1. Scientists whose credibility is well-established among peers sometimes choose to become advocates. Other good scientists have entered public / activism roles as the heads of important agencies.

a. Should only people with such reputations take on such roles?

b. Are there any risks even with such a reputation?

c. On balance, what are the costs and benefits of scientists like these taking on these roles?

2. Assume you are the regional manager for EPA overseeing the ETC cleanup. You are aware that funding priority for cleanup depends on a site being placed on the National Priority List (NPL) and the ETC site has not been placed on the NPL. You also know that the cost of cleaning up ETC would most likely exceed the regional budget. However, the ETC contaminants pose a continual threat to groundwater. How might you justify approval for funding to excavate soil at ETC under the Emergency Removal provision of the Superfund legislation?

3. What is ethics of sustainability?