Ethics Matrix 1: Categorizing Top Level Ethical Issues

Choose a topic or use the one assigned to you, depending on the assignment. Begin to orient your topic in relation to the columns on the worksheet.

Stage 1: Identify and clarify initial conditions for analysis. Provide as much clarity to the description of the topics as possible. This is crucial. You need to define your case/topic clearly and in depth. A title alone will not suffice. Expect to write a paragraph describing. Remember the "who, what, where, when, why and how," in your description.

Stage 2: Review the three top-level categories on the course website, and remember they are inclusive, i.e., one issue can be in multiple categories

Stage 3: Begin with notes or quick phrases to fill the columns out. Make notes as needed and be able to describe further what the tags mean in context. Try to identify at least three issues per column. Provide a sentence or two describing each topic. Hint: you are looking for topics or issues that would make a difference if it were not done well or if it were done some other way, e.g., would your prefer surgery without anesthetics?

• First, identify what would it mean to “be professional” with handling a given issue.
• Second, identify how the topic or issues do, or could have impacts on people and the environment.
• Third, identify where there may be possible impacts based on choices about methods, analysis, and materials. (Note: Some issues or ways of looking at them may seem to fit in more than one column and that’s fine, just be able to explain the relationship.)

Stage 4: Then, rank the topics you identified in Stage 3 in order of importance, where importance can be either ethically "better or worse," it just indicates that it needs to be addressed and is of a high priority. Provide a brief summary (a few sentences) as to why you ranked them this way.

Matrix 1 FAQs

Q. So here what analysis we are talking about? Do you want us to pick a topic? Can you please give me examples of topics that can be picked? e.g., Topic can be “renewable energy over Fossil fuel”?

A: The topic of analysis depends on the assignment for that lesson. For the first assignment, I want you to begin thinking about a topic you would like to cover for your final project. You don't have to commit to what you decide upon now, but try to pick a case that you yourself would find useful to study more in-depth. Consider something you could either use and apply in your current work or a topic that you would like to add to your portfolio. If you are a solar, wind, or biofuels person, I suggest choosing something in that arena which you would like to learn more about. Try to avoid broad and sweeping topics, such as renewable energy over fossil fuels, and narrow your topic down as specifically as possible. The more specific you are, the easier it is to do the analysis because you are working with specifics. For example, we will later look at the ethical issues surrounding biofuels, and why some biofuels are much more ethical than others. So, it would be much better to do a comparison between, say first-generation biofuels and third generation biofuels, or the ethical issues of corn ethanol.

Q: So for Stage 3, do you want us to fill space under the Categories (I. Prof and Research integrity, II Broader Social and Enviro Impact, III Embedded Ethics) for the selected topic?

A: Yes, that is the goal. The first pass is to just sketch out the topics, like brainstorming, and the second pass is to add description and reasoning as to why those topics.

Q: Please clarify Stage 4, “Rank in order of importance”? Should the ranking be based on positive impact or negative impact?

A: Positive and negative impacts can very much depend on who you ask (we'll see this much more in terms of stakeholders.) Your ranking should really be based on the overall magnitude of the impacts, as opposed to whether or not they are positive or negative.

Figure 1.1: Close-Up Photography of Yellow Dahlia Flower

Credit: photos_by_ginny licensed by CC0

This first lesson is an overview of the Ethical Dimensions of Systems Research (EDSR), providing general terminology and approach to understanding the following case studies. The EDSR program describes how to recognize and evaluate ethical issues in research procedure and conduct, in the consideration of broader public and environmental impacts, and as values become embedded in research and analysis itself. Because common topics, types, and methods for ethical recognition and analysis are applied across all of the case modules, students should develop a set of tools for critical reflection on various issues of ethical importance. As developed in the EDSR approach, three main categorical distinctions for research ethics used here are broader social and political impacts (extrinsic ethics), research practice and conduct (procedural ethics), and embedded values (intrinsic ethics). By showing where and how to look for these types of ethical issues, the EDSR approach helps practitioners to anticipate where ethical issues may arise in a given research and/or application context.

Lesson Objectives

• Reflect on the scope of ethical principles as they apply to this course.
• Distinguish between ethical categories and ethics versus values.
• Define ethical terms, particularly as they apply to an ethical analysis of systems.

What is due for Lesson 1?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

A note on using "Ethics Tools"

This educational module provides users with concepts and examples for the development of tools for learning ethical analysis. "Ethics tools" are used to identify and design towards optimal solutions that satisfy a wide variety of ethical dimensions.

Whether you are a student or instructor, you will be able to interact with this module and learn more about other resources available on the specific topics under consideration. Users of this module, and any module within the Ethical Dimensions of Coupled Energy and Environment Systems Research series, are enhancing and refining their moral literacy by expanding their knowledge of ethical concepts and in considering examples and cases where ethical reasoning is required.

Expanding your knowledge of ethical concepts and studying of examples will help to enhance your ethical literacy.

We present here an approach that attempts to help you find firm footing in engaging and responding to questions concerning ethical and moral behavior encountered in the production and application of systems research. However, we understand that any approach will fall short on being a universally applicable approach to all contexts in research ethics. Further, while we focus on concepts particular to the production of knowledge (i.e., scientific research), many of these issues are also critical to industry, the public, and

One issue always worthy of consideration concerns addressing, “who bears the burden of intended and unintended consequences of our research?” Another issue that requires particular care in attention is in assessing the broader social impacts of research, particularly during the formation of the research itself.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to the General Questions discussion forum (not email), located under the Communicate tab or the Lesson tab in Canvas. Your instructor will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you are able to help out another student.

Figure 1.2: Corn shows the effect of the drought in Texas on Aug. 23, 2013.

Credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) photo by Bob Nichols (Public Domain)

First, think about this scenario...

Let's say that, in a particular year, the climatic conditions in the U.S. produce significant droughts for certain regions in the Midwest. In this scenario, these severe droughts happen in regions that typically expect a significant amount of rainfall every year to support the extensive growth of corn. This lack of rainfall causes a near-complete failure of the corn crops in the region, which grows the most corn per unit area in the world. This failure of crops leads to increased prices in corn products and other foods that use corn as feed (chicken, beef, even fish). But this drought also leads to a sudden jump in price because corn is used as the main feedstock for brewing most of the ethanol that goes into our gas tanks ("up to 10% ethanol per gallon"). Now, let's think about how this impacts prices at the pump and at the grocery store. Prices per gallon or per pound go up for everyone that buys these products. However, if we consider the increase in cost to the consumer is, say, an increase of $1.00 per gallon or pound, that $1.00 per gallon or pound is four times the percentage of someone's income that makes $30,000 per year than it is for someone that makes $120,000 per year. Also, as a result of the drought, the price of the white corn that is used to make tortillas, a main food staple in Mexico, goes up. The white corn crop might not even be impacted by the drought, but because the price of white corn is tied to the price of yellow corn, used to feed livestock and brew biofuels, the price of this common food staple also goes up.

Having considered this scenario, what do you think about it? Is there something here we can describe as a better or worse decision about using corn for ethanol? Is there something good or bad about food prices competing directly with fuel prices? These questions do not have simple answers.

Engaging complex systems

Engaging complex systems, whether they are tied to energy or environment, requires significant investigation and research support. This applies to engagement through politics and economics as well as it does with science and engineering.

The development of sustainability strategies and the technological and scientific research in the support and pursuit of renewable energy require rational and well thought through processes of evaluation. These well thought through processes of evaluation form a basis of research practice that is common to both engineering and science. Complex systems also often require multidisciplinary approaches to addressing a variety of questions and concerns, usually towards a framework of problem-solving. While one might not be engaged specifically in the scientific aspects of a complex system, the need for research and further discovery is needed in engineering, economics, policymaking, intellectual property, ecology, etc. For the purposes of this module series, we consider anyone conducting research into some aspect of complex systems to be engaged in "systems research." Further, whether one is conducting basic research on materials or looking at the global economic implications of sea level rise, one needs to be aware of the ethical dimensions of the systems they are researching. The modules of this series investigate various ethical issues that arise in the research of energy and environment systems.

Energy and Environment Systems affect Human Systems

Complex systems do not always imply environment or human systems, which implicitly require an ethical analysis and treatment. However, all of the modules in this series do involve some aspect of environmental systems and some aspect of energy systems. And energy systems, by their very definition, involve human systems.

Normative Procedures and Processes in the Production of Research

Figure 1.6: Adult Biology Chemist

Credit: Pixabay licensed under CC0

There are the ethical considerations of how to proceed in the course of conducting any manner of scientific research. These are referred to as procedural ethics and signify the typical areas of responsible conduct of research, including issues such as falsification of data, fabrication of data, and plagiarism, as well as considerations around conflicts of interest, research misconduct, treatment of human and animal subjects, and responsible authorship. While there are many considerations around procedural ethics that are highly relevant to nanotechnology research, such as fabrication of experimental results, responsible authorship amongst colleagues, etc., for the most part, the same type of considerations of procedural ethics will appear in nanotechnology as they do is most any other field of science and engineering research.

Nine Areas to Consider in Responsible Conduct of Research

According to the National Office for Research Integrity, there are nine main areas to consider in the Responsible Conduct of Research:

• Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership
• Conflict of Interest and Commitment
• Human Subjects
• Animal Welfare
• Research Misconduct
• Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship
• Mentor / Trainee Responsibilities
• Peer Review
• Collaborative Science

“Federal and institutional research misconduct policies define research practices that researchers must avoid.”

"Authorship and collaboration problems are a serious threat to the research enterprise and to the motivation of young scientists, especially when they involve misappropriation of ideas and data."

"Every job occupied, every grant received and every paper published by someone who engages in misconduct deprives at least one honest scientist of an opportunity to which he or she was entitled.”
 

Broader Social, Political, and Environmental Impacts

Coupled Energy and Environment Systems present significant challenges and opportunities to questions concerning the broader impacts on societal (economic, political, cultural) and environmental (ecological, biological, land-use) domains. This is where ethical considerations become more specific to the content and context of energy and environment systems research as it extends to and applied in the world outside of the laboratory.

Broader Impacts Criteria

The NSF broader impacts criterion (i.e., the second merit criterion) poses many similar questions in the area of extrinsic ethics, and provides a useful framework for beginning to think about how the research applies to societal and environmental concerns, particularly in the formulation of research agendas and in thinking about the implications a specific line of research may imply for policymakers, regulatory agencies, and civil society organizations (CSOs).

Further considerations of issues around the distribution of benefits and harms of energy and environment systems need to also be taken into account, to assure, for example, that the output of systems benefits only all sectors of society.

Issues to consider about ethics concerning broader impacts

• What are the public policy and/or legal implications of research?
• Are there questions around intellectual property?
• Is the research potentially transformative of society and/or economy?
• Are there dimensions of social justice that need to be considered?
• Are there educational dimensions to the research?
• Does the research take into account underrepresented groups?
• Are there issues about privacy that need to be considered?
• Are risks to health and environment being adequately considered in a precautionary manner?
• Have long-term considerations about future impacts been taken into account?

Research Choices have Real World Implications

Figure 1.12: Women in Vocational School, 1942

Source: Howard R. Hollem from Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)

While considerations of procedural ethics require a framework of responsible research behavior, and extrinsic ethics requires an explicit consideration of broader impacts, intrinsic ethics requires a deeper analysis of how the research itself is constructed and where certain choices being made in the line of research embed value judgments and can impact real-world outcomes. For example, the handling of uncertainty and margins of error tend to be mathematical questions concerning the probability of a certain event to occur, yet, these uncertainties can determine real-world decisions about actions, regulations, etc. (Note: Choices made about intrinsic issues can have extrinsic impacts, as the two are intricately related.)

Embedded Values

The basic idea of intrinsic ethics concerns choices that seem to be only considered in mathematical or within the terms of the art, yet can embed certain values and result in different implications as to the application or future direction of the energy and environment knowledge. As well, ethics/values can be embedded in choosing not to pay attention to certain limits or parameters, i.e., in what is not being represented in a given analysis.

Reflexivity in Research

The means to address intrinsic ethics is through reflexive analysis (reflection based on values questions -> course correction) of research choices being made based on the kinds of questions highlighted here. This reflexivity should occur both while conducting research and while engaging in the peer review process.

Some issues to consider about the intrinsic ethics of coupled energy and environment systems

• How are standards of proof, errors, and uncertainties handled in a given analysis?
• What constitutes empirical adequacy and how consistent are results, over how many runs?
• What is the scope? Are some dimensions of the analysis oversimplified?
• What classification typologies are being used (ontologies)?
• How / what methods were selected?
• What went into the choice of research questions?

Assignment Suggestions

I want you to think of the approach and cases we cover in this class as more like "ethics forensics" and how to apply tools for ethics investigations, as opposed to learning strict ethical theory, moral laws, etc. Perhaps another way to put it, in pop culture terms, is that our course is more like a detective show than a courtroom drama.

As such, I don't expect you to have the absolutely correct answers or perfect choices for examples. I want you to try ideas out, experiment with different hypotheses, suggest various paths of action, etc. I want you to notice things, looking closely at important details. (You certainly may not have time to look at all of the details; but, in time, you will begin to notice things as you go.)

The matrix assignments are all intended towards helping you discover possible ethical issues when evaluating a given topic of interest – in this case, in renewable energy and sustainability-related issues. Each of the columns represents a different dimension in which ethical issues can be viewed. You can take a topic, as broadly or narrowly defined as you like and apply this matrix. It is best to stick with one topic at a time, i.e., the same topic evaluated according to each column. Complete the assignment in column form or written out as paragraphs or in some combination... as long as I can recognize what you are doing, then that should work.

Suggestions for completing Matrix 1

The first column should get us thinking about the issues concerning professional and research integrity that help keep processes safe, transparent, honest, etc.

The second column should prompt us to think about questions concerning the work that could affect other people, society, the environment, and other broader impacts.

The third column requires thinking closely about the processes and technologies that can embed certain ethical choices, perhaps without even realizing it. This kind of analysis is a bit tricky and requires an understanding of the professional and/or research practices themselves. The choices we make as professionals can have consequences we may not have considered.

Let's try an example: Consider public architecture in the U.S. before the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Architects were free to design public buildings that were difficult, if not impossible, to access for citizens in wheelchairs. Leaving out consideration of access to a public space by not just people in wheelchairs, but pretty much anyone not on two good legs, produces significant inequity in opportunities and access to public resources for that group. Using the first column (professional and research integrity), we would say that architects at the time were following the best practices of their field, meeting code and other professional expectations, so all was ok there. Using the second column, we would begin to see, however, that a significant sector of society at any given point (even people on crutches, with a broken leg, who may at other points be bi-pedal) may not be able to access a public building (courthouse, town hall, library, etc.) without significant difficulty, if at all. Using the third column, we would see that architectural practice and design of public spaces did not take into account the wide variety of human variability, and the only way to change that is to change that practice of the design of public spaces. After 25 years of significant protest (which began with the wave of returning injured soldiers returning from Vietnam), regulation and sets of guidelines were designed that became law in 1990. We can see this as a process in that the ADA goes back and significantly changes the first column which now makes following these considerations professional responsibility, and not following these regulations will not pass inspection. This is a historical process that reflects these three dimensions, but we can, and will, use it in a variety of areas.

Lesson 1 References

Ethical Dimensions of Scientific Research and supporting theory

Research Integrity and Responsible Conduct of Research

Teaching Research Ethics

External Resources

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

“Through its Ethics and Member Conduct Committee, IEEE aims to: foster awareness on ethical issues; promote ethical behavior among those working within IEEE fields of interest; create a world in which engineers and scientists are respected for exemplary ethical behavior.” Review the IEEE Code of Ethics. • Review ethics cases.

National Academy of Engineers (NAE)

“Founded in 1964, the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) is a private, independent, nonprofit institution that provides engineering leadership in service to the nation. The mission of the National Academy of Engineering is to advance the well-being of the nation by promoting a vibrant engineering profession and by marshaling the expertise and insights of eminent engineers to provide independent advice to the federal government on matters involving engineering and technology.”

Within the NAE

“The overarching mission of Center for Engineering Ethics and Society (CEES) is to engage engineering leaders in examining the ethical and societal challenges of engineering and bringing them to the attention of the engineering profession and society.”

Online Ethics Center

“The Online Ethics Center (OEC) is maintained by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and is part of the Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society (CEES). The CEES started in April 2007 and plans conferences and other research and educational activities under the direction of the CEES advisory group.”

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

“Through its Ethics and Member Conduct Committee, IEEE aims to: foster awareness on ethical issues; promote ethical behavior amongst those working within IEEE fields of interest; create a world in which engineers and scientists are respected for exemplary ethical behavior.” Review the IEEE Code of Ethics.

National Academy of Engineers (NAE)

“Founded in 1964, the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) is a private, independent, nonprofit institution that provides engineering leadership in service to the nation. The mission of the National Academy of Engineering is to advance the well-being of the nation by promoting a vibrant engineering profession and by marshalling the expertise and insights of eminent engineers to provide independent advice to the federal government on matters involving engineering and technology.”

Within the NAE

“The overarching mission of Center for Engineering, Ethics and Society (CEES) is to engage engineering leaders in examining the ethical and societal challenges of engineering and bringing them to the attention of the engineering profession and society.”

Online Ethics Center

“The Online Ethics Center (OEC) is maintained by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and is part of the Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society (CEES). The CEES started in April 2007 and plans conferences and other research and educational activities under the direction of the CEES advisory group.”

Figure 2.1: Person Holding Green-leafed Plant

Credit: Chokniti Khongchum from Pexel licensed under CC0

Overview

This section of the course will satisfy the requirements of the Scholarship and Research Integrity (SARI) program, covering responsible conduct of research (RCR) issues, such as: the acquisition, management, sharing, and ownership of data; publication practices and responsible authorship; conflicts of interest and commitment; research misconduct (falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism); peer review; collaborative science; mentor/trainee responsibilities; human subjects protections; and animal welfare.

Lesson Objectives

• Build knowledge and comprehension of procedural ethics.
• Define, recognize, give examples, and interpret situations through an analysis of procedural ethics.
• Identify and classify where conflicts of interest, and other procedural ethics, may occur in given examples.
• Explain and defend reasoning for claims.

What is due for Lesson 2?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to our Questions? discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions tab in Canvas. I will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you, too, are able to help out a classmate.

Scholarship and Research Integrity (SARI) program here at Penn State is an initiative for enriching and expanding education and support for issues facing graduate researchers in every field.

"Penn State is committed to modeling, teaching and promoting responsible conduct of research and scholarship within the University community. All scholars, from graduate students to senior investigators, confront ethical issues in their professions. The issues that require attention are constantly changing. While advances in technology and the ability to interact with colleagues across the globe have opened up vast opportunities for advancement, they have also created new challenges for the responsible conduct of research and scholarship.

Advance discussion of core principles and possible scenarios can help inform choices frequently made under pressure, helping to eliminate poor decisions. Penn State recognizes that we have a unique opportunity —and a responsibility—to address these issues in a proactive and deliberate manner."

The core principles of research integrity concern the avoidance of research fraud. Research fraud can be perpetrated in at least three main ways, namely through the falsification of the research record, the fabrication of data in the research record, and/or plagiarism (the representation of other(s) work without reference as your own). All three of these infractions of research integrity can have damaging results to individuals, even leading to wrongful death in some cases. Further, such situations can corrode overall public trust of scientific research itself, including research institutions.

How eager would you be to take a medicine for an ailment if you were not at all sure if either the medicine would work on your ailment – or if the side-effects of the medication were worse than the disease? How confident would you be in someone you never met saying that they "have your best interests" in mind when making decisions for you, such as ? On one hand, new medicines could not be brought to market if no one was willing to take part in early trials of the medicine. On the other hand, not many people would be eager to be among the first to test out a new drug for an ailment or life-threatening disease, unless the alternatives were definitively worse. Research is often conducted on humans, animals, living systems, and environments in ways that could impact the well-being (positively and negatively) of those subjects of research. Important ethical questions arise when we begin to ask how much those subjects know about the risks of partaking in specific research or how a specific intervention may impact their health. Further, ethical problems are compounded when the subject(s) of research or decision-making cannot speak or make decisions for themselves, such as for an unconscious patient on life support, or even for non-human subjects, like animals, plants, and ecosystems. The main ethical question that arises is whether a subject or stakeholder is able to consent to participating in research and/or decision-making, or what is referred to as "informed consent."

Figure 2.4: Rat in Research

Credit: Jean-Etienne Poirrier, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Having the capacity to give consent to being part of research, receiving a medical treatment with known risks (like surgery), and/or having decisions (including policies) about your welfare made on your behalf requires the ability to consent and be informed (and understand that information) well enough to make a well-grounded decision. The idea of informed consent, however, is only applied to humans who can consent. While consent cannot be given by animals, ecosystems, and other non-human subjects, the idea of consent is implicit in trying to come to a decision about the minimization of harms. This consideration of the well-being of non-human subjects unable to consent would widely apply, from animals in a laboratory setting to aquifers in a hydraulic fracturing (fracking) zone, and are typically taken into consideration through existing regulatory processes (such as the Institutional Review Board or Environmental Impact Assessments.)

The main concept to keep in mind here is the idea of consent, whether it be informed consent of a patient or research subject, or a form of representative consent, where a person or organization stands in for the concerns of the non-human subject(s) undergoing research or significant changes.

Motivation

A significant motivating factor for conducting research and moving it forward is receiving credit for the research and findings. Credit is given to those who play a significant role in shaping the research and/or interpretation of results. Authorship, either of papers, project proposals, architectural plans, etc., is a primary aspect of the distribution of one's work and a necessary aspect of moving a career forward in many fields. In academic research settings, authorship and credit provide the foundations by which a researcher is evaluated. The more prestigious the journal is, the higher the impact the research is likely to be perceived to have, the more prestige the researcher. In business and policy planning, credit and acknowledgment can depend on and be evaluated based more on team and leadership performance than in academic settings. Regardless of the context, "credit where credit is due" seems an apt phrase to describe what it takes to move a career forward.

Figure 2.6: Wikipedian Protestor 

Credit: Wikimedia (Public Domain)

Acknowledgment comes in many forms, again, depending on the context. In a commercial environment, acknowledgment may take the form of upholding patents, which may be licensed and put to use in other products. In an academic environment, acknowledgment comes in the form of citing previous works and findings upon which the current research is based. In a laboratory environment, acknowledgment may come in the form of providing credit to technicians either through co-authorship or in an acknowledgments section. Acknowledgment sections of books often cite specific examples of how certain individuals helped to shape the author's thinking around a particular point.

Credit as Currency

"The reward individual scientists seek is credit. That is, they seek recognition, to have their work cited as important and as necessary to further scientific progress. The scientific community seeks true theories or adequate models. Credit, or recognition, accrues to individuals to the extent they are perceived as having contributed to that community goal. Without strong community policing structures, there is a strong incentive to cheat, to try to obtain credit without necessarily having done the work. Communities and individuals are then faced with the question: when is it appropriate to trust and when not?"
 

A conflict of interest can arise when there are competing interests in a particular project or line of research that hinder the capacity for clear judgment and unbiased analysis. We want to avoid conflicts of interest to avoid social favoritism (cronyism and nepotism), the preference of familiar people and things (the mere-exposure effect), favoritism towards funding sources (funding outcome biases), bias in review of other projects based on competing interests, self-favoritism (egotism), internal review (self-policing), etc. Bribery, described in further detail below, presents an immediate conflict of interest.

Figure 3.1 Energy Infrastructure

Credit: Chris LeBoutillier. "UCR ecologist on geoengineering: a new solution to the climate crisis." UC Riverside News. April 22, 2021.

This lesson will cover the basic principles of global climate change and how the warming of the climate is driving the push towards innovation and adoption of renewable energy technologies, processes, policies, and cultures. This lesson will look at the push for renewables as a necessary condition for beginning to address the climate problem at its main source, namely, greenhouse gasses emitted as a byproduct of the burning of fossil fuels and other industrial processes. The call to address climate change is, at its root, an ethical imperative which further underpins the drive for renewables.

Lesson Objectives

• Articulate the relationship between climate change and the drive for renewable energy.
• Explain environmental arguments for the move to renewable energy.
• Identify ethical reasons for considering renewables.
• Identify ethical challenges to adopting renewables.

What is due for Lesson 3?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found in this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to our Questions? discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions tab in Canvas. I will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you, too, are able to help out a classmate.

The links between energy use and the global warming of the atmosphere are significant. In 2011, the global total output of CO₂ from energy production was 32,579,000,000 metric tons (32.6 Gigatons) or 71,824,400,397,211 pounds. That is just for one year, for energy consumption alone.

First, read Chapter 1 of the IPCC report on Renewable Energy (RE) and climate change.

This is a rather complex document with a significant amount of data and figures, and it is sometimes easy to lose the thread of the argument. This document expects you to already know something about how climate change works. For a quick background on how the greenhouse effect works, please have a look at HyperPhysics and University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR).

Pay attention to

In Chapter 1 of the IPCC RE Report:

• How is energy consumption linked to drivers of CO₂ output?
• How is renewable energy linked to CO₂ output?
• What kind of renewables should be implemented?
• When should they be implemented?

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. Describe the reasoning behind the urgency to move to renewable energies by a certain deadline.
2. What is a per capita emissions output? What does it mean to have a high per capita emissions versus a medium or low per capita?

Figure 3.2: Silhouette of Three Wind Turbines

Credit: Pixabay from Pexel licensed under CC0

In Part 1, you read about the linkages between energy, renewables, and climate change. Now, read the International Energy Agency's Methodology for the "450 Scenario" and Chapter 8 of 2012 World Energy Outlook.

This report by the IEA works through various energy policy scenarios based on requirements to meet certain targets.

Pay attention to:

• The importance of the 450 in the 450 scenario
• What is meant by "carbon in energy reserves and infrastructure"
• Examples of emissions lock-in
• Energy efficiency versus renewable energy

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. Is there an obligation to meet the 450 scenario? If so, what is that obligation?
2. Is there an obligation to invest in renewable energy innovation and infrastructure? By whom and when?
3. What do the scenarios demonstrate as the more effective investment in the near future? Renewable energy or energy efficiency?
4. Why should decision-makers listen to these research findings?

Biofuels are fuels generated through the processing of biomass for energy. They can be solids, in the form of biofuels like wood derivatives (pellets, paper, charcoal, etc.), digested biomass (like cow dung). They can be liquids, like biodiesel, ethanol, and methanol. Or they can be a gas, like methane. The advantage to biofuels is that they can be a very useful way to store and transport (solar and chemical) energy that is immediately available for use, like fossil fuels. As well, biofuels present possible opportunities for zero-carbon emissions (over the lifecycle). The difficulties biofuels present are mainly that: biofuels are more processing intensive and expensive than fossils; biofuels also require significant land and resources that can compete with needs for food crops, thus driving up prices on food; and that biofuels, if not managed correctly, can produce very little reduction in overall emissions for a significant cost. In this module, you will learn about the various types of biofuels, learn of reasons why a lifecycle analysis is required to determine the value of a biofuel process, and investigate.

Lesson Objectives

• Recognize why biofuels are of interest.
• Categorize types of plants used for biofuels.
• Be informed about the basic science behind biofuel production.
• Conduct a stakeholder analysis.
• Identify and reason through ethical issues in the production of bioethanol.

What is due for Lesson 4?

This lesson will take us two weeks to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific timeframes and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to our Questions? discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions tab in Canvas. I will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you, too, are able to help out a classmate.

Figure 4.1: Endurance Biofuel Reactor for biofuels

Credit: Argonne National Laboratory from Flickr licensed under CC0

Biofuels come from...

Biofuels are fuels generated via a biological/metabolic process. Biofuels can be in a solid, liquid, or gas form. (Fossil fuels are basically very old, i.e., fossilized, biofuels.) Biofuels are actually the oldest among all fuels used by human populations, readily available in forms such as burning wood and dung. Liquid biofuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel, are particularly appealing because they are intended to replace traditional fuels, like gasoline and diesel. Unlike fossil fuels, biofuels are renewable in that they can be grown, for the most part, on demand (within typical biological constraints.) Depending on the method, biofuels are typically "carbon neutral" in that the CO₂ released during their burning is CO₂ that was captured and stored as a carbohydrate (through photosynthetic respiration). The "carbon neutral" aspect, along with the useful (transportable) form of liquid fuels, makes biofuels quite appealing as part of a broader renewable energy strategy.

Nuffield Report

This lesson focuses on the Nuffield Council on Bioethics report on the ethics of biofuels. Within this report, you should gain an understanding of the history of biofuels, how biofuels are produced, why biofuels are appealing, different biofuels pathways for current and future production, and the main ethical issues that arise in the production of biofuels.

In the Nuffield Report, you need to pay particularly close attention to the various ethical arguments laid out in chapters four and five. Each of the six ethical principles suggested in the Nuffield Report, (Human Rights, Environmental Sustainability, Climate Change, Just Reward, Equitable Distribution of Costs and Benefits, and Duties) is an example of a broader social and environmental impacts issue. (Note: These categories correlate to EDSR matrix 2b.)

Biofuels and Their Broader Impacts

What should be apparent from reading the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report on Biofuels is that all biofuels pathways require us to think about the wide variety of possibly significant impacts that growing and processing feedstocks could have on populations and environments. All of these impact factors need to be taken into proper consideration when making an argument for a particular biofuels pathway. (Note: For those thinking about nonmarket aspects of biofuels, evaluation of the various impacts is essential to putting forward any sound strategy.)

Tools for Evaluating Broader Impacts

This course presents you with a few tools for identifying the range of possible broader impacts that could emerge from any large systems project, such as increasing biofuels production. Of course, there are a wide variety of broader impacts that may not present any ethical problems; but, here, we are going to focus on those impacts that do, or could present ethically significant issues in the consideration and evaluation of any renewable energy or sustainability strategy.

In Lesson 1.2, you were introduced to the concept of Broader Social and Environment Impacts as part of the EDSR framework. In Lesson 2.1, you were introduced to questions concerning the ethical treatment of stakeholders and nonhuman subjects, which includes the idea of a system as a subject. (The reason why the treatment of stakeholders and nonhuman subjects is considered a professional integrity issue is that these considerations ought to be a normal part of professional practice. In other words, the consideration of stakeholders and nonhuman subjects should be considered in terms of a direct impact and not necessarily a broader impact.) For this lesson, you will evaluate across the three dimensions of systems ethics (Matrix 1) and conduct a stakeholder analysis (Stakeholder Matrix).

Figure 4.2: Corn Field

Credit: Todd Trapani from Pexel licensed by CC0

Broader Social and Environmental Impacts (EDSR Category 2) of U.S. Corn Ethanol

This is an example of the applying the Broader Social and Environmental Ethics Matrix (2b) to the case of U.S. Corn Ethanol production. This example attempts to find something for every subcategory here; however, some of these subcategories may not be relevant for all cases. For your own assignments, try to identify at least the most ethically relevant of the subcategories.

1. Broader Impacts (top categories)

1. Advancing discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning

   Public education about biofuels requires the explanation of methods, benefits, impacts, and trade-offs in using the fuels. More public platforms to learn about biofuels ought to be made readily available. My suggestion would be to engage NASCAR, here in the U.S., and try to convince them to run their races only on biofuels, which their own team would need to "brew." This way, fans could likely be interested enough to learn about the various aspects of biofuels. (Of course, now the stock cars would be running the "moonshine" in their tanks instead of running it in their trunks.) Stock cars aside, biofuels are still the most significant form of energy consumed by 3/5 of the human populations. Biofuels are used, most significantly, in rudimentary cooking and heating applications throughout the world. While we can think about second and third generation biofuels, much of the world uses some form of rudimentary biofuel as part of their daily routine.

   Advancement of learning and understanding while promoting teaching ought to, first and foremost, consider the needs of those populations most dependent on biofuels for their daily survival. We ought to, as well, do better about educating "ourselves" about the needs of those groups (depending on more rudimentary biofuels) and educating those societies dependent on more industrialized forms of energy production and consumption about how their practices impact other's access to rudimentary biofuels. Corn biofuels are especially problematic, even under the most ideal of conditions. Corn biofuels require significant inputs of CO₂ intensive fertilizer production and fresh water. (~100 gallons of water to grow a gallon of fuel.) Reaching out to communities that may be impacted by corn biofuels ought to learn the trade-offs that need to be made.

2. Broaden participation of underrepresented groups, e.g., gender, disability, geographic, ethnicity, economic

   In conducting a stakeholder investigation, we can see many possible areas where underrepresentation of particular groups is likely to pose a significant ethical issue. Public participation in the decision-making process is essential to bringing to light the challenges and problems that the spectrum of groups may face, but without a specific process that gives voice and credence to minority interests, most minority perspectives would go unconsidered. Many environmental injustices are based on social and economic status. In terms of corn ethanol, a wide variety of farming communities could be impacted. As well, indirectly, those communities that consume corn as a main food staple could be impacted. Bringing together and voicing these various perspectives beforehand could lead to better, i.e., less impactful, decisions on the front end. At the very least, typically underrepresented communities ought not be negatively impacted by the cultivation and processing of corn for use as biofuels.

3. Infrastructure for research and education examples: facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships

   In terms of corn based biofuels, research and education can be readily observed in action through agricultural extension programs, such as those at Penn State. International biofuels research networks have been established to support rapid knowledge and technology transfers. As well, there are industry specific organizations, such as aviation, that are seeking to understand the best way to integrate biofuels to meet their needs. Once a biofuel pathway is established, a commitment is implicitly made to maintain education and innovation.

4. Dissemination and translation of results

   How well is research about the latest developments in biofuels being disseminated? If the latest research happens to demonstrate that corn based ethanol is neither sustainable nor all that economically viable? If the research ends up in academic journals, is it getting in front of the right audience? Are the results of the research being "translated" into terms that a lay audience may understand?

5. Benefits to society

   Corn biofuels present a variety of economic benefits to the corn farmers, fertilizer producers, the seed industry, and others that would see economic gains from a move to corn ethanol. However, there are many significant problems with corn based biofuels, covered in other sections below.

2. Public Policy Implications

1. Regulatory implications

   Regulatory support via farming and energy based subsidies for corn based biofuels can prove problematic for other biofuel strategies. Overall, regulations are going to be necessary if biofuels are to be adopted. Regulations will typically affect some aspect of the transport industry to change fuel standards such that a certain percentage of biofuels are mixed in with regular fossil based fuels. The airline industry in the U.S., for example, is committed to trying to achieve a 20% biodiesel mix for all short haul passenger flights. (This is near the maximum that the current generation of engine technology can take.) Corn based ethanol will likely be de-emphasized as a regulatory priority once cheaper and less land-use / water-use intensive processes become readily available.

2. Application implications

   Adopting corn biofuels requires accepting certain application and infrastructure commitments that may not have been made explicit in the decision-making process about adoption. There are ethical implications to requiring secondary stakeholders to take on certain commitments, from car companies whose engines need to be able to accept the higher ethanol based fuels to the farmers who have to grow a corn in a way that requires buying into the "big agricultural" system or face not being competitive.

3. Technology transfer and knowledge transfer

   When it comes to new and innovative methods for producing biofuels, is there an obligation to transfer those methods to other countries, particularly those most in need of energy development opportunities? On the other hand, is there also an obligation to make sure that any such technology being transferred is indeed appropriate for the location and context? For example, would it be a good idea to try to get countries where corn is the main food staple to also try to invest heavily in corn biofuels? If technology does get transferred (such as genetic technology of the corn, the fermenting and refining facilities, and the biochemistry of the catalysts), then is the appropriate knowledge and training also transferred so that local populations can run the corn ethanol systems?

4. Research for decision-making

   What scientific, technical, and economic research on corn ethanol is being used to make decisions? Is the research produced by a company, by academic researchers, public/private partnerships, think-tanks, etc? Is the research being used appropriate to the decision-making context (climate, soil conditions, water resources, trained experts)?

5. Evidence-based decision-making

   Is research being used at all when decisions are being made about corn ethanol pathways? Does the evidence about the viability of corn ethanol support the decisions being put forward? Is the evidence being used representative of all the research, or is the evidence being "cherry-picked" by those advocating a certain policy direction? (Think of the spectrum of lobbying interests here.)

3. Social Justice Issues

1. Distributive justice: Allocation of benefits and burdens of an activity

   Corn ethanol presents significant distributive justice concerns in terms of land-use impacts, water resource impacts, and food vs. fuel considerations. For example, when the price of corn in the U.S. climbed rapidly due to a new regulatory emphasis on corn ethanol production, this directly affected the price of white corn which also went up quickly in Mexico, due to NAFTA regulations. As white corn is the main food staple for a large majority of the Mexican population, poorer populations were finding it difficult to purchase enough white corn for tortillas to feed themselves. This was also due to the fact that many Mexican farmers decided to grow yellow corn because they could get much more for the yellow corn on the North American market than they could for the white corn on the local market.

2. Procedural justice: Enhancing participation and representation of groups and individuals in research decisions and outcomes

   Decisions get made through a process, but who gets included in that process? While there really is no perfect procedure that can take into account every single perspective when making a decision, there is an ethical obligation to identify the stakeholders (including the 'silent stakeholders') most likely to be impacted and include those voices in building consensus towards a decision. How inclusive of various stakeholder perspectives were the decisions that were made about supporting the adoption of corn ethanol in the U.S.? Were the decision-making procedures influenced mainly by Congressional lobbyists? Or, were there public hearings and attempts to survey public opinion before commitments were made?

3. Intergenerational justice: Duties of present generations not to pursue policies or practices that create benefits for themselves but impose costs on future generations

   How far along in duration does the consideration of impacts extend? Selecting and committing to corn ethanol would not only set up commitments for current populations, but also for future generations. Does corn ethanol provide enough CO₂ reductions to improve climatic conditions for future generations, or are there other biofuels options that could address these needs better?

4. Retributive justice: Are those harmed by actions being properly compensated, and/or are those committing ethical infractions being properly reprimanded for their actions (does the punishment fit the crime)?

   Two forms of retributive justice can be considered in the context of corn ethanol. First, the production of corn ethanol did make it difficult for some families to be able to afford enough of their staple food. Market interventions by the president allowed for subsidies of white corn production, even though it went against NAFTA free trade agreements. Second, do companies in the corn ethanol conduct certain practices that go against regulations? Emissions can come at a variety of points throughout the production process. Are those industrial firms correctly reporting all emissions? If not, and they get caught, are they being punished at a rate high enough to discourage further emissions?

4. Transformations in Economy and Society

1. Transformations in daily function

   For the most part, nothing really changes for those who use liquid fuels for transportation. Corn ethanol is appealing to many because there is so little difference to the end user between it and what they already use. People may seek out corn ethanol on a preferential basis, but there are no significant transformations in how business is done. Those that may be most impacted on a day to day basis are the farmers that are most likely to be impacted by a significant shift to corn based biofuels.

2. Transforming public understanding and education

   Corn biofuels do not readily present a different and evolutionary take on energy systems that would take us away from dangerous levels of emissions. Other biofuels do this much better, such as large biodigesters located in a densely populated area which could significantly improve public understanding and appreciation of turning waste into energy while at the same time capturing the CO₂ that would otherwise be emitted. Again, unless there was a radical public information campaign (such as NASCAR intentionally adopting corn ethanol as its fuel) corn ethanol does not present significant outreach opportunities that improve the chance of other more effective biofuels.

3. Transformation of economic means of production

   Does corn ethanol present enough of an energy solution that it will likely change how we go about procuring and using energy? Based on the overall energy and CO₂ payback of corn ethanol, it does not seem likely shifts would be coming to our energy economy. In fact, if you begin to look at longer-term trends in automobiles, you see that a shift to electric cars is relatively inevitable, depending primarily on a transformative shift in battery storage solutions. There will be a move away from liquid fuels for ground transportation purposes within the next decade. (Most urban transport in the U.S. runs on either electric or CNG.)

5. Risks and Precautions

1. Definition and assessment of risk

   Corn ethanol presents a series of risks ranging from eutrification and other forms of pollution to local water sources and overuse of water resources, particularly where fossilized (non-replenished) water is being used for agricultural purposes in corn farming, such as in regions of the U.S. Southwest. Risks of continuing dependence on natural gas resources in the production of nitrogen fertilizers via the Haber process. Risks are also present in the politics and economics of GMO crops, where genetic content is transmitted via pollen to non-interested parties, and, to make matters worse, that pollen can produce seed that is genetically licensed, so is subject to copyright and intellectual property laws. Who identifies and assesses the risks presented by corn ethanol? Are those risks being taken seriously? Are the risk assessments being conducted by non-interested parties?

2. Precautionary principle

   The principle essentially states that, in the face of uncertainty about outcomes, one must proceed with caution. For the most part, corn ethanol does not present many uncertain risks in its production and consumption. The risks of corn ethanol, as mentioned above, are relatively well known. This does not mean, however, that one should roll out a massive biofuels plan based on corn ethanol. Many uncertainties do remain, such as the long-term impacts of turning away from other biofuels pathways.

3. Recognizing and tracking emerging risks

   For corn biofuels, an emerging risk would be increased problems due to water consumption. Further, climatologists are currently predicting a massive 1000-year drought coming for the West and Midwest, i.e., much of the corn belt. If all our "eggs" were put into the corn ethanol basket, such a drought would likely cripple that part of the energy economy. This is an emerging risk that requires our close attention now. This goes for all biofuels being grown as crops in that region.

While not entirely exhaustive, this represents a fairly thorough sketch of the wide variety of possible broader social and environmental impacts presented by corn ethanol pathways. Ideally, each of these issues would have a form of resolution that could be designed and planned for as part of a way to improve the outcomes of corn ethanol systems.

Figure 5.1: Black and Silver Solar Panels

Credit: Pixabay from Pexel licensed under CC0

Innovations in solar energy, specifically photovoltaics, have seen significant progress in efficiency and installation area over the past decade. The further production of photovoltaics is a necessary component for any sustainable energy portfolio. Industrial choices of raw materials, their use, flows, and wastes are central to many aspects of industrial ecology. In the case of solar materials, there are significant broader impacts questions around strategic mineral availability, mining impacts, toxicity in manufacturing, and material lifespan and end of use. The determination of system boundaries for material life cycle analysis require significant considerations of issues such as selection of cognitive values when choosing sustainability indicators, classification of boundaries (closure of sets), and framework assumptions about how materials are consumed and circulated.

Lesson Objectives

• Comprehend the scope of the science behind PV systems.
• Describe and Classify various parts of life-cycle assessments.
• Differentiate between and ethical reasons for Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA) compared to Life-Cycle Cost Assessments (LCCA).
• Recognize where in the LCA process ethical considerations can be included, such as in choosing goals and scope.
• Identify and categorize key ethical issues in the analysis of material flows for PV.

What is due for Lesson 5?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to our Questions? discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions tab in Canvas. I will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you, too, are able to help out a classmate.

Video: Welcome (00:41)

Video: Introduction to Solar Photovoltaics (PV) (2:07)

Video: Steps of PV Action (1:48)

Video: Varieties of PV (1:31)

Video: Solar Spectrum (1:34)

Video: Shortwave Band (3:04)

Video: PV Installation on the Rise, but What is the Impact? (3:51)

Video: Cradle to Cradle Concepts (2:06)

Video: Cradle to Grave vs. Gate to Gate (4:02)

Video: Goals and Scope of LCA (3:35)

Video: Harmonization and Other Pressures (2:59)

Video: Questioning Assumptions about Goals and Scope (2:53)

Video: When Does PV Begin to Pay Back? (1:43)

Video: Financial Payback and Solar Resources (4:01)

Video: Energy Paybacks (1:22)

Video: GHG Emissions, Paybacks (1:16)

Video: PV Industry Payback (2:10)

Video: Si and CdTe PV (1:05)

Video: Broadening Goals and Scope to Include Toxics (2:08)

Video: Difference in Comparative Emissions (4:45)

Video: Difference in Cradle to Gate (4:42)

Video: (Stakeholders) Do I, the Homeowner / Private Citizen, Really Have a Choice? (2:34)

Video: Benchmarks and metrics, global market (peak watt, etc.) (4:14)

Video: A Tiered System (3:48)

Video: QA/QC and Transparency (2:19)

Video: Clients and Value Sets (2:15)

Video: So, Where Should I Buy My PV? (2:14)

Video: Supporting the Economy (00:45)

Video: Panel Manufacturing (00:36)

Video: Installation is a Local Service: It is not Outsourceable (00:46)

Figure 6.1: Oil Drilling Rig

Credit: US Bureau of Land Management (Public Domain)

Examine possible correlations between independently acquired datasets dynamically using open source methods and sources.

Lesson Objectives

• Identify the stakeholders in hydraulic fracturing.
• Describe and categorize the possible ethical issues that emerge in the use of scientific and engineering research on hydraulic fracturing.
• Analyze the potential ethical issues around transparency of reporting, hydraulic fluid contents, and the projected certainty around well leakages.
• Categorize and justify the potential ethical issues as Research Integrity, Broader Impacts, or Embedded Ethics.
• Advanced Options:
  • Level 1: Describe how groundwater is sampled and how, depending on which of the sampling methods is applied, can possibly change the understanding of the risks associated with methane leakages.
  • Level 2: Define what the term "appropriate" means in the discussion of Appropriate Wastewater Management Options.

What is due for Lesson 6?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific timeframes and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to our Questions? discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions tab in Canvas. I will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you, too, are able to help out a classmate.

We will begin to identify potential ethical issues in the language of science in the article titled "Impact of shale gas development on regional water quality" which appeared in the May 16th, 2013 issue of the journal Science.

In this article, we will be looking for potential ethical issues that could arise from the scientific study of the impact of shale gas on regional quality water quality.

We will look specifically at the language used in the article to help us locate issues worth further ethical consideration. Later on, we will use the Ethical Dimensions of Scientific Research approach to help us think about where else to look. There is potential for significant ethical issues because the article deals with two issues of immediate importance to contemporary society, namely, development of the energy sector and water quality.

The first sentence of the background indicates to us that natural gas is of significant concern to various regions around the world because of its ability to be a relatively clean energy source as well as reducing dependence on energy imports. As such, we are immediately told that this issue we are about to look at has significant political and environmental importance, often linking us to a variety of ethical considerations. As a transition fuel, methane is also important because it helps is to reduce emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels, various criteria pollutants (NOx, O3, CO, SO2, pm, Pb), and mercury emissions from coal burning, specifically.

Hydraulic fracturing as a way of extracting difficult to reach methane sources has the further appeal of being economically feasible. The process of hydraulic fracturing is a high-pressure process intended to crack rock about 1km below the surface and, as such, this process presents environmental risks to underground water reservoirs through possible gas migration via fractures, the later discharge of the wastewater initially used as hydraulic fluid, and accidental spills in the management of wastewater. What goes unsaid in stating these environmental risks are what these risks also pose to people exposed to such contaminants, but understand that environmental risks are almost always linked to risks to human health, livelihoods, and wellbeing.

As it is stated in the advances in paragraph, the most common problem is with faulty seals around the well casing to prevent leakage of methane. However, the incidence rate of faulty seals is in the range of 1-3% of installed wells. Methane has been detected in areas around well drilling, but there is controversy as to whether or not the methane that was detected was due to the drilling or other natural processes. Without data as to what the conditions were before drilling, what they refer to here as a pre-drilling baseline, it is difficult to determine current conditions from "normal" conditions, as methane has been known to enter into the water table naturally in some of these areas before drilling occurred. As we will see in this article, methods of measuring methane isotopes were used to help answer some of these questions.

Wastewater management of the used hydraulic fracturing fluids is going to dominate environmental debate because wastewater contains both significant chemical additives for the fracturing process as well as vast quantities of heavy metals and radioactive contaminants brought up to the surface from deep underground. As wastewater can only be reused so many times, and as fields mature, there will be growing pressure on finding better strategies for managing the wastewater.

Looking more specifically at the contaminants found in used fracturing fluid, the urgency and risks associated with wastewater management become readily apparent. According to the article, waste management can be more effective through improving three significant areas of research, that is: better modeling of what happens to contaminants of concern, increased long-term monitoring of the wells, and the dissemination of data (which includes improving transparency in the fluid contents). The paper identifies three significant impediments, however, to peer-reviewed research into the environmental impacts of well drilling. First, confidentiality requirements dictated by trade secret laws and what is legal during investigations keep information hidden. Second, the expedited rate of development is making it difficult to conduct studies within a reasonable timeframe, and the limited funds available for research into the impacts of horizontal well-drilling for shale gas. This becomes a problem because the burden becomes to prove harm is being done by this process by a wide range of stakeholders local to drilling sites, as opposed to the burden of having to prove that no harm is being done, which would be put on the drilling and energy companies.

Now, you will want to work through the entire article, reading in a close manner such as this.

Significant Principles

• Read the language of the article closely, trying to notice where certain terms can help us identify potential ethical situations, such as when terms like risk are used.
• Scientific uncertainty can lead to ethical uncertainty, such as in the case of methane migration.
• Terms like 'environmental debate' indicate both a generally public debate (in what is good for the public) along with a consideration of the environment.
• Topics like energy and water quality, particularly when combined together, will almost always have potential ethical considerations connected to them because of their overall importance to everyone involved.
• It is important to trace back to some of the outside sources covered by the review.

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. What are possible reasons for concern by members of the public (including private landowners)?
2. Why would various stakeholders have such a different set of concerns and perspectives on risk?
3. Is there anywhere in the research you see here as based on assumptions about uncertainty? What are those assumptions?
4. What does the article identify as the significant risks to groundwater from shale drilling? Be able to describe these risks.

Figure 6.2: A deep fracture/the risks associated with shale fracking: methane and fracking fluid in H2O. 2nd image shows exploited and new gas reserves

Credit: ConsumerNotice.org

These articles provide significant insight into the water pollution risks concerning wastewater from hydraulic fracturing, focusing mainly on the Marcellus Shale region. You will see some common findings emerge in these three readings that pose some concern and elicit recommendations from the authors. Pay attention to these findings.

Significant Principles

• Hydraulic fracturing fluid has significant chemical additives, exposure to which can pose problems to the environment and human health.
• There are places of more certainty and less certainty (more uncertainty) about the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing fluid. Can you discern where the main difference is?
• What other key information is missing from the first two articles on pollution and chemical evaluation that would help decision makers (third article)?

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. What risks are posed by hydraulic fracturing fluids?
2. What do you think the response to these risks ought to be?
3. Who ought to be mitigating any of these risks?
4. Is there enough certainty in the research to support concerns about the risks of wastewater? If not, where could more certainty help?
5. What level of disclosure should there be in terms of wastewater fluid (pre and post use) by the industry?
6. How are concerns about the future discussed here?

Figure 6.3: Abandoned gas well

Credit: Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)

These articles provide significant insight into the risks concerning methane migration into groundwater from hydraulic fracturing, focusing mainly on the Marcellus Shale region. Like the articles from the prevision section, you will see some common findings emerge in these three readings that pose some concern and elicit recommendations from the authors. Pay attention to these findings.

Significant Principles

• A different set of risks are posed by methane than by wastewater itself. Be able to distinguish between these risks.
• There appear to be two sides to the argument around methane. Pay attention to the main reasons for disagreement.
• There are some important differences here between methods used in various articles. Why would a difference in methods lead to different interpretations of outcomes?

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. What risks are posed by potential methane release into groundwater?
2. What do you think the response to these risks ought to be?
3. Who ought to be mitigating (fixing) these risks?
4. What are the main differences between uncertainty with methane release versus uncertainty with wastewater?
5. Which perspective on methane release is more correct?
6. Which article would you be most willing to base a decision on? Why?
7. How does the selection of methods make a difference in the evidence you might have?

Sustainability Indicators (SI) are a tool used in an attempt to measure the status of a system for which we have no endogenous terms of success, i.e., "the sustainable state." The primary purpose of SI is to provide a measure for the effectiveness of decisions, both as a measure of previous decisions and as a projection of current decisions into the future. With obvious applications for public and corporate policy, SI are used in a variety of specific contexts that can determine the limit of their applicability in other contexts, i.e., what is a measure of sustainability in one context may not be valid under another context or definition of sustainability. This lesson will take you through some of the historical details in the development of Sustainability Indicators (SI), how SI developed as an integral part of sustainability research, and specifically, how SI are being used to measure the sustainability of cities. 

Learning Objectives

• Provide the arguments for sustainability indicators.
• Identify the challenges to creating comprehensive sustainability indicators.
• Assess the shortcomings of sustainability indicators.
• Present the ethical issues that can emerge from the challenges and shortcomings to sustainability indicators.

What is due for Lesson 7?

This lesson will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Course Syllabus for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignment below can be found within this lesson.

Questions?

If you have any questions, please post them to the General Questions discussion forum (not email), located under the Discussions or the Lesson tab in Canvas. Your instructor will check that discussion forum daily to respond. While you are there, feel free to post your own responses if you are able to help out another student.

Sustainability Indicators (SIs) emerged for the purposes of Sustainable Development as a product of ecological studies quantifying the value of certain parts of an ecosystem in an attempt to provide policymakers with a system for comparing the potential value or harm of one policy over another, i.e., understanding the trade-offs. SIs also provide decision makers with a means for measuring progress over time (e.g., improvement or decline in the system or part of the system.) A simple example is that pollution levels in water resources could indicate whether certain efforts to regulate those pollutants were effective. However, the measure of pollution levels alone does not indicate whether an action is sustainable. It is only in the context of a broader set of indicators (of parts of the system) that the measure of pollution levels would begin to inform us about the sustainability of an action or set of actions.

Urban systems studies are an area that has seen significant attempts at creating comprehensive sets of Urban SIs, as you will encounter in Chapter 3. Many researchers in sustainability and/or urban studies consider the challenge of making our cities sustainable as the main hurdle to achieving a sustainable society. This is for various reasons, including the projected growth of human populations between now and at least 2100 will be in urban centers, where more than 50% of the world's population currently lives, roughly two-thirds of which are in developing countries. Yet, for all of the projected growth, urban living (per capita) provides the best opportunity for a low-impact lifestyle (e.g., per capita, residents of NYC have the lowest greenhouse gas footprints in the U.S.) This is because of high-density living with efficient and readily available public transportation.

Significant Principles

• Sustainability Indicators (SIs) are used in decision-making processes.
• SIs should not be oversimplified or reductive.
• The use of SIs may or may not be comprehensive enough to capture all of the relevant system interactions.
• There are significant limits to the types of value that can be quantified that ecosystems provide.
• "Ecosystem Services" is a means for capturing the value of certain environmental processes (such as trees processing CO2 and providing O2) for decision makers.
• The selection process of SIs for a project that impacts a wide range of stakeholders ought to have the input of a relevant sample of those stakeholders.

Potential ethical questions for consideration

1. By what processes are SIs determined?
2. Who has input in the determination of SIs, and which SIs will be used in the decision process?
3. Are there rhetorical or dogmatic dimensions to the determination of the SIs?
4. What happens when certain functions cannot be readily quantifiable (such as the cultural significance of a given landscape)? Are they ignored?
5. In what ways can SIs be value-laden?