A Lifecycle Approach for Artificial Intelligence Ethics in Energy Systems

Abstract

Despite the increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) ethics frameworks, the practical application of these frameworks in industrial settings remains limited. This limitation is further augmented in energy systems by the complexity of systems composition and systems operation for energy generation, distribution, and supply. The primary reason for this limitation is the gap between the conceptual notion of ethics principles and the technical performance of AI applications in energy systems. For instance, trust is featured prominently in ethics frameworks but pertains to limited relevance for the robust operation of a smart grid. In this paper, we propose a lifecycle approach for AI ethics that aims to address this gap. The proposed approach consists of four phases: design, development, operation, and evaluation. All four phases are supported by a central AI ethics repository that gathers and integrates the primary and secondary dimensions of ethical practice, including reliability, safety, and trustworthiness, from design through to evaluation. This lifecycle approach is closely aligned with the operational lifecycle of energy systems, from design and production through to use, maintenance, repair, and overhaul, followed by shutdown, recycling, and replacement. Across these lifecycle stages, an energy system engages with numerous human stakeholders, directly with designers, engineers, users, trainers, operators, and maintenance technicians, as well as indirectly with managers, owners, policymakers, and community groups. This lifecycle approach is empirically evaluated in the complex energy system of a multi-campus tertiary education institution where the alignment between ethics and technical performance, as well as the human-centric application of AI, are demonstrated.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.