Sanchez 4:00
L10
ETHICS AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE USE OF THE KBS-3 METHOD FOR
NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL MANAGEMENT
Michael Hensler (mjh140@pitt.edu)
OVERVIEW
The KBS-3 Method
Before beginning to discuss any ethical issues
behind the use of copper canisters in nuclear waste disposal
management, it is important to have a basic understanding of
what nuclear waste is, how it forms, and why copper canisters
are being used for containing nuclear waste.
In his book Routledge Explorations in
Environmental Studies: Nuclear Waste Management and
Legitimacy, Mats Andrén describes the KBS-3 method as
“encapsulating waste through the use of various barriers that
prevent leakage into the biosphere” [3]. The KBS-3 provides
three such barriers for the radioactive waste. The first layer is
a copper canister that is lined with an iron insert. This canister
is then enclosed by a thick layer of bentonite clay. The
bentonite clay should be composed of approximately 10-17%
water and will act as a “buffer” between the copper canister
and the surrounding bedrock. This buffer will protect against
sulphide molecules, which are present at the repository depth
of 500 m. According to Karsten Pedersen’s Journal of
Applied Microbiology, if this sulphide were to reach the
copper canisters, then there would be “considerably
accelerated corrosion” [4]. Thus, if the copper canisters
corrode, radioactive waste will be released into the bedrock
and contaminate the groundwater, which is the water that we
drink. The last line of defense for the radioactive waste is the
bedrock. The bedrock provides minimal defense against the
waste entering the surrounding biosphere, according to the
article “Modelling of thermal rock mass properties at the
potential sites of a swedish nuclear waste repository” by Jan
Sundberg et al. [5]. A pictorial representation of the KBS-3
method is shown below:
What is Nuclear Energy?
Nuclear energy is the result of the nuclear fission of
an atom - most notably, the Uranium atom. When fission of
an atom occurs, the atom splits apart and releases energy.
Nuclear power plants capture this energy in order to power
homes.
Nuclear Power Plants
As previously mentioned, Uranium atoms are the
primary source of nuclear energy. In nuclear power plants,
pellets of uranium-235 atoms are placed end-to-end in over
200 fuel rods that are each 12 feet long [1]. The uranium-235
atoms begin to split and give off neutrons, which collide with
other uranium-235 atoms [1]. In doing so, heat and various
isotopes of radioactive elements are produced [1]. There are
control rods in the reactor to control how much fission occurs.
Inserting the rods absorbs the neutrons and stops the fission,
while removing the rods allows fission to occur [1]. Once heat
from the fission is produced, it is transferred to a coolant. This
coolant is typically in the form of water [1]. The water is
heated to approximately 600 degrees Fahrenheit, which turns
the water into steam. The vapor turns the blades of a turbine,
which is connected to an electrical generator [1]. Thus, once
the blades spin, electricity is produced. After turning the
turbine, the vapor is condensed and turned back into water.
This process occurs in hyperboloid-shaped cooling towers, as
pictured below:
FIGURE 1 [2]
Hyperboloid shape of nuclear cooling tower
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2014-10-28
FIGURE 2 [6]
Pictorial representation of the KBS-3 system
Michael Hensler
SCENARIO
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODES OF
ETHICS
Placing the copper canisters 500 meters below
ground in bedrock, where groundwater is found, is a scenario
that could have monumental impacts. My company, however,
says not to worry about the groundwater as it is irrelevant.
They wish to overlook the facts of this scenario and continue
with the flawed KBS-3 method. My boss was even willing to
pay me an extra $500,000 in order to keep quiet about it.
As an engineer, there are codes of ethics that I must
acknowledge and utilize each and every day. There is a code
of ethics that pertains to all engineers, as well as a code of
ethics that relates to each field of engineering. These codes
ensure that engineers maintain honesty, integrity, and
impartiality in their daily routines, with the public’s safety
and welfare in mind. Without further ado, I will apply these
codes of ethics to the ongoing scenario.
What Could Happen
In the aforementioned KBS-3 method, if
groundwater (which contains sulphide molecules) penetrates
the bedrock and permeates through the bentonite clay to reach
the copper canister, then corrosion will occur on the copper
canisters, allowing the waste to enter the groundwater. While
this takes place 500 m underground, it is important to know
that this groundwater is, in fact, extracted at these depths. The
EPA has the following to say about contaminated
groundwater: “In many parts of the world, groundwater is
pumped out of the ground so it can be used as a source of
water for drinking, bathing, other household uses, agriculture,
and industry. In addition, groundwater can reach the surface
through natural pathways such as springs” [7]. This alone
would have impacts on multiple entities, including myself.
NSPE Code of Ethics
The National Society of Professional Engineers
(NSPE) is an association that represents engineers
nationwide. In order to connect all of the engineering
disciplines, a code of ethics was created by the NSPE. This
code of ethics provides a baseline for which engineers must
evaluate their products. Thus, as an engineer, I must reflect
upon the ongoing scenario with the KBS-3 method, and
determine how I can improve the quality of the design based
on said code of ethics.
Ethical Considerations
The canon that stands out to me the most in the
NSPE code of ethics is, “Hold paramount the safety, health,
and welfare of the public” [8]. It has been made known that
there are some potential issues with the current KBS-3
method. These issues not only put myself at risk, but it also
endangers the public. This contradicts the aforementioned
canon that I must abide by as per the NSPE. As a result,
certain modifications of the design must be taken into
consideration to prevent a catastrophe where lives are lost.
One issue, a conflict that I have previously
discussed, is the corrosion of copper canisters by way of
sulphide molecules. The “Journal of Applied Microbiology”
by Karsten Pederson provides a lengthy explanation of the
sulphide interaction. In his conclusion, Pederson says the
following about sulphide interaction with the bentonite clay
and copper canisters: “The autoradiography results show that
sulphide production did occur in the clay very close to the
copper surface” [4]. In other words, once sulphide permeates
through the bentonite clay and reaches the copper canister, the
sulphide will react with the copper canister and penetrate this
defense mechanism. Radioactive waste will then be released
into the groundwater. As a result, the KBS-3 method must be
revisited since the welfare of society is at risk. The journal
made note that their study was done on bentonite clay with a
density of 1.5 g/cm3 [4]. This article made me think about how
I could improve upon the KBS-3 method. For example, what
if the bentonite clay density were raised to 3.0 g/cm3? Would
the sulphide concentration near the copper surface be
reduced? If there is a way to reduce the sulphide concentration
Impacts
If the radioactive waste were to enter and
contaminate the groundwater, then there would be a huge
personal impact on me, the engineer. I would reflect on my
design and realize that it was my fault that this tragedy
happened. It was me, the engineer, who has put people’s lives
at stake due to a flaw in my design. Furthermore, there is an
effect on the company. This company that I work for has put
their trust in my talents to construct a safe, productive solution
to the ongoing nuclear waste build-up problem. By producing
a flawed design, I have associated this company with failure.
Now, no one will want to invest in this enterprise. The worst
impact of all is the societal effect. Once the contaminated
water is extracted from the bedrock, this water would be used
for everyday needs for the public: watering plants, showering,
and above all, drinking. This puts lives of the community at
stake. On top of all of this, I have tarnished the field of
engineering. More specifically, I have essentially ruined the
future use of nuclear power. That is to say, there would not be
any more supporters for nuclear energy if adverse effects were
the only resulting byproduct. In order to avoid such a
catastrophe, I need to evaluate the code of ethics of
engineering, and decide how I can ameliorate the safety of my
design.
2
Michael Hensler
to a negligible level, then there is the opportunity of saving
lives.
Aside from the ethical consideration of the physical
design, it is important to note the violation of the code of
ethics by my boss. My boss, Mr. Jake Peavy, is considering
paying me $500,000 to keep my mouth shut about the
mechanical downfall of the KBS-3 method. As per the
chemical engineering code of ethics, chemical engineers must
“formally advise their employers or clients if they perceive
that a consequence of their duties will adversely affect the
present or future health or safety of their colleagues or the
public” [9]. Mr. Peavy is putting the health and safety of
everyone at risk by sweeping this scenario under the rug. He
must notify our company, as well as other engineering
entities, of the flaw so that we may improve upon it for future
revisions of the KBS-3 method. Marion Hersh is the author of
an ethics article titled “Science, technology, and values:
promoting ethics and social responsibility.” In this article,
Mrs. Hersh discusses the importance of responsibility as it
pertains to ethics in engineering [10]. I, too, believe in social
responsibility in the field of engineering. I feel as though if
there is something that is off, you should be able to accept that
and take responsibility for that. We are all human, and errors
will happen. Revisions to designs may be made. Even Thomas
Edison had to go through multiple versions of the light bulb
until he produced a working bulb. That being said, there are
modifications that need to be taken into consideration for the
copper canisters. Is there perhaps a way to eliminate corrosion
on the copper surface? With the code of ethics in mind, how
am I able to tweak the design to make it more civilizationfriendly? These questions become important as I work
through future adaptations of the KBS-3 method.
Also, in the code of ethics for chemical engineers, it
is made aware that chemical engineers must “issue statements
or present information only in an objective and truthful
manner” [9]. By blatantly ignoring the fact that there is a
design mishap and failing to speak about it in a truthful way,
Mr. Peavy violates this code. Mr. Peavy must be forthcoming
about any and all information so as to not risk the lives of the
community.
And lastly, the chemical engineering code of ethics
notes that chemical engineers must “conduct themselves in a
fair, honorable, and respectful manner” [9]. Since he is not
being upfront about the current scenario, Mr. Peavy does not
adhere to this code. I read a general ethical engineering article
that was named “Engineering Ethics Beyond Engineers’
Ethics” and was written by Josep M. Basart. Mr. Basart
pointed out that “to be an engineer is to be individualistic and
strong enough to withstand moral challenges” [11]. This
insight allowed me to think over Mr. Peavy’s offer of
$500,000 to me in exchange for withholding information. I
pondered Mr. Basart’s logic and realized that I must be strong
enough to not succumb to illegal behavior. Engineering is my
profession and livelihood. I do not wish to risk my future as
an engineer, nor wish to tarnish the engineering field, by
violating any moral or official codes of ethics.
Case Study Insight
Case number 89-7 of the NSPE case studies provides
excellent insight to the ongoing scenario. In this case study,
there was a potential hazard due to a faulty mechanical design
of a fire alarm system. The engineer was neither an electrical
nor mechanical engineer [12]. The engineer had to consult the
code of ethics in order to determine what to do. The
correlation between this scenario and my KBS-3 scenario is
that there is a problem that extends beyond our qualifications.
For the KBS-3 method, there are environmental and chemical
concerns. While I am qualified to research and rectify the
chemical portion of the scenario, I am unable to speak in
regards to the environmental portion. Thus, I can notify my
company head of the dilemma in order to find an
environmental or civil engineer to determine the best solution.
So, I notified the head of my company, Mr. Michael
Moustakas, and he put me into contact with a renowned
environmental engineer by the name of Dr. James Shields. Dr.
Shields has been working in this field for over 15 years and
has received numerous accolades, such as the Stanley E.
Kappe Award and the Edward J. Cleary Award. Dr. Shields
was also named the International Honorary Member for the
American Academy of Environmental Engineers and
Scientists (AAEES). I had the opportunity to sit down and
discuss with him the KBS-3 method and the environmental
impact that it could have. According to Dr. Shields, in order
to ensure that the ground water is not contaminated, the
copper canisters must be equipped with a digital device that
detects levels of sulphide molecules [13]. Once the number of
sulphide molecules exceeds the minimum amount to corrode
the copper canister (the “threshold,” as he called it), the digital
device will alert my company so that we may extract the
canister and reinforce it [13]. I have decided that the best way
to rid the copper canister of its impurities is to cleanse the
surface of the copper canister and rebounding it with a fresh
layer of bentonite clay.
Case study number 1042 from the Texas Tech
website of case studies also influences my thought process.
The case talks about a graduate student who is working for a
construction firm [14]. He notices that some steel beams are
not lined with a protective coating and that walls are now
covering the beams. The project superintendent informs the
inspector that the beams have received the proper coating.
The graduate student is troubled by this issue, but the
superintendent said to let it go [14]. As per the NSPE code of
ethics, the superintendent is in direct violation of several
codes and canons. For one, the superintendent is endangering
the welfare of the public by not putting the protective coating
on [8]. In addition to that, the superintendent is not being
straightforward with his information and is lying to the public
[8]. In the current scenario I am in, there exists a direct
correlation between myself and the graduate student, as well
as my boss and the superintendent. I realize that there are
potential health factors in the current KBS-3 design. My boss
is made aware of this problem and informs me to ignore it. In
3
Michael Hensler
finally, be sure to continue to ask yourself the question, “Is
there anything wrong with my design and how I am going
about completing this project?” Once thinking about it, I
assure you that you will find problems that you did not know
existed before. And, if you are searching for the answer, the
best place to go is to the codes of ethics for both the NSPE
and your specific field.
order to solve this problem, I turn to the code of ethics. Since
the public’s health and safety is at risk, I must address the
issue until the risk is resolved. This could possibly consist of
me notifying a knowledgeable third-party to further assess the
scenario, such as Dr. Shields, the environmental engineer.
DECISION
REFERENCES
Due in part to the seriousness of nuclear waste and
its potential impact on the environment and those around me,
I feel as though it is necessary to continue to consider the
ethical issues at hand. The disposal of nuclear waste is a new
topic and one that should be taken seriously. Attempting to
speed up the implementation of the KBS-3 method is a
violation of the various codes of ethics that engineers must
follow since the method puts the public at risk. Further, there
are indeed mechanical flaws and environmental concerns.
These issues are in direct violation of the codes of ethics if the
KBS-3 method were to be implemented right now, as noted
earlier. Therefore, further research needs to be done in order
to eliminate any and all ethical concerns. And finally, it
should not be overlooked that my boss is bribing me to keep
the issues secret. The simple fact that my boss is trying to give
me $500,000 should be cause for concern. It is my duty as an
engineer, as per the NSPE code of ethics, to be forthcoming
about this and notify a third-party of this ethical violation in
order to eradicate it [8]. All in all, upon reflecting on the
various codes of ethics and understanding what is potentially
at stake, I feel it is necessary to conduct more research on the
KBS-3 method and fine-tune the flaws before implementing
it.
[1] (2012). “How do Nuclear Plants Work?” Duke Energy.
(online
article).
http://www.duke-energy.com/aboutenergy/generating-electricity/nuclear-how.asp. p. 3.
[2] (2010). “Didcot power station cooling tower.” Wikimedia.
(image).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Didco
t_power_station_cooling_tower_zootalures.jpg. p. 1.
[3] M. Andren. (2012). Routledge Explorations in
Environmental Studies: Nuclear Waste Management and
Legitimacy. New York, NY: Routledge. (print book). pp. 611.
[4] K. Pedersen, M. Motamedi, O. Karnland and T. Sandén.
(2000). “Mixing and sulphate-reducing activity of bacteria in
swelling, compacted bentonite clay under high-level
radioactive waste repository conditions.” Journal of Applied
Microbiology.
(online
article).
doi: 10.1046/j.13652672.2000.01212.x. p. 1038–1047.
[5] J. Sundberg, P. Back, R. Christiansson, H. Hoekmark, M.
Laendell, & J. Wrafter. (2009). “Modelling of thermal rock
mass properties at the potential sites of a swedish nuclear
waste repository”. International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and
Mining
Sciences, 46(6).
(online
article).
http://rt4rf9qn2y.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.
88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apqdiearthsci&rft_val_fmt=info:
ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Internati
onal+Journal+of+Rock+Mechanics+and+Mining+Sciences
&rft.atitle=Modelling+of+thermal+rock+mass+properties+at
+the+potential+sites+of+a+Swedish+nuclear+waste+reposit
ory&rft.au=Sundberg%2C+Jan%3BBack%2C+PaerErik%3BChristiansson%2C+Rolf%3BHoekmark%2C+Hara
ld%3BLaendell%2C+Maerta%3BWrafter%2C+John&rft.aul
ast=Sundberg&rft.aufirst=Jan&rft.date=2009-0901&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1042&rft.isbn=&
rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Journal+of+Rock+Mechan
ics+and+Mining+Sciences&rft.issn=13651609&rft_id=info:
doi/10.1016%2Fj.ijrmms.2009.02.004. p. 1044.
[6] (2012). “Our method of final disposal.” Svensk
Kärnbränslehantering
(SKB).
(image).
http://www.skb.se/Templates/Standard____24109.aspx. p. 1.
[7] (2011). “Groundwater Contamination.” EPA. (online
article).
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/students/wastsite/grndwatr.ht
m. p. 2.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I recently got into contact with a well-known
Industrial Engineer by the name of Dr. Hunter Pence. During
this discussion, Dr. Pence told me the following: “If you, as
an engineer, are faced with an ethical issue, you must evaluate
the situation and base your decision on what the various codes
of ethics say” [15]. This quote has stuck with me ever since
the discussion. I frequently reference this quote as I continue
to refine my design. Throughout this paper, you may have
noticed that I mentioned the canons and codes of ethics when
looking for a solution to an ethical problem. This has been
made possible to me in large part because of the insight that
Dr. Pence has provided me. I recommend that you abide by
the same principle that Dr. Pence has handed down to me.
Also, it is important to note that the canons and codes were
written in order to eliminate any problems that arise. Thus,
you, as well as all engineers, must take the codes seriously
and abide by them each and every day. If you know that there
is a problem in your design, be sure to address and note that
in any discussion with an employer. If there is something that
you are not qualified to do with your background, ensure that
you locate a qualified engineer that may assist you. And
4
Michael Hensler
[8] (2007). “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” National
Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE). (online article).
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics. p. 1-2.
[9] (2013). “Code of Ethics.” The Global Home of Chemical
Engineers
(AIChE).
(online
article).
http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics. p. 2
[10] M. Hersh. (2012). “Science, technology, and values:
promoting ethics and social responsibility.” AI & Society.
(online
article).
http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Direct.asp?AccessToken=8PUY3
P0V0WF039WJ4U0YOXUY3FX3VP90U&Show=Object.
p. 167-168.
[11] J. Basart. (2013). “Engineering Ethics Beyond
Engineers’ Ethics.” Science and Engineering Ethics. (online
article).
http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=
2a503155-aa48-42a6-b38258b03d449a07%40sessionmgr4002&vid=14&hid=4107. p.
179.
[12] (2014). “Public Health and Safety – Delay in Addressing
Fire Code Violations.” National Society for Professional
Engineers
(NSPE).
(online
article).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf. p. 1-2.
[13] J. Shields. (2030, Aug. 9). Conversation.
[14] (2014). “Ethical Cases.” Texas Tech University. (online
article).
http://www.depts.ttu.edu/murdoughcenter/products/cases.ph
p. p. 3.
[15] H. Pence. (2028, Dec. 3). Email Correspondence.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would first like to take the time to acknowledge my
family. If it weren’t for them, I would not have the privilege
of sitting here and typing this paper. I send them my love. In
addition, I would like to thank Kathy Lipinksi for her
assistance in checking for grammatical errors in the first half
of my paper. It is greatly appreciated. And last, but not least,
I would like to thank the “Late Night Homework Club
(LNHC)” for providing me with the motivation to finish this
paper. These people consist of Jen Motter, Aileen Curley, and
Jess Duffy.
5
Your Name
6