(Solution Manual) Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design John Wiley & Sons

Mihelcic,Zimmerman, 2

Geography, Geology & Earth Science

Solution Manual

2nd Edition

• $15.00 $50.00

---

Description

Solution Manual for Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design John Wiley & Sons, The downloadable file consists of 522 pages, and the total size of the file is 4.64 MB. Purchase now only for highly discounted price.

Author(s): Mihelcic, Zimmerman

---

---

Study Note Preview

Solutions Manual for: Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design John Wiley & Sons, 2014. (James R. Mihelcic & Julie B. Zimmerman) ISBN: 978‐1‐118‐74149‐8 2nd Edition Solution Manual written by: Colleen C. Naughton Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of South Florida 1st Edition solutions provided by: Dr. Heather E. Wright Wendel (University of South Florida) & Dr. Ziad Katirji (Michigan Technological University) Version 1; November 21, 2013 Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. Chapter 1. Sustainable Design, Engineering, and Innovation 1.1 Write an official 1 -page office memo to your instructor that provides definitions for: (a) Sustainable Development (by the Bruntland Commission), (b) Sustainability (according to the American Academy of Environmental Engineers (AAEE) Body of Knowledge), (c) Sustainability (according to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Body of Knowledge), and, (d) Sustainable Development (according to the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics). Solution: Student responses will vary. See the next page for a full example memo. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. Date: February 10, 2010 To: James R. Mihelcic, Civil & Environmental Engineering Subject: Definitions of Sustainable Development The Bruntland Commission defines sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."1 The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Body of Knowledge defines sustainability as “the ability to meet human needs for natural resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective waste management while co nserving and enhancing en - vironmental quality and the natural resource base essential for the future.”2 The American Academy of Environmental Engineers (AAEE) Body of Knowledge defines sustainability as “a condition in which the use of natural resources and cycles in human and industrial systems does not lead to diminished quality of life due either to losse s in future economic opportunities or to adverse impacts on social conditions, human health and the environment.”3 This definition is based on that of Mihelcic et al. (2003).4 The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) defines sustainable development as “the challenge of meeting human needs for natural resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective waste management while conservin g and protecting environmental quality and the natural resource base essential for future development”.5 All these definitions are similar to the broadest definition of sustainability by the Bruntland Commission . ASCE, AAEE, and NSPE definitions add more detail to the definition of development in relation to their respective fields with infrastructure and the environment. Between the three engineering societies, ASCE and NSPE are almost identical in defining sustainability as meeting human needs for engineering systems without compromising the future. However, the definition by AAEE is unique and incorporates quality of life as opposed to human needs, social conditions, and human health. 1 World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2 American Society of Civil Engineers. (2008). Civil engineering body of knowledge for the 21st century, Preparing the civil engineer for the future , (2nd. Ed.). Body of Knowledge Committee of the Committee on Academic Prerequisites for Professional Practice. Reston, VA. 3 American Academy of Environmental Engineers. (2009). Environmental engineering body of knowledge. The Environmental Engineering Body of Knowledge Task Force, Baltimore, MD. 4 Mihelcic, J.R., Crittenden, J.C., Small, M.J., Shonnard, D.R., Hokanson, D.R., Zhang, Q., Chen, H., Sorby, S.A., James, V.U., Sutherland, J.W., Schnoor, J.L. (2003). “Sustainability science and engineering: Emergence of a new metadiscipline,” Environmental Science & Technology , 37(23):5314 -5324. 5 National Society of Professional Engineer. (2007). Code of ethics for engineers , Alexandria, VA. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.2 Write your own definition of sustainable development as it applies to your engineering profession. Explain its appropriateness and applicability in 2-3 sentences. Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.3 Identify three definitions of sustaina bility from three sources (for example, local, state or federal government; industry; environmental organization; international organization; financial or investment organization). Compare and contrast those definitions with the Brundtland Commission defin ition. How do the definitions reflect their sources? Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.4 Relate the “Tragedy of the Commons” to a local environmental issue. Be specific on what you mean in terms of the “commons” for this particular example, and carefully explain how these “commons” are being damaged for current and future generations. Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.5 Research the progress that two countries of your choice (or your instructor’s choice) have made in meeting each of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Summarize the results in a table. Among other sources, you might consult the UN’s MDG Web site , www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ . Solution: The Millennium Development Indicator’s website has country and regional snap shot tables for each of the goals and indicators (http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Host.aspx?Content=Data/snapshots.htm ). A summary of the progress made in Mali and Ghana (Students may have chosen different countries) are displayed in the table below. Mali Ghana Target Indicator First Year Latest Year Progress First Year Latest Year Progress Value Year Value Year Value Year Value Year Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger Reduce extreme poverty by half Proportion of population living below $1.25 (PPP) per day (%) 86.1 1994 50.4 2010 On track 51.1 1992 28.6 2006 On track Reduce hunger by half Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption (%) 25.3 1991 7.9 2011 Achieved 40.5 1991 <5 2011 Achieved Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education Universal primary schooling Net enrolment ratio in primary education (enrollees per 100 children) 42.2 1999 67.2 2011 On track 61.5 1999 84.2 2011 Below target Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women Equal girls' enrolment in primary school Ratio of girls to boys in primary education 0.61 1991 0.88 2011 Below target 0.86 1991 1 2011 Achieved Women's share of paid employment Share of women in wage employment in the non-agricultural sector (%) 27.3 1997 34.6 2004 Below target 31.7 2000 Below target Women's equal representation in national parliaments Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament (single or lower house only -%) 2.3 1997 10.2 2012 Off track 9 1998 8.3 2012 Off track Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. Mali Ghana Target Indicator First Year Latest Year Progress First Year Latest Year Progress Value Year Value Year Value Year Value Year Goal 4: Reduce child mortality Reduce mortality of under -five- year-old by two thirds Under -five mortality rate (deaths of children per 1,000 births) 257 1990 175.6 2011 Off track 121 1990 77.6 2011 Below target Goal 5: Improve maternal health Reduce maternal morality by three quarters Maternal mortality ratio (maternal deaths per 100,000 live births) 1100 1990 540 2010 Off track 580 1990 350 2010 Off track Access to universal reproductive health Contraceptive prevalence rate (percentage of women aged 15-49, married or in union, using contraception) 6.7 1996 8.2 2006 Off track 17.2 1992 23.5 2008 Off track Unmet need for family planning (percentage of women aged 15 -49, married or in union, with unmet need for family planning) 27.5 1996 27.6 2006 Off track 36.9 1993 35.7 2008 Off track Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDs HIV incidence rate (number of new HIV infections per year per 100 people aged 15 -49) 0.09 2001 0.06 2009 Below target 0.18 2001 0.15 2009 Off track Halt and begin to reverse spread of tuberculosis Incidence rate and death rate associated with tuberculosis 163 /41 1990 68/9.7 2010 On track 155/ 36 1990 86/8.7 2010 On track Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. Mali Ghana Target Indicator First Year Latest Year Progress First Year Latest Year Progress Value Year Value Year Value Year Value Year Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability Reverse loss of forests Proportion of land area covered by forest (%) 11.5 1990 10.2 2010 Below target 32.7 1990 21.7 2010 Below target Halve proportion without improved drinking water Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source (%) 28 1990 64 2010 Achieved 53 1990 86 2010 On track Halve proportion without sanitation Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility (%) 15 1990 22 2010 Off track 7 1990 14 2010 Off track Improve the lives of slum - dwellers Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 94.2 1990 65.9 2009 Below target 65.5 1990 40.1 2009 Below target Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development Internet users Internet users per 100 in habitants 0 1990 2 2011 Off track 0 1990 14.1 2011 Below target Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.6 Go to the U.S Department of Energy’s website ( www.doe.gov ), and research energy consumption in the household, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors. Develop a table on how this specific energy consumption relates to the percent of U.S. and global CO 2 emissions. Identify a sustainable solution for each sector that would reduce energy use and CO 2 emissions. Solution: Students will need to do some research on the web for this item. Energy consumption values can be found on the Annual Energy Review website (http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/in dex.cfm ) . Greenhouse gas emissions by sector can be found on the EPA ( http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html ) or IPPC web pages. Sector Total U.S. Energy Consumption in 2012 (trillion Btu) Percent of U.S. Emissions (2012) Percent Global Emissions (2004) Sustainable Solution (Students answers may vary) Household 20,195 21.3% 8% (includes household & commercial Solar panels Commercial 17,507 18.4% (see above) LED light fixtures Industrial 30,562 32.2% 19% Carbon tax Transportation 26,712 28.1% 13% Public transportation infrastructure Total 94,977 100% See figure below for more details Global greenhouse gas emissions by source (commercial and residential are grouped) (EPA reference to IPCC 2007 for global emissions in 2004) Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.7 As a consumer interested in reducing your carbon emissions, (a) which should you do: (1) install more efficient lighting for your home or (2) buy a car that gets higher miles per gallon? To answer this, consider that a 100w light bulb that is run 3 hours a day every day will use around 100 kWh a year. A high efficiency light uses about 25% of a conventional light bulb. Replacing it with a 25w Compact Fluorescent Bulb would save 75 kwh a year. This would equal 150 lbs of carbon dioxide or the same amount of carbon dioxide emissions associated with burning 7.5 gallons of gasoline. (b) Given that the average US household uses 10,000 kWh a year of which 8.8% is lighting, how many gallons of gas and lbs of CO2 could be saved by switching all of the bulbs in a home? (c) For comparison, if you drove 12,000 miles a year and upgraded from a car that gets the national average of 20 mpg to one that got 30 mpg, how much would you reduce your gas consumption and CO2 emission s on an annual basis? (d) What if you upgraded from a car that get 30 mpg to 37 mpg? (combustion of 100 gallons of gasoline releases 2,000 lbs. of carbon dioxide). Solution: a. You should choose depending on how many light bulbs you use in your home and for how long each day and how much you drive each year. By performing the calculations for parts b and c, you should choose to install more efficient lighting for your home. b. 10,000𝑘Wℎ × 0.088 × 0.75 × 150 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 2 = 𝖾𝖾, 000 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 75 𝑘Wℎ 10,000𝑘Wℎ × 0.088 × 0.75 × 7.5 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 = 4, 𝖾50 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 75 𝑘Wℎ c. (12,000 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 × 1 g𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛) − (12,000 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 × 1 g𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛) = 200 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 20 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 30 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 200 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 × 2,000 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 2 = 400 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 1000 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 2 d. Switching from a 20mpg vehicle to 30 mpg vehicle results in a 10 mpg savings. (12,000 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 × 1 g𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛) − (12,000 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 × 1 g𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛) = 76 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 30 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 37 𝑚i𝑙𝑒𝑠 76 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 × 2,000 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 2 = 152 𝑙𝑏𝑠 𝐶𝑂 1000 𝑔𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑠 2 2 Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.8 Visit EPA’s Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Award website at www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/pubs/pgcc/past.html . Select a past award -winning project. Based on the description of this project, what are the environmental, economic and social benefits of this green chemistry advance? Solution: Student responses will vary. An example of an award -winning project of the Green Chemistry Challenge Award is for Buckman’s Maximyze Enzymes. These enzymes are made of natural catalysts that reduce the energy and wood fiber needed to manufacture high -quali ty paper. In one case, paper was able to be reduced by 3 pounds per 1,000 square feet which not only reduces the amount of raw pulp materials but also lowers shipping and energy costs. With increased paper strength, more recycled fibers can be used in the paper which is beneficial to the environment and reduces costs. Overall, this new enzyme translates into a social benefit with less deforestation and a cleaner environment for a healthier society. For more information on this specific green chemistry chall enge award winning project, see the link below: http://www.buckman.com/about -us/news/562 -buckman -wins -presidential -green -chemistry - challenge -award Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.9 Discuss whether shoe A (leather) or shoe B (synthetic) is better for the environment based on the data in Table 1.8. Is it possible to weight one aspect (air, water, land pollution or solid waste) as being more important than another? How? Why? Who makes these decisions for our society? Table/1.8 Hypothetical Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of Shoes on a basis of per 100 pairs of shoes produced Product Energy use (BTU) Raw material consumption Water use (gallons) Air polluti on (lbs.) Water pollution Hazardous and solid waste Shoe A (leather) 1 Limited supply; some renewable 2 4 2 lb. organic chemicals 2 lb. hazardous sludge Shoe B (synthetic) 2 Large supply; not renewable 4 1 8 lb. inert inorganic chemicals 1 lb. hazardous sludge; 3 lb. nonhazardous sludge Solution: Student responses will vary. While shoe A uses less energy, nonrenewable resources and water, it uses more water and results in higher hazardous and solid waste. On the other hand Shoe B uses more energy and water but emits less air pollution and produces less hazardous and solid waste. You will need to develop a weighting system to rate each option, in each environmental impact category to develop an overall score to compare the two options. Environmental regulators and the general population make these decisions for society. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.10 To compare plastic and paper bags in terms of acquisition of raw materials, manufacturing and processing, use and disposal, we’ll use data provided by Franklin Associates, a nationally known consulting firm whose clients include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as well as many companies and industry groups. In 1990, Franklin Associates compared plastic bags to paper bags in terms of their energy and air/water emissions in manufacture, use, and disposal. Table 1.9 presents the results of their study: Table/1.9 Results of Study Comparing Plastic and Paper Bags Life Cycle Stages Air Emissions (pollutants) oz/bag Energy Required BTU/bag Paper Plastic Paper Plastic Materials manufacture, product manufacture, product use 0.0516 0.0146 905 464 Raw materials acquisition, product disposal 0.0510 0.0045 724 185 (a)Which bag would you choose if you were most concerned about air pollution? (Note that the information does not tell you if these are toxic air emissions or greenhouse gas emissions) (b) If you assume that two plastic bags equal one paper bag, does the choice change? (c) Compare the energy required to produce each bag. Which bag takes less energy to produce? Solution: a) For paper: 0.0516 + 0.0510 = 0.1026 oz/bag For plastic: 0.0146 + 0.0045 = 0.0191 oz/bag Plastic ; however, the nature of the air emiss ions may be of concern. b) For paper: 0.0516 + 0.0510 = 0.1026 oz/bag For plastic: (0.0146 + 0.0045) * 2 = 0.0382 oz/bag No. Plastic still has a lower life cycle air emissions than paper even with using twice as many bags. c) For paper = 905 + 724 = 1629 BTU/bag For plastic = 464 + 185 = 649 BTU/bag Plastic bags take less energy to produce (even at the 2:1 ratio). Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.11 You are preparing a life cycle analysis of three different electrification options for powering your 1,200 square foot home in rural Connecticut. The options you’re considering include: 1) just using your local grid, 2) putting in a solar installation on your roof, or 3) building a transmission extension to join up with your neighbor’s already -built wind turbine. Write a possible goal, scope, function, and functional unit for this LCA. Explain your reasoning. Solution: Student’s answers may vary. Goal: Determine which of the following electrification options have the least environmental impact: 1) just using your local grid, 2) putting in a solar installation on your roof, or 3) building a transmission extension to join up with your neighbor’s already -built wind turbine. Scope: This LCA will consider the resource extraction, manufacturing, and use -phase but will not consider transportation and end-of-life stage. Function: Provide enough energy to light and run appliances in a 1,200 square foot home in rural Connecticut. Functional unit: The energy to power 1,2000 square foot home in rural Connecticut. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.12 Consider the full life cycle of each of the three electrification options (possibly beyond whatever you’ve selected for the scope of your LCA) in Problem 1.11. Discuss which of the life cycle stages is most impactful for each electrification type. You will need to take into account the life cycle impacts of primary through final energy in each case. As a reminder, life cycle stages typically include: resource extraction, manufacture, transportation, use, and end of life. Solution: Student responses will vary but below is an example solution. Electrification Option Impactful life stage 1) Just using your local grid Material extraction of non-renewable resource such as coal and the burning of such during the use-phase. 2) Putting in a solar installation on your roof Material extraction of metals for solar panels. End-of- use in recycling/disposal of solar panels. 3) Building a transmission extension to join up with your neighbor’s already -built wind turbine Material extraction for materials to build the extension. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.13 Draw causal loop diagram for corn -based ethanol production using the following variables: climate change, corn -based ethanol use, fertilizer demand, CO 2 emissions, Fuel demand, Fossil fuel use, and Corn demand. Solution: Fossil fuel use o o s Corn -based s ethanol use Corn demand Fuel demand o Climate change s CO 2 emissions s Fertilizer demand s s Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.14 (a) Is centralized drinking water treatment and distribution more or less resilient than point of use water treatment technologies? Why or why not? (b) Does it matter whether these water treatment systems are implemented in the developing or developed world? Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.15 The design team for a building project was formed at your company last week and they have already held two meetings. Why is it so important for you to get involved immediately in the design process? Solution: It is at the design stage where there is the most power and potential to influence the ultimate “greenness” or sustainability of a design. It is at this stage that there is an ability to specify inherently benign materials, to design for end of life handling, and consider the entire life cycle. At the design stage there is an opportunity to impart new performance and capabilities. This is also the most economical place to focus due to the fact that costs are committed at this point although they are not incurred until much later in the process. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.16 Provide an example of a product either commercially available or currently under development that uses biomimicry as the basis for its design. Explain how the design is mimicking a product, process, or system found in nature. Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. ( ) ( ) 1.17 Two reactants, benzyl alcohol and tosyl chloride, react in the presence of an auxiliary, triethylamine, and the solvent toluene to produce the product sulfonate ester (see Table 1.10). Calculate the E factor for the reaction. What would happen to the E factor if the solvents and auxiliary chemicals were included in the calculation? Should these types of materials and chemicals be included in an efficiency measure? Why or why not? Table 1.10. Useful information needed to solve Problem 1.17 Reactant Benzyl alcohol 10.81 g 0.10 mole MW 108.1 g/mole Reactant Tosyl chloride 21.9 g 0.115 mole MW 190.65 g/mole Solvent Toluene 500 g Auxiliary Triethylamine 15 g MW 101 g/mole Product Sulfonate ester 23.6 g 0.09 mole MW 262.29 g/mole Solution: Without solvent: 10.81 + 21.9 E − factor = = 1.4 23.6  With solvent and auxiliary: 10.81 + 21.9 + 500 + 15 E − factor = = 23.2 23.6  If solvents and auxiliary chemicals are included the E factor increases 20 -fold. These chemicals should be included if they are not recovered and recycled because they also contribute to the total waste of the process. These chemicals are also important because many solvents are VOCs and toxics. 23.2 kg waste produced / kg of product 1.4 kg waste produced / kg of product Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.18 Choose three of the principles of green engineering. For each one, (a) explain the principle in your own words; (b) find an example (commercia lly available or under development), and explain how it demonstrates the principle; and (c) describe the associated environmental, economic, and societal benefits, identifying which ones are tangible and which ones are intangible. Solution: Application 1.10 in Chapter 1 lists the twelve Principles of Green Engineering. Students can build their solution to this problem by reviewing this table and associated reading material. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.19 (a) Develop five sustainability metrics or indicators for a corporation or an industrial sector analogous to those presented for communities in Table 1 -X. (b) Compare them with traditional business metrics or indicators. (c) Describe what new information c an be determined from the new sustainability metrics or indicators. Solution: Student responses will vary. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.20 A car company has developed a new car, ecoCar, that gets 100 miles per gallon (mpg), but the cost is slightly higher than cars currently on the market. What type of incentives could the manufacturer offer or ask Congress to implement to encourage customers to buy the new ecoCar? Solution: Students’ responses will vary. Here is an example response: First, the manufacturer would need to demonstrate how a higher capital cost of the vehicle will be made up in the savings with higher fuel efficiency. The manufacturer could also offer better warranties or payment plans for the vehicle to attract consumers. They may request that congress provide tax write offs or subsidies for consumers who buy more fuel efficient vehicles. Moreover, the manufacturer could lobby for tax breaks on their ecoCar facility property taxes and revenue. Those savings could then reduce the market price of the vehicle for consumers. Solutions Manual prepared by: Colleen Naughton, Ziad Katirji and Heather E. Wright Wendel Environmental Engineering: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design, 2nd Edition James R. Mihelcic and Julie Beth Zimmerman, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014. 1.21 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Why or why not? (3 -5 sentences) “Technology -forcing pollution regulations are preferable to standards - or ou tcome -based regulations”. Solution: Student responses will vary.