Cooper Sloan '22: Multidisciplinary Learning Competency

Evaluating the Ethicality of Solar Energy

Amid a climate crisis, the need for renewable and sustainable energy is dire. And in recent years,  renewable energy infrastructure has been steadily increasing (Chappell, 2021). However, with this new demand for alternative sources of energy, comes undesirable environmental impacts. For example, many renewable energies are manufactured using materials that can’t be recycled. Such is the case with wind turbines, whose blades end up in landfills called “turbine graveyards” (Belton, 2020). Many renewable sources of energy also require intrusive operations, such as mining, to acquire all the necessary materials. Renewable sources of energy can even have emissions of their own, for example, SF6 is a commonly used insulative gas that prevents unintentional combustion caused by electrical sparks. However, SF6 is an incredibly potent greenhouse gas emission. In this way, renewable energies can be seen as counterproductive. These are all ethical factors that must be considered when deciding to transition to alternative sources of energy. In this essay, I will explain how under the ethical lenses of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, the usage of renewable energies, such solar photovoltaics, and the consequences that come with it is an ethical alternative to traditional energy sources. I will present the dilemma using both utilitarian and deontological lenses to examine the ethics of solar energy. Then, I will follow this analysis with a discussion of virtue ethics. Finally, I will use the American Society of Mechanical Engineers’ code of ethics to present final arguments based on the Canons of their doctrine.

To decarbonize our energy sector and avoid the worst effects of the climate crisis, massive investments into renewable energy will be needed on a global scale. Renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, and geothermal, provide us with clean and sustainable alternatives to traditional coal, petroleum, and natural gas. However, these “sustainable” alternatives do have their environmental drawbacks when it comes to waste. Wind turbines for example, although mostly recyclable, run into sustainability issues when it comes to retired turbine blades. As of today, there are no economically feasible ways to recycle, or properly dispose of, wind turbine blades. Typically, these blades end up in massive landfills, or “turbine graveyards” (Stella, 2019). Similarly, as of 2011, retired solar cells (which contain toxic metals such as lead and cadmium) produce nearly 300 times more toxic waste than nuclear power plants do (Shellenberger, 2020). Considering the rather significant waste factor of renewable energy sources, it begs the question: Are renewable energy sources an ethical alternative?

Using the utilitarian lens, an act is morally right if the net benefit to society is greater than that of an alternative course of action (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2019). Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, meaning the morality of an act depends solely on its consequences, regardless of the intent. To view the morality of renewable energy sources, such as solar, through a utilitarianist point of view one must first determine who is affected. On a micro-scale, the households or communities that receive electricity produced by solar panels are benefitted by receiving some of the cheapest energy on the market (Evans, 2021). On a more macro-scale, everyone in the world is indirectly affected by the energy generated from solar power. Since solar energy contributes to the necessary decarbonization of the entire planet, every living being is benefitted. On the flip side, plenty of people are directly affected by the waste from solar panels. Since solar panels are commonly disposed of in landfills, toxic metals such as lead can seep into the immediate surroundings causing severe environmental contamination (Stone, 2020). However, since such environmental hazards remain relatively local, individuals living near the landfills are the most affected. Summing up net good vs net bad is often subjective but given the fact that solar panel waste is primarily a local negative, while solar panel usage is a local and a global positive, a net good is apparent. Not to mention that, left undealt with, the climate crisis will cause irreversible damage to the global environment and human life. If the latter occurs, there will indisputably be a net bad. Thus, it can be concluded that, through the utilitarian lens, solar energy is indeed ethical because it ultimately maximizes the amount of “good” for the greatest amount of people.

Deontology asserts that actions are ethically sound if they are in accordance with a clear set of rules. There are many different applications of deontology, for example, the Ten Commandments is an example of deontology. Simply put, any doctrine which has a clear set of rules is deontology. Unlike consequentialism, deontology focuses explicitly on the act itself, regardless of the outcome (The Ethics Centre, 2016). Any act that agrees with our self-given rules is deemed ethical, whereas any alternative, is not. Therefore, when applying deontology to the ethics of renewable energy usage, we need only consider the intent rather than the result. In terms of solar power, the intention behind installing solar infrastructure is to diminish environmental catastrophe. And although the waste produced by retired solar panels is certainly a negative consequence, the deontological approach affirms that because solar panel installation carries objectively good intentions, then the act itself is considered ethical. Consequently, if our self-given goal is to mitigate human-induced environmental degradation, solar energy is ethical through the deontological lens.

In contrast with utilitarianism (a consequentialist view) and deontology (a system of duties and rules), virtue ethics emphasizes moral character. Take, for example, any unambiguous ethical situation such as helping a friend in dire need. A utilitarian would help because the consequence of doing so will maximize the overall net good. A deontologist would help because doing so would agree with their set moral rules, such as the golden rule. A virtue ethicist, on the other hand, would help because doing so would be altruistic and benign (Hursthouse and Pettigrove, 2016). In virtue ethics, character is paramount. Living an ethical life and acting rightly consists of establishing virtues such as wisdom, courage, patience, and justice) while avoiding vices (such as arrogance, greed, recklessness, and injustice). To apply virtue ethics to renewable energies, one must consider the underlying characterizable traits that relate to using, or not using, renewable energy sources. At first, it may seem a stretch to relate one’s character to their source of energy. However, in considering the known effects of traditional energy sources, such as coal or natural gas, morality becomes apparent. Continuing the use of fossil fuels means continuing mass exploitation of the natural world, and all of life that inevitably depends on it. Such overt harm to all known life is not honorable, wise, or just and it is therefore not virtuous. Furthermore, exploitation of nature on such a massive scale is inherently reckless, greedy, and unjust, consequentially making it a vice. Although waste from retired solar panels is in no way virtuous, the effect of the waste has fewer negative consequences than direct exploitation of the environment through industries such as coal and natural gas. Lastly, it is human nature to try to survive, and as such, destroying the rock you live on is, in all respects, counterproductive and unvirtuous. Hence, it can be concluded that the implementation of solar energy infrastructure is, under the lens of virtue ethics, ethically sound.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers has its own code of ethics of engineers. The fundamental principles state “Engineers uphold and advance the integrity, honor and dignity of the engineering profession by: using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare; being honest and impartial, and serving with fidelity their clients (including their employers) and the public; and striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession.” (ASME, 2012). The ASME’s code of ethics also lists 10 canons, some of which stand out. Canon 1 of the ASME’s code of ethics states “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties.”. Under this precept, solar energy would be favorable over coal because, although retired solar PV’s release harmful materials in landfills, the harmful effects of coal-fired plants are much more widespread and can cause destructive weather phenomena such as acid rain.  Additionally, Canon 8 states “Engineers shall consider environmental impact and sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties”. Under this consideration, it is unequivocally clear that the development of solar energy (including the waste that comes with it) has a significantly less harmful environmental impact than fossil fuels. Based on current knowledge and consensus, solar photovoltaics have 10 times less greenhouse gas emissions than coal-fired power plants on a lifecycle basis (World Nuclear Association, 2011). As follows, solar energy is considered an ethical energy alternative under the ASME’s code of ethics.

In conclusion, the ethical lenses of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics each confirm that the usage of solar energy and the consequences that come with it is an ethical alternative to traditional energy sources. Likewise, under the American Society of Mechanical Engineers’ code of ethics, solar energy is accepted as an ethical source of energy compared to traditional energy sources. Accordingly, an ethical engineer should, in all cases, continue working toward the advancement of renewable energy infrastructure. Although renewable energies can have significant environmentally negative consequences on a local level, they take the place of traditional carbon emissive fossil fuels, which is the biggest contributor to climate change (EPA, n.d.). And although local environmental damage is never an ethical thing, human-induced climate change is even more unethical because it is the biggest threat to life on earth today (UNSC 2021). Not to mention, the more we work toward the advancement of renewable energies, the better they will become in terms of reducing their environmentally negative impacts.

REFERENCES

Chappell, B. (2021, May 11). Renewable energy growth rate up 45% worldwide in 2020; IEA Sees 'new normal'. NPR. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://www.npr.org/2021/05/11/995849954/renewable-energy-capacity-jumped-45-worldwide-in-2020-iea-sees-new-normal 

Belton, P. (2020, February 7). What happens to all the old wind turbines? BBC News. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51325101 

Stella, C. (2019, September 10). Unfurling The Waste Problem Caused By Wind Energy. NPR. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from http://www.npr.org/2019/09/10/759376113/unfurling-the-waste-problem-caused-by-wind-energy 

Shellenberger, M. (2020, September 25). Are we headed for a solar waste crisis? Environmental Progress. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/6/21/are-we-headed-for-a-solar-waste-crisis 

Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2019, June 3). Consequentialism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ 

Evans, S. (2021, October 13). Solar is now 'cheapest electricity in history', confirms IEA. Carbon Brief. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from http://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-is-now-cheapest-electricity-in-history-confirms-iea. 

Stone, M. (2020, August 13). Solar panels are starting to die. what will we do with the megatons of toxic trash? Grist. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://grist.org/energy/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-what-will-we-do-with-the-megatons-of-toxic-trash/ 

The Ethics Centre. (2016, February 18). Ethics explainer: Deontology. THE ETHICS CENTRE. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-deontology/ 

Hursthouse, R., & Pettigrove, G. (2016, December 8). Virtue Ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ 

ASME. (2012, February 1). Society policy ethics code of ethics of engineers - ASME. ASME. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://www.asme.org/wwwasmeorg/media/resourcefiles/aboutasme/get%20involved/advocacy/policy-publications/p-15-7-ethics.pdf 

World Nuclear Association. (2011, July). Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://www.world-nuclear.org/uploadedFiles/org/WNA/Publications/Working_Group_Reports/comparison_of_lifecycle.pdf

EPA. (n.d.). Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data,” . EPA. Retrieved February 9, 2022, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data