2004Cambridge University Press eBooksRequires access

Zero waste, zero emissions

Marquita K. Hill

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

“The time has come for humankind not to expect the Earth to produce more, but rather to do more with what the Earth already produces.” Belgium industrialist, Gunter Pauli How can we speak of zero waste or zero emissions if, as you learned earlier no process is 100% efficient? The answer is that zero waste is a philosophy, one that says there is no waste: what we call “waste” or “pollutant” is really a useful resource. This philosophy recognizes too that, if we aspire to reduce waste by 100%, we accomplish more than if our goal was 40% or 80%. Sections I to III below emphasize dematerialization , reducing the quantities of materials we use. Section I asks how well we are doing in reducing waste and pollution, and looks at the waste that the United States produces. Section II discusses industrial ecology , a discipline with the goal of enmeshing industrial society into the environment. It also raises the idea of increasing our efficiency in resource use 4-fold, perhaps as much as 10- to 20-fold. Section III examines tools useful in working toward zero waste, including life-cycle assessment (LCA) and design for the environment (DfE). Other tools too point toward ways to reduce use of resources: servicizing and product stewardship . Section IV takes us to detoxification ; that is, changing the chemicals we use and how we produce them, “green chemistry.” The intention is to reduce chemical risk to humans and the environment. Finally, Section V asks, is there progress toward zero waste?

About this research paper

What this paper is about

“The time has come for humankind not to expect the Earth to produce more, but rather to do more with what the Earth already produces.” Belgium industrialist, Gunter Pauli How can we speak of zero waste or zero emissions if, as you learned earlier no process is 100% efficient? The answer is that zero waste is a philosophy, one that says there is no waste: what we call “waste” or “pollutant” is really a useful resource. This philosophy recognizes too that, if we aspire to reduce waste by 100%, we accomplish more than if our goal was 40% or 80%. Sections I to III below emphasize dematerialization , reducing the quantities of materials we use. Section I asks how well we are doing in reducing waste and pollution, and looks at the waste that the United States produces. Section II discusses industrial ecology , a discipline with the goal of enmeshing industrial society into the environment. It also raises the idea of increasing our efficiency in resource use 4-fold, perhaps as much as 10- to 20-fold. Section III examines tools useful in working toward zero waste, including life-cycle assessment (LCA) and design for the environment (DfE). Other tools too point toward ways to reduce use of resources: servicizing and product stewardship . Section IV takes us to detoxification ; that is, changing the chemicals we use and how we produce them, “green chemistry.” The intention is to reduce chemical risk to humans and the environment. Finally, Section V asks, is there progress toward zero waste?

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

“The time has come for humankind not to expect the Earth to produce more, but rather to do more with what the Earth already produces.” Belgium industrialist, Gunter Pauli How can we speak of zero waste or zero emissions if, as you learned earlier no process is 100% efficient? The answer is that zero waste is a philosophy, one that says there is no waste: what we call “waste” or “pollutant” is really a useful resource. This philosophy recognizes too that, if we aspire to reduce waste by 100%, we accomplish more than if our goal was 40% or 80%. Sections I to III below emphasize dematerialization , reducing the quantities of materials we use. Section I asks how well we are doing in reducing waste and pollution, and looks at the waste that the United States produces. Section II discusses industrial ecology , a discipline with the goal of enmeshing industrial society into the environment. It also raises the idea of increasing our efficiency in resource use 4-fold, perhaps as much as 10- to 20-fold. Section III examines tools useful in working toward zero waste, including life-cycle assessment (LCA) and design for the environment (DfE). Other tools too point toward ways to reduce use of resources: servicizing and product stewardship . Section IV takes us to detoxification ; that is, changing the chemicals we use and how we produce them, “green chemistry.” The intention is to reduce chemical risk to humans and the environment. Finally, Section V asks, is there progress toward zero waste?

Key concepts: Zero (linguistics), Zero emission, Zero waste, Zero-point energy, Environmental science, Physics, Waste management, Engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Zero waste, zero emissions — Research Paper | ScholarLens