Environmental Biotechnology: The Science of Environmental Technologies Explained

In a span of just a few decades, advances and new environmental applications of science, engineering, and their associated technologies have merged into an entirely new way of seeing the world. Science is the explanation of the physical world, while engineering encompasses the applications of science to achieve results. Thus, what we have learned about the environment by trial and error has gradually become what is now standard practice in environmental science and engineering. This heuristically gained knowledge has come at a great cost in terms of loss of life and illness associated with errors, poor decisions (at least in hindsight), and a lack of appreciation of environmental effects.

The “environmental movement” is relatively young. The iconic works of Rachel Carson, Barry Commoner and others in the 1960s were seen by many as mere straws in the wind. The growing environmental awareness was certainly not limited to the academic and scientific communities. Popular culture was also beginning to appreciate the concept of “spaceship earth,” meaning that our planet consisted of a finite life support system and that our air, water, food, soil, and ecosystems were not infinitely elastic in their capacity to absorb the deliberate contempt of humanity. The poetry and music of the time expressed these fears and called for a new respect for the environment. The environmental movement was not a one-off venture, but was intertwined with growing protests over the war in Vietnam, civil rights, and a general malaise with the “establishment.” The petrochemical industry, the military, and capitalism were under increasing scrutiny. and skepticism.

The momentum of the petrochemical revolution that followed World War II seemed unstoppable. However, much of the progress we now take for granted was the result of those who agitated against the status quo and refused to accept the paradigms of their time. In fact, we provide evidence for the validity of some of the causes of these early environmentalists. A handful of cases were watershed moments in progress in protecting public health and the environment. It seems that every major piece of environmental legislation was preceded by an environmental disaster precipitated by mistakes, mishaps and misdeeds. The amendments to the Clean Air Act were the result of deadly episodes such as those experienced in Donora, Pennsylvania and London, UK. The hazardous waste legislation came after public protests related to the Love Canal in upstate New York. “Right to know” legislation around the world grew out of the disaster in Bhopal, India. Contingency plans for oil and waste spills were strengthened following the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska. International energy policies changed, with sentiments growing against nuclear power, following the near-miss at Three Mile Island in the United States and the actual catastrophe at Chernobyl in the Ukraine. More recently, public health and engineering emergency response planning was completely revamped in response to the events of September 11, 2001.

Certainly all of these can be classified as “environmental” problems, but they also represent new social paradigms. That’s the tricky part of dealing with emerging technologies, including biotechnologies. Contemporary society has a way of imposing problems on us. Ironically, society demands the promotion of new and better things and processes, at the same time that it demands that scientists, engineers, doctors, and other members of the scientific community sufficiently control the consequences of the very technologies that members of society insist on. that we use For example, society may reasonably or unreasonably demand certain characteristics of food (greater nutrition, less fat, attractive color). They may be quite happy with a product, until it is discovered that it has real or perceived negative characteristics. For example, the public may be pleased that the price of strawberries remains low and the texture high until they discover that the plants have been genetically altered to resist frost damage. However, this engineering feature could have been the main driver of the lower price and better texture. Similarly, cleaning up contaminated water and sediment may benefit from genetically modified bacteria and fungi to break down some very persistent pollutants, but the public may fear potential problems if these microbes somehow escape their intended use and make their way into components. unplanned in the food chain. . Prominent and infamous environmental problems have arisen as by-products of some useful and high-demand enterprise.