7    INTRODUCING POLLUTION PREVENTION/WASTE
MINIMIZATION IN THE UNIVERSITY AND
PROFESSIONAL CURRICULUM: SUCCESSES AND
FAILURES
Richard D. Sisson, Jr., Professor and Associate Head
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Head for Materials Science and Engineering
James C. O'Shaughnessy, Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Massachusetts 01609
INTRODUCTION
Introduction of pollution prevention/waste minimization techniques both into the graduate and the
undergraduate curriculum has had varying degrees of success. At graduate level PP/WM techniques
have been introduced into a number of courses at various institutions. However at the undergraduate
level many barriers exist preventing these techniques from being included into the curriculum.
BACKGROUND
Traditionally the Environmental Engineering discipline has focused on end-of-pipe treatments and
compliance with regulatory requirements. Only recently has the concept of design for the environment
(DFE), pollution prevention engineering (PPE) and toxic use reduction (TUR) been introduced into
environmental engineering programs. At Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WP1) a major pedagogical
effort has been initiated to introduce these new concepts into the manufacturing engineering program
in addition to the environmental engineering programs. In close cooperation with the Toxic Use
Reduction Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell, a continuing education professional
seven day course/seminar has been presented to a wide variety of professionals from industry,
government and consulting firms.
Various approaches to waste management have been employed throughout the past decades. These
efforts include treatment, disposal, recycling, material recovery, waste separation, waste concentration, and waste reduction. The major focus in the 1990's is shifting to pollution prevention/waste
minimization as the management practice of choice. The major reason for this shift is because
pollution prevention/waste minimization techniques are proactive in nature rather than reactive to
future constraints in discharge limitations. In addition pollution prevention/waste minimization simplifies waste management by reducing the amount of waste that needs to be managed. Waste minimization also has the built in advantage that it can result in more efficient manufacturing processes and
reduction and / or elimination of waste treatment costs. Both of these built in benefits result in greater
profit in any manufacturing process.
Historically, USEPA and other regulatory agencies have relied primarily on programs and policies
that address environmental problems after the point of waste generation. This approach, commonly
known as "end-of-the-pipe" management, was based on command and control regulations that rarely
offered the generator positive incentives to reduce their waste. This practice also called pollution
control has been the basis for the evolution of most environmental engineering courses. The idea of a
single optimal engineered solution has been the backbone of the majority of engineering analysis and
design courses taught over the past two decades. This conventional approach has been successful and
has contributed to the overall improvement of our environment.
The official policy of the federal government is waste reduction, as stated in the 1984 Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).1
48th Purdue Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, 1993 Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Michigan 48118. Printed in
U.S.A.
51