Sanchez, 4:00 L01 ETHICS IN ENGINEERING: A CIVIL APPROACH Adam Bottenfield (asb121@pitt.edu) greener, more sustainable energy supply is clearly a good thing, while endangering the public’s safety and using exorbitant amounts of taxpayer dollars on an untested technology is risky to say the least. Taylor is faced with an ethical dilemma that many engineers could one day face in real life. As engineers, our job is to abide by a strict code of ethics and, although the choice isn’t always clear, make a decision that impacts potentially thousands of people. AN ETHICAL DILEMMA James Taylor, a senior civil engineer working for the Department of Transportation is on the verge of redefining the way that infrastructure is built and the way energy is produced in the United States. He has been an innovative leader in the controversial new technology Solar Roadways for well over a decade and has become the world’s foremost expert on the technology. Although he has faced many setbacks, Taylor finally has his opportunity to see his dream come to life. A recent vote by the city council of Pittsburgh decided that, in an effort to solve both its energy concerns and infrastructure issues, concrete roads will now be replaced with the recently developed Solar Roadway tiles. The Solar Roadway technology, although brand new, has huge potential to solve both the energy and infrastructure crisis that the United States is currently facing. Met with substantial skepticism, Solar Roadways are a viable technology that could greatly alter the energy industry. So what exactly is a Solar Roadway? It is a road or highway constructed entirely of solar panel tiles that can be used to harness solar energy and distribute it to nearby buildings and structures. A loose definition of the technology is provided by Michael Belfiore of Popular Mechanics. Belfiore writes, “Solar Roadways are comprised of rugged hexagonal glass plates in which are embedded solar cells, electronics, and LEDs” [1]. The basic structure is hexagonal because it allows each piece to snap into place adjacently with another piece, making the solar roadway very customizable, which is essential if one wishes to make a useable road out of the material. The glass is necessary to let in solar radiation so that the solar cells can operate to maximum efficiency, and Taylor claims they are still strong enough to withstand the wearing of motor vehicles constantly pressing down on it. Finally the LED’s are powered by the solar cells and will be able to display an image or signal that motorists should be aware of. For example, instead of painting lines every few years on the surface, the LED’s could easily display the lines at no cost. Many have raised concerns over the strength of the glass and whether it is safe for motor vehicles to drive over. Although Taylor claims that the glass used to construct the tiles is sufficiently strong, the glass hasn’t been fully tested yet since the technology is so new. Also, the deadline to start the project is fast-approaching so Taylor and his team do not have time for further tests. In addition, Taylor knows that his project will be extremely expensive, so much so that he questions whether or not taxpayer dollars should be spent on such a gamble of a technology. Taylor must decide whether or not to continue with the project even though his decision could have serious implications. On the one hand, creating a Abiding by Codes of Ethics When considering his decision, Taylor will have to take into account multiple factors. Engineers around the world abide by a certain code of ethics, whether it is one that is specific to their profession or a more general one. This is certainly something Taylor will have to consider when deciding whether to implement Solar Roadways or not. Probably the most respected engineering association, the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), puts out their own code of ethics, consisting of several fundamental canons. The first canon is the broadest of all, and Taylor’s current circumstance could come into conflict with it. The canon states that an engineer should “Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [2]. Obviously, if Taylor decides to go through with the project and it turns out that the tiles are not as strong as previously thought, then he puts the welfare and safety of the public in danger, directly clashing with the first canon. According to the NSPE rules of practice, “If engineers' judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate” [2]. This would lead Taylor to stop the project if he had doubts about the integrity of the panels and notify his superiors about the problem. Although this may damage his reputation, it would also potentially stop a serious disaster from occurring. Taylor would not only put NSPE’s code of ethics into consideration, but he must also take into consideration the American Society of Civil Engineer’s code of ethics. One of the principles of the ASCE says that an engineer should strive to advance the engineering profession by: “using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare and the environment” [3]. This principle poses a problem for Taylor because it states that a civil engineer should be honest and also enhance the environment. Taylor should be honest in his uncertainty of the strength of the tiles, but if he chooses to continue with the project, he will be greatly reducing the cities impact on the environment. The dilemma only increases when one considers that implementing the Solar Roadway technology would basically eliminate most carbon emissions 1 University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 2014-08-28 Adam Bottenfield from the city of Pittsburgh, increasing the cleanliness of the city and the inhabitant’s health. One such case, presented by the Department of Philosophy and the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Texas A&M, illustrates the need to pay great attention to safety. The object of concern is a radio tower built by a company called Antenna Engineering that collapsed due to insufficiently sized bolts. One of the interesting facets of this case is the “gray area” that develops when one considers who is responsible. Is it the manufacturer of the materials because they did not provide the workers with sufficiently sized bolts, or is it the workers themselves for not realizing that the bolts were not large for the task at hand? The paper poses the questions: “Where does the responsibility of Antenna Engineering end and Riggers begin? Should Antenna Engineering have provided adequate hoisting lugs in their original design?” [7]. Taylor would have to consider these types of questions when constructing the Solar Roadway because, although he didn’t design the original components of the tiles, he would be the one putting them together and would therefore bare some of the responsibility. Another case study involves the fourth canon in the NSPE code of ethics, which states that an engineer must “Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees” [2]. The scenario is that an engineer hired by a landlord is aware of fire code violations, but does not inform anyone because, in order to be a “faithful agent” to his client, the engineer must maintain a level of confidentiality. On the other hand, Beck, the author of the case study, writes, “Professional engineers have a fundamental obligation to act consistently with regard to such requirements because of their impact on the public health, safety, and welfare” [8]. It would seem that these canons contradict each other in certain circumstances. On one hand, an engineer is called to maintain confidentiality with his/her client, while on the other hand an engineer must make sure that the public is safe. If the engineer is then called to withhold information that pertains to the public’s safety, complications occur. When dealing with Solar Roadways, Taylor could be forced to encounter this situation if the Pittsburgh City Council requires him to continue the project even though there are major safety concerns. In this instance, Taylor would have to choose between keeping faith with his client and the safety of the general public. One would think that the safety of the public would outweigh the obligations to the client, but it would be a difficult situation for any engineer hoping to be hired in the future. A third case study, written by the National Institute of Engineering Ethics, deals with the licensing of engineers, which is relevant to Taylor’s situation because the project he is taking on is very large, so he will undoubtedly have to hire additional engineers to aid him with the planning and development of the Solar Roadways. As project manager, Taylor will be in charge of hiring all engineers under him, so he will need to make sure that each one is licensed in the state of Pennsylvania. In this specific case study, an engineer works without a license because he is called to help in a potentially dangerous situation, where a clock tower is endangering workers because it is leaning and could potentially fall [9]. A Practical Approach Aside from the philosophical and moral approaches of abiding by his profession’s code of ethics, Taylor could turn to well-established research and real-world situations to help him decide about his present dilemma. Numerous engineering disasters have occurred that have been well documented, and understanding the errors of other engineers can help prevent any future disasters that could occur. For example, Steve Starrett of the ASCE looked into a recent collapse of a skywalk caused by failures on the part of the engineers. Starrett determined that faulty connections were to blame, but really the root of the problems stemmed from the engineers determination to complete the project quickly without regard to safety. Starrett then concluded that all engineering disasters have a few ethical issues that were neglected. A few key factors that apply to Taylor’s situation are: 1). “Financial aspects contribute to most human-caused disasters” 2). “It is common to find that shortcuts in regular procedures contributed to a disaster” 3). “Design and construction errors are a key factor in accidents” [4]. If Taylor considered these findings, he would understand that taking shortcuts would be a very dangerous option indeed, especially considering that thousands of people would be using his Solar Roadways every day. Aside from safety, Taylor must also consider the cost of the project he is undertaking. Taylor has an obligation to the public to use their money wisely, and if the benefits of the project do not outweigh the costs, then the project should not be undertaken. According to Sunny Freeman of the Huffington Post, Solar Roadway tiles cost around $70 per square foot, whereas traditional asphalt cost anywhere between $3-$15 per square foot [5]. Although this is a huge difference in cost, the idea of free energy to Pittsburgh’s citizens is very inviting. David Roberts of Grist sums up the value of clean energy nicely when he states, “Think not just about solar roadways, but more generally about the goal of clean, abundant energy, economic renewal, and a livable climate. What’s that worth?” [6]. Once again, Taylor would have to be able to prove that the initial cost of constructing the roads is negligible compared to the savings that would be a result of the Solar Roadway. Case Studies Another way to determine the correct ethical approach to Taylor’s situation is to look at a number of case studies. By looking at both hypothetical and real-life cases, one can draw connections to the Solar Roadway case and perhaps determine the best course of action. Although the situations may not directly relate to this specific case, many ethical concepts are similar and therefore can be applied to other ethical predicaments. 2 Adam Bottenfield This case study shows the legal trouble that engineers can face if they do not follow proper procedures, and Taylor will certainly have multitudes of procedures to follow considering the size of the engineering project that he is undertaking. Although the legal procedures for this project would certainly be overwhelming, Taylor would have to pay close attention to them to make sure his project is being done in the right way. A final case study, written by E. Karagianis, is perhaps the most applicable to Taylor’s situation. It involves a structural engineer who has been recently informed that a skyscraper that he built has serious structural flaws. If the engineer decides to do nothing, thousands of people are in danger. If the engineer decides to take action and notify his superiors, his professional reputation will be impacted negatively [10]. Taylor would face a similar situation if he decided to continue on with his project and later find out that the Solar Roadway tiles were not durable enough to withstand the wear of constant motor traffic. Taylor would then be put in a difficult situation, but according to the first canon of NSPE’s Code of Ethics, Taylor would have a clear choice to make. He would undoubtedly have to inform his superiors so as not to endanger thousands of people’s safety. lar-roadways-indiegogo_n_5416811.html [6] D. Roberts. (2009). “Could We Replace the Nation’s Pavement with Solar Panels?” Grist. (online article). http://grist.org/article/2009-08-28-could-we-replace-roadsand-parking-lots-with-solar-panels/ [2] (2014). “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” National Society of Professional Engineers. (online journal). http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics [3] (2014). “Code of Ethics.” American Society of Civil Engineers. (online journal). http://www.asce.org/Ethics/Cod e-of-Ethics/. [4] S. Starrett. (2013). “Engineers Face Ethical Dilemmas.” American Society of Civil Engineers. (online article). http://ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.1061/%28ASCE%29LM.19 43-5630.0000213 [7] (1992). “Engineering Ethics”. Texas A&M University: Department of Philosophy and Department of Mechanical Engineering.(online journal).http://ethics.tamu.edu/Portals/3 /Case%20Studies/TVAntennaCollapse.pdf [8] C. Beck, J. Branch. (2014). “Public Health and SafetyDelay in Addressing Fire Code Violations”. National Society of Professional Engineers. (online journal). http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No %2013-11-FINAL.pdf [9] R. Bucknam. “The Leaning Tower: A Timely Dilemma” National Institute for Engineering Ethics. (online article). http://www.depts.ttu.edu/murdoughcenter/products/cases.ph p [10] M. McFarland (2012). “Occidental Engineering”. Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science. (online article). http://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases/OccidentalEng .aspx [1] M. Belfiore. (2014). “We Could Build a SolarPowered Roadway. But Will We?” PopularMechanics. (online article). http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/i nfrastructure/we-could-build-a-solar-powered-roadway-butwill-we-16879565 CONCLUSIONS It is clear from the multiple sources compiled that Taylor has many angles to approach the problem from. Taylor must take into account the canons of both NSPE’s and ASCE’s code of ethics. When considering these, one could easily say that Taylor should immediately stop the project now despite that fact that it would hurt his reputation as an engineer. However, one must also consider the great gains that could be made by the Solar Roadway technology if it is to be successful. If the Solar Roadway project turns out to be successful, clean energy will be provided to the entire city of Pittsburgh for free, reducing carbon emissions and increasing the health of its citizens. When looking at other real-life situations and case studies, the one aspect that stands out that safety should always be taken extremely seriously. This being said, if I were in Taylor’s situation, I would inform the Pittsburgh city council that I would need to perform further tests on the tiles so that I could ensure that they could structurally withstand the wear of motor traffic. This would also ensure that the taxpayer’s money isn’t wasted on an unproven technology. In conclusion, the first canon of NSPE’s code of ethics trumps other factors, such as professional reputation and even the hope of clean, free energy for the time being. Protecting the public’s welfare should be taken seriously in all cases of engineering. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Malik Snowden and John Loss for helping me write my paper by staying up in Benedum all night on Saturday, and slapping me in the face with soap when I fell asleep so that I could get more work done. REFERENCES [5] S. Freeman. (2014). “Solar Roadways Spark Public's Imagination, But Cost Could Be Barrier”. Huffington Post. (online article). http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/05/30/so 3