Ethics of the Hydraulic Fracturing Plan In the “QBC and Hydraulic Fracturing” case Sam Crow the Deputy Minister of the Environment is faced with a difficult choice. He can go with the original wind turbine plan that is environmentally sound and safer. Or the hydraulic fracturing plan that will have greater future benefits but, poses a number of known environmental and safety concerns (Handout 1-5). In this essay it will be argued that the hydraulic fracturing argument is unethical. To determine which choice Sam Crow should make it is necessary to apply six of the seven moral standards to the situation. Based on utilitarianism Sam Crow should use the hydraulic fracturing plan. This is because utilitarianism is based on a consequential...The end:
.....ndicates that failing to make solid ethical decisions can be bad for the company as well as for people in the wider society. In conclusion, Sam Crow should stick to the original plan. The hydrological fracturing plan is unethical according to most ethical criteria. The case of Curragh Resources Inc. indicates that failing to follow these ethical arguments can be disastrous for society and the company involved. Word Count: 1873 Works Cited AP/ADMS 3660, “Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility” lecture 3 for AP/ADMS 3660, York University, 2011. Handout, QBC and Hydraulic Fracturing, AP/ADMS 3660, York University, 2011. Karakowsky , Len, Carroll, Archie B. and Buchholtz , Ann K., Business and Society, Thomson Nelson, Canada, 2005.