4.7 Article

Can pollution problems be effectively solved by environmental science and technology? An analysis of critical limitations

期刊

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
卷 37, 期 2, 页码 271-287

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00283-4

关键词

environmental science and technology; pollutant remediation; entropy; mechanistic reductionism; industrial ecology; paradigm shift; post-normal science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is currently believed that science and technology can provide effective solutions to most, if not all, environmental problems facing western industrial societies. The validity of this optimistic assumption is highly questionable for at least three reasons: First, current mechanistic, reductionist science is inherently incapable of providing the complete and accurate information which is required to successfully address environmental problems. Second, both the conservation of mass principle and the second law of thermodynamics dictate that most remediation technologies while successful in solving specific pollution problems - cause unavoidable negative environmental impacts elsewhere or in the future. Third, it is intrinsically impossible to design industrial processes that have no negative environmental impacts. This follows not only from the entropy law but also from the fact that any generation of energy is impossible without negative environmental consequences. It can therefore be concluded that science and technology have only very limited potential in solving current and future environmental problems. Consequently, it will be necessary to address the root cause of environmental deterioration, namely, the prevailing materialistic values that are the main driving force for both overpopulation and overconsumption. The long-term protection of the environment is, therefore, not primarily a technical problem but rather a social and moral problem that can only be solved by drastically reducing the strong influence of materialistic values. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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