BY: Zach Alexander JT Bagwell Bobby Dini Nixy Osorio Darren Ringer Trent Roling CHERNOBYL

 Started out during a steam turbine test, which was intended to find problems with power delivery system  Engineers were attempting to figure out a way to supply the cooling pumps with power in the event of a failure  The plan was for 3 diesel generators to take over in case of emergency  Power was cut, and the generators were started  Unfortunately, the turbine did not supply enough energy to keep the pumps moving, and the heat spiked WHAT ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS DISASTER?

 Somehow (still unclear) a button called the EPS-5 was pressed  This dropped all of the remaining control rods into the reactor pool  Control rods actually temporarily increase temperature before cooling  This led to a runaway reaction (along with the fracture of some control rods) creating immense pressure CIRCUMSTANCES (CONT.) Image courtesy of: gpicture/chernobyl_25th_anniversary/bp2.jpg

 Fundamental Canons 1. Hold Paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. a. Inadequate Control Rod Design b. Reactor had a positive void coefficient characteristic.(RBMK reactor) c. Violation of operating regulations(removal of most control rods) d. Lack of knowledge by station staff of reactor's characteristics. e. Non-routine operation of the reactor (coasting turbine could provide adequate coolant circulation while waiting for diesel generators) KEY ETHICAL PRINCIPLES INVOLVED

 Nuclear disaster was triggered not by natural disaster  Chernobyl could have been avoided:  Poor training  Personnel chose not to continue with the test that was being conducted  Lack of safety measures  Lack of planning  Less pressure from a government to achieve results  Better design HOW COULD THIS DISASTER HAVE BEEN AVOIDED?

 Reactor conditions were abnormal and control responses were unexpected – communicating this with management should have been the top priority, in spite of perceived consequences  Much of the initial firefighting response was not appropriate for the accident and did not serve any ultimate purpose – safety guidelines should have been known and disseminated  Most of the surrounding population was evacuated inefficiently without adequate protection or information; the scope of the accident was not known for a long time due to political considerations – this should not have happened from an ethical standpoint  Due to power needs, the plant continued operation for decades. This would need to be carefully weighed against the danger involved to the workers WHAT ACTIONS COULD YOU HAVE TAKEN IF YOU WERE PART OF THE PROJECT IN QUESTION?

 People may feel that personal privacy is at risk. Our product will be able to tell the location of a person at times, if our product were to be implemented in a mass scale.  Also in order to use the device, students will have to associate themselves with a Bluetooth ID. It is possible that people will not want to disclose this information.  Tracking tools have always have been a problem for privacy issues, such as GPS, Google Maps, ect.  Our product must be able to ensure close to 100% accuracy due to the nature of the product, we have to ensure to the teacher that the product is more convincing then the student. WHAT ARE THE ETHICAL ISSUES THAT MAY BE INVOLVED IN YOUR OWN PROJECT?

 Encryption of all user data  No central database of information  All storage of data will be offline at all times WHAT STEPS WOULD YOU TAKE TO MAKE SURE THERE WILL BE NO DISASTERS INVOLVING YOUR PROJECT?