Matthew Girman
WATER TREATMENT ETHICS
Matthew Girman ()
1
Matthew Girman
INTRODUCTION: ETHICS AND ENGINEERING
Ethics are the moral principles that people consider when making decisions every day. For example, a person returns home from a grocery store and finds out that the cashier made a mistake and did not ring up a certain item. Does the person return to the grocery store and offer to pay for the item, or does he stay at home without paying for it? The ethics that this person was taught will have a huge impact on what decision he makes. Ethics also factor into decisions on a larger scale. For instance, the government has to take ethics into account when it makes decisions on a daily basis. When government officials decide whether to construct a building in a certain area, they have to take many factors into consideration. What is the area currently used for? Do people live in the construction area? What effects will the construction have on the environment? All these ethical questions must be addressed before construction can begin.
Ethics play a major role in the daily life of an engineer as well. The situation I described with the construction of a new building involves engineers in the decision making process. The government officials who ultimately make the final decision do so after receiving consultations from multiple civil engineers. In another example, mechanical engineers that design and manufacture engines for car companies have to make sure that the exhaust from the engines does not harm the environment. Additionally, bioengineers have to consider ethics when testing prosthetics on human beings, for example. Those are just a few instances when engineers face ethical dilemmas.
Why are ethics important to me?
As a future engineer, it is mandatory that I am not only familiar with the code of ethics, but I follow it each and every day. The code of ethics is a standard by which professional engineers are expected to conduct themselves. Because of this, it is very important that I understand the code of ethics and know how to apply it to every problem I encounter as an engineer. If I do not follow the code of ethics, then I will most likely lose my job. Obviously, it necessary to utilize the code of ethics to my advantage in my engineering profession.
WATER FLUORIDATION
A common method for treating water is to add fluoride. Fluoridation is the controlled process by which fluoride is added to water. Fluoride is a substance that works to prevent tooth decay. The fluoride reduces the rate of which your enamel, or the outer layer of your teeth, demineralizes. Demineralization is essentially the wearing down of your teeth. Basically, the fluoride prevents cavities for the people who drink the water. When it is kept at the correct level, fluoridation is a major factor in improving the overall dental health of human beings.
Scenario
As an environmental engineer, I work for a company that treats the water supply for a small town. The company is responsible for controlling exactly what is in the water before it gets distributed to the people of the small town. My job is to monitor and measure the levels of each substance that is put into the water. One of the chemicals that is put into the water for treatment is fluoride. According to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, the maximum contaminant level of fluoride in water is 4.0 mg/L [1]. That number means that for every liter of water in a given sample, the maximum amount of fluoride allowed is 4.0 milligrams. So a sample of 10 liters of water can have no more than 40 milligrams of fluoride. This fluoride level was determined to not cause any health problems for the people who drink the water.
One day, I measure the fluoride level in a large sample of water that is about to be sent out and find that the level of fluoride exceeds 4.5 mg/L. Keeping in mind the standards set by the Safe Drinking Water Act, I decide to go to my boss, who is also an engineer, and discuss the ethical problems associated with an elevated level of fluoride. When asked, my boss denies any knowledge of the high fluoride levels and claims that it is not a problem.
Also, I notice that when we run out of space to hold the water supply, excess water that has already been treated is being dumped back into the river that it was originally taken from. I know that it is our company’s policy to dispose of the water in that way, so I asked my boss about that, too. He does not see a problem with the company’s current policy.
ETHICAL PROBLEMS IN THIS SCENARIO
Accepting Responsibility
In this scenario, a few ethical questions arise. The engineering code of ethics states that engineers must take accountability for what they do [2]. First of all, the boss is supposed to know exactly what is put in the water and how much is put in. Even if he is not physically adding the fluoride himself, it is expected that he does something to fix it when he is first notified of the problem. If he denies responsibility for the elevated fluoride levels, he is breaking a code of ethics.The person that inserted the excess fluoride is also obligated to accept responsibility for the mistake. In this scenario, both my boss and whoever added the fluoride are both violating the code of ethics.
Health issues
One of the most important responsibilities for engineers is making sure that their actions do not endanger the health of civilians. The National Society of Professional Engineers says, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [3]. As a result of taking in too much fluoride, children can develop dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis is simply a change in appearance, such as color, of the tooth’s enamel.In some cases, large, noticeable white spots form on the surface of teeth. Only children can get dental fluorosis because it occurs while the permanent teeth are forming underneath the gums. Since the amount of fluoride that causes dental fluorosis is different for each case, it is not known exactly how much fluoride is too much for children. That is why any amount of fluoride that is above the maximum level allowed of 4.0 mg/L can be dangerous, and it is important to stay within that restriction.
Another adverse side effect of excess fluoride is skeletal fluorosis. Skeletal fluorosis is the result of an extreme amount of fluoride accumulation on bones. It can cause pain to both bones and joints, as well as damage to those areas in advanced cases. Skeletal fluorosis mostly affects older people because fluoride accumulates over a number of years. Again, staying under the maximum amount of fluoride can help prevent skeletal fluorosis.
Environmental Issues
Fluoride has also been shown to have a negative impact on the environment. It can be detrimental for aquatic organisms that live in the river where the excess treated water is being dumped. The concentration of fluoride that can be lethal varies from species to species, but it has been tested that a fluoride concentration range from 2.7 to 4.7 mg/L can kill rainbow trout [4]. Rainbow trout can be found in North America, so it is possible that they could be in the river where I work. Even if they are not, there is a very good possibility that other aquatic species in the river can be killed from the same concentration of fluoride that is lethal for rainbow trout. In addition to the fish in the river, plants that live around the river could be affected. Also, animals, such as deer, that drink water out of the river might respond negatively to the fluoride.
According to the code of ethics from the American Society of Civil Engineers, engineers are responsible for preserving the environment in which they work [5]. As engineers, we are not supposed to do anything that might have an adverse impact on the environment. Since it has been clearly proven to hurt the environment, my company should not be putting the treated water into the river where it can affect the wildlife.
CASE STUDIES
Industrial Solvents
In this case study, you are an engineer who is hired by an industrial solvent manufacturing company that is suspected of polluting the groundwater below the plant. Your job is to measure the toxicity level and prepare a report to submit to the state regulatory agency to show that the company is within the agency’s requirements.You measure the toxicity of the groundwater and fine that the company is only a minor contributor to pollution, but not enough to get them in any serious trouble. One day, you arrive early to find the owner of the plant pumping water into the groundwater observation wells in order to give the appearance that they are polluting the water less than they actually are. The owner does not see you as you get into your car and immediately leave the site.
As a result, you talk to your management and decide not to represent the industrial solvent manufacturing company in their case with the state regulatory agency. The company immediately files a lawsuit against your firm for not following through on the contract. However, another member of the industrial solvent company blows the whistle on his owner, and the company is fined several hundred thousand dollars while the owner faces criminal charges.
This case study is relevant to my topic because it involves someone tampering with the water supply for the benefit of their company. It explains that the best course of action is to talk to your boss about the issue. Hopefully, the boss will handle it for you. However, in my situation, my boss is the one who is at fault. According to this case study, the best thing for me to do is approach my boss’s superiors and discuss my concerns.
Design Flaw
In this scenario, a structural engineer receives a call from an engineering student. The student says that a skyscraper that the structural engineer designed has a major technical flaw in its construction. After initially dismissing the claim, the engineer looks over his data to find that the student was right. He realizes that strong winds could potentially topple the building, killing thousands of people both inside and on the ground. If he notifies city officials of the problem, he could risk damaging his reputation as an engineer.
This study is similar to my scenario because it involved someone being approached about an error that was made. What does a person do if confronted with this information? In my scenario, my boss ignored the error that he was made aware of. Even though admitting to the problem could damage his reputation, it is probably in my boss’s best interest to own up to the mistake and fix it.
Waste Containers
In this case study, an engineer notices leaking drums of chemicals at a chemical waste warehouse. He calls a company employee who decides to transport the containers back to the company’s home site. Although the engineer knows that the employee has good intentions, he realizes that moving chemical waste back to the home site is illegal. He has to decide whether to do nothing and potentially have his company face action from the Environmental Protection Agency, or tell the employee’s superior about what he is about to do.
The engineer decides to keep quiet and help the employee load the trucks with the drums for transportation back to the company’s home site. It turns out that no one else finds out about what they did. Although the engineer and employee did what they thought was right, they are lucky to have not gotten in trouble with the Environmental Protection Agency.
This case study is relevant to my scenario because the engineer is faced with a decision of whether to speak up or not. The difference is that the engineer in this scenario thinks that his decision helps the environment. In my situation, keeping quiet would result in harm for the environment. Although the engineer did not face the repercussions for his illegal actions, it is not a good idea to use his actions as an example for future reference.
MY DECISION
After carefully looking over the case studies, I have decided that the best course of action is to contact my boss’s superior to express my concerns about what is going on at the company. I tell him about the elevated fluoride levels and the dumping of the excess water into the river. The case study about the industrial solvent company showed that it is best to disclose information. If I decide to not say anything and my company doesn’t change its actions, then I could possibly face legal action along with my company. When I weigh the possible consequences, approaching my boss’s superiors seems to be the best option.
THE RESULT
As a result of my actions and pressure from his superiors, my boss decides to make sure that the fluoride levels are within the required range. He has an engineer report the fluoride levels of the water frequently so we do not end up with elevated levels. Also, he puts a stop to the policy of dumping excess treated water into the river. Instead, the chemicals are filtered out of the water before it is dumped into the river, so we are no longer putting dangerous chemicals into the environment.
However, my boss knows that his superiors reprimanded him because of what I said. Shortly after the changes were made, my boss tells me that I am no longer needed at the company. Even though I lost my job, it is not as bad as what could have happened if I didn’t do anything. I still have the opportunity to go out and get another job. On the other hand, I could have not only been in trouble with the law, but I could have had my reputation tarnished for working at a company that was doing illegal activities, making it extremely hard to get a job in the future. Overall, I think I made the correct decision.
REFERENCES
[1] “Basic Information about Fluoride in Drinking Water.” (2013, July 23). United States Environmental Protection Agency. (Online article).
[2] É. Montoya. (2009). “IEEE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. (Online article). p. 65
[3] “Code of Ethics for Engineers.” (2007, July). National Society of Professional Engineers. (Online article).
[4]“Fluoride.” (2015, September 28). Green Facts. (Online article).
[5] “Code of Ethics.” (2006, July 23). American Society of Civil Engineers. (Online article).
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
E. Butterman. (2014, March). “Ethics in Engineering.” American Society of Mehanical Engineers. (Online article).
S. Florman. (2002). “Engineering Ethics: The Conversation without End.” National Academy of Engineering. (Online article).
“FAQs for Dental Fluorosis.” (2015, August 31). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (Online article). Effects.” Fluoride Action Network. (Online article).
“Ethics Cases.” (2014, October 1). Texas Tech University. (Online article).
“The Cost of Integrity.” Web Guru. (Online article).
M. Pritchard. (2006, August 23). “Leaking Waste Containers.” Online Ethics Center. (Online article).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the Bevier Engineering Library for providing the resources to allow me to complete my research. I would also like to thank the other engineers in my residence hall for proofreading my paper. Finally, I would like to thank John Calvasina for providing valuable feedback on my previous assignment that helped me improve as a writer.
1