Transitions - Sustainable Design: The Science of Sustainability and Green Engineering - page 85

the cost and the decision would be morally acceptable. At a minimum, the effect
of the lie on future lie-telling would have to be factored into the ratio, as would
other cultural norms.
Another of Kelman's examples of flaws of utilitarianism is the story of two
friends on an Arctic expedition, wherein one becomes fatally ill. Before dying,
he asks that the friend return to that very spot in the Arctic ice in 10 years to light
a candle in remembrance. The friend promises to do so. If no one else knows
of the promise and the trip would be a great inconvenience, the benefit/cost
approach instructs him not to go (i.e., the costs of inconvenience outweigh the
benefit of the promise because no one else knows of the promise). These examples
point to the fact that benefit/cost information is valuable, but care must be taken
in choosing the factors that go into the ratio, properly weighing subjective and
nonquantifiable data, ensuring that the views of those affected by the decision
are considered properly and being mindful of possible conflicts of interest and
the undue influence of special interests. This is further complicated in sustainable
design, since the benefits may not be derived for decades and possibly by people
other than those enduring the costs and risks.
The challenge of green engineering and design is to find ways to manage
environmental risks and impacts in a way that is underpinned by sound science
and to approach each project from a “site-wide” perspective that combines health
and ecological risks with land-use considerations. This means that whatever
residual risk is allowed to remain is based on both traditional risk outcomes
(disease, endangered species) and future land uses (see Fig. 3.2). This is the
temporal perspective at the heart of sustainable design. Even a very attractive near-
term project may not be as good when viewed from a longer-term perspective.
Conversely, a project with seemingly large initial costs may in the long run be
the best approach. This opens the door for selecting projects with larger initial
risks. Examples of site-based risk management include asbestos and lead remedies,
where workers are subjected to the threat of elevated concentrations of toxicants
but the overall benefits of the action are deemed necessary to protect children
now and in the future. In an integrated engineering and design project, a risk
that is widely distributed in space and time (i.e., numerous buildings with the
looming threat to children's health for decades to come) is avoided in favor of
a more concentrated risk that can be controlled (e.g., safety protocols, skilled
workers, protective equipment, removal and remediation procedures, manifests
and controls for contaminated materials, and ongoing monitoring of fugitive
toxicant releases). It even allows a view toward what to do after the useful life of
a building or product (i.e., design for disassembly: Df D).
This combined risk and land-use approach also helps to moderate the chal-
lenge of “one size fits all” in environmental cleanup. That is, limited resources
may be devoted to other community objectives if the site does not have to be
cleaned to the level prescribed by a residential standard. This does not mean that