COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
C00008 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
.cb POLITICAL ENTHUSIASM AND ENGINEERING ETHICS


	Engineers are by now quite familiar with ethical problems that
can arise if a company is tempted to neglect safety standards in
order to complete a project economically or to sell a product.
If the product is clearly unsafe, it is clear what to do;
 the only problem is to muster
the courage to do it.  If the problem is a worry that the safety
may not have been sufficiently investigated, then the ethical problem
are more complex but have been and are being explored.

	There is a widespread unstated assumption that ethical problems
arise only through conflict between a business interest and the
public welfare.  For example, a Stanford School of Engineering flyer
describing Professor Bruce Lusignan's
course Engineering 235 says:

	%2"Students are the only people who can
be objective en masse" on an issue as sensitive as the energy crisis,
Lusignan pointed out.  They are not swayed by the "dominant economic
interest" in the energy busines, he said"%1.

	Unfortunately, there are other hazards to objectivity than
financial interest.  These include personal ties with a group espousing a
policy, intellectual faddism, and bureaucratic momentum in government
or any other large organization.  Perhaps the most serious,
in my opinion often more serious than financial interest,
occurs when a politician or political group ties their political
fortunes to a technological issue.  An elected official or candidate
for office has far less job security than an engineer or business
objective, and his job prospects are far more seriously affected
by admitting that one of his policies is mistaken.  Therefore, when
technological issues become political issues, lack of enthusiasm
for the cause or finding a mistake in the plan, tends to be
regarded as treachery even more than in business.

	The current politicization of energy issues raise a number
of ethical problems.  Here are some examples:
.item←0

	#. Money has been taken by Stanford for studies of Soft
Energy paths and for comparing solar and other sources of energy.
The agencies that support these studies expect particular answers.
Specificaly, future contracts depend on proposals that agree with
the preconceptions of government officials.

	#. A second temptation is the foolish demonstration project.
Consider the "solar powered surrey" built by Lawrence Livermore
Laboratories.
.<<Guy Armantrout 422-8616>>
This is a an electric golf cart (or some such vehicle) with a roof
of solar cells.  It can charge its battery.  It is monstrously
expensive and demonstrates no fact that wasn't already known.
If one wanted to charge batteries with solar cells, it is obviously
better to leave them in a fixed location rather than lug them
around costing power and having them only accidentally in the most
favorable sun position.  Clearly, this project represents a
combination of a lack of engineering seriousness together with
an excess of money for some aspect of solar energy.

	#. The third danger is that many professors already perceive
what views are needed to get grants these days, and some may have
trimmed their sails accordingly.  Of course, it is always hard to
say in some particular case that a change of apparent views isn't
genuine.

	The point of this essay is that ethical problems can arise
from many more sources than financial conflict of interest.