Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
material resources, deal rationally with their waste and the requirement for ade-
quate and affordable energy. This dichotomy of desire between compromising
neither commercial success nor environmental stewardship is particularly impor-
tant for the long-term future of the economy. Over the years, a certain brand
of extremist environmentalist thought has sought to demonise industry and com-
merce, decrying them and casting them in the role of enemy. This is scarcely
helpful, for two reasons. Firstly, if any particular industry is actively damaging
the environment, it is hardly likely to react constructively to criticism from its
avowed detractors. Secondly, and perhaps much more importantly, industry in
its widest sense is what has defined humanity from the outset. It accounts for
what our Neolithic ancestors did, trading skins and flint axes across Europe; it
is absurd to suggest that our collective future will be different. The way ahead,
then, is to accept this and chart a course which, if it cannot do the most good
in absolute terms, must settle for doing the least harm. In much the same way
as some have vilified industry, there are those who have held the idea of a self-
sustaining civilisation up to ridicule, arguing that ultimately this would have us
living in mud huts, devoid of all the benefits of science and technology. The one
view is as facile as the other.
The issue of sustainability has gained ever greater significance over recent
years, and this seems set to continue in the future. In 1987, under the aegis
of the World Commission on Environment and Development, the Bruntland
Commission coined a definition of sustainable development. Their concept of
an approach which 'meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs' has received widespread
international acceptance. The main aims have been further developed into social
progress to address the requirements of all, effective environmental stewardship,
the maintenance of high and stable economic growth and levels of employment
and the utilisation of natural resources in a prudent fashion (DETR, 1999). These
goals also tend to offer strong commercial benefits and as a result, businesses
have not been slow to see their potential. In a survey undertaken by the manage-
ment consultancy, Arthur D. Little, of some 500 environmental, health and safety
and other business executives in North American and Europe, 95% believed sus-
tainable development was 'important'. Around 80% said it had significant real
business value, while 70% of the Europeans and more than 55% in the US
reported an active sustainable development approach to strategy and operations
within their organisations, for reasons of perceived business advantage. In this
context, increased efficiency, competitive streamlining, better public relations,
work-force awareness and rising customer expectations were all cited, while the
impact of technological innovation was universally recognised.
In many respects, the move towards integration is inevitable. We cannot
unscrew one leg of our tripod without unbalancing the whole structure. Sustain-
able development inherently demands a cogent view of resource management,
and this implicitly covers materials, waste and energy. It becomes impossible to
consider them in isolation. If waste becomes viewed as raw-material-in-waiting,
one bridge is clear. Between waste and energy, however, the current link is
Search WWH ::
Custom Search