1 Challenge the future Sustainability and its Ethical Foundations Guest lecture for 4413RENESY - Renewable Energy Systems Behnam Taebi, 3 December 2015.

Presentation on theme: "1 Challenge the future Sustainability and its Ethical Foundations Guest lecture for 4413RENESY - Renewable Energy Systems Behnam Taebi, 3 December 2015."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Challenge the future Sustainability and its Ethical Foundations Guest lecture for 4413RENESY - Renewable Energy Systems Behnam Taebi, 3 December 2015

2 2 Challenge the future To be discussed today A brief history of sustainable development Philosophical challenges to the notion of sustainability Sustaining what? Why? For Whom? Sustainability ethics: the case of nuclear energy

3 3 Challenge the future Part 1 Sustainability Ethics Ethical pillars of sustainability

4 4 Challenge the future A brief history I The Club of Rome: The Limits to Growth – 1972 Growth is not endless and depends on finite resources Ecological impacts of economic growth The Brundtland commission: Our Common Future - 1987 First systematic introduction of sustainable development …“meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Earth summit in Rio de Janeiro – 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Sustainable development enters policies: Precautionary Principle Agenda 21: a blueprint of actions on global national & local level A voluntary “non-binding” aim to reduce Greenhouse Gases

5 5 Challenge the future A brief history II Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 1988 Assessment 1996: “discernible human influence on climate” Assessment 2001: “stronger evidence that most of the warming … is attributable to human activities” Kyoto as amendment to UNFCCC in Rio started in 1997 To reduce and stabilize GHG – voluntary commitments Emission trading was introduced Kyoto’s first commitment period ended in 2012 Second period 2013-2020 (Doha) has fewer participants Japan, New Zealand and Russia didn’t accept new targets, Canada withdrew altogether and the US never ratified

6 6 Challenge the future The Precautionary Principle (1992) A key question in innovation is “how to deal with uncertainties” In 1992, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development Principle 15: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. Early warnings are often not taken very seriously Because of lack of scientific evidence that there could be harm for the environment or human-beings E.g. lead in petrol Source: Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation, European Environment Agency, 2013

7 7 Challenge the future Sustainability in terms of resources Sustainability is a matter of natural resources we bequeath Strong: next generation inherit a stock of environmental assets no less than the stock inherited by the previous generation Weak: next generation inherit a stock of wealth, comprising man-made assets and environmental assets, no less than… (Pearce 1989) Contention arises from the substitutability of resources Distinction between natural and manufactured resources Can we compensate for the depletion of natural resources? Strong concept sets the threshold for impact assessments This is a matter of social, political and moral preferences

8 8 Challenge the future Sustainability as environmental impact Another key issue in sustainability is to limit our impact on the environment, assuming that people in the future will use the same environment Indeed, any activity with respect to the environment - – certainly technological developments - will have a certain impact on the environment What level of impact is acceptable? This is a question with a moral dimension

9 9 Challenge the future The growth dilemma Both the availability of resources and the environmental impact aspects are discussed in the Brundtland’s concept No-growth lobbyists and developing countries The club of Rome retained that growth must be limited Dire need for growth in Southern countries The Brundtland’s concept attempts to offer a solution It does imply limits but no absolute limits “limitations … on environmental resources and by the ability of the biosphere to absorb the effects of human activities”

10 10 Challenge the future The ethical pillars of sustainability Social justice grounds sustainable development Sustainability is supported by three main pillars 1.Fair distribution of well-being among contemporaries intragenerational justice – “essential needs of world’s poor” 2.Fair distribution of well-being between generations intergenerational justice 3.Sustainability also refers to the relation with nature

11 11 Challenge the future The Brundtland definition …“meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” What does the notion of “need” entail? For the present and future generations Can we simply coincide our and their needs? Tragedy of the commons – Garrett Hardin Commons as communal grazing of livestock Prisoner’s dilemma it is in the collective interest of all parties to cooperate, while it is in every party’s individual interest not to cooperate

12 12 Challenge the future Tragedy of the Commons To cooperate: to remain silent To defect: to confess & to accuse the other one The common of pasture Partiers are individual herdsmen To cooperate: to take as few as possible cattle To defect: to take as many as possible cattle

13 13 Challenge the future What are the commons? What are the important things held in common? The non-renewable energy resources The environment (including the atmosphere) Tragedy of Commons argues that we should accept limits To our action and our freedom In order to maintain the commons for all Tragedy of the commons primarily emphasizes spatial issues But the same questions relate to all things we hold in common with future generations Spatial relates to the space dimension; also intragenerational issues Temporal relates to the time dimension; also intergenerational issues

14 14 Challenge the future Philosophical challenges to obligations Sustainability assumes obligations to future people 3 challenges to these alleged ethical obligation 1)The non-identity problem How can we harm not existing people whose existence and identity depend on our action? (Parfit 1984) 2) The ignorance problem We don’ t know what they need We don’t even know that they will be 3)The distance problem To which future people do we have obligations? To what extent?

15 15 Challenge the future However… We can assume that There will be people in the future …whose interests can be affected by us They need – at least – clean air, water and a protected climate We all have access to same environment & resources Consider limitations on our actions to protect their interest How far in the future should we care? Should we make a distinction between different future people? Negative duties are more compelling and extend further Positive duties are duties to benefit someone Negative duties are duties not to harm

16 16 Challenge the future Why sustainability in energy issues Recall: the two dimensions of sustainability Social justice in a spatial sense Social justice in a temporal sense Spatial & temporal Tragedy of the Commons Depleting non-renewable resources Affecting the environment Two aspects of energy discussion Energy consumption Energy production

17 17 Challenge the future Part II Sustainability Ethics Sustaining what, why and for whom? The case of nuclear energy

18 18 Challenge the future Sustainability & conflicting interests Three key ethical questions in sustainability I.What is it that we wish to sustain? II.Why should we sustain it? III.For whom should we sustain it? In order to answer these questions, sustainability is considered as a moral value From which we can derive other contributing values How to deal with conflicting interests For instance between the present and future generations Values are things that we hold paramount Moral values refer to how we understand good life

19 19 Challenge the future Sustaining what? Why? Since we (the present generation) and future generations have all access to the same environment and resources, we have a moral duty to 1)Sustain the environment and humankind’s safety Leaving the nature no worse than we found it Protecting public health 2)Sustain human well-being Resource durability or availability of non-renewable resources Economic durability

20 20 Challenge the future Source: Taebi, B. and A. C. Kadak. 2010. Intergenerational Considerations Affecting the Future of Nuclear Power: Equity as a Framework for Assessing Fuel Cycles. Risk Analysis 30 (9): 1341-1362. Environment and humankind Human well-being

21 21 Challenge the future Sustaining the environment Why should we care about the environment? Should it primarily serve human interest? Anthropocentrism Does it have an intrinsic value? Non-anthropocentrism Unreasonable to expect no change in environment How to repair/compensate for inevitable changes E.g. how to repair the environment after toxic waste pollution E.g. how should we compensate for the damage causes by climate change Instrumental value means that something serves some other good Intrinsic value means that there is no need for instrumental references

22 22 Challenge the future Moral standing of non-humans Environmental philosophy deals with the relation of humans with the nature in general And more specifically, with non-human animals How should we assign moral standing ? The ability to think and to freely choose: autonomy Right and duties towards each other (do animals have rights?) The ability to experience pleasure and pain These questions already entered policy making

23 23 Challenge the future Sustaining health and safety We should not jeopardize the safety of future people This is a negative duty How far in the future should we offer such protection? This is the third key question : for whom to sustain? Should we distinguish between different future people? Is it feasible/desirable to offer exactly the same protection? The scope of this questions goes beyond philosophical contemplations

24 24 Challenge the future Rem is a unit for measuring health impact of radioactivity also referred to as radiotoxicity. In Europe we use Sievert (1 Sv = 100 rem) Radiological protection The next 10,000 years: 15 millirem per year (current level) Beyond that period: 350 millirem later adjusted to 100 millirem p/y

25 25 Challenge the future Sustaining natural resources Sustainability is interpreted here as durability (resources) Obviously we can’t stop using non-renewable resources So we should provide compensation for depletion (Barry 1999) Debate on the moral relevance of the status quo There is no moral relevance for the present situation, because previous generations survived with much less (Beckerman 1999) If future generations are not responsible for the situation they find themselves in, we have to compensate them (Barry 1999) The status quo is quite conservative as it neglects population growth, which is a main issue in sustainability discussions The status quo refers to the present situation

26 26 Challenge the future Renewable resources Sustainability is often taken to be synonymous with renewable resources Durability is indeed a very important aspect of sustainability Because no depletion of natural resources will occur However, it is myopic to see sustainability only as durability Sustainability is a complex notion that relates to many different considerations Also renewable brings about certain considerations E.g. biofuel and food scarcity, land use (tropical forest) etc.

27 27 Challenge the future Economic durability For an energy source to be sustainable It must be economically durable Durable for whom Whose interest are we taking into account? For what period? Are future interests as important as the present ones? Economist introduce here the concept of discounting Very relevant for discussion on cost-benefit analysis We will extensively discuss the economic issues in lecture 3 (Acceptability of new technologies)

28 28 Challenge the future Is nuclear energy sustainable? …“affordable, reliable electricity” that does not put “the earth’s climate in jeopardy,” (Bonser 2002) …the safety of plant operation as well as proliferation concerns (Stevens 1997) under certain conditions “there is a basic case for treating nuclear energy as a contribution to sustainable development at least in a “transitional role towards establishing sustainable energy” (Bruggink et al 2002) …nuclear power is inherently “unsustainable, uneconomic, dirty and dangerous” (GreenPeace 2006)

29 29 Challenge the future Sustainability as a framework There are two methods for producing nuclear power 1.To use uranium once in a reactor (available resources at least 100 years) resulting in radiotoxic waste for 200,000 years; 2.To recycle and reuse the waste. Available resources for thousands of years; waste life time is 10,000 years Which fuel cycle do you consider more sustainable? Based on which criteria? How would you rank these criteria or moral values? Why?

30 30 Challenge the future The open and closed fuel cycles

31 31 Challenge the future Are we there yet? In energy two aspects are very relevant Availability of resources How it affects the environment and public health Both aspects have a spatial and temporal dimension Sustainable development could be very useful notion… In the future of energy discussions; both consumption and provision IF we manage to identify interest at stake And address conflicts of interests appropriately ‘Appropriate’ has a strong normative dimension

32 32 Challenge the future Reading These books could be found in TU Delft library Van de Poel, I. R. and L. M. M. Royakkers. 2011. Ethics, Technology and Engineering. An Introduction: Wiley-Blackwell. Chapter 10: Sustainability, Ethics and Technology Raffaelle, R., W. Robison and E. Selinger, eds. 2010. Sustainability Ethics: 5 questions. Copenhagen: Automatic Press. The following article could be found online (make sure you long in on a TU Delft network) Taebi, B. and A.C. Kadak. 2010. Intergenerational Considerations Affecting the Future of Nuclear Power: Equity as a Framework for Assessing Fuel Cycles. Risk Analysis 30 (9):1341-1362. available onlineavailable online