STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS WERE COWARDS
A short video intended to raise awareness of the structural engineer’s responsibility with regards to climate change. The format is based on the iconic anti-piracy campaign videos of the early 2000’s.
“STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS WERE COWARDS”
“THEY CONTINUED TO DESIGN CARBON INTENSIVE BUILDINGS, FOLLOWING INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS, DESPITE BEING AWARE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR CHOICES.
THEY KNOWINGLY CONTRIBUTED TO A SIGNIFICANT PROPORTION OF MAN-MADE CLIMATE COLLAPSE, WHICH RESULTED IN THE DEATHS OF HUMANS IN EVERY PART OF THE WORLD, AND IRREVERSIBLE ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE.
INSTEAD OF questioning design briefs,
INSTEAD OF designing with locally available and natural materials,
INSTEAD OF reusing existing materials,
INSTEAD OF caring for their planet and the people on it,
THEY PRIORITISED SHORT TERM FINANCIAL GAIN AND MAINTAINING A STATUS QUO. DESPITE BEING HIGHLY SKILLED INDIVIDUALS, THEY HID BEHIND EXCUSES SUCH AS RELUCTANT CLIENTS, LACK OF NATIONAL POLICY AND FEAR OF SHORT TERM COSTS. THEY BLAMED GOVERNMENTS FOR NOT PRODUCING LEGISLATION, AND ARCHITECTS FOR UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS, INSTEAD OF TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS.”
… IS THIS REALLY going to be OUR LEGACY? …
It has now been over SIX years since The Institution of Structural Engineers officially placed Sustainability on par with Structural Safety.
It has also been over six years that I have been hearing too many excuses from peers and people with significant power, including senior engineers.
As a profession, we have not yet fully taken on the idea that SUSTAINABILITY IS A MATTER OF SAFETY. And we do not have, nor did we ever have, the luxury of time on our side to push this challenge downstream into the future.
What does it mean to place sustainability on par with structural safety?
Well, you know how important structural safety is. You know that you would be in a heap of trouble if a building collapsed and you responded: “The Client did not have the funds for foundations”… Or if a column failed because it was too slender and you presented the idea that: “The Architect wanted a narrow column”. This would be so obviously unacceptable. The same standard applies to sustainability.
We are responsible, we are therefore accountable.
Despite it being over six years ago, I wonder… What has it really changed? Have you, or your practice, changed your approach proportionally to face the challenge of our climate and ecological collapse? Or did you recognise yourself somewhere in the list of excuses above?
Reply honestly in the comments if you have the courage.
I made this short video to continue the conversation around the responsibility of Structural Engineers in the face of Climate and Ecological collapse.
Be brave.
27th May 2026