Fixing up Our Common Home

An Environmental Engineer’s Reading of Laudato Si’

“Rather than a problem to be solved, the world is a joyful mystery to be contemplated with

gladness and praise” (Laudato Si’ 12).

Grace Eder

Simpson Essay Contest

Sheil Catholic Center at Northwestern University

Evanston, Illinois

May 15, 2019

2

Introduction

Pope Francis issued his first full encyclical, Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common

Home, in June 2015. That year, the global mean sea level reached a new record high.1 It was the

year that the 68th United Nations General Assembly declared to be the International Year of Soils

to raise awareness about the deterioration of soils which nourish the world’s crops.2 It was

second-hottest year on record, and it preceded the absolute hottest year on record.3 It was the

year that 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, a unified goal to adopt sustainable energy

sources, curb greenhouse gas emissions, and limit the rise of global temperatures, in light of

human-induced climate change.4

Conversations about the environment press heavily on today’s consciousness. The use of

the word “environment” has shot up in popularity from 1800 until now (Figure 1).5

Figure 1: Use of the word “environment”

1 National Oceans and Atmospheric Administration. “2015 State of the Climate: Sea Level.” Climate.gov, August 2, 2016, https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/2015-state-climate-sea-level. 2 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. “About.” 2015 International Year of Soils, accessed May 7, 2019, http://www.fao.org/soils-2015/about/en/. 3 Climate Central. “The 10 Hottest Global Years on the Record.” Climate Central, February 6, 2019, https://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/the-10-hottest-global-years-on-record. 4 Camila Domonoske. “So What Exactly Is the Paris Climate Accord?” NPR, June 1, 2017, https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/01/531048986/so-what-exactly-is-in-the-paris-climate-accord. 5 Google. “Ngram Viewer – ‘environment.’” Google Books.

3

While “environment” might be a relatively new term in literature and politics, the phrase “care

for the earth” has deep roots in Catholic tradition, which allows Pope Francis to build on a firm

foundation of theological writings and teachings. He references a diverse array of sources

including the Bible, Catholic social teaching, and previous magisterial documents about

environmental destruction and its impact on the poor. However, as an encyclical, the most

authoritative teaching document, scholars predicted it would have a “magnified impact”

compared to the loose collection of previous doctrine6 and indeed, it did increase awareness of

climate change, particularly among Catholics.7

I read Laudato Si’ last summer, in little chunks every night. By day, I interned in the

environmental branch of an engineering consulting company. No two days were the same; I

monitored excavations at construction sites, interviewed maintenance men for environmental site

assessments, recorded field notes to characterize soil borings, and scanned records of old

mishaps and cleanups. I learned that expansive aquifers of water hide in the ground below our

feet, and I found out about government programs that encourage property owners to remediate

human-caused contamination of that groundwater.

My engineering coworkers excelled at teaching me “what” and “how,” but I wanted to

know the “why” of the work. What—we need to clean up a chemical spill that has leaked into the

groundwater. How—we will decide whether the best method for this site is pumping the water or

6 Mark Stoll. “Pope Francis is actually bringing America’s environmentalism movement to its religious and moral roots.” Washington Post, June 17, 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/17/pope-francis-is-actually-bringing-americas-environmentalism-movement-to-its-religious-and-moral-roots/?utm_term=.18d310aebe4f. 7 Edward Maibach, et al. “The Francis Effect: How Pope Francis Changed the Conversation About Global Warming.” Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, November 5, 2015, https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-francis-effect/.

4

injecting a metabolizer. I lost myself in Google goose-chases. What were these chemicals? How

do they affect us? And why did we need to take responsibility? I struggled to understand why my

major, environmental engineering, was truly meaningful, aside from a way to earn money.

Whenever I told people I studied engineering, they winked and complimented my money-

making prospects. Surely, I hoped, there is more to my work than its monetary reward. As I read

more of Laudato Si’ each night, I found answers that neither my coworkers nor Google could

provide. I circled full sections and put stars along the margins and scribbled, Yes. This is why I

want to be an environmental engineer.

Pope Francis’s intended audience includes everyone, not just Catholics. As with previous

encyclicals, he references the literature of science and policy in addition to Church doctrine.

Celia Deane-Drummond, in her research on how Pope Francis weaves natural sciences into

Laudato Si’, examines his references to environmental science and modern technologies in light

of Catholic social teaching. She asks, “Is Pope Francis accurate in his scientific analysis?... Are

there specific areas of science that he could have profitably covered, given his overall intention

to convince his readers that there is an imperative for environmental responsibility?”8 She poses

several areas of ecology that could have fit into the encyclical, given Pope Francis’s framework.

Just as she analyzes the encyclical’s coverage of ecology and environmental science, I

will analyze the space for environmental engineering. Though it contains only a few explicit

references to “engineering,” the encyclical still provides a valuable toolkit for this field. I will

interpret two scopes which the encyclical offers an environmental engineer: an outline of values

for the engineer’s general character and a framework of criteria to discern the worth of specific

8 Celia Deane-Drummond, “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences: An Assessment of Possibilities and Limits,” Theological Studies 77, no. 2 (2016): 395.

5

projects. The first scope answers, “What kind of person should an environmental engineer be?”

and the second answers, “What factors should an environmental engineer include when

approaching a project?” Here, I will provide a case study in groundwater remediation to show

how an environmental engineer can use Laudato Si’ as a filter when approaching projects. While

these two scopes were not Pope Francis’s explicit purpose of the encyclical, I will show that his

words are necessary for any environmental engineer, Catholic or otherwise, who wants to

practice a virtuous career.

Engineers traditionally work with hammers and nails. When they see problems in the

world, they consider how to use their toolkit to build solutions. However, just because engineers

hold hammers, does not make everything they encounter a nail. Pope Francis encourages us to

step back and view the world with a broader perspective, knowing the moral limits of our own

power. He writes, “Rather than a problem to be solved, the world is a joyful mystery to be

contemplated with gladness and praise.”9 Environmental engineers, using their hammers with

humility as much as strength, have a unique responsibility in the efforts to fix up our common

home.

9 Francis, Laudato Si’, encyclical letter, Vatican website, May 24, 2015, http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si_en.pdf, sec. 12.

6

Scope 1: The Character of an Environmental Engineer

Deane-Drummond describes Pope Francis’s balance in approaching science and

technology: “On the one hand, he wants to affirm the great gains that contemporary science and

technology have wrought in particular areas: medicine, engineering, and communications in

particular. On the other hand, he is extremely critical of hubristic assertions that presume new

technologies will solve the intense environmental challenges of today.”10 In other words, the

world of science has grown, but the morality of each individual has not. “He gives a place for

scientific research in charting the way forward, even though such initiatives need to be qualified

and monitored by a broader ethical and social framework.”11 In this section, I will explore the

broader ethical framework that environmental engineers should strive to adopt.

What is Environmental Engineering?

The field of environmental engineering encompasses a wide variety of careers. Many

people hold the misconception that environmental engineering developed recently as a reaction

to increasing awareness of global climate change, with the goal of crafting futuristic solutions to

a changing atmosphere. However, most environmental engineers have a much more common and

gritty presence in the work-force. Students who graduate with degrees in environmental

engineering go on to design water treatment systems, test alternative energy sources, regulate

sustainable buildings, manage conservation non-profits, and more.12 And while environmental

engineering is a relatively new field, the work itself is not. Previously, people with degrees in

10 Deane-Drummond, “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences,” 398. 11 Deane-Drummond, “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences,” 400. 12 “Career Paths,” Northwestern McCormick School of Engineering, accessed May 7, 2019, https://www.mccormick.northwestern.edu/civil-environmental/undergraduate/environmental-engineering/.

7

civil engineering, chemical engineering, or public health entered into careers which today

encompass “environmental engineering.”13

What are the Catholic Roots of the Encyclical?

Pope Francis does not speak explicitly to environmental engineers in the Laudato Si’, but

he offers implicit advice to them throughout. He builds this advice on a foundation of Catholic

theology. The Catholic understanding of care for our common home begins with the Bible, from

the very first book. In the story of creation, God created the heavens and Earth and all the

creatures on Earth. He then made humans the stewards of this land.14 Catholics read Genesis, the

first book of the Bible, as mythical revelations of the deeper truth of the role that our Creator

intended us to have in the environment.15 We are stewards over the earth and its creatures, not

all-powerful beings who can use it for our own desires. This theme repeats throughout the Bible.

The psalms echo with awe for God’s creation (see for example Ps 136:6, Ps 148:3-5, Ps 29:3, Ps

8). Continuing into the New Testament, the message to respect the life and dignity of nature and

of each other recurs again and again (see for example Jn 1:3, Col 1:16, Heb 1:3). Pope Francis

refers to verses spanning from the Old Testament to the epistles of Paul. In describing the Bible’s

references to creation, he quotes, “Through the greatness and the beauty of creatures one comes

to know by analogy their maker”16; and “his eternal power and divinity have been made known

through his works since the creation of the world.”17

13 “Why Environmental Engineering is Vital for Our Future.” EnvironmentalScience, accessed May 7, 2019. https://www.environmentalscience.org/environmental-engineering. 14 Gen 1:26-29 (New American Bible Revised Edition). 15 Tremper Longman III How to Read Genesis. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2005). 16 Wis 13:5. 17 Rom 1:20. Continued: “For although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes” (Rom 1:21-23).

8

In addition to Biblical references, Pope Francis weaves in Catholic social teaching and

previous magisterial documents. In fact, he opens the encyclical with a brief timeline of

documents that previous popes have produced concerning environmental degradation, or closely

related. He quotes St. John Paul II’s encyclical Redemptor Hominis, that “human beings

frequently seem to see no other meaning in their natural environment than what serves for

immediate use and consumption. Subsequently he would call for a global ecological

conversion.”18 Then as Pope Francis connects the “deterioration of nature” to the “culture which

shapes human coexistence,”19 he refers to Pope Benedict’s encyclical Caritas in Veritate. And in

addition to quoting previous encyclicals, Pope Francis takes inspiration from conferences such as

the 1999 Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference. In their report, Pastoral Statement on

the Environmental Crisis, they wrote, “Everyone’s talent and involvement are needed to redress

the damage caused by human abuse of God’s creation.”20 As Pope Francis traces an arc through

the Church’s rich teachings on the environment, he builds a solid foundation for his encyclical.

The Church’s teachings and traditions support the themes of advice that I extrapolate for

environmental engineers: “beware the technocratic paradigm,” “understand our place in the

environment,” and “cultivate awe and humility.”

18 John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis, encyclical letter, Vatican website, March 4, 1979, http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html, sec. 15. 19 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 6. 20 Southern African Catholic Bishop’s Conference, Pastoral Statement on the Environmental Crisis, September 5, 1999, http://www.inee.mu.edu/documents/26SOUTHERNAFRICANCATHOLICBISHOPS_000.pdf.

9

Beware the Technocratic Paradigm

In his chapter on “the human roots of the ecological crisis,” Pope Francis outlines the

dangerous “technocratic paradigm” emerging in Western nations. He defines the paradigm as an

obsession with technology as the ultimate solution to environmental challenges, ignorant of “a

greater understanding of what motivates human beings to live in harmony and peace.”21 Pope

Francis warns that the paradigm “exalts the concept of a subject who, using logical and rational

procedures, progressively approaches and gains control over an external object.” 22 While he

acknowledges that science has allowed great accomplishments, he criticizes its misuse. The

technocratic paradigm, he says, “is based on the lie that there is an infinite supply of the earth’s

goods, and this leads to the planet being squeezed dry beyond every limit.”23 An environmental

engineer must understand this danger of the technocratic paradigm.

While technology offers a useful tool, it should be used with the common good in mind.24

People with power must listen to the voices of the poor and vulnerable, and must honor the good

of the community, instead of advancing technology for the sake of the economy or for the sake

of progress itself. Here, as I consider the character of the environmental engineer, I will look at

how the technocratic paradigm affects engineering. However, Pope Francis also outlines how the

paradigm also dominates economics, politics, and culture; he shows that all of these areas

interconnect.25 Engineers should take these factors into account when they develop technological

solutions.

21 Deane-Drummond, “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences,” 401. 22 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 106. 23 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 106. 24 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 94. 25 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 106.

10

On its own, technology has a positive connotation in the broader aspect of history. It is

good and beautiful for humans to innovate solutions that improve the lives of each other and

future generations. Where does technology go too far? When does productivity trample dignity?

As an engineering example, when project managers obsess over progress for the sake of

progress, they fail to honor the dignity of the most vulnerable among us. Pope Francis cites the

examples of a water dam which endangers species of animals26 and housing developments which

neglect poor members of a community.27 He prioritizes human dignity over animal wellbeing,

although the technocratic paradigm affects both.

We see symptoms of the technocratic paradigm all around us, not just in the environment,

but in our quality of life. Pope Francis says that these symptoms include “environmental

degradation, anxiety and loss of the purpose of life and of community living.”28 He continues,

“To seek only a technical remedy to each environmental problem which comes up is to separate

what is in reality interconnected and to mask the true and deepest problems of the global

system.”29 And later, he emphasizes, “Merely technical solutions run the risk of addressing

symptoms, and not the more serious underlying problems.”30 Symptoms require a healer, and

here, engineers step in. Engineers have a responsibility to go beyond a mere technical remedy.

To do so, they must respect the dignity of life and culture of life that they work to protect.

26 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 35. 27 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 152. 28 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 110. 29 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 111. 30 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 144.

11

Understand Our Place within the Environment

Pope Francis speaks of a “universal communion” with creation but emphasizes that we

should open our hearts to each other in priority over animals and plants. “A sense of deep

communion with the rest of nature cannot be real if our hearts lack tenderness, compassion, and

concern for our fellow human beings.”31 Our actions towards creation will affect us, sometimes

in ways we could never predict. “Everything is connected. Concern for the environment thus

needs to be joined to a sincere love for our fellow human beings and an unwavering commitment

to resolving the problems of society.”32 Awareness of this connection is prevalent especially in

the fields of natural sciences that study ecosystems. “We need only recall how ecosystems

interact in dispersing carbon dioxide, purifying water, controlling illnesses and epidemics,

forming soil, breaking down waste, and in many other ways which we overlook or simply do not

know about.”33 While ecology studies the natural ways of the world, environmental engineering

adds human footprints to the soil.

Engineers design systems that that will interact with the natural world. Usually, these

systems benefit humans, which historically has implied harming the natural world. However,

environmental engineers, more so than other engineers, are called to mitigate these harmful

effects. For example, growing corn for ethanol as fuel might appear more renewable than

extracting petroleum for gasoline as fuel, but environmental engineers conduct a life cycle

analyses to show that the amount of corn needed for sustainable ethanol use would damage

swaths of arable land beyond repair, harming the soil and microorganisms, and in turn, hurting

31 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 91. 32 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 91. 33 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 140.

12

people who depend on the food from that farmland. Environmental engineers must appreciate the

connectedness that Pope Francis emphasizes throughout the encyclical.

Cultivate Awe and Humility

Pope Francis encourages everyone to be humble in the face of creation. His final chapter

of the encyclical delivers a positive call-to-action. He says that the first step in developing a

humble character is to be observant. Our mindset influences our behavior, so if someone “has not

learned to stop and admire something beautiful, we should not be surprised if he or she treats

everything as an object to be used and abused without scruple.”34 Because of how much our

character influences our actions, Pope Francis calls for an “interior conversion.”35 He adds,

“Living our vocation to be protectors of God’s handiwork is essential to a life of virtue; it is not

an optional or a secondary aspect of our Christian experience.”36 Any environmental engineer

who seeks to live out a virtuous life will benefit from living out Pope Francis’s message.

The call-to-action is universal, directed at “us,” the first-person plural: “By developing

our individual, God-given capacities, an ecological conversion can inspire us to greater creativity

and enthusiasm in resolving the world’s problems and in offering ourselves to God as a living

sacrifice, holy and acceptable.”37 Environmental engineers, as a part of this greater “us,” must be

wary of the technocratic paradigm, understand our place in the environment, and approach the

natural world with awe and humility. By doing so, they will develop the character that Pope

Francis promotes for each of us.

34 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 215. 35 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 217. 36 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 217. 37 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 220.

13

Scope 2: The Discernment of an Engineer’s Work

The Directive for Projects

As environmental engineers strive for virtuous qualities in their overall character, they

can also read the encyclical for guidance in specific engineering endeavors. Pope Francis traces

pollution, waste, and greenhouse gases back to our “throwaway culture,” a culture of waste.38

After giving a broad overview of these problems, which human innovation has caused directly,

he discusses how human innovation can help remediate the problems. Here, engineers have a

role; in fact, this excerpt accounts for one of the only explicit mentions of engineers in the

encyclical:

“We must be grateful for the praiseworthy efforts being made by scientists and engineers

dedicated to finding solutions to man-made problems. But a sober look at our world

shows that the degree of human intervention, often in the service of business interests and

consumerism, is actually making our earth less rich and beautiful, ever more limited and

gray, even as technological advances and consumer goods continue to abound limitlessly.

We seem to think that we can substitute an irreplaceable and irretrievable beauty with

something which we have created ourselves.”39

When discerning the approach for projects, engineers must maintain respect for God’s creation—

for its complexity and its beauty. Pope Francis advises us to assess the environmental impact of

any project by considering the creatures at risk, as well as the soil, water, and air.40

38 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 22. 39 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 34. 40 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 35.

14

Instead of applying the encyclical’s approach to the whole field of environmental

engineering, I will focus on a case study in groundwater remediation. (Engineers can apply the

method of discernment to many other diverse projects.) Laudato Si’ guides the environmental

engineer to seek preventative, cost-effective solutions that honor people and the environment. As

I saw over the summer, environmental engineers already have strategies for approaching

problems; the encyclical puts the strategies into a bigger picture, with respect for God’s creation

at the core of the work. Environmental engineers, whether religious or not, ask three questions,

to which the encyclical adds deeper insight:

1. What is the problem? Pope Francis advocates for more comprehensive research so that

we can understand the full expanse of the problem.41

2. Who is at stake? He posits that we must maintain preferential option for the poor, both

the “poor of the future” and “today’s poor.”42

3. Does the solution account for the interconnectedness of nature? He says we must

consider the broad effects of solutions.43

By complementing engineers’ existing approach and providing further insight, the encyclical

offers answers to “why,” not just “how.”

Case Study: Groundwater Remediation for PCE Contamination

Some environmental engineers work to remediate contaminated groundwater. Earth, a

blue marble spinning through space, holds life only because it holds water. Most of it—94% of

Earth’s water by volume—sits in oceans and seas. The second largest source of water is not

41 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 135, 140. 42 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 162. 43 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 142.

15

lakes, swamps, or rivers as we might think; each of these sources account for less than 0.01% of

Earth’s water. Rather, in aquifers, hidden from the human eye, groundwater makes up 4% of all

of Earth’s water. Beneath our feet, beneath our land, and even beneath our oceans, groundwater

saturates pores in the rock and soil, in layers we can access by drilling.

Groundwater must remain clean for several practical reasons. People use groundwater

every day for industry, irrigation, mining, livestock, and public supply.44 In fact, 90 million

people rely on groundwater as a drinking source.45 Even when it is not the source of drinking

water, it should stay clean; contamination transported in the groundwater changes phase into

vapors, which then permeate the soil.46 In residential areas, these vapors can leak into buildings

and communities. If the groundwater is contaminated with chemicals that are hazardous to

people’s health, these vapors pose health risks to residents, particularly children. In addition to

building residents, construction workers who encounter groundwater will face health risks if the

groundwater is contaminated.47 As for non-human risks, groundwater affects the ecosystems of

organisms in the soil.48 It also flows into above-ground sources, such as lakes and oceans;

contaminated groundwater threatens the aquatic life and organisms who depend on aquatic life.49

In short, groundwater must remain clean for the sake of humans and other organisms who

encounter it. Pope Francis repeatedly notes the interconnectedness of nature; groundwater serves

as a prime example.

44 United States Geological Survey. “Groundwater Use in the United States.” USGS. 45 “Nutrient Pollution | Where This Occurs: Groundwater and Drinking Water.” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/where-occurs-ground-water-and-drinking-water 46 “What is Vapor Intrusion?” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/vaporintrusion/what-vapor-intrusion. 47 “Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) – User’s Guide.” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-users-guide#usingtables. 48 Brad R. Murray et. al, “Groundwater-dependent ecosystems in Australia: It's more than just water for rivers,” Ecological Management & Restoration 4, no. 2 (August 2003): 110. 49 Allan Freeze and John Cherry, Groundwater (Prentice-Hall, 1979), 3.

16

Question 1: What is the problem?

A “contaminant” refers to either a harmful foreign substance or an overabundance of a

domestic substance.50 A chemical that is helpful in one circumstance can be harmful in another;

in the early 1990s, Waupaca, Wisconsin, discovered that nitrate from agricultural fertilizer was

leaking into its groundwater, the city’s primary source of drinking water.51 A contaminant also

can be naturally occurring, such as arsenic; the US Army Corps of Engineers found high levels

of arsenic in the groundwater on the campus of American University, but since the groundwater

was not a source of drinking water, the site required no action.52 However, more commonly,

contaminants from human sources do require our action to remediate.

The call for remediation is not new. Freeze and Cherry dedicate a whole chapter of their

1979 textbook to “Groundwater Contamination,” stating, “As a result of our consumptive way of

life, the groundwater environment is being assaulted with an ever-increasing number of soluble

chemicals.” They reference several sources of groundwater contamination: sewage disposal on

land, agricultural activities (like the Waupaca example), petroleum leakage and spills, and

radioactive waste disposal, among others.53 Working in the DC area over the summer, I saw

many sites with petroleum contamination. I also saw another widespread source of

contamination from a more seemingly innocent source: typical neighborhood dry cleaning

facilities.

50 René P. Schwarzenbach, Philip M. Gschwend, and Dieter M. Imboden, Environmental Organic Chemistry (New Jersey: Wiley, 2017), ch. 1. 51 “Nutrient Pollution | Where This Occurs: Groundwater and Drinking Water.” Environmental Protection Agency. 52 “Spring Valley | Groundwater.” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.nab.usace.army.mil/Home/Spring-Valley/Groundwater/. 53 Freeze and Cherry, Groundwater, 434-457.

17

Dry cleaners use a solvent called PCE (perchloroethylene) to degrease materials; it is an

ideal solution to wash clothes without submerging them into water. After PCE was first

introduced as a dry-cleaning agent during the Great Depression, dry cleaners across the country

used it as the solvent of choice by 1962.54 In 1989, Amendments to the Clean Water Act

identified 83 compounds found in drinking water that may have an adverse effect on people’s

health; the list included PCE and its related degradation products.55As the scientific community

produced more and more research on the adverse effects of PCE on human and environmental

health, the EPA tightened regulations. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, states began weaning

dry cleaners off of PCE. The nation set a 2008 deadline for phase-out of PCE transfer machines.

By December 21, 2020, all PCE dry cleaning machines will be banned in co-residential

facilities.56

While facilities phase out PCE, environmental engineers work to remediate the damage

from dry cleaners of the past, and even some still present. The molecule PCE has a simple

structure (Figure 2). Two carbons share a double bond. The molecule has a rigid linear shape

with the four chlorine atoms branching off. 57 Because of this symmetry, the molecule is

nonpolar, making it immiscible with water. In fact, it is denser than water, so it will sink (unlike

oil, an immiscible fluid that floats to the top because it is less dense than water). Physically, PCE

is a nonflammable, colorless liquid with a sharp, sweet odor. Environmental engineers must

understand all of these basic properties about PCE as they develop plans to remove PCE from

groundwater.

54 “A Chronology of Historical Developments in Drycleaning.” State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners, accessed May 14, 2019. https://drycleancoalition.org/download/drycleaning-historical_developments.pdf. 55 “A Chronology.” State Coalition. 56 “A Chronology.” State Coalition. 57 “Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene).” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 14, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/tetrachloroethylene.pdf.

18

Figure 2: Structure of perchloroethylene (PCE)

In addition to the details about the contaminant, engineers must know the local ecology,

the subsurface chemistry, and the neighborhood geology. Pope Francis writes that “it is essential

to give researchers their due role, to facilitate their interaction, and to ensure broad academic

freedom.”58 He encourages research as a search for the truth. Deane-Drummond notes, “As a

chemist by training, he demonstrates a readiness to move rather more confidently through the

scientific discourse compared with his predecessors, so it is significant that so much of this

encyclical includes scientific discussion.”59 By fully researching the components of the

contamination, engineers follow Pope Francis’s call to fully understand the problem before

designing a solution.

Question 2: Who is at risk?

Multiple studies have published the health risks associated with PCE exposure, including

liver problems and increased risk of cancer over time.60 There are three means of PCE exposure:

ingestion (drinking contaminated water), inhalation (breathing in releases from dry cleaned

clothes), and contact (touching dry-cleaned clothes, products containing PCE, or soil

58 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 140. 59 Deane-Drummond, “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences,” 396. 60 “National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations#Organic.

19

contaminated with PCE).61 Because the levels of exposure depend on location, and risk factors

depend on the body’s ability to cope, the EPA sets different screening levels for different risk

groups.62 Adults who encounter PCE in the context of residential buildings have different risk

factors from adults who encounter PCE in the context of construction sites. Children have higher

risk factors than adults. The NIH warns, “Don’t let children play in dirt or eat dirt if you live near

a waste site that contains perchloroethylene.”63 To quantify these risks, the EPA sets “Maximum

Contaminant Levels” in extensive tables, which take into account the categories of exposure

(drinking water or not) and groups at risk (children or adults). These tables determine the

maximum permissible amount of a contaminant in a public water system,64 and the EPA updates

them as more research reveals further health risks. The EPA’s categories complement Pope

Francis’s call for preferential option for the vulnerable;65 the regulations show more care and

urgency when children are at risk because they have a lower tolerance, just as there is more care

and urgency for construction workers with higher chances of exposure. By remediating the

contamination, we are also caring for future generations of people; Pope Francis urges us to

clean up the messes of today that could harm the children of tomorrow.66

Question 3: Does the solution account for the interconnectedness of nature?

Environmental engineers aim to reduce the concentration of PCE in the groundwater to

below the “maximum contaminant level.” Environmental engineers first characterize the spill by

61 “Perchloroethylene (PCE, PERC).” NIH | ToxTown, accessed May 13, 2019. https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/chemicals-and-contaminants/perchloroethylene-pce-perc 62 “Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) – User’s Guide.” EPA. 63 “Perchloroethylene (PCE, PERC).” NIH | ToxTown. 64 “National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.” EPA. 65 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 158. 66 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 159.

20

creating boring logs from the bore-holes drilled at strategic locations around a site of study. Then

they take measurements of contamination at different intervals of depth from the borings. With

this information, they model the extent of the plume of contamination in the groundwater. Their

models reveal only rough estimates, since it is impossible to dig underground with a magnifying

glass to see the plume in high-resolution detail. However, once engineers estimate the extent of

the contamination, they design a method to remediate it. The first steps—characterizing the

contamination—complement Pope Francis’s call for more comprehensive research.67 We must

know the problem before we fix it.

Because of diverse conditions of the soil and groundwater, there is no “one size fits all”

solution; this summer, I learned that each site requires a unique method of remediation.

Engineers’ use critical discernment to decide how to remediate a plume of contamination.

Solutions range from chemical (injecting reagents to transform the PCE into something less

harmful), biological (injecting microbes to “digest” and effectively dechlorinate the PCE),

physical (filling the ground with cement walls to block the flow of groundwater), or extraction

(completely removing the contaminated soil and water to a contaminated landfill site). Pope

Francis reminds us about the interconnectedness of nature, an important quality to keep at the

heart of this work. For example, if the engineers decide to remediate a site by injecting microbes

into the ground, they risk having the microbes dominate and displace natural species. Engineers

should conduct patch tests in one small area to ensure that their solution will “match” the

subsurface conditions.

Fifteen years ago, remediation relied on the “pump-and-treat” solutions, in which

technicians completely removed the contaminated material and treated it off-site. Now, engineers

67 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 135, 140.

21

have developed in-situ (in-place) methods, which are cheaper and more effective. Redox Tech,

LLC, a small environmental remediation firm with headquarters in North Carolina, focuses on

in-situ soil and groundwater remediation. Dr. Joe Rossabi, a Northwestern environmental

engineering professor and part-owner of Redox Tech, LLC, applies his scientific background to

help clients (from both the public and private sectors) choose an effective remediation method

for their contaminated sites. These methods must please business owners, who want to save

money, without sacrificing environmental quality. Rossabi focuses on the science, while his

business partner contributes an economics perspective. The constant back-and-forth between the

partners exemplifies Pope Francis’s call for dialogue across fields.68

Insufficient funding or short timelines cause environmental engineers to sacrifice the

quality of remediation. Rossabi gave the example of a project where chlorinated concentrations

below a military hanger required a biological method as the most effective remediation

technique. However, because the construction project would pour concrete on the site soon after

remediation, it would prevent the necessary monthly checks on the injected microbes.

Sometimes, in other cases of PCE plumes, the contamination releases deep into rock, beyond the

point of harming people, and beyond our reach to remediate. The EPA uses a 1993 guidance to

go through site-specific factors and determine “whether groundwater restoration is technically

impracticable and what alternative measures or actions must be undertaken to ensure that the

final remedy is protective of human health and the environment.”69 In these examples, project

managers address the symptoms of the contamination, but not the source—quite contrary to Pope

68 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 57, 141. 69 “Memorandum on the ‘Clarification of the Consultation Process for Evaluating the Technical Impracticality of Groundwater Restoration at CERCLA sites.’” Environmental Protection Agency, accessed May 7, 2019. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/198193.pdf .

22

Francis’s advice.70 Engineers should seek better alternatives and use these options only as a last

resort, based on budget, timeline, and characterization.

To ensure the best alternative, engineers rely not only on their peers, but also on a wide

range of specialists, as Pope Francis recommends. He criticizes the pigeon-holing of scientific

fields, because “each can tend to become enclosed in its own language,” which causes “a certain

isolation and absolutization of its own field of knowledge.”71 Environmental engineering is a

cross-disciplinary field. It requires collaboration between chemists and public health officials,

structural engineers and computer programmers, geologists and statisticians. In addition to

learning from other academic fields, engineers can learn from ethics and philosophy. Pope

Francis posits that faith and reason, though usually considered at odds with each other, must

inform each other in order to enact more sustainable solutions.72 As a professor with a

background in philosophy and physics, Rossabi discusses ethical environmental engineering

practices with his students. When I took his class in the fall after my summer internship, I saw

that he also questioned “why” not just “how” we should design solutions. Pope Francis’s words,

rooted in Catholicism, apply to non-religious engineers because of these connections. As

engineers remediate groundwater, or design solutions in any field, they must understand the

interconnections of the natural world and of the diverse ways to study it.

70 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 144. 71 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 201. 72 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 63, 199.

23

Conclusion

As our throwaway culture grows throughout the world, Pope Francis delivers a timely

encyclical. Laudato Si’ focuses on many angles of the “Care for Our Common Home.” When we

read it as a framework for environmental engineers specifically, we see two scopes emerge:

What character should morally conscious engineers develop? And how should they discern an

approach for their projects? Pope Francis advocates for a culture that is wary of the technocratic

paradigm, wise about our role in the environment, and awestruck at the beauty of creation. His

philosophy presents a framework that we can apply to engineering endeavors, such as

groundwater remediation, and his encyclical provides a toolkit to care for our common home.

Pope Francis insists, “Any technical solution which science claims to offer will be

powerless to solve the serious problems of our world if humanity loses its compass, if we lose

sight of the great motivations which make it possible for us to live in harmony, to make

sacrifices and to treat others well.”73 Reading the encyclical last summer made me grateful for

the compass of the Catholic Church. As I listened to construction workers in the field and

reported back to project managers in the office, the compass helped me focus my efforts. The

significance of my work was not the money-making reward or resume-building potential. I found

deeper significance in interacting with the people I met in the field, considering the people whom

my work would affect, and maintaining humility in the face of creation. St. Francis of Assisi, the

pope’s namesake, is said to have prayed that God would make him an instrument of His peace.

When environmental engineers approach the world as “a joyful mystery to be contemplated with

gladness and praise,”74 their work indeed channels God’s peace.

73 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 200. 74 Francis, Laudato Si', sec. 12.

24

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank these wonderful people:

v Prof. Cristina Traina, for being my advisor, helping me streamline my early ideas (they

were all over the place), suggesting the structure, providing some background sources,

editing the rough drafts, sharing her expertise, and listening intentionally during our

conversations about Laudato Si’. This paper could not have happened without her.

v Prof. Joe Rossabi, for teaching a thought-provoking class about hydrogeology, sharing

his expertise in an interview, reading through all of Laudato Si’ before the interview, and

meeting up for an informed and inspired conversation about ethics in engineering.

v Mr. Geoff Morse, for his detailed help with library research methods.

v Prof. Sarah Dimick, for her encouragement and her nonfiction writing perspective.

v Prof. John Bresland, for the lightning-quick turnaround and the perceptive edits.

v Denise, for being my Laudato Si’ friend and for igniting level-headed conversations

about the environment because of her seminar.

v Emma, for her keen eye and helpful edits.

v Nick, for giving grammar edits, and for keeping me going when the going got tough.

25

Bibliography

Climate Central. “The 10 Hottest Global Years on the Record.” Climate Central. February 6,

2019. https://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/the-10-hottest-global-years-on-

record.

Deane-Drummond, Celia. “Laudato Si’ and the Natural Sciences: An Assessment of Possibilities

and Limits.” Theological Studies 77, no. 2 (2016): 393-415.

Domonoske, Camila. “So What Exactly Is the Paris Climate Accord?” NPR. June 1, 2017.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/01/531048986/so-what-exactly-is-in-

the-paris-climate-accord.

Environmental Protection Agency. “Memorandum on the ‘Clarification of the Consultation

Process for Evaluating the Technical Impracticality of Groundwater Restoration at

CERCLA sites,’” accessed May 7, 2019. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/198193.pdf.

Environmental Protection Agency. “Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) – User’s Guide.” Risk

Assessment, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-

rsls-users-guide#usingtables.

Environmental Protection Agency “Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene),” accessed May 14,

2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201609/documents/

26

tetrachloroethylene.pdf.

Environmental Protection Agency. “What is Vapor Intrusion?” Vapor Intrusion, accessed May

13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/vaporintrusion/what-vapor-intrusion.

Environmental Protection Agency. “Where This Occurs: Groundwater and Drinking Water.”

Nutrient Pollution, accessed May 13, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/where-

occurs-ground-water-and-drinking-water.

Francis. Laudato Si’. Encyclical Letter. Vatican website. May 24, 1995.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/encyclicals/documents/papa-

francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si_en.pdf.

Freeze, John and Allan Cherry. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall, 1979.

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. “About.” 2015 International Year of

Soils. Accessed May 12, 2019. http://www.fao.org/soils-2015/about/en/.

Google. “Ngram Viewer – ‘environment.’” Google Books. Accessed March 1, 2019.

Longman III, Tremper. How to Read Genesis. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2005.

Maibach, Edward, et al. “The Francis Effect: How Pope Francis Changed the Conversation

About Global Warming.” Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. November

5, 2015. http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-francis-effect/.

27

Murray, Brad R., et. al, “Groundwater-dependent ecosystems in Australia: It's more than just

water for rivers,” Ecological Management & Restoration 4, no. 2 (August 2003): 110.

National Oceans and Atmospheric Administration. “2015 State of the Climate: Sea Level.”

Climate.gov. August 2, 2016. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-

images/2015-state-climate-sea-level.

Northwestern McCormick School of Engineering. “Career Paths.” Civil and Environmental

Engineering. Accessed May 12, 2019. https://www.mccormick.northwestern.edu/civil-

environmental/undergraduate/environmental-engineering/.

Schwarzenbach, René P., Philip M. Gschwend, and Dieter M. Imboden, Environmental Organic

Chemistry. New Jersey: Wiley, 2017.

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners. “A Chronology of Historical Developments in

Drycleaning,” accessed May 14, 2019. https://drycleancoalition.org/download/

drycleaning-historical_developments.pdf.

Stoll, Mark. “Pope Francis is actually bringing America’s environmentalism movement to its

religious and moral roots.” Washington Post, June 17, 2015.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/17/pope-francis-is-

actually-bringing-americas-environmentalism-movement-to-its-religious-and-moral-

roots/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.eb990cc58d4a.

28

United States Geological Survey. “Groundwater Use in the United States.” USGS. Accessed

May 12, 2019. https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-

school/science/groundwater-use-united-states?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-

science_center_objects.

“Why Environmental Engineering is Vital for Our Future.” EnvironmentalScience.org.

Accessed May 12, 2019. https://www.environmentalscience.org/environmental-

engineering.