CEO Monthly August 2017

22 CEO MONTHLY / AUGUST 2017 Engineering that includes recycling as a sustainability dimension: Processing -> Structure -> Property -> Performance -> Reutilization/Recyclability They have represented this new paradigm in a circular way as given below: New Circular Central Paradigm of Materials Science and Engineering all of which are important– but rarely on science, technology, and engineering as one of the most important solution-providing factors in sustainability. “Science has been often credited only for its diagnostic role in pointing out and demonstrating numerous issues facing the environment However, in order to be sustainable, the recycling technology used needs to be cost effective, thus fulfilling one important dimension of sustainability. It is exactly here that the role of science and technology is primordial. Sustainability Through Science and Technology Dr. Florian Kongoli believes that the role of science and technology in sustainability is a diagnostic and strongly remedial one. Dr. Kongoli elaborates on his views on this subject. The role of science, technology and engineering has almost been overlooked in the last 25 years in the social and political debates related to sustainability, environmental protection and climate change. The attention has been placed on areas such as social awareness, economy, management, and education– and climate change in the 20th and 21st centuries. It is positively referred to for showing the problems and providing scientific measuring results to demonstrate problems, such as average global temperature increase and other various associated issues. However, from that point, the ball (recognition) seems to stop rolling. Although it is good to credit science, technology, and engineering for their diagnostic role, this is only half of their contribution. The other and most important part, is neglected. “Simple research shows that there is a very high number of studies from centers around the world, that have produced countless comprehensive reports about the economy, social awareness, management, education, and way of life as solutions to both climate change issues and sustainability. A great deal of money has been spent in various countries on these in various countries on these studies that, while valuable, tend to repeat the same ideas and are inflationary when it comes to results and conclusions. Studies on why and how technology can solve the issues of climate change and sustainability, are virtually non-existent.” In international socio-political gatherings on sustainability where Dr. Kongoli has participated, the role of science, technology, and engineering has been frequently ignored. Dr. Kongoli then goes on to develop a fascinating point. “Other aspects have been extensively discussed, yet science and technology has rarely been in the picture. Some well-known speakers, with social and economic backgrounds, have often publicly considered the role of science and technology as a delayed, inefficient, or non-affecting factor in solving pressing climate change issues. Instead, they have opted to create and establish arbitrary new laws and regulations as the only remedial actions available, without even consulting science and engineering. “In my opinion, this seems to be not only a good non-starter, but also ironic. They refer to scientific studies to provide evidence for global warming, and as a basis to establish action plans to remedy the problems. However, these actions that originate from science, somehow do not include science and technology as an important solution. “I have publicly countered and debated vigorously on this stance with scientific and technological concepts in various socio-political meetings. I’m glad to say that I have successfully changed the minds of several of these individuals, about the role of science and technology.” Dr. Kongoli then reveals the limitations that exist in non-exact science domains. He recounts Queen Elizabeth II of England’s visit at an economic institute, sometime after the economic crisis of 2008. “When the director of the institute was explaining to her their work on analysing the economic data and predicting the economic future, the Queen asked a simple question: ‘If, as you say, you predict the economy, why could you not predict the economic crisis of 2008?’ The director responded: ‘Your majesty, if we would have known, we would have predicted it.’ “In another case, in a meeting I was at about a year ago, a recent Nobel Prize Laureate in Economics declared in his major speech, that for any bad prediction on the economy by economists, the people to be blamed are not economists but politicians. “As UK Lord Prescott said, in one of the FLOGEN summits, it is easy to put the blame on ‘externalities’ for any inability of economics to properly predict economic phenomena. According to him, there is evidence that more and more people will use this as a reason to justify why they are not able to achieve the objectives of sustainability.” Lord Prescott went even further in his speech, saying that “The natural law of economics has not worked, and has certainly not achieved sustainability. As one economist said, this was probably the largest failure of the market operating system to keep it in balance.” In contrast, science and technology are generally exact when it comes to prediction, Dr. Kongoli adds. He then offers his thoughts on the issues around real sustainability. “For any possible failure, scientists, technologists, and engineers cannot blame externalities or anybody else for their failure except themselves. However, science and technology are not problem- free. They have their own issues, although they are of a different nature. Sustainability is frequently an unfamiliar concept for scientists consider it as a