Green Project Management

Richard Maltzman, David Shirley

• Publisher: CRC Press
• Year: 2010
• ISBN:
  9781466554085
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Sustainability in Business
• Index: Business

Winner of PMI's 2011 David I. Cleland Project Management Literature AwardDetailing cutting-edge green techniques and methods, this book teaches project managers how to maximize resources and get the most out of limited budgets. It supplies proven techniques and best practices in green project management, including risk and opportunity assessments.

Section III
Approaching the Finish Line

It is good to have an end to journey toward, but it is the journey that matters in the end.

Ursula K. LeGuin

9

The Beginning and the End?

Famous Dutch author Harry Mulisch organized one of his more lengthy books, The Discovery of Heaven,¹ into four big chunks. He titled them:

The Beginning of the Beginning

The End of the Beginning

The Beginning of the End

The End of the End

HEAVEN ON EARTH

Mulisch provides an interesting way for us to think about his book (which, by the way, has been made into an excellent movie), but it also gives us a way to think about the projects on which we work. Even more important, it’s a good way to look at the products of the projects on which we work. In fact, we could take a lesson from The Discovery of Heaven and apply it to Earth. We could say that our projects usually involve only the first two chunks. We take an idea from its inception to the point to which it can be deployed en masse—put into operation or the steady state. Whether it’s a bridge, a sales-training program, a new piece of software, or a wind farm, we, the project manager, get that idea to the steady state. So ironically, we tend to focus not on that steady state, but rather on the beginning of the beginning and the end of the beginning—the getting to the steady state. Here, in the first two chunks, there are indeed green considerations, but they are focused on the project itself and the resources the project team itself uses. They are not focused on longer-term issues like what happens to the product as it is manufactured, used, and disposed of.

“Think about it: you may be referred to as a consumer, but there is very little you actually consume—some food, some liquids. Everything else is designed for you to throw away when you are finished with it. But where is “away”? Of course, “away” does not exist. “Away” has gone away.²

—William McDonough and Michael Braungart (2002)

But although we do that out of necessity (focus on getting to the steady state), the product of the project does not stop when we hand it over. The wind farm, or bridge, or even the software release, was made from materials from the earth, has a life, and has an end of life. Its creation has an impact on our surroundings, it has a useful period of operation (during which there are side effects such as consumables and waste), and the final disposal of the product itself has to be considered as well. We assert that the project manager, though not traditionally tasked with doing so, should also be thinking about the last two of Harry Mulisch’s chunks: the beginning of the end and the end of the end.

LIFE CYCLE THINKING BASICS

One man’s floor is another man’s ceiling …

Figure 9.1 (EPA, 1993) will help get us oriented. In fact, to project managers this chart should look strikingly familiar. It is reflected in the PMBOK Guide diagram for any of its 42 processes—inputs, tools and techniques, and outputs. In this case, inputs are raw materials and energy; tools and techniques are the acquisition of those items, manufacturing processes, use/reuse and maintenance, and recycle and waste management. Outputs (other than the product itself, of course) are atmospheric emissions, waterborne and solid wastes, coproducts, and other releases. Perhaps the most important part of this drawing is at the bottom: the system boundary. This will be discussed later when we get into the details of a life cycle assessment (LCA).

At times, there is confusion between LCA and other approaches that are life cycle based (but that someone may also be calling LCA). Simplifications to LCA have been necessary mainly due to the lack of readily available life cycle inventory data, which is needed to model the entire product system. Sometimes it is driven by specific interests.

FIGURE 9.1
Inputs and outputs.

• Life cycle–based approaches use the life cycle concept to view a product system from cradle to grave but limit the study to a predetermined area of concern, such as energy use, global warming, or material use.

• Using the life cycle concept, or life cycle thinking, considers all the interconnected activities within an industrial system from cradle to grave; i.e., it considers the entire product life. The information may be qualitative, or very general quantitative data may be used. The benefit of using life cycle thinking is to help understand the entire life cycle of the product.

• Life cycle assessment is a standardized approach to quantifying natural resources used and wastes released to the environment from cradle to grave; to assessing the impact of quantities; and to identifying opportunities to affect environmental improvements.

• Screening/streamlined LCA is a simplified application of the LCA methodology in that it is typically a first attempt to collect data and information, e.g., by using generic data, standard modules for transportation or energy production, etc., followed by a simplified assessment.

• Detailed LCA is an application of the LCA methodology that uses more comprehensive, quantitative data and incorporates life cycle impact assessment of all relevant environmental aspects. A detailed assessment usually involves multiple iterations of data collection, impact assessment, and scope definition.

Of necessity, all LCA studies are streamlined. Industrial processes are so extensively interconnected globally that complete consideration of all these interdependencies is impractical. So shortcuts are taken. It is not a question of whether or not streamlining is feasible; it is simply a matter of how much streamlining is appropriate while still leading to meaningful results.

• Life cycle–based approaches (other than LCA) apply the life cycle concept by viewing a product system from cradle to grave but limit the study to a preselected area of concern. An example is life cycle greenhouse gas analysis, which accounts for potential greenhouse gas emissions from cradle to grave with the goal of assessing potential global climate change effects. Carbon footprinting is similar. These types of life cycle–based studies consider the entire life cycle activities but account only for inputs and outputs of interest.

• Life cycle management (LCM) integrates information that is generated by different tools, of which LCA is one. LCA captures environmental information, but information covering other factors, such as costs, performance, risk, community, etc., is also needed. LCM will be covered again later in the discussion. LCA is an effective tool to capture environmental information, but information on other aspects, such as economics and societal needs, is also required. LCM is a term that is growing in popularity and captures the notion of broadening a study’s boundaries to help decision makers achieve sustainability goals. The goal of LCM is to integrate information that is generated by different tools to address risk, economics, technological, and social aspects of products, services, and organizations, as well as the environmental aspects. LCM, as with any other project management tool, is applied on a voluntary basis and can be adapted to the specific needs and characteristics of the individual projects and their organizations.

The holistic approach of LCA is the cornerstone of sustainability. LCA is an effective tool for identifying opportunities for continual improvement within industrial operations and for moving us in the right strategic direction.

History is full of stories of notorious cases where “good intentions” have gone wrong (see text box). To keep organizations from choosing practices that might ultimately become environmentally ruinous, a holistic tool is needed.

The Road to (Environmental) Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions.

We have a long history of “solving” one problem by unwittingly creating another—often with even worse long-term consequences. For example, kudzu, an Asian vine, was introduced as a way of preventing erosion in earthworks in the southeastern part of the United States. It now grows unchecked and is considered an invasive pest. In the 1930s and 1940s, many cities thought streetcar tracks and overhead wires were “unsightly.” They rushed to replace “old and inefficient” means of transport with fossil-fueled vehicles. Some claim it was all a “Great Streetcar Conspiracy” by carmakers, oil companies, and tire manufacturers seeking a bigger market for their products. Today, the same cities are spending millions to re-establish rail lines in an effort to minimize traffic congestion, reduce air pollution, and curb urban sprawl. Scores of drugs meant to cure ills were later found to cause horrible harm. Thalidomide is the most infamous (and tragic) example. But even medicines as familiar as aspirin have been linked to serious health problems (for example, Reye’s syndrome in children). The debate continues over the potential long-term effects of pharmaceuticals in the environment (PIE), while the list of drugs with dubious risk-to-benefit profiles expands each year. Similarly, the long-term risks and benefits of genetically modified (GM) foods and crop-based ethanol fuels continue to be hotly debated.³

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

The basic tool that can be used for holistic life cycle thinking is an LCA (life cycle assessment)....