Lecture16_Enviro1.pdf - Ethics in Science and Engineering Bioengineering 100 Fall 2014 UC Berkeley Reading Assignment Chap 5 Ethics of Emerging

Lecture16_Enviro1.pdf - Ethics in Science and Engineering...

This preview shows page 1 - 5 out of 49 pages.

Lecture 16 Ethics in Science and Engineering Bioengineering 100 Fall 2014 UC Berkeley Reading Assignment: Chap. 5 Ethics of Emerging Technologies Budinger & Budinger Homework #4 assigned 11/6 and due 11/18 Debate #4 on 11/18
Image of page 1
Lecture 16 Debate 4a: Enlist Duo Heavy use of Roundup herbicide triggered an explosion of herbicide- resistant "super weeds" that are hard for farmers to fight and which can choke off crop yields. Such weeds now infest roughly 70 million acres of U.S. farmland, according to the Dow Chemical company. Recently Dow created Enlist Duo which combines a 60-year-old herbicide component known as 2,4-D with glyphosate, the chief ingredient in Roundup which they hope to start selling for the 2015 U.S. spring planting season. The Blue Team states that the 2,4-D in combination with glyphosate should help farmers kill weeds that are resistant to Roundup, reduce the risk from excessive use of herbicides that have been linked to human health problems, and should be better economically for all farmers big and small. The Gold Team is opposed to Enlist Duo, saying that the use of 2,4- D has been linked to a range of health problems, including reproductive problems, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Parkinson’s disease. They also fear the new herbicide could drift into neighboring farm fields, harming crops there, and that in the long run it will only increase weed resistance problems.
Image of page 2
Lecture 16 Debate 4b: University Divesture in Fossil Fuels Students and faculty at more than 400 colleges have called for administrators to divest from fossil-fuel energy companies, but only ~20 have committed to doing so. Stanford recently divested from coal, but the remaining schools who divested had very small endowments, which is cited as the primary reason why other universities have not followed Stanford’s path on divesting in fossil fuels. The Blue Team states that endowments should only advance an academic mission, divestment is a slippery slope that leads to boycotting other “good” causes, universities could exert more leverage on fossil fuel companies if they remained invested, and divestment does great harm to a university’s finances while delivering little benefit to the climate change cause. The Gold Team argues that research- much of which is conducted at universities- overwhelmingly supports the fact that climate change originates from fossil fuels, is contributing to significant destructive forces on burdened populations, that universities have already divested from tobacco companies and South Africa during apartheid and it was effective, and a university community’s duty is to enlighten the arguments on competing moral claims on climate change and how to solve it.
Image of page 3
Lecture 16 Moral Theories of Environment [1] Like ethical discussion around non-humans (animals, corporations) we must decide on what is the moral standing of the environment (environment as stakeholder).
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture