Team 7 Nazir Jairazbhoy and Meredith Weidner Levee Failure Hurricane Katrina Background In 2005 Hurricane Katrina devastated the city of New Orleans the levee system failed 80 city under water ID: 565677
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Engineering Ethics" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Engineering Ethics
Team #7 Nazir Jairazbhoy and Meredith Weidner
Levee
Failure: Hurricane KatrinaSlide2
Background
In 2005, Hurricane Katrina devastated the city of New Orleansthe levee system failed
80% city under waterapproximately 1600 people killed
LSU Deputy Director of Hurricane Research Center was firedSlide3
Ethics Issue
Should you cease public criticism of Army Corp construction efforts or are you obliged to the public to inform them about perceived safety issues?Slide4
Ethics Protagonist
Ivor Van HeerdenDeputy Director of Hurricane Research CenterSlide5
Code of Ethics
Sec. II, 1: “Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” Insufficient planning
Levee design based off 1965 studyRisky Design
built to sustain cities growth not safety Safety compromised by bureaucracy
no central agency in chargePoor maintenance
constant maintenance required
Insufficient funds
US Army Corps of Engineers experienced budget cutts Slide6
Code of Ethics
Sec. II, 3: “Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful way”
Engineers shall issue no statements, criticisms, or arguments on technical matters that are inspired or paid for by interested parties, unless they have prefaced their comments by explicitly identifying the interested parties on whose behalf they are speaking, and by revealing the existence of any interest the engineers may have in the matters.
Van Heerden spoke publicly chastising the Army Corp. of Engineers.
First believed to not be creditable.
Has Doctorate in Marine Biology and worked closely with Civil Engineers on matters of hurricane research.
Justifiable criticism - public safety at risk.
***Information from article:
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/ivor_van_heerden_who_pointed_f.htmlSlide7
Code of Ethics
Professional Obligations Sec. III, 6a
6. Engineers shall not attempt to obtain employment or advancement or professional engagements by untruthfully criticizing other engineers, or by other improper or questionable methods.
a. Engineers shall not request, propose, or accept a commission on a contingent basis under circumstances in which their judgment may be compromised.Slide8
Code of Ethics
Professional Obligations Sec. III, 6aIn an article by Lawrence Biemiller, found the reasons behind LSU’s actions towards van Heerden.
His comments risked federal funding for research program.They are telling him to compromise his judgement to keep their funding.
Violates Sec. III, 6a and does not follow Sec. II, 1 (paramount health).
*** Article: http://chronicle.com/article/Louisiana-State-U-Will-Fire/42726Slide9
Conclusion
From an ethical standpoint, concluded that van Heerden was not in breach of the Code of Ethics but was striving to uphold them.Put future safety of the city over his job.Slide10
Work in New Orleans since 2005
Since his comments, drastic changes have been made to the levee system.Emergency canals
more wallsShort video from 2012:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPADDuXGqKc