Life Cycle Assessment and Economics in First Year Engineering

Suzanne Keilson; Lynne C Elkes

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2018 FYEE Conference
Location: Glassboro, New Jersey
Publication Date: July 24, 2018
Start Date: July 24, 2018
End Date: July 26, 2018
Conference Session: Technical Session III
Tagged Topic: FYEE Conference Sessions
Page Count: 16
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--31423
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/31423
Download Count: 431

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Suzanne Keilson Loyola University Maryland

visit author page

Suzanne Keilson is a faculty member at Loyola University Maryland. Her background and degrees are in Applied Physics and her research interests include signal processing, biomedical and materials engineering, design and STEM education. She has taught for the past twenty years, including in special cross-disciplinary first year programs. She is a frequent presenter at a variety of conferences and venues, is an active member of ASEE and the Mid-Atlantic section as well as both ASME and IEEE.

visit author page

biography

Lynne C Elkes Loyola University Maryland

visit author page

Lynne C. Elkes. M.B.A. is a Lecturer of Economics at Loyola University Maryland. Her publications include “Knowing When to Quit/DNF” (2015).

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

IApproximately three years ago, a module on life-cycle assessment was incorporated into an Introduction to Engineering course that is open to all first-year undergraduate students at Loyola University Maryland. This paper will describe the module, its development, and subsequent revision. Future work will be conducted with a colleague from the Department of Economics. The module begins with a viewing of “The Story of Stuff,” produced by Annie Leonard of Greenpeace. This video is a robust critique of the lifecycle of consumer products. A second video with a tough opposing view introduces students to two fundamentally different political and philosophical viewpoints. Students are asked to write immediate in-class, anonymous responses to both viewpoints. The instructor collects and collates these responses, highlighting major themes and utilizing student quotes. Discussion in the following class session is based upon these responses with the intent to initiate deeper insight and critical analysis. For example, given the common issue of how budgets and percentages are presented in both videos, there is a natural segue into the ways data is presented and the “problem with percentages.” A document unique to this module is introduced referencing the data in full and discusses the important idea that data needs to be referenced with appropriate proportions and units (per capita, per mile, per GDP, etc.) and can be easily distorted when the reference base is changed (e.g. from total budget to discretionary budget). Another major theme in both videos is that of growth and its limits; this is again a natural starting point to introduce students to the foundational concepts in macroeconomics of the question of commodities, an s-curve of development with creative destruction, and the Ehrlich-Simon bet. The conclusion of the module requires students to write a reflective essay where they analyze the presentations more formally for the intended audience, author biases, and methodologies. The students are asked to find one thing they agree with and disagree with on both sides of the debate. Current students (2017) seem to readily accept ecological concerns about consumerism and show a desire for fairness and equity. This author believes those attitudes are well established in current K-12 education. This provides a nice frame, as time allows, to introduce principles from sustainability engineering and design, which are intended to analyze rigorously the externalized costs of products, consumption, and necessary infrastructure. This then lends itself to the application of a rapid “ecoaudit” to assess areas of impact under different design scenarios. This can be accomplished using materials selection software CES Edupack 2017 (Granta Design Limited, 2017).

Citation
Format

Keilson, S., & Elkes, L. C. (2018, July), Life Cycle Assessment and Economics in First Year Engineering Paper presented at 2018 FYEE Conference, Glassboro, New Jersey. 10.18260/1-2--31423

TY - CPAPER
AB - IApproximately three years ago, a module on life-cycle assessment was incorporated into an Introduction to Engineering course that is open to all first-year undergraduate students at Loyola University Maryland. This paper will describe the module, its development, and subsequent revision. Future work will be conducted with a colleague from the Department of Economics. The module begins with a viewing of “The Story of Stuff,” produced by Annie Leonard of Greenpeace. This video is a robust critique of the lifecycle of consumer products. A second video with a tough opposing view introduces students to two fundamentally different political and philosophical viewpoints. Students are asked to write immediate in-class, anonymous responses to both viewpoints. The instructor collects and collates these responses, highlighting major themes and utilizing student quotes. Discussion in the following class session is based upon these responses with the intent to initiate deeper insight and critical analysis. For example, given the common issue of how budgets and percentages are presented in both videos, there is a natural segue into the ways data is presented and the “problem with percentages.” A document unique to this module is introduced referencing the data in full and discusses the important idea that data needs to be referenced with appropriate proportions and units (per capita, per mile, per GDP, etc.) and can be easily distorted when the reference base is changed (e.g. from total budget to discretionary budget). Another major theme in both videos is that of growth and its limits; this is again a natural starting point to introduce students to the foundational concepts in macroeconomics of the question of commodities, an s-curve of development with creative destruction, and the Ehrlich-Simon bet. The conclusion of the module requires students to write a reflective essay where they analyze the presentations more formally for the intended audience, author biases, and methodologies. The students are asked to find one thing they agree with and disagree with on both sides of the debate. Current students (2017) seem to readily accept ecological concerns about consumerism and show a desire for fairness and equity. This author believes those attitudes are well established in current K-12 education. This provides a nice frame, as time allows, to introduce principles from sustainability engineering and design, which are intended to analyze rigorously the externalized costs of products, consumption, and necessary infrastructure. This then lends itself to the application of a rapid “ecoaudit” to assess areas of impact under different design scenarios. This can be accomplished using materials selection software CES Edupack 2017 (Granta Design Limited, 2017).

AU - Suzanne Keilson
AU - Lynne C Elkes
CY - Glassboro, New Jersey
DA - 2018/07/24
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Life Cycle Assessment and Economics in First Year Engineering
UR - https://peer.asee.org/31423
DO - 10.18260/1-2--31423
ER -