page 1 |
Previous | 1 of 6 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
Section One PLENARY ADDRESS 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING: A PROFESSION IN TRANSITION Don Mackay, Professor Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4, Canada INTRODUCTION This 50th Industrial Waste Conference at Purdue gives us an opportunity and excuse to reflect on progress in Environmental Engineering and speculate on future changes. I suggest that during this 50-year period Environmental Engineering has emerged as a discrete and creditable body of knowledge, practice, and academic study. In this review I present a personal view of the evolution of Environmental Engineering and its present status. I also suggest some future directions and principles which may prove useful, especially in the academic world. Examination of the contents of the first and other early Industrial Waste Conferences shows that the focus was almost totally on the treatment of waterborne organic wastes; for example, from municipal sewage and milk processing operations. The aim was to protect public health and avoid oxygen depletion in receiving waters. In later years more attention has been directed toward toxic metals and organics, toward solid wastes, emissions into air, groundwater contamination, incineration, bioaccumulation and human exposure. The scope has broadened considerably. The Association of Environmental Engineering Professors (AEEP) periodically reviews research activities and directions. These reviews show a similar evolution. In a 1988 review1 Professor Dick Luthy of Carnegie Mellon University pointed out that the 1977 meeting was concerned entirely with water and wastewater treatment. In 1982, research challenges and opportunities were also seen in surface and groundwater. By 1990 a matrix had emerged of air. water, and land environments on one axis, with the disciplinary pursuits of physics, chemistry, and biology on the other. This is a powerful concept which I copy and use later. The key point is that not only has the scope of Environmental Engineering broadened, but that an intellectual territory has become defined. It overlaps with civil, chemical, and other traditional branches of engineering, but ultimately, I believe, it must leave its parents and seek its own identity. Like all separations, this can be painful and difficult. On almost every campus there are squabbles about how environmental science and engineering can best fit into academic structures. There are powerful conservative forces which resist change, especially in times of tight budgets. Industry has been faster to change and has created corporate groups to address its environmental responsibilities. Governments at all levels have environmental departments. Incoming students are eager to enter this field, largely because they see an opportunity to contribute directly to a better society. The civil engineer who calculates stresses in the roof of a hockey arena is a world away from his colleague who studies the microbial breakdown of a chlorinated solvent in groundwater. The chemical engineer who models the catalytic conversion of hydrocarbons is distant intellectually from his colleague who studies hydrocarbon bioconcentration in benthos. Many academic administrations are reluctant to allow environmental engineering to seek independence. Some argue that environmental engineering is not yet mature. Perhaps it should remain part of Civil, Chemical, or Mechanical Engineering. I suspect that many administrations eventually become tired of the squabbling and welcome the relief of separation, adopting a "let them sink or swim" attitude. In my experience most are swimming quite satisfactorily. 50th Purdue industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, 1995, Ann Arbor Press, Inc., Chelsea. Michigan 48118. Printed in U.S.A.
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC199501 |
Title | Environmental engineering, a profession in transition |
Author | Mackay, Don |
Date of Original | 1995 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the 50th Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://e-archives.lib.purdue.edu/u?/engext,45474 |
Extent of Original | p. 1-6 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2009-11-24 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page 1 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Transcript | Section One PLENARY ADDRESS 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING: A PROFESSION IN TRANSITION Don Mackay, Professor Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A4, Canada INTRODUCTION This 50th Industrial Waste Conference at Purdue gives us an opportunity and excuse to reflect on progress in Environmental Engineering and speculate on future changes. I suggest that during this 50-year period Environmental Engineering has emerged as a discrete and creditable body of knowledge, practice, and academic study. In this review I present a personal view of the evolution of Environmental Engineering and its present status. I also suggest some future directions and principles which may prove useful, especially in the academic world. Examination of the contents of the first and other early Industrial Waste Conferences shows that the focus was almost totally on the treatment of waterborne organic wastes; for example, from municipal sewage and milk processing operations. The aim was to protect public health and avoid oxygen depletion in receiving waters. In later years more attention has been directed toward toxic metals and organics, toward solid wastes, emissions into air, groundwater contamination, incineration, bioaccumulation and human exposure. The scope has broadened considerably. The Association of Environmental Engineering Professors (AEEP) periodically reviews research activities and directions. These reviews show a similar evolution. In a 1988 review1 Professor Dick Luthy of Carnegie Mellon University pointed out that the 1977 meeting was concerned entirely with water and wastewater treatment. In 1982, research challenges and opportunities were also seen in surface and groundwater. By 1990 a matrix had emerged of air. water, and land environments on one axis, with the disciplinary pursuits of physics, chemistry, and biology on the other. This is a powerful concept which I copy and use later. The key point is that not only has the scope of Environmental Engineering broadened, but that an intellectual territory has become defined. It overlaps with civil, chemical, and other traditional branches of engineering, but ultimately, I believe, it must leave its parents and seek its own identity. Like all separations, this can be painful and difficult. On almost every campus there are squabbles about how environmental science and engineering can best fit into academic structures. There are powerful conservative forces which resist change, especially in times of tight budgets. Industry has been faster to change and has created corporate groups to address its environmental responsibilities. Governments at all levels have environmental departments. Incoming students are eager to enter this field, largely because they see an opportunity to contribute directly to a better society. The civil engineer who calculates stresses in the roof of a hockey arena is a world away from his colleague who studies the microbial breakdown of a chlorinated solvent in groundwater. The chemical engineer who models the catalytic conversion of hydrocarbons is distant intellectually from his colleague who studies hydrocarbon bioconcentration in benthos. Many academic administrations are reluctant to allow environmental engineering to seek independence. Some argue that environmental engineering is not yet mature. Perhaps it should remain part of Civil, Chemical, or Mechanical Engineering. I suspect that many administrations eventually become tired of the squabbling and welcome the relief of separation, adopting a "let them sink or swim" attitude. In my experience most are swimming quite satisfactorily. 50th Purdue industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, 1995, Ann Arbor Press, Inc., Chelsea. Michigan 48118. Printed in U.S.A. |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page 1