Schaub 4:00
L-19
RESEARCH OR IMPLEMENT: AN ENGINEERING ETHICAL DISPUTE
Jenna Swenor (jcs137@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION: THE TECHNOLOGY
A new filter has recently come to the water purification
scene. This new technology is rather simple to understand: it
is just ordinary fabric, cotton, covered in layers of silver
nanowires and carbon nanotubes [1]. Carbon nanotubes are
tube-shaped material that has a diameter that is one billionth
if a meter [2]. Silver nanowires are similar to the nanotubes
with having a diameter that is one-billionth of a meter. The
wires are made of crystalline silver [3]. As you can see
nanotechnology plays a huge part in this discovery. Professor
Yi Cui, professor at the University of Stanford who headed
this project, stated “the big advantage of the nanomaterials is
that their small size makes it easier for them to stick to the
cotton” [1]. Nanomaterials cause the biggest difference
compared to other filters. The biggest difference is that the
filter allows the bacteria to pass through the filter rather than
trying to capture it. The pores on the fabric filter are large
enough for the bacteria to pass through and the water to go
through quickly. The pores in this filter are in the range of tens
to hundreds of micrometers in diameter. Most other filters
have smaller pores to catch the bacteria which result in a much
slower filtration rate. This process is 80,000 times faster than
other filters [1]. Minimizing the time to process the water is
an important factor in designing a new filter [4]. Another
advantage of having bigger pores that the captured bacteria
does not build up and create a film on the filter. This is known
as biofouling and is a common problem for smaller pore
filters. Since the filter pores are in the tens to hundreds of a
micrometer in diameter range, the bacteria is larger in
diameter so the bacteria is able to pass through. Even though
the filter allows the bacteria go through, the filter kills over
ninety-eight percent of the Escherichia coli bacteria in the
water. This is obtained through using an electric field on the
filter. The electric field is twenty volts and kills the bacteria
as it passes through in just a few seconds. The electricity
needed to power the filter can be obtained through a few car
batteries, solar panels, a stationary bicycle or a hand crank.
Also the twenty volts required to kill the bacteria is not
enough to cause harm to one who comes in contact with the
filter. The voltage is enough to just cause a little tingling
sensation [1]. The electricity is needed to power the filter or
the filter is less effective [5].The electricity needed to power
this filter is much less than other filters because gravity is
enough to push the water through the filter. There is no need
to pump water through the filter like smaller pored filters [1].
THE ETHICAL DISPUTE
This new discovery was made three years ago and it is still
in the early stages of implementing the filtration system into
full-scale use. The primary use of this technology would be
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering
2013-10-29
for small scale usage, primarily in providing clean water to
those isolated or in locations where resources are limited once
the filter has been fully tested and researched. More research
needs to be done before a huge scale implementation of the
fabric filters could be achieved. This full scale
implementation would be for more developed countries or
bigger communities in isolated areas.
One bacteria is enough to kill a person. Since the filter is
not one hundred percent effective, implementing it in the field
without some other sort of system or multiple stages of these
filters would not be ethical. More research needs to be done
to find a way to make the solution kill all the bacteria so it
could stand on its own and provide one hundred percent clean
water.
There is still not enough research to exactly know the side
effects of water – borne carbon nanotubes and silver
nanowires. Experiments have been done with mice and
carbon nanotubes. These experiments showed effects on the
mice’s lungs quite similar to the effects of asbestos. Tests
have been performed on water and they showed that the
nanomaterial was not leaching into the water. More tests need
to be performed to make sure that the nanomaterial is not
dislodging into the water and that they stay part of the filter
after long term usage [6].
Recently a company approached me about my research
and explained they had a great opportunity for me. They
explained that they are a global company working on
improving the quality of life of small communities around the
world by providing them with the resources they need. They
explained that they are currently working on a project in
small, isolated community in South America and they think
the filter I am working on is a great solution for their project.
I explained to them that I am still doing research about the
long-term effects of the nanotechnology on human health. I
also informed them that I do not know when I will be done
fully researching the filter because the technology is still in
the early stages. They still pressed me to come work with
them and take the knowledge I knew about the filter with me
and help them mass produce this technology for their projects.
They explained that the communities need the filter now and
I could help them get the resources they need to help them
have better and healthier lives. I know that if I take this
opportunity I will help improve people’s lives initially but in
the long term will I help them?
I know what they are asking me to do is questioning my
ethics as an engineer. I know that taking my research from the
lab I am currently working for goes my contract and I know
that is not right. Also to potentially produce a filter that could
harm the health of people around the world is not ethical
either, but I do not know for sure that the filter will harm the
future health of people in these communities. I would like to
Jenna Swenor
help the people that need help now rather then have them
continue to get sick and have poor living conditions.
the Code of Ethics provided by the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers is that engineers should be “honest and
impartial and serving with fidelity their employers, their
clients, and the public” [8]. This helps me see that I have to
put the public before my personal plan for my career and
future. I have to do what is best for society rather than what is
the best career move for me [8].
I know I need to use my knowledge to better help people
all around the world but to help out now or later is the real
question. “Using their Knowledge and skill for the
enhancement of human welfare,” as stated by the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers in their Code of Ethics [8].
Although my research is not fully complete, there are plenty
of people that are struggling to get clean water and by giving
this filter the go ahead I can help those people get clean water
now. That would be using my knowledge to help the human
welfare and it would help them now rather than for years
down the road [8].
ENGINEERING CODES OF ETHICS:
PROVIDING THE PATHWAY TO
RESOLVING THE ETHICAL DISPUTE
I know that I cannot be the first engineer to have to make
a decision like this so I go to engineering websites to help find
resources that can better guide me through the situation. I find
codes of ethics on the National Society of Professional
Engineers and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
The first code of ethics I reference is from the National
Society of Professional Engineers. This society is important
in the engineering profession in providing assistance to
engineers in the non-technological aspects of engineering. In
the Fundamental Canons of the Code of Ethics for Engineers
from the National Society of Professional Engineers states
that engineers should “hold paramount the safety, health, and
welfare of the public” [7]. This is important in my situation
because I am potentially putting the health of the public in
jeopardy with my technology because I do not know the longterm effects. In another section of the Code of Ethics for
Engineering, the Professional Obligations, states that,
“engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that deceives the
public” [7]. If I choose to not continue my research for the
long term effects of the silver nanowires on the human health
than I am omitting facts that the public has the right to know
about. I am not informing them of the potential health risks of
the filter. Another important point about ethics from the
National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics for
Engineers from the Professional Obligations is that,
“engineers shall avoid the use of statements containing a
material misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact”
[7]. This supports the idea of not stopping research now and
continuing to investigate the potential long-term health risks
with the filter [7].
Another aspect from the Code of Ethics from the National
Society of Professional Engineers that applies to my situation
is the job offer that I got that requires me to take my work
from this job to my next which goes against my current jobs
contract. In the Rules of Practice section in the Code of Ethics
provided by the National Society of Professional Engineers
states that, “engineers shall act for each employer or client as
faithful agents or trustees” [7]. This includes not accepting
“financial or other valuable consideration, directly or
indirectly, from outside agents in connection with the work
for which they are responsible” [7]. In other words, I should
not accept the job offer and raise from this company just
because of the current work I am doing because they want me
to take my research with me [7].
The next code of ethics I reference is from the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers. The American Institute of
Chemical Engineers is responsible for providing chemical
engineers with resources they need to help them through their
career and develop their careers. One of the goals stated by
THE UNKNOWNS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY
Nanotechnology provides lots of ethical issues for
engineers. Most of the ethical issues are from the fear of the
public rather than logical backed issues. Therefore deciding
whether or not those issues are important factors in decisionmaking is difficult. As an engineer you do not want to evoke
fear in the public but is it ethically wrong to support plans and
research even if the public finds it fearful? Nael Barakat and
Heidi Jiao speak on this issue of ethics in their paper Proposed
Strategies for Teaching Ethics of Nanotechnology. They
stated that only the issues that are “founded on solid scientific
evidence, should be considered without hesitation” [9]. There
are many types of ethical issues with nanotechnology and they
are life-basics ethics, life-quality ethics and life and human
definition ethics. The type of ethics that applies to my
situation is the life-basics ethics. This applies to my situation
because it deals with the health hazards of nanotechnology.
Since the amount of research is very limited on
nanotechnology it is hard to say currently what the health
hazards may be [9].
The amount of research on nanotechnology is minimum so
no one really knows the long-term risks with using
nanotechnology. As stated in the Encyclopedia of
Nanoscience and Society: Ethics and Risk Analysis, “there is
no evidence of actual harm to health or environment from
nanomaterials” we than can conclude that with our current
knowledge there is no reason why we should suspect any
harm to human health or the environment from these materials
[10]. Therefore we could implement the filter into society
with this logic from Daniel Seltzer and Mark Ratner from
Northwestern University.
CONCLUSION: MY DECISION
After looking over the engineering codes and looking at
my own morals I know that I cannot go through with this job
2
Jenna Swenor
Purification of Drinking Water.” Nanotechnology. (Online
Journal). DOI:10.1088/0957-4484/24/23/235101
[6] K. Bourzac. (2010). “Clean Water for the Developing
World.” MIT Technology Review. (Online Article). http://w
ww.technologyreview.com/news/420703/clean-water-forthe-developing-world/?a=f
[7] “Code of Ethics for Engnieers.” (2007). National Society
of Professional Enginers. (Online Article). http://www.nspe.
org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[8] “Code of Ethics.” (2013). The American Insistutte of
Chemical Enineers. (Online Article). http://www.aiche.org/a
bout/code-ethics
[9] H.Jiao, N.Barakat. (2010). “Propsed Strategies for
Teaching Ethics in Nanotechnology.”Nanoethics. (Online
Journal). DOI 10.1007/s11569-010-0100-0.
[10] D. Seltzer, M. Ratner. (2013). “Ethics and Risk
Analysis.” Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Society.”
(Online Encyclopedia). http://dx.doi.org/10.4136/978141297
2093.n117.
[11] “85 Movie Quotes.” (2013). Inspiration Station. (Online
Article). http://www.inspirationstation.info/1-movie-
offer and help them mass produce this filter. I cannot put
people in harm’s way for the initial good that it may do. The
short term benefits do not outweigh the long term damage the
filter may or may not have. I cannot take that risk and it is not
right to support and implement a product that is not fully
researched and understood yet, even though I found some
sources that would support a decision to mass produce then
implement the filter. I know that it is better to wait and finish
my research and then allow the technology available to the
public.
I choose to not to take this offer because I know that selling
out my work to another company is not the right choice. My
work is not close to being finished and to really help people I
need to finish my research and not push into the
implementation stage when it is not ready. The National
Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics really
helped me decide that my decision to not implement right now
is the best option.
Another factor that helped my decision is what I would feel
like if I was on the other side of this situation. Instead of me
designing the product I am the consumer and I am using this
product thinking that the engineer that designed this knew
everything he/she could about the technology. I would be
upset to find out if they pushed the technology through
knowing that it was not ready yet and potentially putting my
health in jeopardy. Knowing this and knowing that I could
potentially harm the health of many people’s lives I know that
pushing the technology is the best answer. Everything that
happens is a test to see what we are willing to compromise.
The show The Finder had it right when the show stated, “we
quotes/movie-quotes-2.html#ZvG1ZXE0BGc78dmQ.99
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
K. Bourzac. (2010) “Making a Nano – Water Filter for the
Developing World.” MIT Technology Review. (Video).
http://www.technologyreview.com/video/420716/making-anano-water-filter-for-the-developing-world/
all are being tested all the time. Life is a test” [11]. This is
just one of the many tests that is going to come my way
and I know I studied enough to pass this one.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my friend Jake for helping me
through the writing process and spending countless hours at
the library researching. I would also like to thank the Writing
Center for guiding me through the writing process.
REFERENCES
[1] L. Bergeron. (2010) “High – Speed Filter Uses Electrified
Nanostructures to Purify Water at Low Cost.” Stanford News.
(Online Article). http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/
nano-pure-water-083110.html
[2] “Carbon Nanotubes.” (2010). The Carbon Nanotube
Specialist. (Online Article). http://www.nanocyl.com/CNTExpertise-Centre/Carbon-Nanotubes
[3] R. Gupta, S. Peruvemba. (2013). “What’s the Differnence
Betwwen Silver Nanowire and ITO for Touchscreens?.”
Electronic Design. (Online Article). http://electronicdesign.c
om/components/what-s-difference-between-silver-nanowireand-ito-touchscreens
[4] G. Rao. (2010). “Nano Focus: Electrified Nanostructures
Enable Low – Cost Water Sterilization.” MRS Bulletin.
(Online Journal). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1557/mrs2010.72
0
[5] S. Kumar, S. Ghish, N. Munichandraiah, H. Vasan. (2013)
“1.5 V Battery Driven Reduced Graphene Oxide – Silver
Nanostructure Coated Carbon Foam (rGO – Ag – CF) for the
3