3000-HW1-Sample Soln 4 - -— - - Mum? WW1 561M f4)—...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–6. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: -— - - Mum? WW1 561M f4)— 1-24-08 COE 3000 - A Prb #1 5 When looking at a global view sustainability, three key concepts form an abstract defi 'on of sustainability: the surv' al and prosperity of humans, the available resources, and the capacity of the ecosystem to pport such prosperity (Pearce, Banegas 104). In the next 50 years, the average estimation f 1' population growth hovers around nine billion people (Musser 46). Most of the growth is c tered on urban areas, and could form a new status of city: Megacities, with populatio of ten million or more inhabitants (Zwingle 78). In developing natio ustainability iss s can already be observed in th e - sent time. Populations are growing , allsmith 74), Traffic jams regularly last for hours . decreases the quality of life for those stuck in en ess hour of traffic. The burning o ’ fossil fuels centered around congested roadways cause health problems for those unfortun ‘ enough to be stuck in traflic or living near high volumes of automobiles, harms the surroun u g ecosystem, and depletes the precious natural resources as thousands of cars stand idle . u o' dump noxious materials into the surrounding area (Zwingle 85). Developing countries are n alone in the issues of rapid growth versus sustainability. The average American ‘ 2 : ' ~ .n .:..;.: ; ‘ ' - requires much more resources than their counterparts in developing nations. It as been measured that the United States is home to 5% of the Earth’s population, yet pro ces 25% of the C02 (Global Warming 19). In dealing with a finite biosphere, the e ’ e global picture must be reviewed in order adapt to a “dynamic equilibrium” (Daly 102). v t is, emphasis should be put on issues that promote a world view of sustainabi ' , not just a limited perspective of an individual nation. Problem #2 Global Warming summarizes what political officials have been brushing aside for decades: Global Warming is very real, and its long term effects will be devastating if radical measures are not taken very soon. The main culprit is C02, which is a byproduct of burning / fossil fuels for energy. It is responsible for clogging the Earth’s atmosphere and trapping in the .7 / solar energy which would normally radiate away and dissipate into space. The effects of global ,. " warming range fiom mild to devastating: just a one degree shift in the ocean temperature will not only extend the bikini season, but lead to record-breaking storm intensities, drought, massive /" glacial melting. A shifting of the Gulf Stream ever so slightly would put the once balmy Europe into a deep freeze—it is, after all, on the same latitude of Alaska. A new input into the natural C02 cycle, such as humans burning fossil fuels, can shift the once equilibrium into a negative reinforcing feedback loop, where the situation becomes disastrous at an exponential rate (Hallsmith 80). Needless to say, a decrease in the C02 emissions is the proper route to explore. Such measures like the Kyoto Treaty that reduce industrial emissions by way of selling permits to emit into the atmosphere, have already had positive environmental and economical impacts (Gibbs 112). Civil Engineers face a great challenge in dealing with global warming, and have a severe impact on whether the problems are addressed in time. Poor planning can stem into several major issues: hastily-designed urban areas, not taking into account long term sustainability, and not communicating on a global level to stay on top of the most recent innovations. To ease the immense threat of global warming, Civil Engineers should reflect on current situations of urban planning; Sic Palo, Brazil has an inefficient public transportation system that leads to some 10 million trips a day just in private automobiles. Progress is slow, and building new infrastructure on top of old is expensive. But the ultimate goal is to increase the use of public transportation of 60-70% (Zwingle 82). This would severely cut down the amount of C02 released, and increase the quality of life of the inhabitants in the bustling city. Before the human population shrinks, it is expected to expand dramatically to upwards of nine billion people. Civil Engineers need to start planning in the present '/ e in order to help the , growing population into a sustainable intragenerational equity (Pearce, fiegas 98). An \, efficiency between—meetinggg human needs ifppd, water, and shelter—jeedio‘be readily 3W1 available and not compromise the resources and standards of living for the future generation. As the current situation stands, growth is choking out the available resources and permanently damaging the ecosystem. A last measure to improve the present climate trends is for Civil Engineers to get involved with the global political machine that currently designs future policies to last only the entirety of an election cycle (Gibbs 108). Legislators and Civil Engineers need to be on the same page when it comes to focusing on the long term reduction of human environmental impact, and eventually alleviate global warming. Q 5 Problem #3 In less than 2 years the field of Civil Engineering has broadened and become ’ ecialized. To combat global trends of population explosion, urbanization, and policymakers in order to easily facilitate the spre of a global e librium. The world needs an infrastructure that enables decision makers to “address health, e nomics, the environment, and national security in an integrated way” (Bloom 92). The mo sound way of producing this unified effect is for Civil Engineers to get involved p blic o e so that they can “directly influence policy and legislation relating to infrastruc ‘ sustainability” (Vision 71). Civil Engineers will be on the forefiont of these ideas and planning urban areas to mitigate population growth and the environmental impact. By striving for a more efficient “closed system” of human development, centralizing human impact on area instead of sprawl will help to balance the cycle of natural regeneration versus human consumption (Hallsmith 77). Problem #4 Civil fl Based on the three dimension of sustainability in a triaxial representation, an optimal transformational system would meet or exceed the needs it was designed for, not impact the natural resources in a negative manner, and have little or a net positive impact on the surrounding wosystem(Pearce, Banegas 102). With respect to the major metropolitan areas of Chicago and Atlanta, the triad of sustainability requirements can further describe these points as lessening the commuting time of citizens, increase the use of public transportation to decrease the consumption of fossil fuels, and to impact the ecosystem less with the required infrastructure for roadways. All three aspects need to relate back to the longevity of data, because true sustainability cannot be viewed as just a “snap shot” in time, but rather through a lifespanr The data given on the performance measures by The Texas Transportation Institute cover ar‘span of 23 years, which should be suflicient for pe of this paper. I ’ Commuting tggfflzibig isgupg‘mgportafion, and in a sustainable system there is not room or factgjsnhat waste flame and resources sitting in traffic. Given the mobility data for each area and comparing the annual delay in person—hours, there is a vast difference between the increasing delay times. The average del per peak traveler in Chicago in 1982 was 15, and has [ r i had a steady increase of roughly 3—5%§hereas Atlanta started with 26 in 1982 and had \ , U” (’0 anywhere from a 9-1 1% increase until 00, and then started decreasing steadily about 2-339 4,“ 9%, Although ‘ h higher initial time, if current trend continues, Atlanta will 6 s w - r C ' o in havin lays per peak traveler. Even though Chicago has almost twice the 46 7, , r a} . somewhere in th public transportation, an issue at should be addressed is the city MO I wants to become more 6 clent with ' ' ulace. Looking at just the expansion of £2 /% ( arterial street lane miles in each city, ' ' amount of growth in Chicago until about (i / l ‘ i - 2002, when the growth rate jumps fro >l% to 2° and up. This trend can be seen in growing / fl V cities with a sudden explosion of populat ' wever, the Chicago population does not W _ 13/, 7% rapid influx of peoplLThis be explained by people living farther away from where they/a (fl 2 ’5 y I, m/ work and shop (Hallsmrth gm Atlanta there is significant growth in the city, which w flag / I v x ' ervproportional increase in th erial streets. , V I , fl } 7 on the data given, one can assume that Atlantabiit; the more sustainable / 'C’ZT “ syste ' ho ver greatly it is impeded by delay times. Ifthe growth in use of public A trans ion increases, there could be a decline in transportation ode/1&5 we roads would be less congested. Two additional performance measures to ensure a thorough picture of the transportation systems would be to compare the costs associated ivith maintaining the infrastructure and, fi‘om a citiz viewpoint, the relative ease of use. Transportation maintenance issues many times lead to de ys in travel time, which in turn means lost wages, lost taxable dollars earned, etc., which rms a negative reinforcing feedback loop that negates the original objective of sustainabili .. The relative #16 $eW%ujs@flity of a system; if it is not easy 0 use, the Oject w111-fari despite the bes intentions. W, ,l \. 4/l(//, 1“ ,' {'2'} //‘ I / ’ /, \ Sources Bloom, Barry R. Public Health in Transition, Scientific American Special Issue: Crossroads for Planet Earth, September 2005. Cohen, Joel E. Human Population Grows Up, Scientific American Special Issue: Crossroads for Planet Earth, September 2005. Daly, Herman E. Economics in a Full World, Scientific American Special—{53pm Crossroads for Planet Earth, September 2005 . I , Gibbs, W. Wayt. How Should We Set Priorities?, Scientific American Special Issue: Crossroads for Planet Earth, September 2005. Global Warming, Time Magazine, January 2007. Hallsmith, Gwendolyn. Systems Thinking for Communities, Chapter 4, The Key to Sustainable Cities, Meeting Human Needs, Transforming Community Systems, New Society Publishers, 2003. Musser, George. The Climax of Humanity, Scientific American Special Issue: Crossroads for Planet Earth, September 2005. Pearce, AK, and Vaneéas, J .A. Defining Sustainability for Built Environment Systems: and Operational Framework, International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Vol. 2, Nos 1/2/3, 2002. Texas Transportation Institute (7P1), Urban Mobility Report, 2007. The Vision for Civil Engine ' g in 2025, Civil Engineering, August 2007. Zwingle, Erla. Cities — Ch enges for Humanity, National Geographic Magazine, November 2002. ' ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 06/29/2009 for the course CEE 3000 taught by Professor Meyer during the Spring '07 term at Georgia Institute of Technology.

Page1 / 6

3000-HW1-Sample Soln 4 - -— - - Mum? WW1 561M f4)—...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 6. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online