S. A. Shelley: On September 12, 2025, the blades fell off a big wind turbine in Perth, Scotland. Despite being in operation for less than a year, the blades, for some reason, dropped 250 ft (76m) to the ground. Because of copyright, OWOE cannot show the actual photos of the disaster, but OWOE does provide an artist’s sketch (Fig. 1), along with links to source articles.
What struck me about the event is that the turbine operator, Aviva, had the gumption to immediately declare the crash a consequence of an engineering fault. Although it is possible that it was an engineering fault, it is too easy to quickly cast such blame. History tells us that more likely it was a consequence of incorrect specifications (e.g., design wind conditions), fabrication, installation or operation (monitoring). Or as is most common, it was some combination of several of those that taken together resulted in the failure.
Engineers get blamed for way too many accidents, crashes, failures and disasters. It is true that there are numerous examples of bridges collapsing because of civil engineering failures through either incorrect analysis and calculations (almost every major bridge collapse in Canada since Canada’s foundation) or improperly incorporating geologic or environmental conditions (Tacoma Narrows Bridge or St. Francis Dam ). And a ship capsizing at launch is most likely a naval architecture engineering failure.
But far too quickly, engineers are frequently scapegoated in the aftermath of disasters, even though many failures stem from decisions made far beyond the drafting table. People, especially politicians, blame many disasters on engineering failures without understanding the true cause of the event. Engineers tend to check and double check designs and calculations. There are many specifications and proscribed procedures as part of the rigour of engineering. Unfortunately, in too many cases, it’s budget cuts imposed by executives, political pressure to fast-track projects, or regulatory loopholes that compromise safety standards: The root causes of disaster often lie in systemic mismanagement rather than technical incompetence.
Engineers operate within financial, legal, and organizational constraints that can severely limit their ability to implement optimal solutions. Yet when tragedy strikes, it’s their names that appear in headlines, not those of the policymakers or corporate leaders who ignored warnings or prioritized profits or rapid outcomes over safety and operations. This misplaced blame not only undermines public trust in engineering but also distracts from the deeper accountability that needs to be addressed. See for example the Ottawa LRT rail disaster, in which the entire system is grossly overbudget and continues to underperform.
For the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore in 2024, initial public speculation swirled around potential engineering flaws, with some questioning whether the bridge’s design or maintenance had failed. However, investigations quickly confirmed that the collapse was triggered by an external impact (a cargo ship colliding with one of the bridge’s support piers) (see note 1). This tragedy highlights how engineers can be unfairly blamed when broader systemic factors – like outdated regulations or insufficient investment in infrastructure upgrades – are the true culprits.
Let’s stop reactively blaming civil, mechanical or naval engineers for failures until all causes are fully examined and identified. We do enough already, without most people understanding how necessary we are to civilization.
BUT there is one form of engineering that deserves a tremendous amount of blame: Social Engineering, especially as it is practiced by most western, progressive governments. Governments at all levels have become adept at Public Influence Campaigns in order to force idealized outcomes on citizens, regardless of the consequences. Governments often attempt to shape public opinion and manipulate public behavior by targeted and repetitive messaging designed to influence beliefs (see the postscript to the OWOE blog, Ossification), using behavioral nudging (psychology) to encourage desired actions and controlling information to confuse populations and manipulate metrics. Again, not to beat the city of Calgary to death (for the municipal governments of the last 10 years have set the city well unto that path), I offer Fig. 2 as a stark example of what happens when social engineering infects governments.
Fig. 2 is not an uncommon sight in Calgary: There is blood on the downtown streets somewhere, every day. What has become common is that residents of Calgary have become accustomed to such sights. Calgarians have also had to get accustomed to the sight of people dying of drug overdoses outside city hall, to fights on the CTrains outside city hall, and to shopkeepers around city hall employing more private security than shop staff. The politicians don’t seem to look out the windows of city hall, and instead have gotten very good at denying, lying and then denying some more. During the 2025 State of the City Address, Mayor Joyti Gondek, proclaimed, “We’re creating a 24/7 downtown, where people don’t just commute in and out, but walk their dogs, raise their kids, launch businesses and build lives” (Calgary mayor shares message of optimism). To which I might add, that better be a guard dog that people are walking downtown.
The profession of engineering applies science to better the human condition. It incorporates observation, reason and analysis to ensure safe and beneficial outcomes as much as possible. The art of politics and social engineering these days incorporates projections, feelings and avoidance, which makes the human condition worse for too many.
Vive l’Alberta Libre
Fermer la ligne 5!
Note 1: There have been so many bridges collapses in America resulting from ships and barges ramming into piers that I am nervous crossing any bridge across any navigable waterway.