Q1: This question involves reading a paper, watching a safety video, and answering open- ended questions:
- Watch “Mixed Connection, Toxic Result” via the Chemical Safety Board.
- Read ‘Don’t Do This!’ by Glenn Young and Joel Olener.
- What overlaps, if any, do you see between the video and the article? What does overlap (or the lack of) imply/mean?
Q2: Read ‘Ethics- Examining Your Engineering Responsibility’ by Deborah L. Grubbe and “Ethics Survey Results: Your Responses” from Chemical Engineering Online. In ~1 typed page, summarize key points and reflect on anything that stands out to you.
Q3: Read the ‘Crashing into Law’ case study attached here. Address the following:
- a. List 3 to 5 relevant stakeholders in this case.
b. Pick three stakeholders, and describe the duties and rights these stakeholders have toward each other. This is best done with a drawing of each stakeholder with arrows indicating duties one owes to other and rights one has.
For c and d, use the three stakeholders identified in Part b to:
c. Determine to what degree each stakeholder’s duties were fulfilled or neglected.
d. Determine to what degree each stakeholder’s rights were violated or protected, and by whom.
e. Construct an alternative scenario that would have avoided any problematic ethical issues you identified in the case. An alternative does not have to be perfect or even optimal to be better than what happened.
f. The AIChE code of professional ethics is a guide for chemical engineers. What professional and ethical issues highlighted by this case are addressed in the AIChE code of Ethics?
This is the AIChE code you might need it for question 3 (AIChE Code of Ethics (March 28, 2016) [http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics] is included at the end of the case study).
for part (b) in the question (1) I upload for you the file named ( don’t do this ).