IEN 380
Case Study
Due December 2, 2020
at noon on Blackboard
Improving the maxed out U.S. Energy Grid. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives our aging infrastructure a D+ grade, with most of our power lines past their 50 year lifespan and already operating at full capacity. Estimates suggest that there is a cumulative investment gap of $177B dollars between 2016 and 2025 for future generation facilities and transmission and distribution (T&D) grids. When looking at potential upgrade options, new technology, including distributed energy grids and smart meters could greatly enhance the sustainability and resiliency of our grid. What is the best way for America to move forward: upgrading our cu
ent infrastructure, adapting new generation, distribution, and storage technology, or a mix of both?
As we have discussed in class Engineers must abide by a Code of Ethics, and specifically Industrial Engineers follow the Code of Ethics by NSPE. In your groups, you are to consider both of these huge projects to the country and you need to do the following:
1. Research the true state of our aging infrastructure and discuss how ASCE came up with it’s grade. You should include what has been done to date since ASCE published it’s report.
2. Estimate the cost of the scenarios: simple upgrading of existing infrastructure, deploying new technology, or both. You will need to estimate cash flows for building and maintaining these upgrades. Use a 30 year planning horizon.
3. Conduct a Cost Benefit Analysis using the cash flows estimated in #2.
4. Develop a multi-attribute matrix and analysis to determine how to determine which infrastructure projects should be prioritized. You need to determine the attributes, weights to be used in determining which projects should be prioritized.
5. As a result of doing a Cost Benefit Analysis and a Multi-Attribute Analysis, what are the ethical problems that arise from this type of an analysis? Make sure to refer to the NSPE Code of Ethics. The expectation is that there are a minimum of 3 – 5 ethical problems that arise from these types of analyses.
6. Conclusion: Based on your analysis, can the US afford not to upgrade the US Energy Grid? Explain why or why not and recommend a course of action. Make sure to consider the global, economic, environmental and societal impact of your solution and its ethical responsibilities.
Requirements:
· You must form a team between 3 - 4 people of your choosing. Minimum of 3 and maximum of 4.
· Individual accountability and responsibility: Each team member researches the case assigned on their own prior to the first team meeting. The team member is required to come to the team meeting with a written document with a basic information about the case and the source of the information. A minimum of 5 sources should be
ought to the first team meeting about the assignment.
· You are expected to provide in Excel your analysis, tables and graphs.
· Your final paper must have a Reference page and there must be a minimum of 10 sources including government estimates. You must also use in-text citations and provide references to materials to support you statements where applicable. Please review the section on Research and Using Wikipedia in the syllabus.
· The written paper is to be in Times New Roman, 12 pt font with 1” margins single space. This matters and I do deduct points for failure to follow the formatting requirements.
Submission Requirements:
1. A single pdf packet is to be submitted on Blackboard by December 2, 2020 at noon. The packet is as follows:
a. Cover page
. Executive Summary – Max 1 page
c. Case Summary that includes:
a. Background Research base on #1
. Cost estimates from #2. This should be in Excel table embedded into your document with a detail explanation of where and what they mean.
c. Cost/Benefit Analysis – The calculations and rationale for what you chose is to be included from #3
d. Multi-Attribute analysis – Any tables or analysis should be embedded into your document along with the detail explanations of your reasoning from #4.
e. Ethical analysis and discussion
f. Conclusion
d. References
e. Excel Files – copied into the word document. (and submitted separately on Blackboard)
f. Each team member’s individual contribution (word doc that they needed for the first meeting)
2. Excel file to be submitted on Blackboard separately by December 2, 2020 at noon.
Case Study Ru
ic is posted on Blackboard. Review it carefully so you are aware of how the assignment will be graded.
Research information-
A key to successful research is to use reliable, high-quality information sources. While high quality information can be found on the open Web, it can be hard to pick out from the vast amounts of unreliable and unsourced material that also exist there. Using the li
ary is the best way to ensure you are using the best research sources. The University of Miami Li
aries have millions books, articles from scholarly journals, magazines and newspapers as well as videos, reference materials and a wide range of other materials all collected, categorized and organized for your convenience, much of it available online.
Along with the website, the li
ary's most useful resources are the li
arians who are there to help you find the information you need for your work by pointing you to the most appropriate resources and showing you the best search techniques. Each of the li
arians in the Education and Outreach department specializes in different subject areas. You can also find help at the Reference Desk just inside the Richter Li
ary turnstiles and the Ask-a-Li
arian e-mail and IM services on the li
ary website.
Use of Wikipedia: Wikipedia is not a valid source for several reasons. First, it is an encyclopedia—a summary of analysis of original work. That synthesis of ideas is your role. Also, because it is publicly edited and on the open Web, it has other flaws:
a. In controversial areas it commonly falls prey to faddishness or gets whittled down to vague generalities by factions of editors cutting what they find objectionable.
. The references at the bottom of Wikipedia articles can point to more reliable information, but they are chosen for public accessibility above quality and you have access to much more through the li
ary’s subscriptions paid for by your tuition.
There is nobody responsible for checking to see if those articles say what the Wikipedia-editor says they say, so they frequently don’t.
Case Study Ru
ic
Criterion
Strong
Average
Weak
all points
2/3 of points
1/3 of points
Research XXXXXXXXXX15 points
Excellent research into the issues with clearly documented links to sources. Minimum of 10 quality sources cited not including the textbook.
Good research into the issues with documented links to sources. Minimum of 6 quality sources cited not including the textbook.
Limited or incomplete research to sources and less than 6 sources cited
Cost Estimate XXXXXXXXXXpoints
Provides a comprehensive estimate on the infrastructure cost of rebuilding the energy grid. Includes all possible expenses for the 30 year period
Provides an estimate on the infrastructure cost of rebuilding the energy grid. Does not includes all possible expenses for the 30 year period
Provides an incomplete estimate on the infrastructure cost of rebuilding the energy grid. Does not includes all possible expenses for the 30 year period
Cost Benefit Analysis XXXXXXXXXXpoints
Completes a comprehensive accurate Cost Benefit Analysis with at least 5 benefits accounted for in the analysis of the major project areas.
Completes an accurate Cost Benefit Analysis with at least 3-4 benefits accounted for in the analysis of the major project areas.
Completes an inaccurate Cost Benefit Analysis or has less than 3 benefits accounted for in the analysis of the major project areas.
Multi-Attribute Matrix description XXXXXXXXXX10 points
Determines and fully describes at least 10 attributes to evaluate each project. Weights are assigned for each attribute along with an excellent rationale to the weight.
Determines and describes at least 6 attributes to evaluate each project. Weights are assigned for each attribute along with a rationale to the weight.
Determines and describes at less than 6 attributes to evaluate each project. Weights are assigned for each attribute but do not have a rationale to the weight.
Ethical Dilemas XXXXXXXXXXpoints
Provides a comprehensive ethical analysis showing at least 4-5 ethical problems with resolutions. Uses the NSPE Code of Ethics in the justification.
Provides an ethical analysis showing at least 3 ethical problems with resolutions. Uses the NSPE Code of Ethics in the justification.
Provides an ethical analysis showing less than 3 ethical problems with resolutions. Does not uses the NSPE Code of Ethics in the justification.
Conclusion XXXXXXXXXX5 points
Answers completely on affordability of the projects by the US with supporting statements and recommends a course of action based on their analysis.
Answers completely on affordability of the projects by the US with supporting statements and recommends a course of action based on their analysis.
Superficial discussion of the affordability or no discussion or does not recommend a course of action.
Individual Accountability 10 points
Evidence of thorough research by each team member of the case assigned on their own with written document with basic information about the case and the source of the information with a minimum of 5 sources.
Evidence of some research by each team member of the case assigned on their own with written document with basic information about the case and the source of the information with a less than 5 sources.
No individual work provided and or superficial individual work provided with less than 2 sources or none listed.
Writing Mechanics XXXXXXXXXXpoints
Demonstrates clarity, conciseness and co
ectness; writing is free of grammar and spelling e
ors
Occasional grammar or spelling e
ors, but still a clear presentation of ideas; lacks organization
Writing is unfocused, rambling, or contains serious e
ors; poorly organized
Citations XXXXXXXXXX10 points
Provides in-text citations with a reference page in the paper.
Provides some in-text citations with a reference page in the paper but has references