Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering

BEng Degree (Honours) in Structural Engineering

CSTRU_8_Y3

Ethics in Engineering

Name: Graham Doyle

Module: Engineer in Society

Lecturer: Leonard O’ Driscoll

Date: October 17th 2008

Word Count: Question 1: 2070Question 2: 1962

Index

Question 1……….…………………………………………………………………...…….2

1.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………....3

1.1 Rights Ethics……………………………………………………………………...4

1.1.1 Rights Ethics in Engineering…………………………………...….…….6

1.2 Duty Ethics……………………………………………………………….……….6

1.2.1 Duty Ethics in Engineering……………………………………..……….7

1.3 Conclusion……………………………………………………………….………..8

Question 2………………………………………………………………….....…………….9

2.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………..………….10

2.1 Causes of the disaster…………………………………………………….... . . . . . . . 11

2.1.1 Location and design of the plant…………………………………..…...11

2.1.2 Storage of MIC………………………………………………………….12

` 2.1.3 Piping……………………………………………………....……...……..13

2.1.4 Safety Systems………………………………………………………..…13

2.2 Conclusion……………………………………………………………….……....14

3.0 References………………………………….......……………………………….....16

1

Question 1

Research and discuss “Rights Ethics and Duty Ethics in Engineering” with regard to ethics in engineering. How are these topics relevant to Engineering in the 21st century? Use any relevant case studies to support your discussion.

“Because you have a right to life, I have a duty not to kill you; and if I have a duty not to deceive you then you have a right not to be deceived”

Ethics in EngineeringBy Martin & Schinzinger

2

1.0 Introduction

http://www.reformpittsburghnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/ethics-large.thumbnail.jpg

Ethics is defined as “the study of morality.”1 It is the ability of a person to decide solely what is correct and what is not. Simply, it is the knowledge of knowing what is right and what is wrong when making a decision. Ethically, “telling a lie is morally wrong because of the damage this lie will cause; both to the liar and to society which depends on honest reletionships.”2 However, although this is an easily answered question, there are others which are not quite so easy. For example, is it ethical to use animals as research subjects when trying to find a cure for human illnesses such as cancer?

Luckily, engineering ethics do not have many of these questions. The majority of our answers are either yes or no. Engineering ethics has been defined numerous ways by various sources. Wikipedia states that it “is the field of applied ethics which examines and sets standards for engineers’ obligations to the public, their clients, employers and the profession subject for both professional engineers and other engineers.”3 The textbook, Ethics in Engineering, states that it “consists of the responsibilities and rights that ought to be endorsed by those engaged in engineering, and also of desirable ideals and personal commitments in engineering.”4

The work that an engineer is involved with can affect many people so it is of utmost importance that it is completed to a high standard. Poor work by an engineer can affect the safety of the public or the people involved in a project, the environment and also construction and maintenance costs to the client.

In all definitions, it can be said that ethics in engineering ensure that the highest standard of work practice is maintained at all times from engineers to all affecting parties involved in a project. It also ensures that the engineering profession is maintained and protected for the future. Engineering ethics can be further divided into two groups; Rights Ethics and Duty Ethics.

3

1.1 Rights Ethics

As an engineer in an ever-changing world, it is imperative that our ethics play a role in the choices that we have to make during the course of our career. As engineers we should have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong decisions in our work as this can affect many people. Engineering has been shaped by ethics for a number of years, including rights ethics. This type of ethics “regard human rights as fundamental.”4 As an engineer, you must respect human rights as these will play a critical role in your career when it comes to dealing with projects, designs and clients.

Human Rights include the right to “life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and social, cultural and economic rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to food, the right to work, and the right to education.”5 It also includes the right to “privacy, health, safety, consumer, contract”1 and many more. Human rights can be further split up into two groups; liberty rights and welfare rights. By “holding paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, it can be interpreted as having respect for the public’s rights to life (by producing safe products), rights to privacy, rights not to be injured (by dangerous products), and rights to receive benefits through fair and honest exchanges in a free marketplace.”4 Engineers must ensure that all rights are adhered to strictly and ethically throughout the course of their career.

A different version of this type of ethics was created by John Locke. He was a famous ethicist who “was the first philosopher to carefully articulate a rights ethics.”4 He believed only in liberty rights suggesting that welfare rights did not exist to people. His approach to rights ethics was that “all mankind… being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.”6 His followers became known as Libertarians and believed only in the rights to life, liberty and property. Locke maintained and preached that all actions which respect the individual rights of others are good and morally right.

John Locke Declaration of Independencehttp://robwroblewski.org/images/John_Locke.jpg research.history.org/.../home_declaration.jpg

4

The popularity of rights ethics was further cemented by the US Declaration of Independence in 1776. Described as one of the most important and influential documents in history, its sole purpose was to enable the American colonies to become free from under British Rule. The declaration was seen to have put significant emphasis on the rights of individuals similar to the ideas vocalized by John Locke. Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration, stated “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”7

French Motto Universal Declaration of Human Rights Irish Proclamation www.midi-france.info/06141203_motto.htm commons.wikimedia.org www.sinnfeinbookshop.com

Another famous example of rights ethics around the world is in the French motto, Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité created in 1791. In English, this is translated into liberty, equality and fraternity/brotherhood. This motto clearly echos the beliefs of John Locke and the Declaration of Independence. In addition, in the Irish Proclamation in 1916 declared “the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible.”8 In recent years, the latest example of rights ethics has been the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948.

1.1.1 Rights Ethics in Engineering

5

As an engineer, it is vital to ensure that your work is completed and maintained to a very high standard in regard to human rights. There are many rights that you have and must abide by as an engineer. These include the right to;

“To be an ethical engineer, To national registration and freedom to practice, To receive a salary of a certain amount when employed, To receive remuneration for professional services rendered, To practice regardless of health or physical fitness, To warn the public of dangers, To protect the public safety, To express one’s professional judgment, including the right to dissent, To exercise responsible professional judgment, To privacy and employer confidentiality , To refuse unethical activity without prejudice or loss of contract, To not be discharged where the discharge would be inconsistent with the public

good.”9

To be a lawful and ethically correct engineer, you must fulfill all of your rights. A good structural engineer will not complete drawings and calculations for the design of a new building if it will be a danger to the general public and to itself. A case showing this was the Citicorp Building in New York1. The engineers involved in the design, calculations and construction of this new fifty nine storey building were shocked to learn that they omitted key wind design data from the calculations. They found that if a wind with a direction of 45° hit the building, the joints would fail and the building would instantly collapse killing everybody in the building and around the area. Being ethically right engineers, they owned up to their mistake, recalculated their designs and replaced the joints in the building. This case study shows that, even in the present world, the rights of engineers are always going to come into play and are still relevant when making any type of decision.

1.2 Duty Ethics

The book, Ethics in Engineering, describes this type of ethics as with “regards to duties of respect for autonomy.”4 Robert G. Olsen stated that it “is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions.”10 Basically, this type of ethics means that you have a duty to respect people’s liberty and the choices that they make regardless of the consequences of their actions.

Similar to Locke, Immanuel Kant was another famous rights ethicist. As a German philosopher, he believed solely in duty ethics. He moralized that, the only ethic to adhere

6

to, was the “fundamental duty to respect persons.”4 Simply, Kant maintained that we should treat people with respect and never use them as tools for our own personal gain. Gail D. Baura suggested that “Kant instructs us to treat others as an end, but never simply as a means to an end.”11

Kant considered that “duties should be performed regardless of whether these acts lead to the most good.”12 He preached that “it is always wrong to lie – even if a murderer is asking for the location of a potential victim.”10

As engineers, it is our duty to perform our job ethically. We must make the right choices and decisions in performing to our duties as professionals. It should be observed that by not following our duties, significant mistakes and accidents could follow.

1.2.1 Duty Ethics in Engineering

Engineering is a profession which our actions have many consequences. We must ensure our designs are suitable, our calculations are correct and out methods of construction are safe and reliable. We have a duty to honour our profession and must keep that in top priority at all times during the course of our career. Some duties that we have include:

To do a job legally and ethically, To be a good employee,

To work honestly in a job,

To do a job to the best of our knowledge and ability,

To protect the safety of the public,

To protect the health of the public,

To protect the welfare of the public,

To conform to relevant legislation and laws.

It can be observed that our duty ethics as engineers are still relevant today. This is evident in particular by the Ford Pinto case1 in the late 1970’s. Ford, under pressure for a new product, released a new brand of car to the public with a fault in the gas-tank that could cause an explosion. The cost to make a single car safe from explosion was found to be $11, but Ford refused, claiming that it would have been cheaper to pay death and injury compensation to all the victims rather than recall the cars and install the vital safety part. It turned out that they were wrong. They estimated total compensation to victims as $49.5

7

million and total costs to install the safety part as $137.5 million thinking that they would be saving money by not installing the part. However, their estimations were wrong and they ended up paying over the $137.5 million in damages. In this case, the Ford Company broke many duties it had towards the public and to themselves which cost them dearly.

1.3 Conclusion

Rights ethics and duty ethics are simply mirror images of each other. An example of this is that we have duties and one of our duties is to protect the rights of others around us. Another is “one persons right to life, is another’s duty not to harm them.”1 It should be noted here that although these types of ethics are mirrored, there is also a distinct separation between them. As said previously “rights ethics regards human rights as fundamental, and duty ethics regards duties of respect for autonomy as fundamental.”4

With respect to engineering, rights and duty ethics should be kept in high priority at all times especially when dealing with the public. In terms of business, clients will not hire engineers for a project with a poor design, safety and cost record due to poor business ethics. This report illustrated how these rights and duties are still relevant in the twenty-first century by the examples listed and also by the Citicorp and Ford Pinto case studies mentioned. It should be noted here, that as ethical engineers, we must obey and follow all of our rights and duties that may arise during the course of our careers to preserve and protect our future.

8

Question 2

Research the following case “Union Carbide disaster at Bhopal” with regard to ethics in engineering. Discuss mistakes that were made, and how they could have been prevented from occurring.

“Mothers didn’t know their children had died, children didn’t know their mothers had died and men didn’t know their whole families had died.”

Ahmed Khan, Bhopal residenthttp://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/3/newsid_2698000/2698709.stm

9

2.0 Introduction

Bhopal is the capital city of the Indian state, Madhya Pradesh. Having been a popular location for industries relocating in the early 1960’s, the area began to thrive. In 1969, Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) established an industrial plant in Bhopal to manufacture pesticides such as carbaryl. The production of these pesticides were “to help the country’s agricultural sector increase its productivity and contribute more significantly to meeting the food needs of one of the world's most heavily populated regions.”13

The Bhopal Planthttp://www.tcnj.edu/~rgraham/rhetoric/bhopal-plant.jpg

The plant used methyl isocyanate (MIC), a highly reactive chemical, as an ingredient in the production of the pesticide carbaryl. MIC was imported from the USA until 1979 when a new factory was built on the grounds of the Bhopal plant with the sole purpose of manufacturing MIC. In the early 1980s, the demand for pesticides in the country declined and this led to a build up of MIC in the plant.

In the early hours of the 3rd of December 1984, water leaked into an MIC tank creating a vicious exothermic reaction. The result of the reaction was the release of toxic gases such as MIC and hydrogen cyanide into the atmosphere. Almost 900,000 people in the densely populated city suddenly became exposed to the deadly gases. The government, in the India state of Madhya Pradesh, had released statements claiming, “3,800 people died and several thousand other individuals experienced permanent or partial disabilities.”14

10

However, “Independent organizations recorded 8,000 deaths the first days. Another 100,000 to 200,000 people are estimated to have been injured.”15

UCIL claims that the accident was an act of “sabotage by a disgruntled worker”15 at the plant. However, further investigations revealed otherwise and found UCIL guilty of negligence at the plant. UCIL was prosecuted by the Supreme Court of India and forced to pay a settlement of $470 million to the Indian government. However, “survivors say they received around $500 each and claim the clean-up efforts were inadequate.”16

The Bhopal Disaster has been recorded as the “world’s worst industrial disaster”15 in history. It is known as this because of the enormous death toll and the health and environmental effects that the disaster still holds over Bhopal.

2.1 Causes of the disaster

There have been many investigations carried out in the aftermath of the Bhopal disaster describing how it occurred and how it could have been easily prevented. Blame has been shifted towards the designers and engineers involved, UCIL and management at the plant. It was found by investigators that the disaster “was the result of a combination of legal, technological, organizational, and human errors.”17 A few of the major causes of the disaster at looked at in detail in this section.

2.1.1 Location and Design of the Plant

UCIL chose Bhopal as the site for the plant for a two different reasons. Firstly, it was a central location to transportation systems, such as major railways and roadways, and secondly it had an abundant workforce readily available.

11

Location of the Plant in Bhopalhttp://www.bhopal.org/whathappened.html

One of the major issues that accompanied the Bhopal disaster was the idea to build the plant in such a densely located area, especially after UCIL were offered a site to build the plant outside the city. “Authorities had tried and failed to persuade Carbide to build the plant away from densely-populated areas. Carbide explained their refusal on the expense that such a move would incur.”15

The design of the plant was drawn up by UCIL, supervised by its engineers and built by local Indians. The Indian government still blames UCIL for the disaster citing “the accident was caused by negligence on the part of UCIL in originally contributing to the design of the plant and its provision for storage of excessive amounts of gas at the plant.”18

The location and design of the Bhopal plant was an enormous mistake made by designers and engineers employed by UCIL. The plant should have been located in a reasonably populated industrial area with a great deal of emphasis placed on the design in terms of safety, maintenance and risks. If the plant had been more carefully located, designed and constructed, the disaster could have been easily prevented from occurring. Ethically, in terms of engineering, the location was bad judgment and a poor choice.

2.1.2 Storage of MIC

MIC tank at Bhopalhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/world_bhopal___20_years_on/html/4.stm

Investigators believe that this is one of the main reasons why the disaster at Bhopal occurred. MIC was stored in tanks that were half buried on the site and was capable of containing up to a staggering 15,000 gallons each. These tanks, if located in the USA, would not have been allowed because of the high risk which accompanied their design. The MIC would have been split up into smaller tanks and located a reasonable distance from each other. If the tanks had not been so large and located so near each other, then the scale of the disaster would have been minimal with lesser consequences. In addition, the refrigeration unit that was used to keep a safe temperature of the MIC to 0°C was turned off a few months previous the disaster to reduce electricity costs at the plant. MIC was then stored at a temperature of around 20°C with no refrigeration.

Investigators found that on the night of the disaster, the “MIC storage tank was filled beyond recommended capacity and a storage tank which was supposed to be held in reserve for excess MIC already contained the MIC.”17 With poor design, refrigeration and lack of care from management, it was inevitable that a disaster with MIC at the plant occur. If appropriate care had been taken in the design stages and also by management at the plant, then the whole disaster could have been easily averted.

12

2.1.3 Piping

The piping used in the plant at Bhopal was made with non-stainless steel that was susceptible to corrosion. After a few years in use at the plant, they began to corrode and weaken. The exothermic reaction between the MIC and leaked water “was sped up by the presence of iron in the pipelines.”15 The presence of iron acted as a catalyst and caused the reaction to gain momentum.

Designers and engineers should have made sure that the piping to be used at the plant was safe and non-hazardous. It should have been known at the planning stage what the chemical tanks would be holding and then which type of piping should have been decided taking this into consideration. The piping should slow down a reaction, not speed it up as was the case at Bhopal. This was an enormous mistake, both ethically and in design, made by engineers and designers and it is something that could have been easily prevented if the appropriate piping material was used.

2.1.4 Safety Systems

There were six safety systems in operation at the plant which were designed that if a problem was to occur, the outcome would have been minimum. At the time of the disaster, each of the six safety systems were out of order or malfunctioning which led to a high risk of disaster occurring.

Main Safety Systems at Bhopalhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/world_bhopal___20_years_on/html/4.stm

One of these safety systems was the use of a refrigeration unit that was placed around the tanks to keep the temperature of the chemicals around 0°C to minimize the risk of a reaction occurring. However, the refrigeration unit had been decommissioned a few months before the disaster to save money from electricity bills.

13

Also, another safety system implemented in the plant was the flare tower. This was a tower designed to burn off any leaked MIC gas from the tanks. However, the tower had been out of service for a few weeks before the accident as it was waiting for some new piping to arrive. It was found that “the tower was inadequately designed for the disaster, as it was capable of handling only a quarter of the volume of gas released.”17

Another system was the use of warning alarms within the plant. One alarm used “on the storage tank failed to signal the increase in temperature on the night of the disaster”17

and also it was found the “the MIC tank’s alarms had not worked for four years.”15 On the night of the disaster the factory siren, alerting the surrounding areas, was quickly silenced by management at the plant to avoid panic in the city. The other three systems, the gas scrubber, temperature and pressure gauges and the water curtain were out of order due to maintenance or else were malfunctioning and were ignored. However investigators believed that even if they had been in proper service it would have only been able to “handle one quarter the capacity that which was actually reached in the accident.”17

The poor design of the safety systems by engineers and the sloppiness of management at the plant to replace and maintain existing piping and machinery are one of the biggest causes of the disaster. It is possible to think that had all the safety systems been working that night and management reacted quickly then the outcome of the disaster would not have had so many serious consequences. It is absurd to think that all of the safety systems were out of order on the night of the disaster and even more so to think that UCIL would put a high risk of danger on the city of Bhopal just to save a few dollars.

The safety systems in the plant were installed to ensure that if an accident did occur in the plant, it would have cost no deaths. It is ethically wrong that the systems were out of order for such a long period, knowingly to management at the plant. The management should have chosen to protect the lives in and around the plant as opposed to cutting corners and costs within the plant.

2.2 Conclusion

The growth of pesticide manufacturing began slowing down in the late 1970’s and by the early 1980’s there was a rapid decline in demand. UCIL had tried to cut costs by making MIC at the plant instead of importing it but it was no good. The business was failing and costs were cut at every corner in the plant. For example, refrigeration units were turned off, safety systems were out of order, corroding pipes were not replaced and the numbers of staff were radically reduced. In November 1984, UCIL decided that the best thing to do would be to close the plant early in the following year.

The Bhopal disaster is still known to this day as the “world’s worst industrial disaster.”15

The death toll stands at just below 20,000 with a further 200,000 people injured. To this day, there are still effects from the disaster shown in the area such as contaminated water and soil conditions. Others effects that the people are suffering from include “eye

14

problems, respiratory difficulties, immune and neurological disorders, cardiac failure secondary to lung injury, female reproductive difficulties, and birth defects among children born to affected women.”15

In regards to ethics, the Bhopal disaster was due to mistakes made my engineers, designers, UCIL and management at the plant. If reasonable care had been taken by all these individual parties in their involvement at Bhopal, then perhaps the disaster could have been prevented from occurring. Although the disaster happened twenty four years ago, the people in Bhopal are still suffering the consequences.

15

References

1 - Class Notes by Leonard O’ Driscoll

2 - http://www.philosophyclass.com/ethics.htm

3 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering_ethics

4 - Ethics in Engineering by Martin, Roland Schinzinger

5 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

6 - http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_locke.html

7 - http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

8 - http://www.iol.ie/~dluby/proclaim.htm

9 - http://home.cfl.rr.com/welden/engineers_rights.html

10 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics

11 - Engineering Ethics by Gail D. Baura

12 - online.sfsu.edu/~larryk/engr100/Ethics%20class%20lecture.pdf

13 - http://www.bhopal.com/

14 - http://www.bhopal.org/

15 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_Disaster

16 - www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3140

17 - www.american.edu/ted/bhopal.htm

18 - http://localsnake.com/docs/G/15.616%..../Bhopal.doc

16