ABSTRACT
The rocket lifts off, a new drug is proclaimed, even more transistors are etched onto a silicon chip, and it is the scientist who is acclaimed. Somehow, the engineers who really achieved these advances are set aside. Again, scientists seem to be in the driving seat when it comes to the discussion of the environment and the effect human actions have on that domain. Yet the data are conflicting, inadequate, and in many instances biased by computer models that better reflect the assumptions inherent in the programs than the world they purport to represent. A sterile debate ensues as scientists exchange their hypotheses. Against this background, engineers have to deal with actual problems thrown up by increases in population and the needs of such people for food, clean water, and the removal of wastes. Environmental issues are woven into this tapestry of contingency requirements. Decisions are made on the best available (most reliable) data coupled to policies that can be modulated to take account of changing circumstances. The need to respond to society’s requirements means that decisions have to be made rather than debating points scored. As engineers are charged with these responsibilities, it is necessary to examine the makeup and modes of action of these individuals in more detail.
