UFO is USFO

Some of you might be thinking how the famous UFO's just got a new name USFO's. Well, USFO stands for United States Flying Object. Why did even name it that way? Well, there is a reason behind this. I do believe that certain clownish UFO's were zooming and flying around the world in old times, but I definitely don't believe that its from outside world. USA is behind this awful activity. They just shot flying saucers from NASA station which went out to public, and the public was so foolish to fall for it, and started giving it a name Unidentified Flying Object. This phenomena is one of the ways to control our minds to support their Illuminati agenda. First this little sightseeing was spotted on the skies, then there is our talented media to make it look real, and then there are movies to corrupt young generations and even adults.

UFO sighted 

USA wants us to believe this for a reason, they want us to believe that aliens are out there planning to take over the world in later years and provoke a war. When this war happens, Illuminati will propose anything and we will accept, because we are blindfolded and have fallen for their activities and hence are far away from truth. Except for the fact, the war is not going to be between aliens and us, its only and only USA and Israel with their more advanced weapons to use it on the world (on us) and cause utter terror havoc throughout the whole world and keep blaming aliens for it. 

The movie The Fourth Kind, a title which refers specifically to alien abduction (the fourth type of alien encounter), purports to be based upon real events.  But is it?

Two months back, I happen to watch this movie "The Fourth Kind". After watching this movie, I was almost in awe that really aliens do exist and they are taking over the whole world. In every debate and arguments that I had with my friends regarding this 'alien' topic, I would stick to my point that ALIENS EXIST ALIENS EXIST, until one day my friend told me to watch some documentary about it. After that day, my point of views changed, my ideas changed, my whole personality changed, I would never believe whatever media babbles about this little topics. Who cares, I know the truth! Thank God, now my friends its your turn to get served by the truth. Believe me, whatever they show in movies and media, its all a hoax, its one big giant setup for you, setup for you to enter the world of fantasy having no control over your mind and thus believing everything the puppets of Illuminati tell you. They control us big time! so Wake Up!

The following videos contain the very information that can set you free from this cuffs.

Engineering Code & Ethics

Hello, I am here with another research. If anyone wants to get his homework done, so there you go:

Introduction

           

            Ethics is the study of the characteristics of morals. Ethics also deals with the moral choices that are made by each person in his or her relationship with other persons. Engineering ethics is the rules and standards governing the conduct of engineers in their role as professionals. Engineering ethics encompasses the more general definition of ethics, but applies it more specifically to situations involving engineers in their professional lives. Thus, engineering ethics is a body of philosophy indicating the ways that engineers should conduct themselves in their professional capacity.

            The work of engineers can affect public health and safety and can influence business practices and even politics. One result of this increase in awareness is that nearly every major corporation now has an ethics office that has the responsibility to ensure that employees have the ability to express their concerns about issues such as safety and corporate business practices in a way that will yield results and won’t result in retaliation against the employee. Ethics offices also try to foster an ethical culture that will help to head off ethical problems in a corporation before they start.

            There is also a distinction between what is legal and what is ethical. Many things that are legal could be considered unethical. For example, designing a process that releases a known toxic, but unregulated, substance into the environment is probably unethical, although it is legal. Conversely, just because something is illegal doesn’t mean that it is unethical. For example, there might be substances that were once thought to be harmful, but have now been shown to be safe, that you wish to incorporate into a product. If the law has not caught up with the latest scientific finding, it might be illegal to release these substances into the environment, even though there is no ethical problem in doing so. Engineering is certainly a job – engineers are paid for their services – but the skills and responsibilities involved in engineering make it more than job.

Codes of Ethics

            Professional codes of ethics consist primarily of principles of responsibility that delineate how to promote the public good. As such, codes provide guidance and support for responsible engineers, establish shared minimum standards, and play additional important roles. These codes express the rights, duties and obligations of the members of the profession. Primarily, a code of ethics provides a framework for ethical judgment for a professional. Codes serve as a starting point for ethical decision making. A code can also express the commitment to ethical conduct shared by members of a profession. A code of ethics doesn’t create new moral or ethical principles. These principles are well established in society, and foundations of our ethical and moral principles go back many centuries. Rather, a code of ethics spells out the ways in which moral and ethical principles apply to professional practice. Put another way, a code helps the engineer to apply moral principles to the unique situations encountered in professional practice. A code of ethics helps create an environment within a profession where ethical behavior is the norm. It also serves as a guide or reminder of how to act in specific situations. Although codes of ethics are widely used by many organizations, including engineering societies, there are many objections to codes of ethics, specifically as they apply to engineering practice.

Societies

            As engineering rose as a distinct profession during the nineteenth century, engineers saw themselves as either independent professional practitioners or technical employees of large enterprises. There was considerable tension between the two sides as large industrial employers fought to maintain control of their employees. When the nineteenth century drew to a close and the twentieth century began, there had been series of significant structural failures, including some spectacular bridge failures, notably the Ashtabula River Railroad Disaster (1876), Tay Bridge Disaster (1879), and the Quebec Bridge collapse (1907). These had a profound effect on engineers and forced the profession to confront shortcomings in technical and construction practice, as well as ethical standards. Professional engineering societies in the United States began to be organized in the late 19^th century, with new societies created as new engineering fields have developed in this century. As these societies matured, many of them created codes of ethics to guide practicing engineers.

One response was the development of formal codes of ethics by three of the four founding engineering societies. The AIEE (American Institute of Electrical Engineers) was the first of the five so called founder engineering societies in the US to adopt an engineering code. That was adopted by the Board of Directors, March 8, 1912.

a)      General Principles.

b)      The Engineer’s relations to client or employer.

c)      Ownership of Engineering Records and Data.

d)     The Engineer’s Relations to the Public.

e)      The Engineer’s Relations to the Engineering Fraternity.

f)       Amendments.

While the following principles express, generally the engineer’s relations to client, employer, the public, and the engineering fraternity, it is not presumed that they define all of the engineer’s duties and obligations. A new industry arose beginning with Guglielmo Marconi’s wireless telegraphy experiments at the turn of the century. What was originally called “wireless” became radio with the electrical amplification possibilities inherent in the vacuum tubes which evolved from John Fleming’s diode and Lee de Forest’s triode. With the new industry came a new society in 1912, the Institute of Radio Engineers. The IRE was modeled on the AIEE, but was devoted to radio, and then increasingly to electronics. It, too, furthered its profession by linking its members through publications, standards and conferences, and encouraging them to advance their industries by promoting innovation and excellence in the emerging new products and services. Through the help of leadership from the two societies, and with the applications of its members’ innovations to industry, electricity wove its way—decade by decade—more deeply into every corner of life—television, radar, transistors, computers. Increasingly, the interests of the societies overlapped. Membership in both societies grew, but beginning in the 1940s, the IRE grew faster and in 1957 became the larger group. On 1 January 1963, The AIEE and the IRE merged to form the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, or IEEE. At its formation, the IEEE had 150,000 members, 140,000 of whom were in the United States.

            The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is an international non-profit, professional organization for the advancement of technology related to electricity. IEEE's Constitution defines the purposes of the organization as "scientific and educational, directed toward the advancement of the theory and practice of electrical, electronics, communication and computer engineering, as well as computer science, the allied branches of engineering and the related arts and sciences." In pursuing these goals, the IEEE serves as a major publisher of scientific journals and a conference organizer. It is also a leading developer of industrial standard (having developed over 900 active industry standards) in a broad range of disciplines, including electric power and energy, biomedical technology and healthcare, information technology, information assurance, telecommunications, consumer electronics, transportation, aerospace, and nanotechnology. IEEE develops and participates in educational activities such as accreditation of electrical engineering programs in institutes of higher learning. It is properly presented as a master brand with the letter "IEEE" to the right. The IEEE consists of 38 societies, organized around specialized technical fields, with more than 300 local organizations that hold regular meetings. IEEE is one of the leading standards-making organizations in the world. One of the more notable IEEE standards is the IEEE 802 LAN/MAN group of standards which includes the IEEE 802.3 Ethernet standard and the IEEE 802.11 Wireless Networking standard. The members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of their technologies affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in accepting a personal obligation to their profession, its members and communities they serve, do hereby commit themselves to the highest ethical and professional conduct and agree:

1.  to accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment;
2. to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, and to disclose them to affected parties when they do exist;
3. to be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on available data;
4. to reject bribery in all its forms;
5. to improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate application, and potential consequences;
6. to maintain and improve our technical competence and to undertake technological tasks for others only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent limitations;
7. to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and correct errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others;
8. to treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race, religion, gender, disability, age, or national origin;
9. to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious action;
10. to assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to support them in following this code of ethics.

            ASCE and ASME did so in 1914. AIME did not adopt a code of ethics in its history.

            The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) is a professional body founded in 1852 to represent members of the civil engineering profession worldwide. It is the oldest national engineering society in the United States. ASCE's vision is to have engineers positioned as global leaders who strive toward building a better quality of life. Its world headquarters is in Reston, Virginia. ASCE was founded in New York City on November 5, 1852 when twelve engineers met at the offices of the Croton Aqueduct and formed the American Society of Civil Engineers and Architects. ASCE was the first national engineering society created in the United States. ASCE's mission is to provide essential value to its members and their careers; to its partners and to the public. ASCE seeks to provide value by:

-          Developing leadership skills in its members and supporting civil engineer leaders;

-          Facilitating advancement of the technology utilized by the profession;

-          Encouraging and providing tools for lifelong learning within the profession;

-          Advocating infrastructure and environmental stewardship; and

-          Promoting professionalism and the civil engineering profession.

ASCE is the world's largest publisher of civil engineering information — producing more than 55,000 pages of technical content each year. The ASCE Publications Division produces 31 professional journals (available both in print and online editions), conference proceedings, standards, manuals of practice, committee reports and monographs under the ASCE Press imprint. A 200,000-entry civil engineering database is available at their website, along with many other resources for practicing civil engineers including a complete publications catalog and the ASCE Online Research Library, providing access to more than 600,000 pages of journal articles and proceedings. ASCE works to share and grow the engineering body of knowledge among civil engineers worldwide and proactively informs engineers of the opportunities and challenges that global developments have on the practice of engineering. The Society serves approximately 14,000 international members, and provides networking opportunities through ASCE International Sections and Groups, an international program at the Annual Meeting, and other events. ASCE has Agreements of Cooperation with 72 engineering organizations in 59 countries, supports 12 International Sections and 19 International Groups, and participates in a variety of international engineering organizations. About half the contributions to ASCE journals come from overseas authors, and half of publication sales are to engineers living abroad. These are following Fundamental ASCE’s codes of ethics.

Fundamental Principles: Engineers uphold and advance the integrity, honor and dignity of the engineering profession by:

1)      using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare;

2)      being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity the public, their employers and clients;

3)      striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession;

4)      supporting the professional and technical societies of their disciplines.

            The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) is a professional body, specifically an engineering society, focused on mechanical engineering. The ASME was founded in 1880 by Alexander Lyman Holley, Henry Rossiter Worthington, John Edison Sweet and Matthias N. Forney in response to numerous steam boiler pressure vessel failures. The organization is known for setting codes and standards for mechanical devices. The ASME conducts one of the world's largest technical publishing operations through its ASME Press, holds numerous technical conferences and hundreds of professional development courses each year, and sponsors numerous outreach and educational programs. The organization's stated vision is to be the premier organization for promoting the art, science and practice of mechanical and multidisciplinary engineering and allied sciences to the diverse communities throughout the world. Its stated mission is to promote and enhance the technical competency and professional well-being of its members, and through quality programs and activities in mechanical engineering, better enable its practitioners to contribute to the well-being of humankind. As of 2006, the ASME has 120,000 members. Core values include:

-          Embrace integrity and ethical conduct

-          Embrace diversity and respect the dignity and culture of all people

-          Nurture and treasure the environment and our natural and man-made resources

-          Facilitate the development, dissemination and application of engineering knowledge

-          Promote the benefits of continuing education and of engineering education

-          Respect and document engineering history while continually embracing change

-          Promote the technical and societal contribution of engineers

            ASME is one of the oldest standards-developing organizations in the world. It produces approximately 600 codes and standards, covering many technical areas, such as boiler components, elevators, measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits, cranes, hand tools, fasteners, and machine tools. ASME requires ethical practice by each of its members and has adopted the following Code of Ethics of Engineers.

            The American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) is a professional organization for chemical engineers. AIChE was established in 1908 with the purpose of establishing chemical engineers as a profession independent from chemists and mechanical engineers. As of 2005, AIChE had about 40,000 members, including members from 93 countries worldwide. Members of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers shall uphold and advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the engineering profession by: being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity their employers, their clients, and the public; striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession; and using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare. To achieve these goals, members shall:

-          Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public and protect the environment in performance of their professional duties.

-          Formally advise their employers or clients (and consider further disclosure, if warranted) if they perceive that a consequence of their duties will adversely affect the present or future health or safety of their colleagues or the public.

-          Accept responsibility for their actions, seek and heed critical review of their work, and offer objective criticism of the work of others.

-          Issue statements or present information only in an objective and truthful manner.

-          Act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, avoiding conflicts of interest and never breaching confidentiality.

-          Treat fairly and respectfully all colleagues and co-workers, recognizing their unique contribution and capabilities.

-          Perform professional services only in areas of their competence.

-          Build their professional reputations on the merits of their services.

-          Continue their professional development throughout their careers, and provide opportunities for the professional development of those under their supervision.

-          Never tolerate harassment.

-          Conduct themselves in a fair, honorable, and respectful manner.

            The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is a professional engineering organization in the United States. The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is the national society of engineering professionals from all disciplines that promotes the ethical and competent practice of engineering, promotes licensure and enhances the image and well-being of its members. Founded in 1934, NSPE serves more than 54,000 members and the public through 53 state and territorial societies and more than 500 chapters. Engineering is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, engineers are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for people. Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honesty, impartiality, fairness and equity, and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

Fundamental canons:

1. Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.
2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
5. Avoid deceptive acts.
6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

Risk, Safety and Accidents

            One of the most important duties of an engineer is to ensure the safety of the people who will be affected by the products that he designs. All of the codes of ethics of the professional engineering societies stress the importance of safety in the engineer’s duties. No duty of the engineer is more important than her duty to protect the safety and well-being of the public. Indeed, the codes of ethics of the professional engineering societies make it clear that safety is of paramount importance to the engineer.

Safety and Risk

            There are four criteria that must be met to help ensure a safe design. First, the minimum requirement is that a design must comply with the applicable laws. This requirement should be easy to meet, since legal standard for product safety are generally well known, are published and easily accessible. Second, an acceptable design must meet the standard of “accepted engineering practice”. You can’t create a design that is less safe than everyone else in the profession understands to be acceptable. For example, federal safety laws might not require that the power supply in a home computer be made inaccessible to the consumer who opens up her computer. However, if most manufacturers have designed their supplies so that no potentially lethal voltages are accessible, then that standard should be followed by all designers, even if doing so increases the cost of the product. The engineer must continually upgrade her skills by attending conferences and short courses, discussing issue with other engineers, and constantly surveying the literature and trade magazines for information on the current state of the art in the field. Third, alternative designs that are potentially safer must be explored. This requirement is also difficult to meet, since it requires a fair amount of creativity in seeking alternative solutions. This creativity can involve discussing design strategies with others in your field and brainstorming new alternatives with them. The best way to know if your design is the safest available is to compare it to other potential designs. Fourth, the engineer must attempt to foresee potential misuses of the product by the consumer and must design to avoid these problems. Again, this requires a fair amount of creativity and research. It is always tempting to think that if someone is stupid enough to misuse your product, then it’s their own fault and the misuse and its consequences shouldn’t bother you too much. However, an engineer should execute designs in such a way as to protect even someone who misuses the product.

            Once the product is designed, both prototypes and finished devices must be rigorously tested. This testing is not just to determine whether the product meets the specifications. It should also involve testing to see if the product is safe. The important of adequate testing can be illustrated by the Kursk submarine disaster. The Kursk was a Russian navy submarine that sank in August of 2000, killing everyone on board. The sinking has been attributed to an explosion in the torpedo room that ripped open a large hole in the hull. Many crew members of the Kursk survived the initial explosion, but died because they were unable to escape from the submarine and no attempts at rescue by other ships were successful. The June 3, 2002, edition of Time reported that Russian naval engineers say that the Kursk was equipped with a rescue capsule designed to allow crew members to float safety to the surface in an emergency. However, in the rush to get the submarine into service, this safety system was never tested. After the accident, some of the survivors attempted to rescue themselves by using this system, but it did not function properly. It is essential that in any engineering design, all safety systems be tested to ensure that they work as intended.

            Minimizing risk is often easier to said than done. There are many things that make this difficult task for the engineer. For example, the design engineer often must deal in uncertainties. Many of the risks can only be expressed as probabilities and often are no more than educated guesses. Sometimes, there are synergistic effects between probabilities, especially in a new and innovative design for which the interaction of risks will be unknown. Risk is also increased by the rapid pace at which engineering designs must be carried out.

Accidents

            There have been numerous studies of accidents and their causes, with attempts to categorize different types of accidents. The goal of this type of work is to understand the nature of accidents and therefore find ways to try to prevent them. Since the engineer’s most important job is to protect the safety of the public, the results of this type research have an impact on the engineering professional. There are many ways in which accidents can be categorized and studied. One method is to group accidents into three types: procedural, engineered and systemic.

            Procedural accidents are perhaps the most common and are the result of someone making a bad choice or not following established procedures. For example, in the airline industry, procedural accidents are frequently labeled as “pilot error”. These are accidents caused by the misreading of an important gauge, flying when the weather should have dictated otherwise, or failure to follow regulations and procedures. In the air lines industry, this type of error is not restricted to the pilot; it can also be committed by air-traffic controllers and maintenance personnel. Procedural accidents are fairly well understood and are amenable to solution through increased training, more supervision, new laws or regulations, or closer scrutiny by regulators.

            Engineered accidents are caused by flaws in the design. These are failures of materials, devices that don’t perform as expected, or devices that don’t perform well under all circumstances encountered. For example, microcracks sometimes develop in turbine blades in aircraft engines. When these cracks become severe enough, the blade can fail and break apart. Sometimes, this has resulted in penetration of the cabin by metal fragments, causing injury to passengers. Engineered failures should be anticipated in the design stage and should be caught and corrected during testing. These types of accidents can be understood and alleviated as more knowledge is gained through testing and actual experience in the field.

            Systemic accidents are harder to understand and harder to control. They are characteristic of very complex technologies and the complex organizations that are required to operate them. A perfect example of this phenomenon is the airline industry. Modern aircraft are very complicated systems, Running them properly requires the work of many individuals, including baggage handlers, mechanics, flight attendants, pilots, government regulators and inspectors, and air-traffic controllers. At many stages in the operation of an airline, there are chances for mistakes to occur, some with serious consequences. Often, a single, minor mistake isn’t significant, but series of minor mistakes can add up to a disaster.

The Rights and Responsibilities of Engineers

            The codes of ethics of the professional engineering societies spell out, sometimes in great detail, the responsibilities entailed in being an engineer. However, the codes don’t discuss any of the professional rights that engineers should enjoy. There is often a great deal of overlap between these rights and responsibilities.

Responsibilities

            A hallmark of the professions is the requirement that the professional keep certain information of the client secret or confidential. Confidentiality is mentioned in most engineering codes and ethics. This is a well-established doctrine. This requirement applies equally to engineers, who have an obligation to keep proprietary information of their employer or client confidential. Engineers working for client are frequently required to sign a nondisclosure agreement. Of course, those engineers working for the government, especially in the defense industry, have even more stringent requirements about secrecy placed on them and may even require a security clearance granted after investigation by a governmental security agency before being able to work. It seems fairly straightforward for engineers to keep information confidential, since it is usually obvious what should be kept confidential and from whom it should be kept. For example, a common problem is the question of how long confidentiality extends after an engineer leaves employment with a company. Legally, an engineer is required to keep information confidential even after he has moved to a new employer in the same technical area. In practice, doing so can be difficult. Even if no specific information is divulged to a new employer, an engineer takes with her a great deal of knowledge of what works, what materials to choose, and what components not to choose. This information might considered proprietary by her former employer. However, when going to a new job. An engineer can’t be expected to forget all of the knowledge already gained during years of professional experience.

            Conflict of Interest. Avoiding conflict of interest is important in any profession and engineering is no exception. A conflict of interest arises when an interest, if pursued, could keep a professional from meeting one of his obligations. For, example, a civil engineer working for state department of highways might have a financial interest in a company that has a bid on a construction project. If that engineer has some responsibility for determining which company’s bid to accept, then there is a clear conflict of interest. Pursuing his financial interest in the company might lead him not to objectively and faithfully discharge his professional duties to his employer, the highway department. The engineering codes are very clear on the need to avoid conflicts of interest like this one.

            There are three types of conflicts of interest that we will consider. First, there are actual conflicts of interest, such as the one described in the previous paragraph, which compromise objective engineering judgment. There are also potential conflicts of interest, which threaten to easily become actual conflicts of interest. For example, an engineer might find himself becoming friends with a supplier for her company. Although this situation doesn’t necessarily constitute a conflict, there is the potential that the engineer’s judgment might become conflicted by the need to maintain the friendship. Finally, there are situations in which there is the appearance of a conflict of interest. This might occur when an engineer is paid based on a percentage of the cost of the design. There is clearly no incentive to cut costs in this situation, and it may appear that engineer is making the design more expensive simply to generate a larger fee.

            A good way to avoid conflicts of interest is to follow the guidance of company policy. In the absence of such a policy, asking a coworker or your manager will give you a second opinion and will make it clear that you aren’t trying to hide something. In the absence of either of these options, it is best to examine your motives and use ethical problem-solving techniques. Finally, you can look to the statements in the professional ethics codes that uniformly forbid conflicts of interest. Some of the codes have very explicit statements that can help determine whether or not your situation is a conflict of interest.

Professional rights

            Engineers also have rights that go along with these responsibilities. There are rights that individuals have regardless of professional status, including the right to privacy, the right to participate in activities of one’s own choosing outside of work, the right to reasonably object to company policies without fear of retribution, and the right to due process. The most fundamental right of an engineer is the right of professional conscience. This involves the right to exercise professional judgment in discharging one’s duties and to exercise this judgment in an ethical manner. This right is basic to an engineer’s professional practice. However, it is no surprise that this right is not always easy for employer to understand. The right of professional conscience can have many aspects. For example, one of these aspects might be referred to as the “Right of Conscientious Refusal”. This is the right to refuse to engage in unethical behavior. No employer can ask or pressure an employee into doing something that he considers unethical and unacceptable. Although this issue is very clear in cases for which an engineer is asked to falsify a test result or fudge on the safety of a product, it is less clear in cases for which engineer refuses an assignment based on an ethical principle that is not shared by everyone. For example, an engineer ought to be allowed to refuse to work on defense projects or environmentally hazardous work if his conscience says that such work is immoral. Employers should be reasonably accommodating of that person’s request.

            One of the largest employers of engineers worldwide is the defense industry. This is by no means a modern trend; throughout history, many innovations in engineering and science have come about as the result of the development of weapons. Since fundamentally, weapons are designed for one purpose – to kill human being – it seems important to look at this type of engineering work in the context of engineering ethics and the rights of engineers. An engineer may choose either to work or not work in defense-related industries and be ethically justified in either position. Many reasonable engineering professionals feel that ethically, they cannot work on designs that will ultimately be used to kill other humans. Their remoteness from the killing doesn’t change this feeling. Even though they won’t push the button or may never actually see the victims of the use of the weapon, they still find it morally unacceptable to work on such systems. On the other hand, equally morally responsible engineers find this type of work ethically acceptable. They reason that the defense of our nation or other nations from aggression is a legitimate function of our government and is an honorable goal for engineers to contribute to. It is important to avoid working on any project that you deem unethical, even if it might lead to career advancement, or even if it is a temporary job. It can be argued that weapons work is the most important type of engineering, given its consequences foe mankind. Because of the implications to human life, this type of engineering requires an even more stringent examination of ethical issues to ensure responsible participation.

           

Whistleblowing

            Whistleblowing is the act by an employee of informing the public or higher management of unethical or illegal behavior by an employer or supervisor. According to the codes of ethics of the professional engineering societies, engineers have a duty to protect the health and safety of the public, so in many cases, an engineer is compelled to blow the whistle an acts or projects that harm these values. Engineers also have the professional right to disclose wrongdoing within their organizations and expect to see appropriate action taken.

            There are internal and external whistleblowing. Internal whistleblowing occurs when an employee goes over the head of an immediate supervisor to report a problem to a higher level of management. Or, all levels of management are bypassed, and the employee goes directly to the president of the company or the board of directors. However it is done, the whistleblowing is kept within the company or organization. External whistleblowing occurs when the employee goes outside the company and reports wrongdoing to newspapers or law-enforcement authorities. Either type of whistleblowing is likely to be perceived as disloyalty. However, keeping it within the company is often seen as less serious than going outside of the company.

            There is also a distinction between acknowledged and anonymous whistleblowing. Anonymous whistleblowing occurs when the employee who is blowing the whistle refuses to divulge his name when making accusations. These accusations might take the form of anonymous memos to upper management or of anonymous phone calls to the police. The employee might also talk to the news media but refuse to let his name be used as the source of the allegations of wrongdoing. Acknowledged whistleblowing, on the other hand, occurs when the employee puts his name behind the accusations and is willing to withstand the scrutiny brought on by his accusations.

            There are four ways to solve whistleblowing problem within a corporation. First, there must be a strong corporate ethics culture. This should include a clear commitment to ethical behavior, starting at the highest levels of management, and mandatory ethics training for all employees. All managers must set the tone for the ethical behavior of their employees. Second, there should be clear lines of communication within the corporation. This openness gives an employee who feels that there is something that must be fixed a clear path to air his concerns. Third, all employees must have meaningful access to high-level managers in order to bring their concerns forward. This access must come with a guarantee that there will be no retaliation. Rather, employees willing to come forward should be rewarded for their commitment to fostering the ethical behavior of the company. Finally, there should be willingness on the part of management to admit mistakes, publicly if necessary. This attitude will set the stage for ethical behavior by all employees.

  Conclusion

            Many engineers who are members of professional societies are not aware of the existence of the society’s code, or if they are aware of it, they have never read it. Even among engineers who know about their society’s code, consultation of the code is rare. Codes are in very widespread use today and are generally thought to serve a useful function. Early in the 20s century, these codes were mostly concerned with issues of how to conduct business. For example, many early codes had clauses forbidding advertising of services or prohibiting competitive bidding by engineers for design projects. Codes also spelled out the duties that engineers had toward their employers. Relatively less emphasis than today was given to issues of service to the public and safety. This imbalance has changed greatly in recent decades as public perceptions and concerns about the safety of engineered products and devices have changed. Now, most codes emphasize commitments to safety, public health and even environmental protection as the most important duties of the engineer. One important area where professional societies can and should function is as protectors of the rights of employees who are being pressured by their employer to do something unethical or who are accusing their employers or the government of unethical conduct. The codes of the professional societies are of some use in this since they can be used by employees as ammunition against an employer who is sanctioning them for pointing out unethical behavior or who are being asked to engage in unethical acts. An example of this situation is the action of the IEEE on behalf of three electrical engineers who were fired from their jobs at the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) organization when they pointed out deficiencies in the way the control systems for the BART trains were being designed and tested. After being fired, the engineers sued BART, citing the IEEE code of ethics which impelled them to hold as their primary concern the safety of the public who would be using the BART system. The IEEE intervened on their behalf in court, although ultimately the engineers lost the case. If the codes of ethics of professional societies are to have any meaning, this type of intervention is essential when ethical violations are pointed out. However, since not all engineers are members of professional societies and the engineering societies are relatively weak, the pressure that can be exerted by these organizations is limited.

            When an engineer so strongly disagrees with the purposes of a product, the policies of management, the low level of safety in manufacturing/construction, or lack of candor in advertising, he may simply decide to quit. Under such circumstances engineers may ask to be removed from the projects at hand, or they may decide to separate entirely from their employer. Freed of the usual employment obligations, the unemployed engineer can more freely blow the whistle but should keep in mind that this may lessen chances of finding employment in the future, especially when claims of wrongdoing are greatly exaggerated, whether by the whistleblower or a news medium. One obligation carried over from the resigned position is the duty not to divulge trade or national security secrets. When that is unavoidable, the secrets should be revealed only in a manner the laws may allow or the engineer’s professional society recommends.

Nuclear Energy: Advantage & Disadvantages

This is my research I done in my university and I got some truthful conclusions. So anyone crawling for some real information, please check out the research below. 

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is the energy that we get from the nucleus of an atom of uranium. There is a huge amount of energy that bond holds the atom together. We need this energy in order to make electricity. There are two ways of getting energy from nucleus nuclear fission and nuclear fusion (Willis, 1999).

1.2 Purpose of the Research

Coal and other fossil fuel are limited. They are in limited amount in the Earth crust and the demand of energy is increasing day by day. In this situation we need some other sources of energy and one of this could be nuclear energy (Willis, 1999). Nuclear energy is an upcoming energy source that is being contemplated by many nations worldwide to help overcome the burden of other energy source such as coal. This energy is one of the solutions that can help to replace the diminishing coal as the Earth’s energy source. An overwhelming interest in atomic physics is the main reason why a research on nuclear energy is carried out (Willis, 1999). Nevertheless, this is a controversial topic as it has been opposed by many conservative groups and therefore making it difficult to be accepted publicly.  The study on nuclear energy will help increase the understanding of this current issue and raise awareness of people around the world on the importance of nuclear power (Willis, 1999).

1.3 Production of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear fission is the process in which big atom splits into small atoms and releases energy (Willis, 1999). Uranium is the element which readily undergoes fission. When we project loose electron towards the uranium atom it absorbs it and turn in to fission product. The combined mass of these two atoms are less than the original uranium atom because some mass is converted and released as heat energy to the atmosphere (Willis, 1999). In the same process some neutrons are also released and hit the other atoms, thus resulting in self sustaining chain reaction. This reaction creates very large amount of heat, which can be used to generate electricity (Energy, 1993).

On the other hand, nuclear fusion is the process in which small atoms combine to make a big atom and releases energy (Willis, 1999). Most common example of nuclear fusion is the Sun because the Sun produces energy from fusion of hydrogen nuclei with the helium. Research is still going on the production of fusion energy. Fusion starts by using an atomic bomb due to its complexity and large amount of energy is required for this reaction to get started (Willis, 1999).

1.4 Brief History

Enrico Fermi an Italian physic in 1934 carried out an experiment that proved that neutrons can be made able to split to different kinds of atoms (Energy, 1993). He couldn’t get the elements that he supposed to get when he bombarded uranium with neutrons. After four years, German scientists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman fired neutrons from a source containing the radium and beryllium into uranium and they were surprised to discover lighter elements for example radium and beryllium into the remaining material(Energy, 1993). These new elements had about half the atomic mass of uranium which is very light relative to the findings made by Enrico Fermi. Hahn and Strassman contacted Lise Meitner, who is an Austrian colleague who had been forced to flee Nazi Germany, before announcing their discovery. However, Meitner conducted her own research and found out that the atomic masses of the fission products did not total as the uranium’s mass. She used the Einstein’s theory to prove that the lost mass is actually due to the mass being released as energy to its surroundings. This confirmed Einstein’s work and proved that fission really does occur (Energy, 1993). In 1939, Bohr shared with Einstein the Hahn-Strassman-Meitner discoveries and also met Fermi at a convention on theoretical physics in Washington, D.C. They discussed the exciting possibility of a self-sustaining chain reaction. The self-sustaining chain reaction is a process where atoms could be split to release a large amount of energy. This created a major euphoria as scientists throughout the world began to believe of this concept. Unfortunately, the quantity of uranium needed for this to work should be sufficient. In the year 1942, Fermi and his group of scientists met and started working on their theories which included a potential design for a uranium chain reactor (Energy, 1993).

The world’s first nuclear reactor, which is also known as Chicago Pile-1 was constructed beneath the University of Chicago’s athletic stadium. Finally, the world had entered the nuclear age when Fermi and his group successfully proved the theory of a self-sustaining nuclear reaction during the demonstration of Chicago Pile-1 (Energy, 1993).

2.0 Advantages of Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is clean, safe, reliable, compact, competitive, and practically unlimited. Today over 400 nuclear reactors provide base-load electric power in 30 countries (Ashcroft 2008). Fifty years old, it is a relatively mature technology with the guarantee of great enlargement in the next generation. Nuclear energy produces nearly no carbon dioxide, and no sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides at all. These gases are produced in huge quantities when fossil fuels are burned (Ashcroft 2008).

2.1 Nuclear Waste

One gram of uranium yields about as much energy as a ton of coal or oil it is the famous "factor of a million" (Kunzemann, 2008). Nuclear waste is correspondingly about a million times is not biggest than fossil fuel waste, and it is fully confined. In the USA and Sweden, spent fuel is easily stored away in another place. Spent fuel is reprocessed to separate out the 3% of radioactive fission products and heavy elements to be vitrified (cast in glass) for safe and enduring storage (Kunzemann, 2008). The remaining 97% Plutonium and uranium were recovered and recycled into new fuel materials to produce more energy. The quantity of nuclear waste produced is too small. Nuclear waste is to be deposited in deep geological storage sites; it does not go in the biosphere. Its impact on the ecosystems is negligible (Kunzemann, 2008). Nuclear waste spontaneously decays over time while constant chemical waste, such as arsenic or mercury, lasts forever. Most of the fossil fuel wastes are in the form of gases that go up the smokestack. We don’t see it, but it is not without effect, causing global warming, acid rain, smog and other atmospheric pollution (Kunzemann, 2008).

2.2 Safety

Nuclear energy is safe as proved by the record of half a century of commercial operation and the accumulated experience of more than 12,000 reactor-years(Pillai, 2008).

There have been only two serious accidents in the commercial exploitation of nuclear power .Three Mile Island (TMI) in 1979 USA and in 1986 it was in the Soviet Union (Pillai, 2008). TMI was the worst accident one can imagine in a western power reactor. The core of the reactor melted down and much of it fell to the bottom of the reactor vessel. The radioactivity released was almost completely confined within the reinforced concrete containment structure, the air-tight silo-like building which houses the reactor (Pillai, 2008). The small amount of radioactivity which escaped was quite innocuous. As a result, no one at TMI was seriously radiated nor did anyone die. In fact, Three Mile Island was a real success story for nuclear safety.

The worst possible accident occurred, a core meltdown, and yet no one died or was even injured. The reactors at Chernobyl had no containment structure. The reactor’s faulty design made it unstable and Chernobyl was operated that night in a way known to be dangerous (Ling, 2009). In the execution of a test, all the security systems were deliberately bypassed. An uncontrollable surge in power occurred leading to a steam explosion. The 600-ton graphite moderator then caught fire and burned for several weeks. The smoke carried more than half the radioactive fission products directly into the atmosphere where they were swept far and wide by the winds(Ling, 2009). Fewer than 32 persons died within a few months, and about 200 more were severely irradiated but survived. The inhabitants of the exclusion zone were also victims as they were hurriedly uprooted, evacuated and resettled elsewhere. They lost their jobs and suffered psychological and social trauma in the dissolving Soviet Union (Newkirk, 2009).

Minor accidents that caused release of radioactivity have also taken place like the one occurred in Hitachi, Japan, about 10 years back.

2.3 Reliability

Nuclear reactors grant base-load power and are available over 90% of the time. Interval between refueling has been extended and down time for refueling has been reduced (Ashcroft, 2008). In the USA, these improvements over the years have been the equivalent of adding one reactor a year to the obtainable fleet. Most reactors are designed for a life of 40 years; many are getting that age in good condition and extensions of 20 years have usually been granted (Ashcroft, 2008).

2.4 Competitive Cost

The cost of nuclear energy is competitive and constant. The cost of nuclear energy fuel is a small part of the price of a nuclear kilowatt-hour, whereas fossil fueled energy, particularly oil and gas, is at the mercy of the market (Ashcroft, 2008). Uranium is found everywhere in the crust of the Earth. It is more plentiful than tin. Major deposits are found in Canada and Australia. It is estimated that increasing the market price by a factor of ten would result in 100 times more uranium coming to market. Ultimately, we will be able to recover uranium from sea water where 4 billion tons are dissolved (Ling, 2009). The stations of nuclear energy are too compact, occupying typically the location of football stadium and its surrounding parking lots. Solar cells, airstream turbine farms and growing biomass, all these need a big part of land (Ling, 2009).

2.5 Radiation

Very few are aware of the fact that radiations are present everywhere in the environment. The anti-nuclear organizations also exploit the widespread but mistaken explanation of the studies of the health of the survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing (Newkirk, 2009). In fact a moderate quantity of radiation is natural and beneficial, if not essential, to being. Radiation has been bathing our environment since the earliest history of our planet, and it is present everywhere in nature. In fact, our Sun and its planets including the Earth are the remnants of the huge explosion of a supernova. Everything is radioactive around us in nature and it was already there even before the radioactivity was discovered. This radiation spontaneously decreases with time. When life first appeared on Earth, the natural radiation levels were about twice as high as today. Most people are totally unaware of the fact that the human body itself is naturally radioactive. Our bodies contain about 8000 Becquerel’s (8000 atoms disintegrating every second), about half of which is potassium-40, a chemical element essential for health (Newkirk, 2009).

3.0 Statement of Problem

Nuclear energy has become an important source of energy to be used in the world since the amount of fossil fuel is reducing. Additionally, it has been considered as an exclusive concept to the issue of climate change because it emits no greenhouse gases (Ashcroft, 2008).

The nuclear reactors produce and discharge extremely radioactive nuclear waste products. These products emit dangerous radiation during decomposition and this decaying process will last for thousands of years minimum before it reaches the safe level of decomposition (Ashcroft, 2008). Hence, they cannot be dumped out without proper management and this matter is clearly highlighted in the state of Georgia as there are thousands of tons of highly radioactive waste placed in enclosed areas still waiting to be disposed off (Newkirk, 2009).

The construction of nuclear reactors is very costly and it takes a long time to build them (Pillai, 2008). These nuclear reactors have a short lifespan ranging from forty to fifty years and hence, they are costly to replace (Anderson, D., 2001). The current economic recession has strictly limited all countries in rejuvenating the nuclear industry especially countries that are contemplating in expanding their nuclear fleet as the current reactors are most likely to be retiring by 2030 (Ling, 2009). Besides that, the third world countries will unlikely have access to nuclear power due to the complicated technologies involved and the high costs of construction of nuclear reactors (Kunzemann, 2008). The maintenance and operating costs are also high because lots of money must be sent on to the safety systems in case something goes wrong (Newkirk, 2009).

While the likelihood of a modern reactor explosion like Chernobyl is almost impossible, there is still a possibility of having quite horrific results. Nuclear plant workers usually are exposed to high levels of radiations, which can cause cancer and other ailments. Nuclear reactors are particularly vulnerable to terrorist attacks as it would be very alluring targets to anyone wanting to interrupt the power supply and devastate an entire region in one chance (Ashcroft, 2008).

4.0 Methods of research

A survey was carried out to know the public opinion regarding the issue of the implementation of nuclear energy. 100 questionnaires were distributed to students of MMU Cyberjaya campus, to know their views regarding this matter. The survey was filled up by both the local and international students as the answer will clearly show on what the world think of this energy. This will also indirectly give us an indication on what our future will be as students are the next generation leaders for their respective countries.

5.0 Survey

Our group has successfully conducted a survey regarding the topic on the implementation of nuclear energy from 7^th of March 2010 to 14^th of March 2010 in Multimedia University, Cyberjaya campus. The set of questionnaires were distributed to the volunteers who were willing to take their time and answer it. A total of 100 questionnaires were distributed randomly to students with different gender, faculty, and age group of MMU. Below are the results and discussions based from the collected data. We present the data in the form of graphs and charts. Analysis of the collected data is also carried out, as discussed in following paragraphs. 

Figure 1: The public's opinion regarding nuclear energy

Figure 1 clearly shows that the public has a very negative opinion about nuclear energy. From question 1, about 65 out of the 100 participants who took part in this survey disagreed with the statement that the nuclear energy is a clean source of energy while the other 35 agreed to this statement. The majority of the participants also gave a "no" when asked on whether Malaysia will be interested to practice nuclear energy, which is about 55% of the participants. It is noted that Malaysia does not have the resources that are required for the production of this power. The uranium and the plutonium will cost a fortune and this will really prove a problem to the limited financial resources what Malaysia has at present. 

Figure 2: Concerns regarding nuclear energy

Figure 2 gives a very strong impression about the concerns regarding nuclear energy. Majority of the participants answered as yes to both questions leaving a huge task for nuclear energy to ease this uncertainty. About 90 out of the 100 participants agreed that there are terrorism or proliferation concerns regarding nuclear energy. 

The nuclear bomb that the United States dropped in Japan has left everyone with a painful memory. This is why many countries are afraid of nuclear energy. This is followed by 70 out of the 100 participants agreeing that the nuclear energy will not be accepted due to the current economic meltdown. The current economy recession has caused many countries to suffer financially. As the cost of the nuclear production being very high, most of the countries will try not be involved in this sector as much as they can. 

Figure 3: Alternative energy if nuclear energy does not get acceptance worldwide

About 85% of the participants answered that renewable energy is a mean of energy source that is available readily if nuclear energy is rejected. However there were still 15% of them who think fossil fuels should be maintained as an energy source. This is something to think about as the supply of fossil fuel is limited and going to be extinct soon as it takes million of years to reproduce this through geological process under the Earth plates.

Figure 4: General perception for countries to have nuclear energy

Figure 4, however, shows how close the public opinion is regarding other countries having nuclear energy.  About 45 participants said that every country has the right to implement nuclear energy while the other 55 disagreed to this. Question 7 also gave a carbon copy data as majority of the participants think that every country should not have nuclear energy even for peaceful purposes. This might be due to the terrorism or proliferation concerns that were asked earlier.

Figure 5: Energy of Choice 

Based on question 6 from Figure 5, 55 of the 100 participants which are approximately 55% think that nuclear energy is a much more efficient power source compared to fossil fuel.  This is considered as a small step towards the acceptance of this controversial energy resource.  However, when asked for suggestion, the participants’ answers were very uncertain as both fossil fuels and nuclear energy received 50% each. This clearly shows that all the problems have given the people food for thought on which energy will be more suitable.

Figure 6: Research on Nuclear Energy

Among the 100 participants who took this questionnaire, 80% of them gave an overwhelming "no" to the idea of researching more about nuclear energy, if it is considered as an alternative to fossil fuels, while the other 20% think likewise. This clearly shows that the public has not agreed to the idea that nuclear energy is a solution and want to wait for further development regarding new sources of energy that might be available in the future.

6.0 Conclusion

After the dark ages the human being had been through, such a hardcore poverty, ignorance, weakness in defeating diseases, etc, human has become able to control atoms and manipulate different types of energy. Once human could control one of the most dangerous energy type which is nuclear energy, then human will be able to develop the world or destroy it.

The Scientific American magazine 2008, in terms of development, it writes "A massive switch from coal, oil, and nuclear energy plants to solar power plants could supply 69% of the US’ electricity and 35 % of its total energy by 2050, if we change our point of view to one of the disadvantages and that is towards the fact that during the second world war (i.e. in 1945), the US dropped two atomic bombs in the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

According to the survey which has been carried out by our group, the first chart indicates that the public has a very negative concept about the quality of the nuclear energy source. Also it shows that the public has rejected the ability of Malaysia in implementing   nuclear energy.   Figure 2 brings a lot of question marks on public’s mentality in how they become afraid of such a development in such kind of energy and it also shows that they don’t have faith in the international security department. The right to implement nuclear energy in other countries is no go in public's opinion which is 55%, i.e., 55 out of 100 participants think that nuclear energy is much more efficient power source compared to fossil fuel.  This is considered as a small step towards the acceptance of this controversial nuclear energy.