Vidic 2:00
R13
ETHICS OF THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE
Ashwin Iyer (api4@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION TO THE KEYSTONE
PIPELINE
The Keystone XL pipeline is a pipeline proposed by the
TransCanada Company, approximately 1600 miles in length,
which will go from Hardisty, Alberta to Nederland, Texas. If
all goes according to plan, the pipeline will carry 900,000
barrels a day of a mixture of crude oil and bitumen.
Although this idea sounds promising for America’s oil
industry, it is a highly contested issue to the ethical issues it
presents. Supporters of the pipeline say that the pipeline will
open up many engineering jobs to boost the productivity of
the oil industry in America but critics say that the
environmental damage done by the pipeline outweighs the
benefits. At this point, ethics of engineering come into play
and make the decision on whether or not to construct the
pipeline. It is well known fact that that the environmental
hazards caused by the pipeline has become a main issue
when dealing with the pipeline’s implementation so much
that President Obama said “the net effects of the pipeline’s
impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to
determining whether this project is allowed to go forward”
[1]. The challenge is determining the limit of sacrifice for
potential gain. Who in society will the project impact
positively? Will it do so at the sake of anyone or anything
else? These are questions that we, as engineers, need to ask
ourselves before taking on any big project.
AN ETHICAL SENARIO ARISES
Consider this situation. Bob is an engineer working in the
Nation’s oil industry. His dream is to find a practical and
profitable design for the importation and utilization of
foreign oil. Every day, Bob comes to work in hopes that he
will finally be able to come up with the ideal design for a
trans-continental pipeline but always seems to be one step
short. One day, a company sells him their design and asks
him to implement it to precision. However, he runs into a
slight problem when groundbreaking research shows a
discrepancy between implementation of the ideal pipeline
and what will most probably be constructed. It shows that
even though the most recent engineering techniques have
been incorporated into designing the pipeline there is a scope
for environmental hazard that has been overlooked. He
decides to look into this problem and discover that the
gravity of the environmental harm caused by the pipeline
could delay the implementation of the project. During his
research he discovers that the pipeline will create
approximately 42,000 jobs on American soil that will
stimulate the U.S. economy [1]. The pipeline, however, will
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
Submission Date 2013-10-29
negatively effect the environment during construction and
the human health during its actual implementation. Bob is on
contract with this company and his dream is about to
become reality but he can see that the pipeline design in
question may have some important negative aspects. What is
the right thing to do? Should Bob violate his contract or
should he stay quiet about the faulty design of the pipeline?
UNDERSTANDING THE SITUATION
Before making a decision, one must be educated about
the circumstances. In this situation, the complete
environmental impact of the pipeline must be understood
before an educated decision can be made. Therefore it is
essential to completely research the background of the topic
before continuing to the next step in the decision process. In
researching, one will find the extent to which the pipeline
will harm the environment.
If the project goes by plan, it would destroy many
ecologically important areas, including grasslands in
Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska and the equipment
used during construction would affect the air quality and
cause harm to many animals living in these areas [2]. This
will result in habitat loss that will eventually upset the
ecosystem. It is estimated that there are 23 species protected
by the Endangered Species Act in the areas of proposed
construction. Of these 23 species present, approximately 10
will be severely affected [2].
There is also an appreciable room for error when
operating a pipeline of such magnitude. The idea of spills
and leaks should be a major reason for being careful. The
TransCanada Company’s first line of safety is identical to
the technology that failed to stop an oil spill in Michigan in
2010. Additionally, even if it were improved, two percent of
the pipeline’s daily volume (approximately 8,300 barrels)
would leak [3]. It is estimated that the maximum spill
volume of the pipeline would be roughly 2.8 million gallons,
which would be a concern because spills and leaks through
the pipeline will most likely be in areas where there is
abundance of wildlife [2].
In addition, it can be found that the pipeline is hazardous
to human health. Based on the plan for construction, the
pipeline would run straight through the Ogallala Aquifer, a
major source for drinking water across the country that also
provides an abundant supply of water for irrigation [4]. If the
pipeline leaks anywhere near the aquifer, a majority of the
nation’s water supply would be contaminated. Furthermore,
the crude-oil transported by the pipeline contains more
amounts of dangerous elements for the human lungs than oil
imported from other countries. For example, the excessive
sulfur and nitrogen present could contribute to lung diseases,
Ashwin Iyer
asthma, and cancer [4]. According to the Natural Resources
Defense Council, the Keystone XL pipeline is more likely to
fail than any other pipeline in the world because the bitumen
mixture it carries is extra corrosive [4].
Aside from the possibility of leaks and spills, the danger
present in constructing the pipeline, and its effect on human
health, a properly functioning pipeline may still cause harm
to the environment. Environmentalists believe that the
pipeline will increase the America’s dependence on fossil
fuels and its greenhouse gas emission by increasing the oil
supply present in the country [4]. If the building of the
pipeline is successful, its implementation will probably be
short lived because sooner or later, we will run out of
resources. The idea of short-term compared to long-term
effects also brings into question the idea of greenhouse gas
emission. It is estimated that by using Tar Sands, a
combination of clay, sand, water, and bitumen instead of
conventional oil, the Nation’s greenhouse emission will
increase from 27 to 125 million tons by 2015 [2]. Also, the
production of the oil transported through the pipeline
requires the oil to be mined with strip mining or open-pit
techniques with a severe environmental impact [4].
experienced chronic health problems due to the
contamination of the air of their water wells. In other cases
some citizens discovered that their water was flammable and
their conditions were unbearable. Fox’s discoveries show
that the oil industry has a significant environmental impact
on civilization that counters its positive influence and makes
the decision more challenging.
A DISCUSSION ABOUT ETHICS
As an engineer, one must know the codes of ethics within
a specific field. These codes guide decision making by
clearly presenting the extent to which certain stakeholders in
projects can take a loss.
In this specific scenario, the design of the pipeline would
violate the first fundamental canon of the NSPE code of
ethics for engineers which states that all Engineers should
“hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
public.” [8]. By not speaking up when a discrepancy in the
design was found, Bob is sacrificing the environment, and
therefore the local people are being placed at risk.
Bob must also abide by the Fundamental Principles of the
ASCE code of ethics, which state that Engineers are
expected to uphold the integrity, honor, and dignity of the
profession [9]. This can be done in many ways that are listed
and include using knowledge for the enhancement of human
welfare and the environment. Hence, it would be a violation
of the fundamental principles if he were not to speak out
against the faulty design of the pipeline.
It can easily be seen that violations to the codes of ethics
place citizens in harms way. For example, when NASA was
working on the Challenger, the engineers under contract
warned that if the temperature became too cold, O-Rings
that joined the shuttle to its rocket boosters would fail.
However, their warnings were ignored because the project
became one that relied on budget and deadlines [10]. Ann
Tenbrunsel, an ethics researcher at University of Notre
Dame says that important issues should be approached
through more than one prism. She also states that the prism
through which a situation is viewed could alter the decision.
For example, there is a study that shows that people are
more likely to lie after being told to focus on the business
side of a decision rather than the ethical one. By viewing a
decision through different aspects, the possibility of
unethical decision-making decreases. No matter what aspect
of the decision is used, the codes of ethics for engineers still
set the framework for a proper decision.
DECISION MAKING: AN INTERNAL
CONFLICT
Most decisions consist of an internal conflict. In the case
presented above, the internal conflict consists of giving up a
dream and possibly a career in order to protect the safety of
the people. Bob looses either way. If he protests against the
design of the pipeline, he violates his contract and gains a
negative reputation. However if he doesn’t speak up, he is
jeopardizing the successful completion of the project.
There are always grey areas that an engineer needs to see
for himself. Most ethical situations exist at a certain point
between personal responsibility and public policy [5]. In this
scenario, there is a contract in question and changing the
specifics of the pipeline to fit a certain priority is a violation.
At this point, it may be useful to make a list of positives and
negatives in order to make a certain decision. For example it
may be noted that the pipeline provides the possibility of a
more stable energy future by linking new sources of oil in
Canada to Texas and the Midwest [6]. There is also the idea
of engineering jobs that are created and an investment in the
private sector that will generate approximately $585 million
in new taxes that will lead to new and improved
infrastructure development [6]. Implementation of the
pipeline is in fact profitable for the Nation’s oil industry but
should the environment and public well being be sacrificed?
There are appreciable examples of the oil industry placing
the public at risk. In the documentary Gasland, the narrator
was displaced because a natural gas company wanted to drill
on his property [7]. He then set out and spoke to citizens to
see how natural gas drilling was negatively impacting
people. He discovered that in some cases residents
2
Ashwin Iyer
WHAT WOULD OTHERS DO?
FINAL DECISION
Evan Vokes, a materials engineer working for the
TransCanada Company found himself in a similar situation a
couple years ago. His job was to ensure the company
complied with accepted codes of pipeline construction [11].
Vokes strived hard to solve the company’s problems in an
ethical way but the organization emphasized speed rather
than compliance. Vokes continued to stress compliance to
the codes of ethics but multiple projects including the Bison
Pipeline and the Keystone1 failed. The Keystone 1 was
rushed to completion and 21,000 gallons of oil ended up
spilling when an automatic safety feature failed to detect the
spill [11]. Vokes continued to challenge the company and at
one point he told his boss “I have to quit or fight,” Vokes
ended up being fired but the Canadian National Energy
Board validated his claims and Vokes gained a positive
reputation. In fact, the Canadian Senate invited him to their
study of the pipeline safety on June 6, 2013.
Sometimes when faced with a difficult decision it is
helpful to take a look back and consider what other
successful people did when faced with a similar decision. In
this specific situation, it can be seen that Evan Vokes
stressed compliance with codes of ethics over completion of
a project. It can also be noticed that when the company did
not comply with the codes of ethics there was a significant
failure. By observing Vokes and following his example, the
final decision is easier to make. Vokes may have been fired
but he still holds a positive reputation for standing by the
codes of ethics that were presented to him.
Bob still has to make the decision for himself but it will
be easier if he considers the case of Evan Vokes when he
was presented with a similar situation.
Even though the process is mostly over, Bob still has to
make his final decision for himself. No matter what
information he gathered through research, what the codes of
ethics say, or what he discovered through observing other
professionals, the decision is still his and he has to take
ownership for it. Just like Vokes was fired after he made his
decision to speak out against the TransCanada Company,
Bob may face negative repercussions. In order to make his
actual decision Bob must be strong hearted and know what
he wants as a professional engineer, and why he is in the
position he is. When he knows what he wants to do and
where he wants to go the decision can be made according to
the helpful information he gathered. Until then he will be
lost in the technicalities.
REFERENCES
[1] (2013). “Even Obama’s State Department Knows
Keystone XL Is Not An Environmental Hazard.” Forbes.
(Online Article).
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/07/31/evenobamas-state-department-knows-keystone-xl-is-not-anenvironmental-hazard/
[2] J. Palliser. (2012). “The Keystone XL Pipeline.” Science
Scope. (Online article).
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?action=interpret&id=GALE
%7CA294830152&v=2.1&u=upitt_main&it=r&p=AONE&
sw=w&authCount=1
[3] E. Schor. (2013). “Are Environmentalists Getting it
wrong on the Keystone XL Pipeline.” The Atlantic. (Online
article).
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/02/areenvironmentalists-getting-it-wrong-on-the-keystone-xlpipeline/273149/
[4] (2011). “Keystone XL Pipeline Overview.”
Congressional Digest. (Online Article).
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2
&sid=01b04f32-7ac3-4bce-b4873797f0eef626%40sessionmgr115&hid=124
[5] (2012). “Grave New World.” Prism. (Online Article).
http://www.prism-magazine.org/nov12/feature_02.cfm
[6] R. Christie Jr. (2012). “Why We Need the Keystone XL
Project.” Engineering News-Record. (Online Article)
http://enr.construction.com/opinions/viewpoint/2012/0409we-all-need-keystone-xl.asp
[7] “Gasland.” (2005). (Movie).
[8] (2013). “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” (Online
Article).
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[9] (2013). “ASCE Code of Ethics.” (Online Article).
http://www.asce.org/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/
[10] (2013). “Increasing Your Odds.” Notre Dame Deloitte
Center for Ethical Leadership. (Online Article).
SUMMATION OF THE DECISION
PROCESS
Bob went through the traditional decision making process
that most people go through. First, he did additional research
to further enforce his hypothesis that the pipeline is harmful
to the environment. He discovered that there is a significant
environmental impact presented by the pipeline. After his
research, he considered all possible outcomes of his decision
and considered possible repercussions. Bob also consulted
the NSPE code of ethics and his professional based code.
After consulting the codes of ethics Bob furthered his
understanding of the situation by looking back at another
professional who went through a similar situation and using
him as a role model. At this point Bob should have a strong
idea of what he wants to do.
3
Ashwin Iyer
http://ethicalleadership.nd.edu/ethics-resources/writeups/increasing-your-odds/
[11] J. Dermansky. (2013). “TransCanada Whistleblower
Evan Vokes Details Lack of Confidence of Keystone XL.”
Truth-out.org. (Online Article).
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19130-transcanadawhistleblower-evan-vokes-details-lack-of-confidence-inkeystone-xl
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my writing instructor, the librarians,
and my parents for motivating and encouraging me to write
this paper to my best potential.
4
Ashwin Iyer
5