1. Raakesh s/o Mogana Sundram
Pua Hock Leong
Vincent Low
Elango Elayabharath

2.  Life – Cycle Design Flow
Design
 Ethical Violations in Design
 Analyze Common Factors
Feedback Testing

3.  Love Canal
 Ford Pinto
 Therac – 25
 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant

4.  Located near Niagara Falls.
 Experiencing population boom.
 Hooker Chemical’s dump site for toxic waste.
 Government built school and residence.

5. Image Source: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UV2eaSWz0xY/TMBkOlRDU5I/AAAAAAAAABY/pYsNqs4515c/s1600/LoveCanal-middle500px.jpg

6.  Birth Deficiencies
 Webbed toes
 Extra set of teeth
 Heart defects
 Mental retardation
Image Source: http://www.fiendishcuriosities.com/photos/photo_2006-
06-13_18-12_0.jpg
 High no. of miscarriages

7.  Siting & Design Phase
 No adequate suitability tests done
 Ignored concerns of Hooker Chemical

8.  Sacrificing Safety (Public Health)
 Denial of Responsibility
 Negligence for Ecological & Environmental
sustainability
Image Source: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FivrbNsJk1Y/TTYscPlx8NI/AAAAAAAAAVY/rdkKT8dj7O8/s1600/Love+Canal.jpg

9.  Love Canal
 Ford Pinto
 Therac - 25
 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant

10. Ford Pinto
Image Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bluepinto.jpg

11.  American Subcompact Market
 Ford President Lee Iacocca
 25 month conception to production schedule
(average car takes 43 months)
 Fuel tank design + other design variables

12.  Design: $2000, 2000 pound limit, Fuel Tank problem
 Testing: Rear collision resulted in fuel leakage and fire
 Feedback: Engineers came up with redesign proposals
 Design: Cost/Benefit Analysis was done

13.  Benefits
Savings: 180 burn deaths, 180 serious burn injuries, 2100 burned
vehicles
Unit Cost: $200,000 per death, $67,000 per injury, $700 per
vehicle
Total Benefit: 180 x ($200,000) + 180 x ($67,000) + 2100 x
($700) = $49.5 Million
 Costs
Sales: 11 million cars, 1.5 million light trucks
Unit Cost: $11 per car, $11 per truck
Total Cost: 11,000,000 x ($11) + 1,500,000 x ($ I 1) = $137
Million
From Ford Motor Company internal memorandum: "Fatalities Associated with Crash--Induced Fuel Leakage and Fires." Source:
Douglas Birsch and John H. Fielder, THE FORD PINTO CASE: A STUDY IN APPLIED ETHICS. BUSINESS, AND TECHNOLOGY. p.
28.1994.

14.  Consciously Sacrificing Public Safety
 Monetary Value of Life
 Using Value of Life in Cost/Benefit Analysis

15. Image source: http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/showcase2004/images-04/jn_pinto.gif
 Safety should have been prioritized
 Could have pushed cost of the safety
modification to the consumer

16.  Love Canal
 Ford Pinto
 Therac – 25
 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant

18.  Medical grade linear accelerator
 Cures cancer / tumors
 Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL)
 Overdosed 6 people ~x100 the limit

19.  Therac – 6 and Therac 20
 More compact, dual mode, depth dose
 Not standalone using hardware

20.  Operator interface – return carriage
 Error messages – codes
 No mechanical safety back-ups

21.  Hazard testing – Assumptions
 Programming errors eliminated
 Program does not degrade due to reproduction process
 Execution error only by faulty hardware
 Computer selects wrong energy level
 10^-12

22.  Overconfidence in software
 Safety vs Reliability, User friendly
 Unrealistic risk assessments

23.  Simple and reliable coding practices
 Self checking codes
 Operator training
 FDA intervention

24.  Love Canal
 Ford Pinto
 Therac – 25
 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant

25.  Located in Pripyat
 Experimental test went out of control
 Immediate death of 2 workers, 28 firemen
 Worst nuclear accident

26.  Safety Violations
• Safety Regulations are not followed
• Almost all the 211 control rods are removed
• Unstable fission rate

27.  Safety Violations
• The workers quarter located just 3 km away from the
plant
• Productivity versus safety

28.  Safety Violations
• Lacked of communication between engineers
• Pressured to succeed

29.  Environmental Violation
• No containment structure
• Fast, cheaper, better
•Emergency was not called upon immediately
•Spread of radiation to other parts of the world

30. Alienation
Violations
Environment Pollution
Radiation illness

31.  Profit
 Pride