Bursic 2:00
L02
RENOVATED WASTEWATER
Kayla LeMaster (kml125@pitt.edu)
they were scarcely implemented due to financial reasons in
lieu of their applicable potential [5]. When AOPs were first
developed in 1987, my company, in the interest of our
community’s water safety, quickly developed a two-year plan
to install the innovation into our facility. The plant only chose
to incorporate the process as a backup process for the older
system, which means the AOP method – as an insurance step
– only receives water that has already been treated. So far, we
have seen great results in the final sanitization of the water
with the new oxidation process.
UNHEALTHY BODIES OF WATER
Water covers over eighty percent of our planet’s surface.
Unfortunately, a large amount of this percentage is polluted
by sewage, debris and chemicals via dumping from locations
such as homes, farms, and businesses [3]. This overall water
source is where our bottled and tap water come from daily,
regardless of its level of contamination before being run
through a cleansing process. I, Kayla LeMaster, am both
interested in and actively involved with this issue. I am an
environmentalist and an engineer; I enjoy working with
nature as much as I enjoy developing means to scientifically
benefit the world and its people. Wastewater and how we
handle it is a roundabout issue throughout the entire world
that requires and deserves our attention. Consumable water is
an important requirement for human life, as it is mostly what
our bodies consist of. Of the waste we humans produce
naturally and unnaturally, only a portion is treated before
being released into the large bodies of water on earth: lakes,
oceans, and rivers. Another collection of this refuse, however,
is dumped unceremoniously into these locations [2].
THE DILEMMA
Before the water is released from our plant and returned
into the environmental waterways, the AOP process sanitizes
it one final time. My job is to measure the toxicity levels of
the water as it flows in and as it flows out of my AOP area.
Recently, I have been noting spikes in the toxin levels of the
water as it enters into my section from the primary, main
water cleansing segment that I am not in charge of. These
levels have not yet risen up to the state’s level of dangerous
classification, but have been coming very close to this illegal
level within the past week. Up to now, the oxidation
mechanism I work with has been able to clear out the debris
causing this rising status of uncleanliness and safely returning
the water back to the community environment. However, if
this rate continues to increase I am worried that the final
oxidation step which I oversee will not be enough to handle
such large levels of contaminants that are being passed
through from the initial processes. The intensity of my stage
is only set as a backup to the other steps in the plant; it is not
high enough to reliably handle such an increased load that the
previous steps are meant to lighten.
MY AREA OF WORK
I work as a chemical engineer for the town of Pottsville
Sewage and Waste Water Treatment Incorporated (PSWWT
Inc.). The Pottsville plant I am working at today was
established in 1951. Pottsville is currently a growing
community which I have resided in since I happily attained
my job position at the plant four years ago. My company’s
water cleaning processes first works to cleanse incoming
water of toxins, then moves the body through a more rigorous
degrading process, and finally passes to a tertiary step that
sanitizes the water as a post treatment precaution. My job and
the responsibilities therein are to ensure that the state quality
standards for treated water are adhered to before the final
phase releases the product back into the environment via a
local river and reservoir.
Throughout my entire career at the Pottsville plant, the
Advanced Oxidation Process has been my method of
purification. Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs) are a
genre of processes which engineers have invented to treat
wastewater. These procedures generate hydroxyl radicals
with high oxidant power to degrade the organic and inorganic
molecules contaminating a polluted body of water. However,
the drawback is that they require a high amount of electrical
energy to work successfully, so high that when first invented
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering
2014-10-28
MY REACTION
I took the initiative to do some individual investigation
before taking the matter to my supervisor. According to the
online documentations of our plant, this AOP was the latest
change that our company invested in; the other two parts of
our overall system have not been updated since the company
was founded. Also, as stated earlier, Pottsville is a positively
growing community; more houses and industries are being
built in our town as the population continues to increase. The
amount of waste produced, both naturally by humans and
mechanically through business work, increases with the rising
populace alignment [3]. The rising level of biological
1
Kayla LeMaster
pollutants entering our system from these areas very well may
be becoming too large for our aging system to handle
appropriately. As such, the outdated machinery is an
extremely likely cause to this problem. It should be well
known in every engineers mind that processes can become
very unsafe to the public if not kept up to date with the rising
standards of the industries [2].
Pottsville community is my primary concern. Safe drinking
and housing water is in demand as a continual need in the
world. Since the water we treat is kept in the revolving
environment of lakes and rivers, it will likely be swam in by
children and, one day, be bottled and sent to houses. I believe
that time and resources must always be devoted in order to
produce positive results for the people; safe water spots to
vacation at, clean water to drink, and sanitary water to bathe
in and use for daily purposes.
SUPERVISOR CONSULTATION 1
CONTINUAL DILEMMA
I chose to present my worries and proof of research to my
supervisor, Gabriel Bretti. He was not very concerned with
my findings. He skeptically told me that I was overreacting
and that the toxicity numbers were fine as long as they are
within the safe perimeters decided by the state government.
“Besides,” he said to me, “installing the plant with new
software is going to cost our company a lot of money that our
boss, Percy, will not be willing to spend.” I did not want to
argue with him due to the ethicality of conflict; in the
Fundamental Canons of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers Code of Professional Ethics, it is stated that
“engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer
or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts
of interest” [1]. I believe this statement is trustworthy in order
to avoid personal problems in a work area, but now I am still
concerned by Gabriel’s casual response to a potentially large
issue. I decided to wait a week and watch to see if the poison
levels continue in an upward trend as they enter my portion of
the plant.
Unsurprisingly, three days after my initial report to
Gabriel I found that the toxicity measurements at both ends of
my section to be above the dangerous levels classified by the
state. Clearly, the trend has not waned as they have been rising
for two weeks now. I would like, as much as I can, to prevent
our company from causing any future potential hazard to our
growing community. If the toxin levels continue to rise, the
environment will pay the price for our negligence. Eventually,
our out-of-date systems will no longer be able to handle the
increasing load due to their age. To keep our company and
community intact, we will need to replace or drastically
update them. This, preferably, needs to be done before it
begins to affect the people of the community.
SUPERVISOR CONSULTATION 2
I attempted a discussion with Gabriel again, but his replies
were not much different than they were during our first talk
about my findings. “I already told you,” he explained, “Percy
is not going to waste a very large portion of our company’s
time and money on new equipment. Even if the levels spike
above the government’s perimeters a few times, the water is
still fine. If anything, it will only harm the fish in the river.
Now get back to work.” Still unconvinced by his words, I kept
measuring the water contamination as it continued to rise.
Following my shift that night, I took the initiative to research
the latest processes and options for replacing water treatment
equipment with the current technological standards.
WATER NECESSITIES
I am aware that one of the highest challenges of the
Twenty-First century is the need for safe water for the general
public. Although water is found almost everywhere around
the planet, it is not as abundant as we may think due to the
increasing pollutants in each body [4]. For example, rivers
and lakes are sources for fresh water but not clean water;
bacteria and insects already live in these places, and when
unpurified wastewater is added to these bodies as well, they
only become more unsuitable, especially for human
consumption. If a large body of water is not safely drinkable,
the processes that take that water and clean it before sending
it to the people and their homes must be extremely efficient
[2].
EXTENDED RESEARCH
I found that AOPs, such as the one of my specialty, can be
used in each step of water management. As a primary step,
they are known to effectively increase the biodegradability of
the toxins in the water before being passed on and finished off
by a secondary protocol. As an intermediate step, similar to
the one that is seemingly failing at the Pottsville plant, the
AOPs completely degrade the waste. The processes, run by
hydroxyl radicals, completely undergo secondary reactions in
order to diminish the unsanitary compounds in the
wastewater, regardless of what step they are exploited in [4].
Recently, chemical engineers have discovered that AOPs can
be driven via direct sunlight rather than electricity. The
MY JOB
Also as an engineer, I am required to comply with
integrity in the interest of public health and safety. In fact, in
the Fundamental Canons within the Code of Ethics for
Engineers, it is stated that engineers should “hold paramount
the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [7]. This
statement applies to my situation; water is definitely included
in the desired health of the people everywhere, although the
2
Kayla LeMaster
process is less costly but just as effective as the original due
to the renewable nature of the sun’s UV rays. The naturally
directed AOPs work the same as the mechanized ones; the
only difference is where the energy powering them comes
from [5]. Refitting and installing the systems would be
expensive, of course. In the future, though, I believe that the
renewable energy source would save our company a lot of
money as opposed to the nonrenewable, electrically driven
option we have been using in our current processes.
MY THOUGHTS
At this point in time, my concerns are running with a
couple of options. I can continue measuring the levels of
contamination as they pass through my area of the plant,
hoping Percy was right and it is only a temporary problem. I
can keep researching options that could help my company’s
efficiency in ways that my boss would agree with. I can
document everything that has happened, including my
original findings and concerns, consultations with Gabriel and
Percy, and future ideas for the company. I can also take my
findings to an outside entity – such as the state. I do believe
all engineers should also abide by the codes of ethics; the
cannons are established for good reason and can only better
our engineering community and the efficiency of our works.
To all professional engineers, I suggest a lot of research and
documentation for each of their areas when consulted with an
ethical dilemma. We cannot always control the integrity of the
information given to us from other people, but we can decide
what to do with it; documentation, further research, and
consultations with authority figures are some examples of
things that we very well may be able to handle individually.
BOSS CONSULTATION
It is my duty as an engineer to act with maximum
ethicality and attempt to fix problems in my focus any way
that I can. In the Rules of Practice portion of the Code of
Ethics for Engineers, it states that “engineers shall disclose all
known or potential conflicts of interest that could influence or
appear to influence their judgment or the quality of their
services” [7]. This directive is useful; it feels to me as the right
thing to do, and aided in my decision to take these findings
and ideas to mine and Gabriel’s boss, Percy Olson. I first
explained to him what I have noticed in our plant; I informed
him of the rising illegal levels of substance in our water after
it has been processed in our system and my attempts to consult
Gabriel. I expressed my concerns for our company’s
reputation as secondary to the wellness of the people in our
community that can ultimately be effected by this problem.
He was more responsive than Gabriel, but just as
unethical. He told me that since we upgraded my process as
the ending step, it is enough of a precaution should the main
processes fail. He stated that our company has been stable
since its founding with the original process and he has no
desire to change it. He believes the issue is only a temporary
symptom of increased demand on the system due to the rising
companies, houses, and people in our town. “Plus, the
reputation of our corporation here in Pottsville is very high,”
he told me, “the government will never suspect that we let any
toxins leave our vicinity. If any fish die in the rivers and lakes
we send our water to, we will not be to blame. If any kids
swim in those places and get sick, they, too, are not our
problem.”
Still, I showed him printouts of the innovation I
researched online and explained the positives of it to him. His
mindset did not change; he told me that attaining the newer,
sunlight driven AOPs would not be beneficial enough
compared to the cost and time they would take from our
company. I then explained my far-fetched concerns to him for
the reputation and running of the company; I explained my
predictions as to how the environment will be negatively
impacted before our company gets in trouble. He still
disagreed with my thoughts, though, and dismissed me.
REFERENCES
[1] American Institute of Chemical Engineers. (2014). Code
of Ethics. (Online article)
http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics
[2] B. Jennings, P. Heltne, K. Kintzele. (2014). Principles of
Water Ethics. (Online article).
http://www.humansandnature.org/filebin/pdf/minding_natur
e/August_2009_Principles_of_Water_Ethics.pdf
[3] D. Goldman, O. Assaraf, J. Shemesh. (2014). Human
nature: Chemical Engineering Students’ Ideas About Human
Relationships with the Natural World. European Journal of
Engineering Education. (Article).
[4] D. Rao. (2012). Introduction to Biochemical Engineering,
2nd edn. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill Education. Pvt. Ltd.
(Book). pp. 362, 410.
[5] M. Litter, R. Candal, J. Meichtry. (2014). Sustainable
Energy Developments: Advanced Oxidation Technologies:
Sustainable Solutions for Environmental Treatments.
London, GBR: CRC Press. (Book). pp. 1-18.
[6] National Society of Professional Engineers. (2013). (Case
studies).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
[7] National Society of Professional Engineers. (2014). Code
of Ethics. (Online article)
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[8] Online Ethics Center for Engineering. (2009). “Cases and
Scenarios.” National Academy of Engineering. (Case
studies).
http://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases.aspx
3
Kayla LeMaster
[9] Standford Biodesign. Ethics Case Studies in Biodesign.
(Case studies).
http://biodesign.stanford.edu/bdn/resources/ethicscases.jsp
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my brother, Ben, for significantly
helping me in the brainstorming process of Writing
Assignment 2 as well as aiding me in my troubles while
composing Writing Assignment 3. Ben, a computer scientist,
told me additional online places to look for sources, of which
I used. I would also like to thank my fellow engineering
colleagues for working together, although we all are writing
about different topics, on the basic structure of the paper.
4