-
Home
- Civis project - uprm
- Civis student learning modules
- Sustainability
- Ethical issues in risk management
The real price of cell phones
Recently, a series of microwave antennas have been built in Puerto Rico in the Atalaya hills between the western cities of Mayaguez and Moca. Different kinds of antennas serve different purposes; some provide citizens with cell phone service while others make it possible to track hurricanes and other weather developments. The problem is the impact on the people who live in the surrounding areas. Many antennas have been built within five hundred yards of private residences with some as close as one hundred yards. Local residents were not consulted when the decision was made to build them. They claim that they have suffered a disproportionate number of health problems caused by the EMFs (electro-magnetic fields) generated by the antennas. Construction and repair activities occur at all hours, day and night, disrupting sleep and other normal activities. How should the cell phone companies, government agencies, and other stakeholders respond to these health and safety concerns? How should the possible risks to health and safety associated with antennas be assessed and communicated?
No copper mines in puerto rico
Starting in the mid-1950's, several international mining companies have attempted to receive permission from the Puerto Rican government to construct mines for gold and copper. Orebodies located in the mountainous central region of the island, have attracted several proposals for mining projects ranging from large to small scale. Concerns about
water pollution (produced by tailings or mining waste products),
air pollution (accompanying the proposed copper smelting plants), and
disruption of the agrarian lifestyle still alive in central Puerto Rico became focused into considerable political and environmental opposition. Several mining proposals were defeated as citizens' interest groups formed and intensively lobbied the government not to permit mining. One mining site, located in the Cala Abajo region, has been reclassified as a nature preserve to block further attempts at mining. Mining could benefit the areas around the proposed mining sites by generating much needed jobs and tax revenue. But these benefits come accompanied by increased risks to the environment as well as public safety and health. How should these risks be assessed? Under what conditions, if any, could they be deemed acceptable? What processes should be set into place by the government to ensure adequate public participation in determining whether these risks are acceptable? How should risk information be communicated to a public which is isolated and still largely illiterate?
"no" to the coal plant
In the early to mid-1990's, a consortium of U.S. and Spanish power generation companies proposed an electricity-generating plant for the Mayaguez area that employed co-generation technology fueled by coal. Not only would this privately owned plant sell the electricity it produced to the Autoridad de Energia de Electrica; it would also sell the steam by-product to the two local tuna canning plants that had been operating in the area since the 1960s. But local opposition arose to derail the project. Coal is a non-renewable resource that produces noxious by-products that contribute to acid rain and global warming. Geologists pointed out that the plant would be located dangerously close to an active earthquake fault. Environmental groups raised concerns about water pollution, especially further deterioration of the already endangered coral reef in the Mayaguez Bay due to the discharge of the heated water employed to cool the components of the proposed plant. In televised public hearings, company engineers testified on design modifications to keep endangered species such as manatee from being sucked into the plant through water intake pipes. On the other side of the debate, the Puerto Rico energy utility, the Authoridad de Energia Electrica, predicted energy shortages beginning around the year 2000. (These warnings have been vindicated by the frequent brown-outs and black-outs that residents currently suffer through.) They also argued that the western part of the island needed its own energy-generating facilities to hold onto crucial industries like the textile and tuna canning plants located in the area. Finally, they turned to the use of coal to generate electricity as an effective substitute for petroleum which is used to generate most of the electricity used by Puerto Ricans. Since the rejection of the project, the textile industry has all but disappeared and one of the two tuna canning plants has relocated to Taiwan. Can government play the role of "honest broker" between private industry and a suspicious public? Should public utilities contract with private industry to meet energy and other infrastructure needs? What are the environmental risks of co-generating technology? How can these be responsibly communicated to the public? How should all stakeholders weigh environmental, safety, and health risks against infrastructure expansion and economic development?
Source:
OpenStax, Civis project - uprm. OpenStax CNX. Nov 20, 2013 Download for free at http://cnx.org/content/col11359/1.4
Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google Inc.
