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.
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.
Scientific research can and often does impact public policy in a manner of ways. Understanding that one’s research may be applicable to informing public policy decisions or be subject to regulatory mechanisms is crucial. There are many three main intersections between policy and research that need to be considered, such as policy and regulation about the scientific research and/or technology (policy of science, or science policy); scientific research and technological capacity often informs crucial decision-making processes, such as determination of risks and evaluation of responses (science for policy); and, institutional policies in support of funding and conducting research (research management policy).
Energy and Environment Systems present some significantly challenging scenarios for current and future generations. Further, this type of research is often used to direct regulatory policies, such as in the choice of national sustainable energy strategies and analysis of contingencies, etc.
Energy and environmental systems need to be co-guided to assure public and environmental safety as well as effective production in meeting demands. How, where, and when energy systems research will be applied will often come under the consideration of public officials and agency specialists.
"Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life." -Immanuel Kant
Scientific research is often put to use in decision-making processes. Further, science often informs society about risks that need to be avoided. Of course, much debate can arise from what to do about this new knowledge, such as has often been the case with climate change. Analyses, information, data, expert opinion, reports to congressional commissions, models, projections, solutions, new directions for economic development, etc., all require considering implications.
The coupled and interconnected nature of energy and environment systems will present many unique legal challenges, particularly where regulatory issues cross paths with land use changes, intellectual property rights, licensing agreements, public investments, commercialization, international trade, and distribution. Some of these concerns will also be covered by wider policies and regulation of energy markets, assessment of environmental impacts, and institution specific requirements.
New patents in energy are being filed globally on a daily basis, establishing a rapidly changing legal framework around ownership of and access to new energy technologies. The total (global) patent filings in alternative energy alone, "have increased at a rate of 10 percent per year starting in the 1990s and at a rate of 25 percent from 2001." (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2009) Questions also arise when considering how to license these technologies depending on location and development conditions. The rate of filing new energy related patents is projected to continue increasing over the next two decades, presenting significant opportunities and many uncertainties.
Energy systems are quite diverse and can have a wide range of impacts on private and public property. Biofuels present significant opportunities for a low-carbon impact production of energy, but they also will likely change how we manage forests, crops, and other large-scale feedstock production. Wind energy technologies, while promising, will continue to pose oppositions to their locations, such as impacts on property values, visual preferences, etc. Regardless of the specific technology, innovation, adoption, and licensing of energy technologies will inevitably require further nuance and distinction, often based along ethical considerations.
Energy and environment science and technology present possibilities that could potentially transform the shape of economic production, output, market arrangements, etc. For example, if developments in renewable energy can begin to produce long-lasting and economically feasible means for producing reliable energy at significantly reduced price, competitive advantage will typically drive producers towards adoption of new energy production techniques, which could have broad-reaching implications for economic conditions globally.
It is crucial to ask whether the research could impact how society functions on a day-to-day basis; for example, how we grow food, produce energy, etc. Energy innovations will certainly have sweeping impacts across many aspects of society, aspects and issues which need to be contemplated in the formulation of research and design trajectories, and not just after the fact of invention.
The public understanding of energy and environment systems presents significant challenges, particularly in trying to communicate risks, challenges, etc. Further, rising to the challenge of a prepared “sustainable energy” workforce is very much a concern of K-Graduate education.
Transformations in energy and environment systems will inevitably present challenging questions about economic growth, social welfare, and public goods, the education of both future energy and environment scientists, increases in public understanding of energy systems, etc. The full arrival of sustainable energy based manufacturing will also have profound effects on traditional modes of fabrication and production.
Most people would tend to agree with the stance that our developments in science and technology should adhere to, or at least not be entirely counter to, our notions of the common good, not harming others, not causing further hardships, etc. After all, most people view science and technology as a positive force in society. However, this cannot always be assumed. Further, how we go about making sure society actually does benefit from innovations and new knowledge is not always straightforward, particularly in considering cutting edge research. There are three basic areas worthy of deeper analysis when considering the broader impacts of a given development trajectory.
Are the costs, harms, and benefits of nanotechnologies being distributed equitably over society? Can energy technology be used to improve the least well off first? Are certain populations more at risk from energy production than others (children, poor, elderly)?
How are decisions about energy and environment regulation being taken into account, and who is making the decisions and choices? If groups or individuals are going to be impacted by the development and application of certain energy technologies (i.e., stakeholders), are they included in the decision-making process? What sort of representation and proof of risk must an organization provide before moving forward with a new product or process?
Choices made now about infrastructure, investments, longevity, and risk can have implications for generations to come. For example, once the decision was made to develop nuclear technology, a choice was also made for many, many generations to follow. Infrastructure that is developed also needs to be maintained, or allowed to go to waste. All of these imply costs and opportunities (gained and lost) for decades, centuries, and in some cases, millennia.
Approaching any new territory in science and technology can present great payoffs and public goods, but it can also present daunting challenges that can change and shape international relations. For example, nuclear science and technology continue to present similar challenges to governments and populations across the world. Once certain knowledge or technology is produced, published, circulated, or otherwise manifested into the world, it cannot be undone.
Understanding and fully defining the risks of a given technical scenario require both an analysis of the science itself (see intrinsic ethics issues on handling of uncertainty), and a projection as to how the technology could potentially cause harm or otherwise negatively impact human well-being. Risk has two aspects that need to be considered when thinking about a project. Could the research or technology itself present any apparent or immediate risk? Could the technology increase the overall risk profile of a society?
What constitutes a viable risk assessment for energy and environment technologies? Precaution in the face of risk needs to be considered and taken into account in any case, and certain aspects of energy production can present an exceptional risk to human and environmental health. As such, regulation will need to be comprehensive, robust, and conservative with respect to risk projections.
Precautionary measures mandate that we proceed cautiously (but not necessarily slowly) and deliberatively in the face of high risks coupled with any uncertainties. The precautionary principle in its most simple expression suggests that we plan for worst-case scenarios in the face of high risks coupled with uncertainties. The main idea is that, when faced with taking risks (intended and unintended) that could affect a significant portion of the population or environment, we proceed through the process cautiously and deliberately. The precautionary principle should be invoked when high-risk, irreversible, or catastrophic situations are possible, even at a very low probability.
Links
[1] https://www.pexels.com/@rawpixel
[2] https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/
[3] https://www.pexels.com/photo/bitcoins-and-u-s-dollar-bills-730547/
[4] https://www.pexels.com/@davidmcbee
[5] https://www.flickr.com/photos/steffy65/14170747562/in/photolist-nAdMxQ-4yDf4L-aCFzTq-d2uHt-9Rc7sM-4vt2oH-2fy468J-avhHoV-DLssy-XiHgrE-8geGy5-4yXEyN-9Aq9dB-fapFT4-9ewfF5-5TXKuo-3PgMZ-8Ky7br-kCxSwX-4QZjt2-o1Uw79-7jTGh5-kZDhGp-fQkbJB-4yvuww-3g6c22-9uEmtE-2fHE19G-dXgAVk-8M9qvP-QYj49X-2GN26L-4J7EFq-cJ6kMu-qH2oJS-xAtBp-82kbon-5Trahp-9rmyXd-dV32Di-5rLqSd-8cascm-Di2nYf-fxuF6-2eAwkTE-4uTBsZ-pNMxkK-as7vro-afD4VJ-UciT7A
[6] https://www.flickr.com/photos/steffy65/