92 



in supply — be it a result of industrial accident or regulatory action — Mvill in most 

 cases be far higher than they used to be just a few short years ago. 



Sustainability as an Environmental Goal 



The second trend, of course, is our increasingly sophisticated understanding of en- 

 vironmental issues. TSCA was originally passed in 1976. Since then, we have be- 

 come much more knowledgeable about environmental impacts, about industrial ef- 

 fects on natural systems, and about the global impacts of five and a half billion peo- 

 ple. The EPA Science Advisory Board lists as major environmental perturbations 

 such complex problems as global climate change, loss of biodiversity, ozone deple- 

 tion, and degradation of soil and water resources. In leading industrial firms, we 

 are moving conceptually beyond end-of-pipe and emission control technologies, be- 

 yond even pollution prevention and waste reduction programs. It is not that we are 

 reducing such activities in an absolute sense. Rather, we are recognizing that they 

 are not, by themselves, adequate to allow us to live in equilibrium with natural sys- 

 tems. They are an important dimension of the solution, but by no means the only 

 one. 



This understanding is leading to a fundamental change in the way the environ- 

 mental impacts of materials and products are being managed around the world. 

 Most importantly, it is now clear that any environmental assessment of materials 

 must include consideration of impacts across the lifecycle of materials — from their 

 mining or initial production, to their use in commerce and in products, to the dis- 

 mantling of products and return of the components or materials to the economy. 

 Fixating on any single lifecycle stage of a material runs the risk of failing to recog- 

 nize more serious risks posed at other stages. 



Moreover, it is also inappropriate to consider only one dimension of a material's 

 impact on the environment. Toxicity, for example, is clearly important, but there 

 may be other environmental impacts which are far more serious. For example, in 

 one of AT&T's processes, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were being used as a source 

 of halogen species to dope fiber optic cable. ("Doping" means to implant small con- 

 centrations of a material, called a "dopant," in a substrate substance.) These CFCs, 

 although virtually nontoxic, were ozone depleters, and were accordingly replaced by 

 chlorine gas, provided through highly-engineered and redundant systems because of 

 its toxicity. Was the chlorine more toxic? Clearly. Was using chlorine to replace 

 CFCs still a benefit for the environment? This was. also clear, as demonstrated by 

 the adoption of the Montreal Protocol as amended. Toxicity must not be ignored, but 

 neither can it be the only determinant of the environmental performance of a mate- 

 rial — not if we want to strive for real environmental improvement. 



Perhaps an example will clarify both these points. One substance considered for 

 replacement of lead in solders used in electronics manufacture is bismuth. Although 

 much work remains to be done, there are some indications that bismuth alloys may 

 indeed be suitable for some applications. It also turns out, however, that bismuth 

 as a material occurs in ores in very low concentrations. Moreover, most of the bis- 

 muth produced in the world is generated as a by-product of lead mining. Thus, con- 

 sidering only the manufacturing and disposal lifecycle stages of bismuth, one might 

 be inclined to say the toxicity and environmental benefits of bismuth compared to 

 lead are obvious. However, considering the mining lifecycle stage, it is apparent that 

 much more mining and processing — with all the environmental impacts, energy use, 

 and water use that implies — is required per unit bismuth than per unit lead. More- 

 over, there is still the problem of the lead ore you have mined to get at the bismuth. 

 Do you let it sit there? Do you go ahead and process the lead from it? And, if you 

 do, what have you gained? The proper course for the environment, which seemed 

 so clear when only the manufacturing lifecycle stage and toxicity endpoint were con- 

 sidered, is in fact not at all obvious. 



International Initiatives 



The growing consensus that systems-based methodologies incorporating lifecycle 

 approaches must be applied to products and materials is by no means academic. The 

 International Standards Organization (ISO) is actively working on the development 

 of lifecycle assessment, labeling, and product-based environmental standards 



