4.5 Review Book Chapter

Toward Sustainable Chemical Engineering: The Role of Process Systems Engineering

出版社

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-060718-030332

关键词

sustainable development; sustainability metrics; process and product design; process control; reductionism; holistic research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Products from chemical engineering are essential for human well-being, but they also contribute to the degradation of ecosystem goods and services that are essential for sustaining all human activities. To contribute to sustainability, chemical engineering needs to address this paradox by developing chemical products and processes that meet the needs of present and future generations. Unintended harm of chemical engineering has usually appeared outside the discipline's traditional system boundary due to shifting of impacts across space, time, flows, or disciplines, and exceeding nature's capacity to supply goods and services. Being a subdiscipline of chemical engineering, process systems engineering (PSE) is best suited for ensuring that chemical engineering makes net positive contributions to sustainable development. This article reviews the role of PSE in the quest toward a sustainable chemical engineering. It focuses on advances in metrics, process design, product design, and process dynamics and control toward sustainability. Efforts toward contributing to this quest have already expanded the boundary of PSE to consider economic, environmental, and societal aspects of processes, products, and their life cycles. Future efforts need to account for the role of ecosystems in supporting industrial activities, and the effects of human behavior and markets on the environmental impacts of chemical products. Close interaction is needed between the reductionism of chemical engineering science and the holism of process systems engineering, along with a shift in the engineering paradigm from wanting to dominate nature to learning from it and respecting its limits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据