We plan, design, construct, and then wonder why our infrastructures fail to deliver the planned-for, designed-for, and constructed-for best-of-intentions. Infrastructures have an operational phase in their life cycle, and it is remarkably long. Nothing — but nothing — is invariant with time. Steady state is not the norm. All systems, including environmental systems and the infrastructure for protection thereof, exhibit behavior that is dynamic. Control is about coping with those dynamics and turning them, as appropriate, to our advantage.

Here too, in a broader, grander sense, the NSB Report has put the issue succinctly (National Science Board, 2000):

The integration of informatics, molecular biology, robotics and ecology also has rich potential for environmental technologies that increase efficiency, dematerialization and recyclability and may drop costs substantially. A new and vigorous fundamental science and engineering research agenda that highlights the promise and priorities emerging from the intersection of systems and complexity theory, quantitative modeling, and environmentally benign technology development would be a smart investment.

Something new indeed is needed. We have been waiting long enough.

Reference

National Science Board (2000), "Environmental Science and Engineering for the 21st Century: The Role of the National Science Foundation", Report NSB 00-22, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC, 2 February, 2000.
[See also: www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsb0022]