moving to safer alternatives chemicals, materials, products ken geiser lowell center for sustainable...

23
Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Upload: barnaby-williams

Post on 04-Jan-2016

216 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Moving to Safer AlternativesChemicals, Materials, Products

Ken GeiserLowell Center for Sustainable Production

December 2, 2004

Page 2: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Why Alternatives Assessment?

• We are moving from problem solving to solution making

• Growing consumer demand for safer, cleaner, greener products

• Leading firms and governments are experimenting with assessment tools

• Current tools vary considerably• Little current effort to characterize, compare or

learn from these initial experiences

Page 3: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Why Now?

Problem Oriented

• 1950s Risk Analysis

• 1960s-1980s Risk Assessments

• 1980s-1990s Cost/Benefit Analysis

• 1990s Life Cycle Assessment

Solution Oriented

• 2000s Alternatives Assessment

Page 4: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Foundations

• Alternatives Analysis for Environmental Impact Assessment: Council on Environmental Quality, 1976 (40 CFR 1500)

• Swedish “Substitution Principle”, 1988• Technology Option Analysis: Ashford,

1993• Alternatives Assessment: O’Brien, 2000

Page 5: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

What is Alternatives Assessment?

• A flexible, holistic analysis of alternatives and opportunities that prevent impacts from potentially harmful activities

• Focuses on solutions rather than problems; opportunities rather than inevitabilities

• Drives governments or proponents of an activity to focus on solutions rather than the “acceptability” of potentially harmful activities

• Avoids never-ending discussions of “how risky”

Page 6: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

What do We Want?

We need to be clear about our goals

• Less hazardous (safer) solutions

• Greener solutions

• More ecological solutions

• More sustainable solutions

(Moving away from bads is easier than moving towards goods)

Page 7: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Example: Brominated Flame Retardants

• Finding alternatives to brominated flame retardants (polybrominated diphenyl ethers)

• BFRs—heavily used substance with extensive commercial investments

• BFRs have poorly articulated health risks• The alternative selection is highly varied with no

simple choices• Appropriate alternatives depend on specific

applications

Page 8: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

It’s About Design

• Our world is a “designed place”• Everyday we make design decisions• We are liberated when we see that our

world is designed rather than “given”• Because our world is designed we can

redesign it• Design and redesign are complimentary

processes

Page 9: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

The Design Space

• Designers work within bounded design spaces

• A design space is an area of decision discretion

• Normal design spaces are bounded by cost, performance and manufacturing optimization

Page 10: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Integrating Health and the Environment

• One idea: we are simply adding health and environmental factors as two additional boundary variables (Safer Solutions)

• Another idea: we are seeking to find appropriate matches between efficiency, performance and natural systems (Ecological Solutions)

Page 11: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Selection/De-selection

Design is about selecting/Correction is about de-selecting

Design can be:

• Substance by substance

• Function by function

• System by system

Non-perfect solutions lead to trade offs

Page 12: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Design Models

• Rationalist models: linear problem solving in discrete steps

• Gestalt models: solutions emerging from holistic organizing frameworks

• Behaviorist models: continuous, non-linear processes involving iteration and

feedback loops

Page 13: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Role of Science

• All science has limits– uncertainties, indeterminacies, reductionisms

• Normal science– organized for discovery, not answering questions– accepts only certain kinds of evidence– is separated from “experienced judgment”

• Precautionary science (“appropriate science”) addresses questions, values all evidence and includes wise judgments

• Need to link risk and alternatives science

Page 14: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Types of Assessment Tools

• Lists and Categories

• Sequential screens– negative screens (“no carcinogens”)– positive screens (“easily recycled”)

• Matrix

• Aggregated vs Disaggregated Presentations

Page 15: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Types of Valuation

How are we establishing “values” and “weighting”

• Cultural or subjective

• Dominant vs subordinate values

• Individual vs collective valuation

• Need to consider disparities and inequalities

Page 16: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Nesting Alternatives

Chemicals

Materials

Products

Page 17: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Selecting Chemicals

• Lists– black lists, green lists, “Observation Lists”

• Hazard Assessment Methods– German “Column Model”

– TURI “P2OASys”

• Screening Methods – Dutch “Quick Scan”

• Green Chemistry/ Green Engineering– Principles

Page 18: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Selecting Materials

• Material Assessments– McDonough/Braungart “Material Assessment

Protocols”

– Greenpeace “Plastics Pyramid”

• Material (Substance) Flow Analysis– WRI, “Material Accounts”

– Material Balances

• Materials as systems

Page 19: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Selecting Products

• Design for Environment

• Life Cycle Assessments

• Ecolabel Analyses

• Product Management Systems– Product Take Back

– Recycling and Reuse

• Products vs Services

Page 20: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Questions that Remain

• What about uncertainties?

• What about the limited “time-to-decision” window?

• What about trade-offs?

Page 21: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

What is the Role of the Public?

• Should our models be limited to experts?

• Should our models be so formulistic as to be done by anyone?

• How should “affected parties” participate?

• If every selection has drawbacks, how do we address those who are not “made better off”?

Page 22: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

The Challenge for this Meeting

• Assess the various models and strategies• Identify the various strengths and limits• Identify the criteria for selecting the most

promising models• Select those (or those combinations) that are

most promising• Suggest avenues for future research and

development

Page 23: Moving to Safer Alternatives Chemicals, Materials, Products Ken Geiser Lowell Center for Sustainable Production December 2, 2004

Swedish Product Choice Principle

Persons who pursue an activity or pursue a measure, or intend to do so, shall avoid using or selling chemical products or biotechnical organisms that may involve risks to human health or the environment if products or organisms that are assumed to be less dangerous can be used instead.

- Swedish Environmental Code, 1999