory analysis

impact assessment

data location and integrity

sensitivity snalysis

LCA interpretation

LCA weighting

LCA limitations

life cycle cost analysis

six sigma, lean manufacturing

In some ways the life cycle assessment embodies much of the knowledge needed to apply

the principles of sustainability to the design of traditional and emergent engineering

systems. For example, the impact assessment stage of the LCA requires knowledge of the

physical sciences. Although application of a LCA is complex and requires the use of

commercial software, the concept provides an excellent educational avenue to explore

sustainable development.

Conclusion

Sustainable development is in its broadest sense is economic prosperity with social equity

and environmental stewardship. The ambiguity and lack of specificity in this definition

will challenge engineering faculty to determine how best to include sustainable

development into the engineering curriculum. There is broad support for its inclusion

ranging from professional engineering societies to ABET. The ASCE has within the

second draft of its body of knowledge set the bar for the level of achievement that

students must obtain they must be able to apply the principles of sustainability to the

design of traditional and emergent engineering systems. This corresponds to the

application level of cognitive achievement in Blooms taxonomy. Many of the

engineering programs reviewed do not achieve this cognitive level within their

undergraduate engineering curriculum.

To achieve this cognitive level of achievement will require exposure to the social,

economic, and environmental aspects of sustainable development. Thematically linking

the humanities and social sciences to the technical curriculum can provide courses that

meet the humanities requirement of the engineering curriculum while broadening the

students view of sustainability. Additional coverage of the physical sciences, especially

biology and geoscience, will be required. Students will also require exposure to the

principles of sustainable development. Perhaps unifying the concept of sustainable

development for an engineer is the life cycle assessment. Its application to an engineering

project embodies much of the knowledge previously discussed.

Bibliography

1. Vest, Charles M. (2006) Educating Engineers for 2020 and Beyond, The Bridge, Volume 36, Number 2.

2. Mihelcic, James R. et al. (2003) Sustainability Science and Engineering: The Emergence of a New Metadiscipline, Environmental Science and Technology,

Volume 37, No 23, pp. 5314-5324.

3. Krathwohl, David R. (2002) A Revision of Blooms Taxonomy: An Overview.

Theory into Practice, Volume 41, No. 4, pp. 212-218.

4. Welch, Ronald et al. (2006) Assessing Current Programs Against the New BOK 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings, Chicago, Illinois,

June 18-21, 2006.

5. American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment website. Retrieved January 2, 2008 from http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org.

6. American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment website. Retrieved January 2, 2008 from

http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/html/

commitment.php.

7. American Society of Civil Engineers (1996) ASCE Code of Ethics. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from http://www.asce.org/inside/codeofethics.cfm.

8. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (2006) ASME Code of Ethics of Engineers. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/

Governance/3675.pdf.

9. American Institute of Chemical Engineers (2003) AIChE Code of Ethics. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from http://www.aiche.org/About/Code.aspx.

10. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (2006) IEEE Code of Ethics. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from http://www.ieee.org/portal/pages/iportals

/aboutus/ethics/code.html.

11. National Society of Professional Engineers (2007) Code of Ethics for Engineers. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from

http://www.nspe.org/ethics/Code-2007-July.pdf

12. American Society for Engineering Education (1999) ASEE Statement on Sustainable Development Education. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from

http://www.asee.org/ab out/Sustainable _Development.cfm.

13. ABET, (2007) Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. Retrieved January 3 from http://www.abet.org/.

14. Brundtland, Gro Harlem, (1987) United Nations World commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future. Toronto, Ontario: Oxford

University Press.

15. Vanegas, J. A., A.R. Pearce, and S.J. Bosch, (2002). An Engineering Undergraduate/Graduate Course on Sustainable Design and Construction,"

Proceedings, Engineering Education and Sustainable Development Conference,

Delft, the Netherlands, October 24-26.

16. American Society of Civil Engineers (2007) The Role of the Civil Engineer in Sustainable Development ASCE Policy Statement 418, Retrieved January 3,

2007 from http://www.asce.org/pressroom/news/policy_details.cfm?hdlid=60.

17. Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://www.epa.gov/oppt/greenengineering/.

18. Abraham, Martin and Nhan Nguyen. (2004) Green Engineering: Defining the Principles, Environmental Progress, Volume 22, No. 4, pp. 233 236.

19. Zimmerman, Julie Beth (2005) Sustainable Development through the Principles of Green Engineering in Frontiers of Engineering: Reports on Leading-Edge

Engineering from the 2005 Symposium. The National Academies Press.

Washington, D.C. pp 5357.

20. Carew, A.L. and C.A. Mitchell. (2008) Teaching sustainability as a contested concept: capitalizing on variation in engineering educators conceptions of

environmental, social and economic sustainability. Journal of Cleaner

Production, Volume 16, pp. 105 115.

21. Lynch, Daniel, W. Kelly, M. Jha, and R. Harichandran. (2007) Implementing Sustainability in the Engineering Curriculum: Realizing the ASCE Body of

Knowledge. Proceedings of the 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition,

Honolulu, Hawaii, June 24-27, 2007.

22. Rhodes, F. T. (2006) Sustainability: the Ultimate Liberal Art. The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 20, 2006.

23. Sukumaran, B. et al. (2004) A Sustained Effort for Educating Students about Sustainable Development, Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for

Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah,

June 20-23, 2004.

24. Gordon, R. et al. (2006), Rice University Engineers Without Borders: Training the International Engineer, 9th International Conference on Engineering

Education, San Juan, Puerto Rico, July 23 28, 2006.

25. Bielefeldt, A.R. (2003), "Capstone Environmental Design Course Incorporating Sustainable Projects." American Society of Engineering Education Conference

and Exposition. Nashville, Tennessee, June 22-25, 2003.

26. The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, 1997, Report by the Joint Sub-Committee on Education and Sustainable Development.

Retrieved January 5, 2008 from http://www.atse.org.au/index.php?sectionid=582.

27. Fogg, P. (2006) The Sustainable University. The Chronicle of Higher Education October 20, 2006.

28. University of Arizona website (2008) Retrieved January 19, 2008 from http://www.sustainability.arizona.edu/academicresources/.

29. Turner, C.D., W. Li., amd A. Martinez. (2001), "Developing Sustainable Engineering across a College of Engineering." Proceedings of the 2001 American

Society of Engineering Education Conference and Exposition. Albuquerque, New

Mexico. June 24-27, 2001.

30. Slater, C.S. et al. (2005). Expanding the Frontiers in Green Engineering Education. Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition,

Portland, Oregon. June 12-15, 2005.

31. Stevens Institute of Technology 2007 2008 Catalog. Retrieved January 18, 2008 from http://www.stevens.edu/catalog/2007_2008_Catalog/soe_ugrad_pgms.html.

32. Arizona State University School of Sustainability. Retrieved January 5, 2008 from http://schoolofsustainability.asu.edu/.

33. Rochester Institute of Technology. Retrieved January 5, 2008 from http://www.sustainability.rit.edu/education.html.

34. Kelly, W.E. (2008) General Education for Civil Engineers: Sustainable Development. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and

Practice, Vol. 34, No.1, pp. 7383.

35. Eisen, A. and P. Barlett. (2006) The Piedmont Project: Fostering Faculty Development Toward Sustainability. The Journal of Environmental Education,

Vol. 38, no.1, pp. 25-36.

36. Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) (2006) Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Practice. Prepared for the U.S. EPA - EPA/600/R-

06/060

37. Richter, D., S. McGinnis, and M. Borrego (2007) Assessing and improving a multidisciplinary environmental life cycle analysis course. Proceedings of the

2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, June 24-27,

2007.

Michael A. Robinson, P.E., Ph.D. is an assistant professor of civil and environmental

engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. He is also the co-director for the

Center for Sustainable Development at Rose-Hulman.