Mahboobin, 10:00
L03
Carbon Capture and Storage Dilemma
John Keegan (jfk43@pitt.edu)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In today’s society, global warming has only gained
attention due to the abrupt climate changes. Relatively
speaking, “scientists in this case are talking about ‘near term’
as being 100 years” [1]. Within these next 100 years, the goal
for many scientists is to limit the climate change by
implementing a series of carbon capture and storage
techniques, including carbon sequestration through ocean
sediment. Carbon Sequestration through ocean sediment
would give scientists even more time to test and develop
alternate energy sources. Study Chair Jim White at the
University of Colorado, “’It’s really a question of pace,’
White said at one point, saying that Miami ‘would be largely
dysfunctional’ if a three-foot sea-level rise were to occur over
the next 30 years. The same rise over a 100-year period won’t
be a walk on the beach either, he suggested, but the additional
time would at least be useful in making better risk
management decisions” [1]. With the other impacts of climate
change such as forest fires, flooding and melting of the north
and south poles, “the current pace of climate change is
probably as fast as any warming event in the past 65 million
years” [1]. At this rate of climate change, many engineers are
inventing new ways to store CO2 efficiently. One of these
ways is Carbon sequestration through ocean sediment. “One
of the most promising places to sequester carbon is in the
oceans, which currently take up a third of the carbon emitted
by human activity, roughly two billion metric tons each year.
The amount of carbon that would double the load in the
atmosphere would increase the concentration in the deep
ocean by only two percent” [2]. Not only do scientists
consider the ocean a promising storage place, but a highly
efficient one too. Once reliable pumps are created and tested,
it is possible to pump “40 to 60 metric tons of pure liquid CO2
over 2,500 feet deep in the ocean” over a two week period [2].
THE DILEMMA
John has just finished his senior year at University of X
and is excited to announce to his family that he already has
found a job working as an offshore structural and civil
engineer for a renewable energy company. The job pays very
well, has great hours, and is located on the east coast (close to
his current home). His girlfriend, also a civil engineer, has not
had as much luck finding a job. Her grades in college were
above average and she has a decent background in her field.
Instead of helping her find work, John takes it upon himself
to be the breadwinner, at least for now. John has now been
with renewable energy company A for almost four months
and has just gotten word from his boss, Larry, about a major
project. It involves a new scheme
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering
October 28, 2014
to combat the rising CO2 levels caused by greenhouse gases.
The idea is to focus on the CO2 storage aspect by
implementing new and relatively risky technology. This new
technology is carbon sequestration using ocean sediment as a
storage zone. At first John is hesitant to accept the job offer
because of the negative things he has heard about this
technology. Being in the situation John was in he thought it
would be best to not ask questions. While many other
companies have pondered the idea of carrying out such a
project, almost all of them have decided against it due to the
lack of research done in this area. Another reason why
engineers have avoided this technology is due to the cost.
Projects like this require high-tech ships for transporting large
masses of CO2 and complex pumps that must be carefully
constructed almost 3000 meters below the surface [5]. With
all of this in mind, John questioned how the company could
have acquired all this money. There was no way that millions
of dollars could be taken from the company, so there must
have been an outside investor or donator. It comes as no
surprise to John that his boss take such on such an ambitious
project, but is this too ambitious? If the project is successful,
there will definitely be an increase in the company’s prestige
and recognition, but if the project fails, John will most likely
lose his job and potentially harm the environment and
millions of people.
Within the coming weeks, John will be on an industrial ship
traveling far off the eastern shore to begin work on one of the
first technologies of its kind. Is it worth the risk?
POTENTIAL CODE OF ETHICS
VIOLATIONS
With the amount of money and attention being put into
this project it seems that there could be a good amount of
concern with the ethical codes. To start off, when John
questioned how his boss could have raised all this money,
there must have been some outside help. Taking donations in
order to fund a project is a very common action, but what we
are concerned with is the truthfulness of the sales pitch. One
of the fundamental canons of the NSPE Code of Ethics states
that a company shall “issue public statements only in an
objective and truthful manner” and “avoid deceptive acts” [3].
Raising the money for this project could have been very easy
if Larry explained all the pros to this type of carbon
sequestration technique. After all, it would be hard to raise
money if Larry told his potential donators about the “Ethical
issues entailed by risks of releases of CO2 or other accidents
that pose threats to the environment and people in the local
vicinity of the carbon storage site or along feeder pipeline
systems” [6].
John Keegan
Another key point that John should be worried about is the
ethics behind the safety of the public. It is clearly stated in the
ASME Code of Ethics of Engineers, under the fundamental
canons that “engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health
and welfare of the public in the performance of their duties”
[4]. This canon applies specifically to this situation, because
of the potential of a CO2 leakage. Along with developing a
functional pump for transporting CO2 into highly pressurized
zones, there will always be the risk of an earthquake. No
matter how strong or reliable a pump may be, there will
always be the “Ethical issues entailed by potential earthquake
triggering by pressures from injected gases.” [6]. In large
quantities, CO2 can be highly toxic to not just humans, but
wildlife too. A similar precedent set by the BP Oil Spill,
would cost the company its reputation and a large amount of
money. On top of all these ethics, John must decide if he will
carry out his boss’s orders. This particular decision deals with
the another fundamental canon that states “engineers shall act
in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful
agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest or the
appearance of conflicts of interest” [4]. It seems that with
whichever path he takes, there will be no completely right or
wrong decision. If he chooses to accept his boss’s orders, then
he would be acknowledging the code of ethics that states he
shall be a “faithful agent” and “avoid conflicts of interest of
or the appearance of conflicts of interest”. On the other hand,
if John chose to decline the job, he would be abide by almost
every other canon stated above.
strong desire for recognition and praise. These same values
can be seen through both John’s point of view and the Boss’s.
After analyzing the situation, we can conclude that the boss
has a pompous personality. It seems that he values the success
of the company and himself more than abiding by the ethical
codes about keeping the environment safe and being truthful
to his employees. Unlike the student in the case study, the
boss does not have full control over the invention’s success.
Determining the success of the CO2 pump falls under the
engineers’ control. Thus, it is not as important to consider the
boss’s decision but to understand his motives for the
completion of this job.
In a different case study, Shariq Farhoud, a senior field
technician employed by Everclere Consultants, Inc., has to
deal with a similar ethical decision. When Shariq is consulted
by Chuck (his boss) to provide a “preliminary
reconnaissance” of a client’s property, he runs into a problem.
Within the house he finds contents that may contain
hazardous waste, and the protocol for this would be notifying
the proper federal and state authorities. Although Shariq
knows what the right decision is, his boss and customer
persuade him to assume that nothing is hazardous and to
ignore the protocol to save time. In the interest of keeping his
new job, he elects to follow his boss’s orders [8]. Some of the
violations of ethical dilemmas include the professional
obligations stating “Engineers shall be guided in all their
relations by the highest standards of honesty and integrity” [3]
and the fundamental canons stating “Engineers shall consider
environmental impact and sustainable development in the
performance of their professional duties” [4]. If we relate this
study back to our own dilemma, there are many similarities.
One parallel is the boss to employee relationship. In both
dilemmas the boss does not control the direct ethical decision
the employee makes, but he controls the job security of the
employee. The result for Shariq was to comply with his boss
without asking any questions. What can be taken away from
this study is that maybe saying something to the boss would
have been a good idea. In John’s situation, setting up an
appointment to remind his boss of the potential flaws in this
technology may be a good idea. This strategy would put the
ethical decision back on the boss’s shoulders.
The last case study involves a college student named Raj.
All throughout college he was the smartest kid in all of his
classes, except he did not like to study. In return his grades
were sub-par and he felt that this was a good reflection of his
true knowledge. After the school year he found a summer
internship for a famous research institute. When it came time
to send a resume to the institute, he knew his grades were not
good enough to get in. As a result, he changed his GPA from
a 3.0 to a 3.5 and his SAT scores from 600 Verbal and 720
Math to 700 Verbal and 820 Math. After he sent in his resume
“Raj reasoned that these changes really didn’t matter, because
he would show them who he really was through the quality of
the work he did for the institute once he was hired” [9]. The
connection between John and Raj’s ethical dilemmas is not as
easy to identify as the prior situations. In this dilemma Raj is
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
According to the ethics, the decision may seem clearer
than it should. If we take into account the potential benefits of
taking this job, then it becomes a harder decision. From the
scenario we know that his girlfriend is currently unemployed
and that John has self-elected himself as the breadwinner of
the family. In many ways, John cannot afford to decline this
job offer or else he may never find a job that has the same
benefits. Another favorable aspect of taking the job, will be
his increase in fame and reputation. Being one of the first
engineers to successfully install a working carbon
sequestration pump for use on ocean sediment immediately
increase his salary and even be able to offer his wife a job at
the company. In a case study at Stanford, there was a student
who had developed and automated vascular anastomosis
device for proximal vessel attachment to the aorta in CABG
surgery. The problem is that the risks of the device are
unknown. To understand fully the effects of this device on
humans, it would take months’ worth of lab studies. The
student seems impatient and wants his/her device to be
recognized immediately by directly implementing the
technology into everyday use [7]. Relating this case study
back to the ethical dilemma at hand, we can see that both
situations involve time as a limiting factor. In the case study,
time is working against the student by allowing other people
time to propose new ideas. The student is also battling her
2
John Keegan
dealing with more internal guilt than external. Changing his
grades would be violating the professional obligations that
state “Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that
deceives the public” [3]. In this case, Raj would be deceiving
the famous research institute of his grades. In John’s situation,
honesty to the public would be giving “those directly affected
by the decisions, a voice and representation in the process”
[6]. By doing this, John could potentially carry out with his
boss’s orders and retain his loyalty, without directly declining
the plan.
CONCLUSION
With every ethical situation there is no definitive right or
wrong answer, but by referring to the code of ethics it is easier
to justify your answer. In John’s dilemma, choosing to accept
the job offer would result in a violation of many of the codes
of ethics, but would give him enough money to take care of
his family in the future. If John were to decline the offer then
he would abide by the code of ethics but risk losing his job.
After weighing out the pros and cons of both decisions and
the example case studies, I believe the best decision lies
somewhere in between the two extremes.
REFERENCES
[1] B. Ward. (2013). “Some Good News (and Plenty of Bad)
in NRC Abrupt Climate Change Report.” (online article).
[2] P. Pruess. (2001). “Climate Change Scenarios Compel
Studies of Ocean Carbon Storage.” (online article).
[3] (2014). NSPE Code of Ethics. (website).
[4] (2009). ASME Code of Ethics of Engineers. (website).
[5] D. Brown. (2008). “Ethics and Climate.” (online article)
[6] R. Born. (2008). “Ethical Issues Entailed by Geological
Carbon Sequestration” (online article)
[7] “Case 11- Incremental Development” (online article)
[8] (2014). “Case 1039-I’d Rather Be Fishing” (word
document)
[9] (2014). “Honesty’s Always the Best Policy” (online
article)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank the writing center for helping me with
my paper. I would also like to thank my roommate Jake
Guzzardo for revising my paper for grammatical errors.
3