Budny 4:00
L13
NUCLEAR FUSION ETHICS: CREATING A NEW ENERGY SOURCE IN A
RESPONSIBLE WAY
Patrick McAnally (pmm54@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION: AN ETHICALLY
CHALLENGING SCENARIO
The Situation
One day, working as chemical engineer at the ITER
building, I decide to go through my routine safety check of the
magnets required to hold the plasma in place during the fusion
process. As I am walking around the massive structures I
notice that the concrete structure around the magnets, the walls
of the containment structure, appear to have cracks running
through them. Upon further inspection it appears that there are
a substantial number of cracks running throughout the
concrete, as if it was not cured correctly. A weak containment
structure could be devastating in the event of a malfunction of
the reactor structure. The reactor structure holds the coils that
produce the strong magnetic fields required to contain the
plasma. If there were to be a malfunction of the reactor
structure then the tension of the magnetic fields could be
released and cause the magnets to explode outwards. On a
regular scale nuclear fusion reactor this would be similar to any
other industrial accident, but based on the scale of ITER I am
worried about the magnitude of the explosion and how the
weakened cement walls would be essential to protecting the
people nearby.
The Action Taken
After completely the rest of my inspection I deliver my
report to the safety supervisor of the construction, voicing my
concerns directly to him about the possible dangers that could
come from a failure in the reactor structure with such a weak
containment structure, describing the cracks that are dispersed
throughout the wall of the structure. The weak outer structure
increases the possibility of a magnet explosion because the
reactor structure is formed form the same base, causing a
greater concern that there may be weak cement that cannot be
seen from the outside. The supervisor says that he agrees with
my concern, but it would be a substantial job to tear down a
redo the entire structure due to a couple of sparse cracks. He
says that he will find a more efficient way to fix the problem
at hand and not to worry because now that it has been brought
to his attention it will be handled within the next month.
The “Fix”
Approximately a month later I returned to the part of the
structure that I had noticed was cracked, after it had been
closed off for maintenance. At first glance the structure
appeared to be repaired of all cracks and in the condition that
it needed to be in. But, after further inspection, it became
apparent that a shortcut had been taken. They had simply filled
in the cracks and applied a new coating of paint, meaning that
the structure was not as strong as it appeared, or as if it had
been cured correctly the first time. When I return to the
supervisor and voiced my concerns about how weak the wall
potentially still was, as well as the possibility of a weakened
base that is holding up the reactor structure he informs me that
the problem has been fixed and that I need to focus on the
magnets, the part of the project assigned to me. He assures that
the structure is perfectly capable of completing the job it was
designed to do, and that it would be a substantial setback for
the project to have to rebuild the structure, costing money and
time both of which are not available. He has insinuated that
higher ups have told him, as well as me indirectly, to fix it in
the fastest, cheapest way and then move on.
REACTION TO ETHICAL SITUATION
According to the code of ethics for engineers, they must
“hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public”
[1]. If I were to let the situation go and not draw attention to it
then I would be violating this canon because a weaker
containment structure would mean that an explosion due to a
failure of the reactor structure would have a much more
devastating effect. Instead of the explosion being contained to
just the building that it occurs in, the walls could be blown out
and cause damage to the surrounding area. With such large
magnets required to control the plasma, there would be a
substantially larger explosion than there would be of any other
current fusion facility.
The difficulty with this situation is that the bosses have said
to leave it up to the supervisor and his crew to handle the
situation. Also, the Chemical Engineer’s Code of Ethics says
to “treat fairly and respectfully all colleagues and co-workers,
recognizing their unique contributions and capabilities” [2],
therefore I would have to respect the expertise of the
supervisor and his crew that the repairing was completed
appropriately and will be effective. In order to make the
appropriate decision on the situation it is essential that all parts
of the situation are weighed according to the code of ethics, not
only for engineers in general, but also for chemical engineers.
In order to understand that magnitude of making the wrong
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2013-10-29
Patrick McAnally
decision it is important to know what the fusion process is and
how it differs in the ITER facility than anywhere else.
superconductors. The whole magnetic process is much larger
than the Joint European Torus, “with a confinement volume
over four times JET's, ringed by magnetic fields almost three
times as strong” [6], it is apparent how much stronger the
magnets are than any other fusion facility. Superconductors
were intensely researched by Oxford Instruments, a
superconductor specialist, who said they would make it
cheaper to run the tokamak, as it would “reduce the amount of
electricity needed to produce the magnetic fields” [7]. A key
aspect of ITER’s ability to produce an increased amount of
energy is the vacuum vessel. This vessel determines the
volume of the fusion plasma, meaning that the larger the vessel
the more power produced. The ITER vacuum vessel will be
“twice as large and sixteen times as heavy as any previous
tokamak” [8] making it capable of a much greater magnitude
of energy. The incredible size difference of ITER from any
other fusion facility in the world gives it an edge on the rest
because when it comes to fusion, the larger the facility the
more energy that it is capable of producing.
THE PROCESS OF FUSION
The goal of ITER project is to create the largest scale center
for the fusion process in order to create the first successfully
efficient fusion plant. The main focus of the fusion process is
to use the smallest amount of energy in order to produce an
exponentially greater amount of energy. The theory behind
fusion is based on the famous equation: E=mc2, meaning that
a very small amount of mass can generate an enormous amount
of energy because the speed of light is so great. Fusion differs
from fission in that fission uses heavy uranium nuclei which
are split apart in order to create lighter elements, as well as
causing a tiny portion of the mass to turn directly into energy.
Fusion is essentially the same process but backwards, using
hydrogen nuclei to create helium ions that weigh slightly less.
ITER: HIGER RISK DUE TO A LARGER
PROJECT
ETHICAL SOLUTIONS
In order to come to a conclusion that respects the codes of
ethics, both the engineering one as well as the code specific to
chemical engineers, all sides of the situation must be weighed
against both codes. The chemical engineering code of ethics
states that engineers need to “treat fairly and respectfully all
colleagues and co-workers, recognizing their unique
contributions and capabilities” [2]. Abiding by this code means
respecting that the people who are in charge of the safety of
the operation as well as the repairing of the reported issue by
accepting that they were employed for a reason and are
informed in their work. It is also states that engineers should
only “perform professional services only in areas of their
competence” [2]. Other canons of the code must be weighed
against these two, supporting the other side that it is your duty
to ensure that the problem is sufficiently fixed. The top
engineering canon states that engineers must “Hold paramount
the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [1]. If I believed
that the repair job was not completed correctly than it would
go against this canon to listen to the supervisor and leave it as
is since there could be a possible risk to the public if the
structure were to fail in the event of an explosion. If I am to
follow to code of ethics than it is necessary to consider if this
could be viewed as deceitful, as the fifth canon says that
engineers need to “avoid deceptive acts” [1]. By allowing a
mediocre fix to a possibly serious problem to stand, I would be
violating two canons of the code of ethics by possibly putting
the safety of the public in danger, no matter how small the
chance, as well as allowing a fix such as this to slip by. There
are parts of both codes that support either decision, but in the
end it is necessary to weigh which is more important, the safety
of the public, which in my eyes may be in danger, or respecting
the decisions of colleagues who are trained in the field of the
project that is felt to be inappropriately completed.
The technology itself that is being used in the ITER project
is not incredibly groundbreaking, but the magnitude of the
project is what makes it unique. The size of ITER is essential
because, as Geoff Brumfiel, science correspondent of NPR
radio, says “the bigger the tokamak, the hotter the plasma can
get, and the more efficient fusion becomes” [3]. The ITER
facility “includes concrete-framed buildings with a combined
footprint of 21,000 sq. m” [4], meaning that there is a huge
area where a situation such as the hypothetical one above
suggests could occur. The main goal of fusion is to obtain the
greatest efficiency, meaning to put in as little energy in order
to generate the greatest amount. The ITER facility is designed
to use a magnetic cage called a tokamak in order to suspend
the plasma of hydrogen ions as they are heated. The tokamak
is a metal doughnut which is circled by loops of coil in order
to generate magnetic fields. These magnetic fields are what
keep the plasma suspended, but there is a risk that comes from
these magnets. Because the plasma is such high energy, it takes
a great deal of energy in order to keep it suspended. The
increase of energy that is required means that there is a slight
increase in risk for a structural failure which would cause the
magnetic power to be released and cause a type of explosion.
These magnets are essential though, because keeping the
plasma suspended is key because in order for fusion to occur
the plasma of hydrogen atoms must be heated to, as described
by Dr. Craig C. Freudenrich who received a Ph.D. for the
University of Pittsburgh, “temperatures of about 100 million
Kelvin, approximately six times hotter than the sun’s core” [5],
which is hot enough to melt any solid. Fusion has been shown
to occur under 20 MW of power generation, but ITER plans on
scaling that up to 500 MW of generation.
The tokamak that is used in ITER’s fusion process is the
largest in the world, containing 18 magnets made from
2
Patrick McAnally
TER+fusion+reactor%29&rft.jtitle=Scientific+American&rft.
au=Brumfiel%2C+Geoff&rft.date=2012-0601&rft.pub=Scientific+American%2C+Inc&rft.issn=00368733&rft.eissn=19467087&rft.volume=306&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=56&rft.externa
lDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=293363006&paramdict=
en-US
[4] P. Reina. (2012) “Fusion Plant Takes Shape.” ENR:
Engineering
News-Record.
(Online
Article)
http://rt4rf9qn2y.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.8
8-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt
=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fu
sion+plant+takes+shape.%28The+largestever+nuclear+reactor+of+its+kind%2C+a+%241.3+billion+p
roject+is+going+up+in+France%29&rft.jtitle=ENR&rft.au=
Reina%2C+Peter&rft.date=2012-0326&rft.pub=The+McGrawHill+Companies%2C+Inc&rft.issn=08919526&rft.volume=268&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=8&rft.external
DBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=290149129&paramdict=e
n-US
[5] C. Freudenrich (2013) “How Nuclear Fusion Reactors
Work.”
Howstuffworks.com
(Website)
http://science.howstuffworks.com/fusion-reactor2.htm
[6]
ITER
(2013)
“ITER”
ITER.org
(Website)
http://www.iter.org/
[7] S. Nathan (2011) “Nuclear Fusion: Path to Power” The
Engineer
(Online
Article)
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?action=interpret&id=GALE
%7CA264375631&v=2.1&u=upitt_main&it=r&p=AONE&s
w=w&authCount=1
[8] D. Hambling (2011) “Nuclear Fusion Goes Small.” New
Scientist
(Online
Journal
Article)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026240791
1619702
[9]Ellis, Patti (2013) “Corporate Ethics Education Yields
Rewards”
National
Defense
(Online
Article)
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA339853916
&v=2.1&u=upitt_main&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w
[10] Wyndham, Jessica (2012) “Freedom and Engineering For
All” Mechanical Engineering-CIME (Online Article)
http://rt4rf9qn2y.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.8
8-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt
=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=F
REEDOM+AND+ENGINEERING+FOR+ALL&rft.jtitle=M
echanical+Engineering&rft.au=Jessica+M+Wyndham&rft.da
te=2012-0901&rft.pub=American+Society+of+Mechanical+Engineers&r
ft.issn=0025-6501&rft.eissn=19435649&rft.volume=134&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=32&rft.externa
lDocID=2759883761&paramdict=en-US
[11] Else, Holly (2012) “Safer Nuclear Power Set to Become
a Reality” Professional Engineering Magazine (Online Article)
CONCLUSION: FUSION AND THE ETHICS
INVOLVED
The code of ethics for engineers pertains to almost all
engineering situations, nuclear fusion being no exception. The
way the fusion process has been handled so far has abided by
the canons set forth by both the Engineering Code of Ethics as
well as the Chemical Engineers’ Code of Ethics. The
businesses that employ engineers require that they follow the
specific ethics codes as the current view is that a “culture that
embraces a core set of values is essential to being successful in
business today” [9]. The canons are essential to all of the work
that engineers do today since “ethical standards guide the work
of engineers” [10]. Fusion process respects the canons from
the first which says that engineers must “Hold paramount the
safety, health, and welfare of the public” [1]. Fusion abides by
this canon more so than other nuclear processes, such as
fission, because there is a very small amount of nuclear waste
that is produced. Fusion is “a sustainable and non-polluting
power source” [11] which is a perfect representation of the first
canon. Alongside the Engineering Code of Ethics, fusion
workers must abide by other codes such as the Chemical
Engineers’ Code of Ethics.
With the chemical processes that occur throughout the
fusion process, chemical engineers are an essential part of the
project. With a specialization of engineering comes a
specialization of the code of ethics. Fusion power abides by the
Chemical Engineers’ Code of Ethics in the sense that much of
it is similar to Engineer’s Code, but there is a specific
difference that should be pointed out. Chemical engineers are
to use “their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of
human welfare” [2]. By researching the fusion process they
abide by this canon as the success of fusion would mean a
power source unlike any other that currently exists. With this
success the energy production of the world would be forever
changed. The fusion process not only abides by the general
Engineering Code of Ethics, but is representative of the code
specific to engineers as well, making it not only a viable energy
source but also an ethical option as well.
REFERENECES
[1] National Society of Professional Engineers (1946)
(Revised 2007) “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers”
NSPE.org
(Website)
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[2] American Institute of Chemical Engineers (2013) “Code of
Ethics”
AIChE.com
(Website)
http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics
[3] G. Brumfiel (2012) “Fusions Missing Pieces.” Scientific
American
(Online
Article)
http://rt4rf9qn2y.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.8
8-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt
=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fu
sion%27s+missing+pieces.%28challenges+hampering+the+I
3
Patrick McAnally
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA284449945
&v=2.1&u=upitt_main&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
A. Grant (2013) “How America’s Latest Attempt at Fusion
Power Fizzled.” Science News (Online Article)
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?action=interpret&id=GALE
%7CA327356765&v=2.1&u=upitt_main&it=r&p=AONE&s
w=w&authCount=1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank all of the librarians at the Bevier
Library for assisting me in finding appropriate sources. I would
also like to thank my fellow engineers for assisting me in the
editing and wording of this paper.
4