Advisors Focus on Education, Collaboration, and Planning

by David Brill

According to a draft report issued by its advisory committee in February, the Waste Management Research and Education Institute (WMREI) of The University of Tennessee (UT) should devise a strategic plan, evaluate and possibly increase its efforts in education, and place greater priority on multidisciplinary collaboration.

The advisory committee, drawn from private industry, academia, and state and federal government, met December 11 and 12 to assess the institutes progress and offer overall guidance.

In particular, the committees report referenced evolving opportunities for multidisciplinary collaboration among WMREI, the Joint Institute for Energy and Environment (JIEE), the National Center for Environmental Decision-Making Research (NCEDR), and UTs Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies (CCPCT).

JIEE is a research consortium comprising Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and UT.

NCEDR, housed at UT and administered by JIEE, is a national resource created in 1995 by the National Science Foundation to help decision makers at local, state, and regional levels address complex environmental problems.

CCPCT, an affiliate organization of WMREI, focuses primarily on pollution prevention and waste minimization.

"Weve come a long way, particularly in terms of our interaction with TVA and ORNL," says Jack Barkenbus, WMREI director of policy.

"In large part, that enhanced interaction has come about through the formation of JIEE and NCEDR, both of which are located right down the hall from us."

According to Gary Sayler, WMREIs acting director, an area ripe for collaboration involves the shift in use of biotechnology from pollution remediation to pollution prevention.

"WMREIs research focus--both for policy and biotechnology--needs to shift from strict remediation issues to issues of abatement, pollution prevention, and eventually environmental sustainability," says Sayle, who also serves as director of WMREIs Environmental Sciences Division.

"These themes create an extraordinary opportunity for collaboration."

To nurture such collaboration, WMREI and UTs Center for Environmental Biotechnology will host an international symposium titled "Biotechnology in the Sustainable Environment."

The symposium, slated for April 14-17, will explore where the field of biotechnology is heading and the role regulation and policy will play in its future.

In the area of education, the committee suggested that to remain true to its mission, WMREI should consider extending its outreach beyond student groups and target the general population as well as Tennessee business.

Sayler and Barkenbus envision that the institutes educational programs will capitalize more and more on the use of electronic media.

WMREI researchers have already created a World Wide Web site devoted to recycling and solid waste issues (site address: http://geddi.rtd.utk.edu/tnswep/home.html).

"Education is part of our name and a key component of our overall mission that needs to receive increased emphasis," says Sayler. "But given the level of available resources, were going to have to get creative and capitalize on the electronic network to get our educational messages out."

Sayler says that the institute may use the existing web site as a model for expansion into other areas.

Though WMREIs roster of accomplishments and a funding base that topped $5 million in fiscal year 1994 suggest no lack of vision and guidance, the committee has asked that WMREI produce a more clearly articulated strategic plan.

"To date, our overarching strategy has been tacitly--though clearly--understood by our researchers," says Sayler.

"Based on the boards recommendations, however, we hope to produce a report that clarifies our strategic goals and overall vision for the future."

In addition to citing efforts that should receive greater emphasis, the committee acknowledged the institutes accomplishments in several areas. Among them are:

The Environmental Sciences Divisions collaboration with industry and leading-edge research in use of engineered organisms.

The policy divisions environmental education program, which currently targets students in kindergarten through 12th grade.

Back to the Drawing Board

CCPCT researchers hope to design solutions to the tough pollution problems associated with automobiles.

by Lori Phan

Despite the new-car smell and metallic luster of a pristine automobile poised on a showroom floor, cars, for the most part, are dirty creations.

Beginning with the extraction of metal ores, continuing through manufacture and use, and ending with their disposal at the end of their useful lives, cars and other vehicles--which number more than 146 million on American roads alone--clutter junkyards and landfills and contribute to global warming, acid rain, smog, and ozone depletion.

Nevertheless, few drivers would be willing to surrender their automobiles to help protect the planet.

If we cant count on reducing the overall number of cars on the road, the quickest route to a healthier environment may involve designing and producing cars that are cleaner and greener from the moment they first take shape on a designers computer screen.

"The idea," says Gary Davis, director of The University of Tennessees (UTs) Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies (CCPCT), "is to design pollution out of new automobiles."

CCPCT, an affiliate organization of UTs Waste Management Research and Education Institute, has garnered $750,000 in funding to hep auto manufacturers do just that.

The Life-Cycle Design Project has teamed CCPCT with auto manufacturer Saturn Corporation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a partnership aimed at reducing the life-cycle environmental impacts of automobiles.

The two-year projects funding base reflects $450,000 from EPA, $200,000 from Saturn, and $100,000 from UT.

Eventually, the project will examine ways to help auto designers factor environmental impacts into their overall design decisions when they begin to sculpt the cars of tomorrow.

Grasping CCPCTs project goal may require a brief primer on the various stages of "life-cycle assessment," the process of evaluating and eventually reducing the environmental burdens associated with a product or process through its entire life span.

A life-cycle assessment is composed of three interconnected parts. The first is the inventory, which involves an objective process of quantifying what goes into and comes out of a car as it is manufactured, driven, and discarded.

Inputs in the manufacturing stage, for example, include energy and raw materials. Outputs from that stage include water effluents, airborne emissions, and solid wastes.

Inputs for the operation stage include, among other things, oil and gasoline, while outputs include tail-pipe emissions.

To date, researchers have conducted numerous life-cycle inventories on some of the materials that make up automobiles.

Once the inventory stage has been completed, researchers can then begin the impact assessment stage, which essentially attaches a context or meaning to the inventories in terms of ecological damage or risk to human health over the lifetime of the product.

In simplest terms, the inventory and impact-assessment stages can be reduced to this progression: This is what goes into a car, this is what comes out, and this is what effect those inputs and outputs have on the environment.

The CCPCT project team hopes to push the process on to the third leg in the life-cycle assessment triangle, the product improvement stage, and into a realm where few researchers have gone before.

At this stage, designers will actually begin to make changes in automobile design that will result in net environmental improvements.

"By the time we reach this stage, we know what pollutants automobiles are producing, we know what damage they cause, and we can begin to help designers make changes that will reduce that damage," says Lori Kincaid, CCPCT technical program manager.

But because environmental impacts are often subtle and intricately linked, designing for environmental improvement can prove particularly challenging.

Lets say, for instance, that some lightweight plastics might make a car lighter and more fuel efficient, which reduces environmental impacts during the cars use. These plastics would represent a good material choice, right?

Well, not necessarily.

These plastics may be difficult to recycle, which would make disposal of the automobile more difficult.

"This project will examine numerous design decisions simultaneously and help designers establish, for instance, whether the fuel economy gained by using plastics that are lightweight but difficult to recycle would result in a net environmental gain or loss," says Davis.

But auto designers already face a considerable challenge in meeting federal regulations while designing cars that are functional, economical, and appealing.

Throwing yet another demand their way--that they design cleaner cars--might incline them to hop into their own vehicles, drive away, and never come back.

"The challenge here is to make it as easy as possible for auto designers to value environmental considerations as highly as they value performance, comfort, and price," says Kincaid.

To that end, CCPCT researchers hope eventually to develop a software package that will allow designers to quickly assess the long-term effects of choosing one material over another in designing various components of the automobile.

The process might work this way: An auto designer might have at her fingertips a palette of various materials for use in creating the interior of an automobile, for instance.

Ultimately, the software program might allow the designer to select from a pull-down menu a certain type of recycled plastic for a dashboard or other component of the interior.

From there, the software program might actually compute and quantify the environmental benefits of selecting such a material versus a different type of plastic.

The software, which will be compatible with personal computers and computer-aided-design (CAD) work stations, will allow designers to weigh the environmental gains posed by various materials against cost, appearance, efficiency, performance, and safety regulations.

According toKincaid, the computer program will be the first of its kind to link life-cycle inventories and impact analyses with life-cycle design improvements.

If successful, it may ultimately be used by other auto manufacturers as well as companies producing other products.

Though the project is off and running, Kincaid cautions that several new car models will likely come and go before the software is fully developed and deployed.

"To date, no one has made the transition from assessing a cars impacts to actually tying that assessment to improvements in design," she says.

For Saturn, the project represents a way for the company to hone its competitive edge and maintain environmental leadership in the automotive industry.

Meanwhile EPA, CCPCT, and Saturn regard the project as a way to limit the environmental impacts of automobiles.

For consumers, the project represents a design approach that will afford them the option of purchasing "cleaner" cars that remain comfortable, attractive, and efficient.

Indeed, though future car buyers will still select among a wide range of styles and hues for their new Saturn automobiles, in reality, theyll all drive off the lot in cars that share the same color of green.

For more information, contact Lori Kincaid, CCPCT, The University of Tennessee, 311 Conference Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-4134, or call 865-974-4251.

DOE Confronts its Hazardous Legacy

EERC researchers help DOE probe public attitudes regarding agency efforts to clean up the remnants of its nuclear weapons program.

by Lori Phan

Today, some 50 years after the Manhattan project created the worlds first atomic bomb, many U.S. cities bear the legacy of the nuclear weapons program in the form of contaminated soil. In some cases this soil has scattered to surrounding private properties.

Now that Cold War tensions have eased, the Department of Energy (DOE) has shifted its focus from producing weapons to cleaning up the contamination that remains.

Some of the contaminated sites will be restored under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP), a DOE project initiated in 1974.

A site in St. Louis is among the 46 sites on DOEs cleanup roster scattered throughout 14 states. (The St. Louis site actually comprises two DOE properties separated by several miles.)

All 46 sites are in some way linked to the storage, sampling, processing, machining, or development of weapons, activities that occurred throughout the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s.

According to DOE researchers, theres enoug combined radioactive waste at the FUSRAP sites to cover 460 football fields with a layer of waste 3 feet thick. (Theres enough waste at the St. Louis site alone to fill up Busch Stadium.)

DOE plans to purge all FUSRAP sites of radioactive refuse by 2016 at a cost of around $2.5 billion. To date, 18 of these sites have been totally cleaned up--and 11 others are in the midst of the cleanup process.

Before DOE begins the reme-diation process in St. Louis, however, its taking the time to find out how some of the 7,000 residents living within a one-mile radius of the two DOE properties think DOE should proceed.

Should the agency excavate the waste and treat it on-site? Should the contaminated soil be hauled to hazardous waste dumps in other, less-populous parts of the country? Or, should the agency merely seal off the area and do its best to contain the future spread of contamination?

With those questions in mind, a research team, spearheaded by David Feldman, senior research associate at The University of Tennessees Energy, Environment, and Resources Center (EERC), produced a survey to assess the attitudes and concerns of residents living near the St. Louis FUSRAP site.

One key concern centers on the effects of the hazardous materials on human health.

DOE claims that because of the low level of contamination and current restrictions of uses on the properties, none of the sites poses immediate health risks.

However, not all members of the public agree, including Kay Drey, a local activist and a member of the St. Louis Site Remediation Task Force, a group entrusted by DOE to arrive at the best possible strategy for remediating the St. Louis site.

Drey and other activists insist that the level of contamination at the site is cause for concern, despite DOEs insistence to the contrary.

Dreys skepticism may owe in part to DOEs past record of handling sensitive public-policy issues.

Indeed, until recently, DOE tended to rely on a strategy termed "decide, announce, defend," a scenario whereby DOE managers made decisions in secrecy, announced those decisions to the public, and then defended them if necessary.

According to Chuck Jenkins, a community relations specialist for FUSRAP, the government relied on this approach primarily for national security reasons.

"The old paradigm stems from the governments once-held belief that it had the right and the responsibility to unilaterally make decisions it believed were in the best interest of the nation," says Jenkins.

In the past, for instance, DOE might well have assessed the contamination problem at the St. Louis site, formulated a solution, and put it in motion before offering the public any hint at what its intentions might be.

"Thankfully, DOEs way of thinking has changed significantly in the post-Cold War era," Jenkins adds. "Now, DOE is attempting to nurture public involvement in its decision-making process."

According to David Adler, manager of DOEs St. Louis site, DOEs switch in protocol is essential if DOE wants to move forward with FUSRAP cleanup in a way that enjoys community support.

"DOE has moved to public consensus remedies across the board because it has realized that public support can greatly influence the success of a project," Adler says.

"Were looking to the EERC survey team to help us gauge public opinion on the issue so we can reach consensus on a cleanup strategy."

Part of Feldmans goal in producing the survey was to provide the St. Louis task force, which ultimately will advise DOE on how to proceed, with a tool for assessing public attitudes and concerns.

The survey, created by Feldman and graduate research assistant Ruth Anne Hanahan, was based, in part, on earlier studies examining public opinion at hazardous waste sites.

The surveys three main parts: (1)asked respondents how involved theyve been in DOE public meetings, which DOE convenes about once a month, concerning the St. Louis site; (2) provided information, including projected cost, on the proposed cleanup strategies, which include treatment of the soil and disposal of the remaining contaminants or excavation with on- or off-site disposal; and (3) probed respondents concerns regarding cleanup efforts, including health and environmental risks, cleanup costs, community image, and future land uses.

EERC researchers established a one-mile radius around each of the two DOE properties from which to draw the sample of 1,000 residents.

The survey, which garnered a 20-percent response rate, rendered two principle findings. First, the respondents were most concerned about ground- and surface-water contamination, adequate public involvement in the decision-making process, and the potential health risks associated with contamination.

Of least concern was community image and future land-use restrictions, which many believed already existed.

Second, respondents regarded none of the cleanup options as ideal, and most were concerned with cleanup costs, risks associated with removal of the contaminants, and site safety after the remedy had been carried out.

The two cleanup options most highly regarded by respondents were on-site treatment of the contaminated soil and excavation with off-site disposal.

However, these represent the two most expensive options, with the former costing around $1.3 billion and the latter costing between $580 million (for in-state disposal) and $920 million (for out-of-state disposal).

The message respondents sent? Cost is important, but so is safe drinking water, a healthy community, and a clean environment.

"Respondents seem to be saying that if DOE plans to excavate the contaminated soil, then the agency should ship it out of the community or treat it on-site and ship out the residue," says Feldman. "Conversely, the public doesnt seem to want the contaminated soil excavated if it is safe enough to be left in place and closed off to public access."

In October 1995, Feldman and Hanahan sent the findings to the St. Louis Site Remediation Task Force, which may factor the surveys findings into its recommendations for site remediation.

"We hope to come up with a solution that the community will accept, that is financially feasible, and that will eliminate the threat of contamination," says Tom Horgan, a task force member representing Congressman Jim Talent, in whose district the sites are located. "This survey may help us do that."

The task force hopes to agree on a cleanup strategy by this spring. And DOE hopes to begin cleanup in 1998.

Where the Gas Is Always Greener

EERC and ORNL researchers are building an economic model to help steer future U.S. automobiles toward cleaner fuels and technologies.

by Lori Phan

While some people dream of the color, style, and features of their future cars, environmental economist Jonathan Rubin spends his time pondering how hell fuel his.

Rubin, a research associate at the Energy, Environment, and Resources Center (EERC) at The University of Tennessee (UT), is collaborating with Paul Leiby and other researchers from the Department of Energys Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to help shape a future in which fuel choice extends well beyond regular, premium, or diesel.

Prompted by the Energy Policy Act (EPACT) of 1992, U.S. automobile manufacturers and fuel suppliers are developing alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) and alternative transportation fuels. These vehicles and fuels may help reduce some types of air pollutants,including "greenhouse gases."

The act also seeks to bolster U.S. energy independence by curbing our reliance on imported oil.

Among other things, the act establishes a national goal of replacing 20 percent of current U.S. gasoline and diesel fuel use with cleaner--and more abundant--alternative fuels by 2010.

The candidate alternative fuels include electricity, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), pure methanol, and blends of methanol and ethanol with gasoline.

The EPACT target is an ambitious goal--considering that currently only 3 percent of vehicles on U.S. roads use alternative fuels--and one that prompts a few key questions:

Is the goal feasible? If so, should the government promote compliance, or should the free market alone determine whether Americans are willing to surrender their gas burners and drive AFVs?

Rubin and Leiby have created a simulation model that just might produce the answers.

Their model, the Transitional Alternative Fuels and Vehicles Model (TAFVM), will help determine the viability of EPACTs goal and anticipate the outcomes of various policy options aimed at boosting AFV use.

According to Rubin and Leiby, attainment of EPACTs goal could be hampered by several obstacles, including consumer concern over the reliability of new AFVs, the higher cost of small-scale vehicle production, and the immature state of some vehicle and fuel technologies.

These and other liabilities could seriously limit consumers interest in AFVs.

If, for instance, consumers are skeptical about AFVs performance or worry about finding places to refuel them, says Leiby, theyll be disinclined to purchase the vehicles, particularly if the cars arent competitively priced.

On the other hand, if the AFVs cost and performance rivals that of conventional automobiles and if fuel is readily available, consumers may be willing to make the switch.

As more and more of them do, auto manufacturers will see sales increase, which will reduce the cost of production and allow them to sell their cars at ever more-affordable prices.

But how to nudge the nation in the direction of AFVs? Thats where the researchers model comes in.

"We want to determine what economic incentives or legislative mandates would be necessary to help the nation reach EPACTs goal," says Leiby.

"Were also interested in determining how many AFVs are likely to be on U.S. roads over the next few years without government incentives or mandates."

The switch from petroleum to alternative fuels will likely begin with vehicle fleets. Included are those operated by electric utility and energy companies as well as federal, state, and local governments.

The purchasing of AFVs for vehicle fleets will boost demand and spur large-scale production, says Rubin, which will lower the price of AFVs, thereby encouraging other sectors to buy them.

To discover the best possible way to trigger that reaction, the TAFVM will analyze various policy scenarios.

For example, the model can evaluate whether mandating fleets to use AFVs will lead to greater use of these vehicles or if different incentives like vehicle or fuel tax credits might be more effective.

Based on the input of the various scenarios, the model can project: (1) the total costs of the vehicles and fuels over time, (2) the quantities of "greenhouse-gas" emissions, and (3) the costs and benefits of shifting from the existing technological regime with low use of AFV to another that boasts high use of AFVs.

The model will also estimate how many AFVs are likely to be introduced each year; how cost-effective they will become; and what types of vehicles consumers will favor based on convenience, performance, and cost.

Rubin and Leiby believe that the right combination of policies could launch a supply-and-demand chain reaction among AFV producers, fuel retailers, and consumers.

"Once we reach a critical mass in terms of efficiency, cost, availability, and ease of refueling," says Rubin, "consumers may even begin to favor AFVs in part because some of these vehicles and fuels can have fewer environmental impacts."

The situation isnt entirely unlike the turn-of-the-century transition from horse-drawn to horseless carriages.

As long as internal combustion vehicles were less reliable and significantly more expensive than carriages fueled by oats and hay, few consumers were willing to make the leap in technology.

The model should be completed and ready for use by DOEs Policy Planning Office in the fall. Shortly thereafter, DOE will begin to assess the policy measures--as well as the types of cars and fuels--that will help drive America into the future.

For more information, contact Jonathan Rubin, The University of Tennessee, EERC, 311 Conference Building, Knoxville, TN 37996-4134, or call 423-966-3766.

Staff Citings

Publications

David L. Feldman published a chapter titled "Ethics of Trans-boundary Planning: U.S. and Canada" in Management of Water Resources in North America: Anticipating the 21st Century. The book was published earlier this year by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Presentations

In October, Lori Kincaid presented "Automotive Recycling in the United States and Japan: Benchmarks and Future Directions" at the Society of Automotive Engineers Total Life-Cycle Conference in Vienna, Austria. The presentation covered current recycling strategies of U.S. and Japanese carmakers, assessed the implications of these strategies, and examined some of the barriers to improved automobile recyclability.

Jean Peretz and collaborator David Folz, an associate professor in The University of Tennessees (UTs) political science department, presented "Industrial Performance in Hazardous Waste Management and Minimization: Policy Implications for the States" at the 1995 Southeastern Conference on Public Administration (SECOPA). The conference was held in October in Savannah, Georgia.

In January, Jonathan Rubin presented "Bankable Permits for the Control of Environmental Pollution" at the annual conference of the Allied Social Science Association in San Francisco. The paper, co-authored with Catherine Kling, associate professor of economics at Iowa State University, proposes a new approach to trading pollution permits over time by firms trying to meet envoronmental standards.

WMREI, UT Publications Earn Awards

InSites won a 1996 Technical Communication Award of Merit from the East Tennessee Chapter of the Society for Technical Communication (STC).

The newsletter also won an award from The McKinley Group for its on-line edition. The McKinley Group, whose Internet directory, Magellan, boasts over 1.5 million sites, offered the award based on InSites content, ease of exploration, and "Net" appeal.

Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, a quarterly journal published jointly by The University of Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, won a 1996 Technical Communication Award of Distinction. Forum author Robert Sheets and illustrator Mark Sieger also won awards of excellence for their work.