Responsibility Ethics in Nuclear Engineering - Essay Example

Name: Course: Instructor: Date: Responsibility Ethics in Nuclear Engineering Good engineering practices are essential for excellent engineering; these practices are underlined by the ethical value of engineering. The engineering practices have a significant impact on the human and nonhuman life. The ethical issues that affect engineers impact of the delivery of their services to the society. The nuclear engineering industry is faced with several ethical issues such as responsibility. Responsibility ethics in nuclear engineering have to do with accountability for what one does in the present and future and what they have done in the past. Moreover, obligation-responsibility for nuclear engineers requires them to adhere to the rules and regulations as well as the standards of practice. Responsibility ethics in engineering means that the nuclear engineers can be held accountable, if not legally liable for intentionally, negligently or recklessly caused harms. In addition, responsibility ethics in the nuclear industry requires good judgment, not simply following algorithms. Responsibility ethics is nuclear engineering involves theories as well as concepts together with the situations that require nuclear engineers to take responsibility. Accountability in nuclear engineering is a concept that can be used to mean answerability, responsibility as well as blameworthiness. Moreover, as an aspect of governance, accountability can be used to refer to the problems in private and public nuclear industry. In experience, the nuclear engineering industry has a set of ethical codes that all members are generally supposed to follow. However, there are situations that nuclear engineers do not follow the ethical codes and some of this situations call for the nuclear engineers or the organizations involved to take responsibility. I will begin by examining some situations in the nuclear engineering industry that require engineers to take responsibility. For example, the bidding process of the supply of nuclear material should follow a given process. In some cases, some of the bidders will try to influence the process by maybe bribing some members of the procurement committee to put them on top of the bidders list hence they end winning the contract. However, after some time, these events come to light and any members of the nuclear engineering profession that took the bribes are required to take responsibility. Moreover, as a nuclear engineer, one may be put in place for the night shift at a nuclear reactor plant. At one time during their night shift, the nuclear engineer forgets and sleeps and some functions at the plant stop causing unwanted events. The next day, the supervisor asks for explanation from the nuclear engineer; the best approach to such a case will be to explain the events that led to the occurrence and accept full responsibility. The other situation that may require nuclear engineers to take responsibility is if they are involved in any cover up. For example, an employee at a nuclear power plant finds that there are some safety and operational requirements that the plant has not met. The nuclear engineer raises this concern with the plant’s supervisor who tells him that the requirements cannot be done due to an impending inspection by the authorities. The supervisor somehow convinces the employee to cover up the realization until the inspection is over to which the employee agrees. However, during the inspection, the weaknesses on operational and safety requirements of the plant; in such a case the plant can be closed down and the employee together with the supervisor will have to take responsibility. Furthermore, due negligence at a nuclear power plant, the unexpected happen and the environment is affected by the subsequent events of the occurrence. There is a public outcry and the government forms an inquiry to establish the situations that led to the occurrence and the persons responsible. During the inquiry process, several members of the nuclear engineering profession are found to be some of those responsible for the occurrence. The viable solution in such a case will be that the nuclear engineers will have to accept responsibility that may lead to their subsequent dismissal and prosecution. The nuclear profession has in place the safety standards that members of the profession are required to follow. However, due to negligence by some members, the lack of following the ethical standards lead to the harm of either their colleagues or the public. In such a situation, a member of the nuclear engineering is required to take responsibility. Members of the engineering professions should avoid negligence in their activities to avoid being held responsible by authorities (Harris et al. 58). The nuclear engineering industry has had various nuclear disasters; such disasters require that members of this profession have to take responsibility. At this point, I will examine some of the case studies in the nuclear engineering industry that have led to disasters. One of the most notable disasters in the nuclear engineering industry is the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in March 11, 2011. After the accident, an investigation was conducted to establish the events that led to the accident. Fr example, in 2011, the Government of Japan released a report that pointed out that some of the causes on the disaster were due to institutional and technical problems. The accident had significant impact on the environment as well as the well-being of the people that had contact with the radioactive elements (Hindmarsh 41). These institutional and technical problems could be associated with the nuclear engineering profession. In some reports, some scholars recognized that although the disaster could be attributed to the natural events such as the earthquake, the disaster was to some extent ‘manmade’ and some people had to take responsibility. The chairman of the investigation committee said, “Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant cannot be regarded as a natural disaster. It was profoundly a manmade disaster that could and should have been foreseen and prevented…” (BBC). In such a situation, nuclear engineers are supposed to take responsibility. The other case studies that I will examine to demonstrate the aspect of responsibility ethics in the nuclear engineering industry is the Chernobyl Nuclear disaster that happened in 1986. The disaster is classified on the same nuclear event scale as the Fukushima disaster. Although officials put the total death due to the disaster at 31, this was disputed by members of the public who called for full inquiry into the disaster. The nuclear engineering industry is supposed to maintain safety standards, and if these standards are not maintained, disasters like the Chernobyl happen and this calls for those involved to take full responsibility. In their analysis of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster Xiang and Zhu (8) made a recommendation that persons responsible for the disaster had to be found and held liable. In 1987, there was another nuclear accident in Brazil. The nuclear accident highlighted the importance of disaster preparedness for nuclear accidents. The primary cause of the accident was negligence of some members of the nuclear engineering profession. A Cs-137 teletherapy source was stolen from an abandoned private hospital by some young people who later dismantled it in a scrape-dealers yard in the center of Goiania city. The effects of the radioactive element were examined in over 100,000 people (Slovic 334). Nuclear engineers just like others in the engineering profession have to maintain a standard of care when they are performing their duties. Unexpected problems can arise if the standards operating procedures and regulations are not followed (Harris et al. 54). In the Goiania nuclear accident, the standard of care was not applied causing harm to the general public. Such a situation requires that members of the nuclear engineering profession have to take responsibility. The other case study that I will examine to show responsibility ethics in nuclear engineering is the SL-1 experimental power station accident in Idaho USA in 1961. The disaster was due to errors by the experimenting team some of who belonged to the nuclear engineering profession. The main cause of the disaster was the inappropriate removal of the control rod; the rod absorbs neutrons in the reactor core. Given that the neutrons could not be absorbed, there was an explosion that killed three of the operators. If an accident is caused by manmade errors, the people responsible have to take liability; this is because such unexpected events can be controlled (Harris et al. 58). In my estimation, responsibility ethics is of significance not only to the nuclear engineering profession but also the engineering profession as a whole. Ethical dilemmas will always face nuclear engineers, but it is how they will handle such situation that will determine their liability if disasters occurs. Engineers have to realize that each of their actions will be scrutinized and if anything goes wrong, they will be held responsible. Moreover, the codes of ethics available for various engineering professions should always serves as guide to the engineers when they are carrying out their duties. Each of the activities engineers carry out will always have an impact on human life as wee as the environment. With this in mind, all the engineering activities have to be carried out in such a way that they will have to a positive impact on human life. Moreover, the case studies examined in this paper show that responsibility in nuclear engineering can take various forms. However, in all cases the basis is taking responsibilities for one's actions as an engineer. If one is left to operate a nuclear reactor, they should always be around or else if something goes wrong, the responsibility will always lie in their hands. Furthermore, organizations that deal with radioactive elements also need to ensure that their nuclear engineers are aware of the standards of care to be applied when handling such material. If this is not done, then responsibility ethics in the field of nuclear engineering comes into play. The general publics as always are affected by the actions of engineers. The effects are positive but more often than not these effects can be adverse as seen in the nuclear disasters examined in this paper. Although engineers will be held accountable for the effects their actions will have on human beings, some of these effects are irreversible. The engineering profession has to encourage its members to take due care when doing their job and help in making the society a better place. Even though responsibility ethics is essential for nuclear engineers, there is a need for public education on radioactive material and their effects. Take an example of the Goiania nuclear accident in Brazil. If there had been enough public education about the handling of radioactive material, the disaster could have been prevented. Nuclear engineers should also ensure that they do not neglect radioactive material unattended in an area that can be assessed the public. To conclude, responsibility ethics are significant to the practices of the nuclear engineering profession. The basis of responsibility ethics in nuclear engineering is that almost all disasters in the nuclear engineering industry can be prevented. If the disasters occur, a nuclear engineer was not doing their job, and they have to be held responsible for the occurrences of their negligence. Responsibility should not only lie with the nuclear engineers but also their supervisors who are supposed to be always attentive to ensure that everything at the nuclear power plants is okay. Moreover, the ethical situations that face the nuclear engineers should not always be a problem as they can refer to the code of ethics of their profession for guidance on what to do. In general, the significance of responsibility ethics in the nuclear engineering industry must be emphasized in all nuclear engineering activities. Nuclear engineering is an integrated system with in-depth expertise, experiences and skills based on various technological fields. In the past, nuclear disasters took places in countries such as the US, Russia, Japan, Argentina, and Brazil. The cause of all these disasters was manmade errors from the nuclear engineers. This is itself underscores the need for responsibility ethics in the nuclear engineering industry. A nuclear engineer should be ready to accept responsibility if at any time of performing their duties cause harm to the public or their colleagues. Works Cited BBC News,. 'Fukushima Report: Key Points In Nuclear Disaster Report - BBC News'. N.p., 2012. Web. 2 Nov. 2015 . . Harris, Charles et al. Engineering Ethics: Concepts And Cases. 5th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2013. Print. Hindmarsh, Richard. Nuclear Disaster At Fukushima Daiichi. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013. Print. Slovic, Paul. The Feeling Of Risk. London: Earthscan, 2010. Print. Xiang, Hui, and Yi Zhu. 'The Ethics Issues Of Nuclear Energy: Hard Lessons Learned From Chernobyl And Fukushima'. Online Journal of Health Ethics 7 (2011): n. pag. Web. Read More

However, after some time, these events come to light and any members of the nuclear engineering profession that took the bribes are required to take responsibility. Moreover, as a nuclear engineer, one may be put in place for the night shift at a nuclear reactor plant. At one time during their night shift, the nuclear engineer forgets and sleeps and some functions at the plant stop causing unwanted events. The next day, the supervisor asks for explanation from the nuclear engineer; the best approach to such a case will be to explain the events that led to the occurrence and accept full responsibility.

The other situation that may require nuclear engineers to take responsibility is if they are involved in any cover up. For example, an employee at a nuclear power plant finds that there are some safety and operational requirements that the plant has not met. The nuclear engineer raises this concern with the plant’s supervisor who tells him that the requirements cannot be done due to an impending inspection by the authorities. The supervisor somehow convinces the employee to cover up the realization until the inspection is over to which the employee agrees.

However, during the inspection, the weaknesses on operational and safety requirements of the plant; in such a case the plant can be closed down and the employee together with the supervisor will have to take responsibility. Furthermore, due negligence at a nuclear power plant, the unexpected happen and the environment is affected by the subsequent events of the occurrence. There is a public outcry and the government forms an inquiry to establish the situations that led to the occurrence and the persons responsible.

During the inquiry process, several members of the nuclear engineering profession are found to be some of those responsible for the occurrence. The viable solution in such a case will be that the nuclear engineers will have to accept responsibility that may lead to their subsequent dismissal and prosecution. The nuclear profession has in place the safety standards that members of the profession are required to follow. However, due to negligence by some members, the lack of following the ethical standards lead to the harm of either their colleagues or the public.

In such a situation, a member of the nuclear engineering is required to take responsibility. Members of the engineering professions should avoid negligence in their activities to avoid being held responsible by authorities (Harris et al. 58). The nuclear engineering industry has had various nuclear disasters; such disasters require that members of this profession have to take responsibility. At this point, I will examine some of the case studies in the nuclear engineering industry that have led to disasters.

One of the most notable disasters in the nuclear engineering industry is the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in March 11, 2011. After the accident, an investigation was conducted to establish the events that led to the accident. Fr example, in 2011, the Government of Japan released a report that pointed out that some of the causes on the disaster were due to institutional and technical problems. The accident had significant impact on the environment as well as the well-being of the people that had contact with the radioactive elements (Hindmarsh 41).

These institutional and technical problems could be associated with the nuclear engineering profession. In some reports, some scholars recognized that although the disaster could be attributed to the natural events such as the earthquake, the disaster was to some extent ‘manmade’ and some people had to take responsibility. The chairman of the investigation committee said, “Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant cannot be regarded as a natural disaster. It was profoundly a manmade disaster that could and should have been foreseen and prevented…” (BBC).

In such a situation, nuclear engineers are supposed to take responsibility.

Read More