• Ethics from Sanskrit svádhā → Greek êthos ("habit") → Latin mōrālis ("custom").
• Descriptive Ethics: empirical study of what is accepted as right or wrong.
• Normative Ethics: prescribes how one ought to act based on moral standards.

• Virtue Ethics: focus on character; cultivate good habits (Heraclitus, Socrates, Confucius).
• Contractualism: respect agreements across generations (Intergenerational social contract).
• Deontology: act according to duty, not outcomes (Kant’s Categorical Imperative).
• Consequentialism: outcomes define morality (maximize happiness for most).

• Earth Charter (1987 Brundtland Report): rights and duties towards nature and future generations.
• Engineering Code of Ethics (Charte ISR): safeguard ecological integrity, promote precaution.
• Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): 17 goals, 2030 Agenda.

• No historical energy transition: accumulation of energy sources.
• Industrial Revolution: shift to coal; 1780s James Watt steam engine.
• Petroleum Age: oil wells (1849 Baku, 1859 Titusville), internal combustion engine.
• Atomic Age: nuclear power after 1945 bombings (Hiroshima, Nagasaki).

• New energies add to old ones; no real substitution.
• Example: wood demand rose with coal mining (support beams).
• Jevons (rebound) paradox: efficiency increases → total consumption rises.

• Derived from nuclear physics (electron transition concept).
• Hubbert Peak Theory (1956): oil production would peak then decline.
• Energy transition = wish to maintain growth, not phase out old energy.
• Neo-Malthusianism: finite resources → population and consumption limits needed.
• Ecological Overshoot: resource consumption > planet’s regenerative capacity.
• Techno-solutionism (Cargoism): belief that technology can solve resource issues.

• 1st Industrial Revolution (1760-1840): mechanization, steam power.
• 2nd (1870-1914): mass production, electricity.
• 3rd (1947-2015): digital revolution (IT, internet).
• 4th (2015-present): Industry 4.0, AI, IoT.

• No viable substitutes with current technologies.
• CRM demand driven by clean energy technologies (solar, wind, EVs).
• Heavy dependency on imports; geopolitical concentration of reserves.

Key figures:

• Mineral demand for clean energy technologies to quadruple (SDS scenario).
• Net-zero by 2050 requires 6x more minerals than today.

• Polymetallic nodules: 1-15 mm growth per million years.
• Cobalt-rich crusts: found 400m to 5km deep.
• Polymetallic sulphides: 10,000–40,000 years to form small deposit.

• 1989 DISCOL experiment: 20% direct and 70-75% indirect seabed destruction.
• Long-term impact on megabenthos confirmed.

Context:

• Norwegian company targeting seabed minerals (Clarion-Clipperton Zone, Norway EEZ).

Stakeholders:

• Loke Marine Minerals.
• Norwegian Government, Offshore Directorate.
• International Seabed Authority.
• NGOs: WWF, Greenpeace, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition.

Ethical conflicts:

• Deep-sea biodiversity destruction vs securing critical materials.
• Rights of nature vs economic interests.
• Short-term supply needs vs intergenerational rights.
• Lack of precaution: insufficient understanding of deep-sea ecosystems.

• Explosion of the digital datasphere:

2 ZB in 2010 → 180+ ZB projected by 2025.

• Heavy infrastructure (data centers) needed for AI and IoT.

• Private and public investments booming (France: €109 billion in AI investments announced 2025).
• AI needs massive energy, rare materials, huge data flows.

Context:

• Construction of a major data center in Dugny, France.
• Supports AI and digital transition demands.

Stakeholders:

• Digital Realty / Digital Realty France.
• Paris Terres d’Envol / local government.
• City of Dugny.
• Environmental Authority (Autorité environnementale).
• MNLE 93 (environmental NGO).
• RTE (electricity transmission network).

Ethical conflicts:

• Huge energy and water needs vs environmental concerns.
• Land occupation vs urban and ecological planning.
• Acceleration of rebound effects: digital sobriety neglected.
• Future resource exhaustion risks.

Context:

• French company Mistral AI develops "Le Chat" to compete with OpenAI, Google, etc.

Stakeholders:

• Mistral AI.
• Cerebras Systems (USA) / G42 (UAE).
• French government.
• Partners: AFP, France Travail, Veolia, Stellantis, Free Mobile, Orange.

Ethical conflicts:

• Environmental impacts vs digital innovation.
• Risk of concentration of knowledge and market.
• AI sovereignty vs energy/resource sustainability.
• Need for regulation to prevent technological lock-ins.

eMCO Concept

• Extended Minimum Crew Operations: AI systems enable Single Pilot Operations on commercial flights.
• Objective: assist pilot with automation for certain phases of flight.

Context:

• Driven by Airbus and Dassault with support of European regulatory bodies.
• Follows trend of automation in aviation (autopilots, remote towers).

Stakeholders:

• Airbus / Dassault (technology developers).
• European Commission (policy frameworks).
• International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) (global standards).
• International Air Transport Association (IATA) (airline interests).
• European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (safety regulations).
• Pilot unions: IFALPA, ALPA, ECA, BALPA (represent pilots' interests).

Ethical conflicts:

• Safety vs Cost savings.
• Public trust and Acceptability.
• Job displacement vs Efficiency
• Deontological question
• Consequentialist Evaluation

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) in aviation:

• CCS and DACCS (Direct Air Capture + Carbon Storage) aim to remove CO₂ directly from atmosphere.
• Carbon credits issued for captured and stored CO₂ → sold to industries like aviation to compensate emissions.
• STRATOS Plant (Texas) as pioneering example for large-scale aviation decarbonization.

Context:

• Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) through Oxy Low Carbon Ventures and Carbon Engineering build the STRATOS DACCS plant.
• 1PointFive manages the carbon removal credit system.
• Airbus partners with STRATOS to purchase carbon removal credits for its airline clients (Air Canada, Air France-KLM, EasyJet, etc.).

Figures:

• Goal: remove up to 1 million tons of CO₂ per year.
• Located in Ector County, Texas.
• Plant expected to be operational within a few years (specific timeline evolving).

Stakeholders:

• Oxy, Carbon Engineering, 1PointFive: project developers and technology providers.
• Airbus group airlines: main buyers of carbon removal credits.
• Railroad Commission of Texas: regulatory authority.
• Residents of Ector County: local community potentially impacted.
• Commission Shift and Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL): NGOs monitoring environmental and social impacts.
• US Government: indirectly involved through subsidies and climate policy frameworks.

Ethical conflicts:

• Real emission reduction vs Compensation.
• Environmental justice.
• Effectiveness and verifiability.
• Moral hazard.
• Intergenerational responsibility.
• Deontological challenge
• Consequentialist approach

• SpaceX, Blue Origin → reusable rockets, lower costs, democratized access.
• Arianespace launching Ariane 6 to remain competitive.
• Launch of military satellite CSO-3 highlights dual-use nature (civil + military).
• French Guiana: major launch site (Centre Spatial Guyanais), key for Europe.

• Rocket emissions: black carbon, alumina particles, stratospheric heating.
• Manufacturing: rare metals extraction, huge material footprint.
• Land occupation: impact on local communities, ecosystems in French Guiana.
• Space debris: growing risks to satellites, astronauts, future missions.

Context:

• Ariane 6: new European heavy-lift rocket; goal = reduce costs, improve flexibility.
• CSO-3 satellite: optical military observation for French defense.
• Objective: ensure Europe’s strategic autonomy in space.

Stakeholders:

• Arianespace: launcher company responsible for Ariane 6 operations.
• ESA / CNES / Centre Spatial Guyanais: European and French space agencies managing infrastructure and R&D.
• French Guiana: local communities affected by the launch activities.
• SpaceX / Blue Origin: commercial competitors from the US.
• Pour un Réveil Écologique: activist group concerned with environmental impacts and transition.
• European Union: strategic supporter of independent European access to space.

Ethical conflicts:

• Sovereignty vs Global commons.
• Environmental degradation vs Technological progress.
• Economic development vs Rights of local populations.
• Security vs Civil peace.
• Short-term national interests vs Long-term intergenerational ethics.
• Precautionary Principle.