Marteel-Parrish, A., Abraham, M.A.
Green Chemistry and Engineering
A Pathway to Sustainability
2014
Print ISBN: 978-0-470-41326-5 (Also available in a variety of electronic formats)
Reniers, G.L., Sörensen, K., Vrancken, K. (eds.)
Management Principles of Sustainable Industrial Chemistry
Theories, Concepts and Industrial Examples for Achieving Sustainable Chemical Products and Processes from a Non-Technological Viewpoint
2013
Print ISBN: 978-3-527-33099-7 (Also available in a variety of electronic formats)
Greene, J.P.
Sustainable Plastics
Environmental Assessments of Biobased, Biodegradable, and Recycled Plastics
2014
Print ISBN: 978-1-118-10481-1 (Also available in a variety of electronic formats)
Rajagopal, R.
Sustainable Value Creation in the Fine and Speciality Chemicals Industry
2014
Print ISBN: 978-1-118-53967-5 (Also available in a variety of electronic formats)
Centi, G., Perathoner, S. (eds.)
Green Carbon Dioxide
Advances in CO2 Utilization
2014
Print ISBN: 978-1-118-59088-1 (Also available in a variety of electronic formats)
Edited by David J. Constable and Concepción Jiménez-González
Volume 11: Green Metrics
All books published by Wiley-VCH are carefully produced. Nevertheless, authors, editors, and publisher do not warrant the information contained in these books, including this book, to be free of errors. Readers are advised to keep in mind that statements, data, illustrations, procedural details or other items may inadvertently be inaccurate.
Library of Congress Card No.: applied for
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Bibliographic information published bythe Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at <http://dnb.d-nb.de>.
© 2018 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Boschstr. 12, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
All rights reserved (including those of translation into other languages). No part of this book may be reproduced in any form – by photoprinting, microfilm, or any other means – nor transmitted or translated into a machine language without written permission from the publishers. Registered names, trademarks, etc. used in this book, even when not specifically marked as such, are not to be considered unprotected by law.
Print ISBN: 978-3-527-32644-0
ePDF ISBN: 978-3-527-69526-3
ePub ISBN: 978-3-527-69527-0
Mobi ISBN: 978-3-527-69525-6
Nicholas D. Anastas
US Environmental Protection Agency
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
5 Post Office Square
Boston, MA 02109-3912
USA
John Andraos
CareerChem
504-1129 Don Mills Road
Toronto, ON M3B 2W4
Canada
Ana Isabel Carvalho
University of Lisbon
Instituto Superior Técnico
Centre for Management Studies (CEG-IST)
Av. Rovisco Pais
1049-001 Lisboa
Portugal
David J.C. Constable
ACS Green Chemistry Institute 1155 16th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036
USA
Stephen C. DeVito
US Environmental Protection Agency
Data Quality and Analysis Branch
Toxics Release Inventory Program
Mail code 7410M
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
USA
Michael A. Gonzalez
Emerging Chemistry and Engineering Branch
Land and Materials Management Division
Life Cycle Assessment Center of Excellence
and
US EPA Office of Research and Development
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive MS 483
Cincinnati, OH 45268
USA
Lauren Heine
Northwest Green Chemistry
8108 S Krell Ridge
Spokane, WA 99223
USA
Andrei Hent
University of Toronto
Department of Chemistry
80 St. George St.
Toronto, ON M5S 3H6
Canada
Volker Hessel
Eindhoven University of Technology
Micro Flow Chemistry and Process Technology
Laboratory of Chemical Reactor Engineering
P.O. Box 513
5600 MB Eindhoven
The Netherlands
Concepción Jiménez-González
GlaxoSmithKline
Global Manufacturing and Supply
5 Moore Dr
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3398
USA
John Leazer
US Food & Drug Administration
Northeast Food and Feed Laboratory 158-15 Liberty Avenue
Jamaica, NY 11433
USA
Tânia Pinto-Varela
University of Lisbon
Instituto Superior Técnico
Centre for Management Studies (CEG-IST)
Av. Rovisco Pais
1049-001 Lisboa
Portugal
Qi Wang
Eindhoven University of Technology
Micro Flow Chemistry and Process Technology
Laboratory of Chemical Reactor Engineering
P.O. Box 513
5600 MB Eindhoven
The Netherlands
Margaret H. Whittaker
ToxServices LLC
1367 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
USA
John M. Woodley
Technical University of Denmark (DTU)
Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering
Søltofts Plads
2800 Lyngby
Denmark
Lihua Zhang
Eindhoven University of Technology
Micro Flow Chemistry and Process Technology
Laboratory of Chemical Reactor Engineering
P.O. Box 513
5600 MB Eindhoven
The Netherlands
and
Kunming University of Science and Technology
Faculty of Metallurgical and Energy Engineering
650093 Kunming
China
Although there has been much activity in sustainability, green chemistry, and engineering since we started working in these areas in the early 1990s, there is still considerably more progress that needs to be made. While it is true that there has been a significant amount of research into more sustainable chemistries and processes, there is continuing debate about how to measure sustainability.
The reason for the continuing debate in part stems from the origins of green chemistry and engineering. Green chemistry and engineering initially stemmed from general principles that were intended to prompt people to proactively think about how to develop more sustainable products and processes in a way that avoided increased regulations. However, the principles lacked a standard structure to measure success. In other words, there were no rigorous scientific frameworks to evaluate aims and progress. This is not uncommon in many new fields of science and technology, and typically these frameworks evolve over time as the field matures.
Thankfully, there has been considerable progress and there is now a deeper more precise understanding of what is meant by “green chemistry” and “green engineering.” Even with the progress to date, there is still much work to be done. Sustainability, green chemistry, and green engineering are inherently complex concepts in which a single metric approach is not only insufficient but also misleading, and a multivariate approach is required. If several aspects of sustainability are not simultaneously assessed, one runs the risk of taking the wrong decision by missing trade-offs, ignoring other impacts, or miscalculating the comprehensive sustainability impacts and benefits associated with a process, product, or service.
Unfortunately, not everyone is comfortable with or trained in using a multivariate approach. Thus, some researchers still either claim that it is impossible to assess the sustainability profile of something or insist that taking a single metric approach is valid. We understand the allure of a single mythical metric that would easily, accurately, and precisely guide all decisions as in a “A is better than B” white and black outcome. It is enticing to justify new innovations focusing on a single metric (e.g., global warming potential) forgetting about other effects that may be trade-offs (e.g., toxicity, water scarcity). However, complex, interrelated systems are rarely simple, and designing processes and products is inherently complex, requiring a rigorous, systematic, and systemic approach. In addition, the potential environmental, health, and safety implications make it essential to evaluate different impacts, particularly as they are closely interrelated. To truly drive more sustainable chemical processes, it is imperative to evaluate them from a systems standpoint, which necessarily calls for a range of complementary metrics.
Given the inherent complexity, the communication of green chemistry metrics for effective use is an ongoing challenge that will require continuous attention, as one can easily either overcomplicate or oversimplify the results. All of this can be overwhelming, and could drive any organization to play catch up with developments in the external environment. With additional developments in artificial intelligence, machine learning, data analytics, and data visualization, we expect that some of the challenges of using and communicating sustainability metrics will be solved in due course. In the meantime, as the application of green chemistry and engineering metrics becomes more ingrained in standard processes, it helps to have examples of application.
Our motivation to work on this book is precisely to highlight the evolution of green chemistry and engineering metrics, including practical examples of a multivariate approach. We aim to provide a survey of the current approaches, particularly focusing on application examples of the robust use metrics. This survey could be used as a baseline for the next generation of sustainability metrics that may benefit from more developed data analytics and visualization. We hope that the examples presented here will motivate the community to continuously improve the quest for more sustainable products and processes.
Green Chemistry Institute American Chemical Society Washington, DC, USA |
David J. Constable |
GlaxoSmithKline Corporate Environment, Health and Safety Raleigh, NC, USA |
Concepción Jiménez-González |