04 | Comment
Our annual Top 10 Under 40 Awards program always brings surprises.
14 | Climate Perspectives
Today’s total hydroelectric generation is a fraction of the world’s theoretical potential.
20 | Legal
There are risks for an engineer who assumes the responsibility for another’s work.
22 | Conversation
Professional Engineering and the Oath of Obligation
This year marks the 100th anniversary of Canada’s iron ring ceremony, a symbol for people becoming part of the engineering profession.
7
COVER STORY
Top 10 Under 40 Awards
New companies are being created to tackle challenges in housing and real estate, with engineers’ input. 7
Earlier this year, the consulting engineering community submitted worthy nominations for Canada’s top young leaders, from across the country. Now, meet the 10 winners!
16
Insurance: Investing in the Future Insurance pricing is a crucial—and sometimes volatile—factor in the business health of consulting engineering; flexibility and adaptability are key to profitability.
18
Busways in Power Distribution
‘Busduct’ has emerged as an efficient alternative to traditional cabling, especially in high-rise commercial buildings, industrial plants and data centres.
by Peter Saunders
Our annual Top 10 Under 40 Awards are always a highlight for me. There are so man y surprises along the way. I never know who will be nominated each year, from which firms, in which parts of Canada. When we started the program, I had a hand in selecting the winners—but now that members of our editorial advisory board (EAB) have taken on the entirety of that task, I also never know who from among the nominees will win!
Then there are the many interesting anecdotes that come up in the nomination forms and in my interviews with each of the selected winners (of which you can see snippets in an online video this year, for the first time).
We are never at a loss for worthy contenders for CCE's Top 10 Under 40 Awards.
Not all of these tidbits can (or, to be fair, should) make it into the profiles you’ll read in this issue, but I wanted to take the opportunity to use this space to share some of them with you.
• Bridge engineer Mathew Reynolds’ unusual academic journey took him from civil to biomedical engineering; he and his professor worked with surgeons and published papers on biomechanical features of fixation plates for humerus fractures.
• Simon Glass lives in Georgetown, Ont., which makes us neighbours. As far as commonalities go, this one’s not common; many people in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) have never even heard of our town, population: 44,000.
• Anthony Ho, like many of the engineers I’ve spoken to, enjoyed playing with Lego as a child. His older sister assembled kits as per instructions, but he
would then take them apart and build his own creations. As it happened, both would go on to study engineering!
• Jeffrey Ng has noticed how electrical engineering seems to be ‘imaginary’ to most other people, even his fellow engineers, as it is based on mathematical formulas and theories that are not tangible, but instead have been proved through other theories.
• Transportation advisor Amin Asgarian’s talents have been recognized before. In 2020, he won an Emerging Leader Award for Technical Advancement from Construction Canada—a magazine I had previously helped edit, many years before his win.
• Nico Malfara, born and raised in Toronto, now lives in Vancouver, but his tr ansit leadership role still focuses largely on long-term infrastructure projects back in his hometown, including the Ontario Line subway, scheduled to open in 2031.
What didn’t surprise me was the calibre of the nominations as a whole. This program has shown me there are so many exceptional, up-and-coming consulting engineers across the country. We are never at a loss for worthy contenders for the awards.
Here’s something that might surprise you, however. One of this year’s winners was nominated in a previous year, but did not win at that time.
The fact this person won this year speaks to the importance not only of a detail-rich nomination form, but also of tenacity on the part of nominators to continue to submit. You never know when someone you support could win. So, start planning for next year!
Peter Saunders • psaunders@ccemag.com
SCAN CODE TO VISIT CCE’S WEBSITE: Find the latest engineer-related news, stories, blogs and analysis from across Canada
READER SERVICE
Print and digital subscription inquiries or changes, please contact: Angelita Potal
Tel: 416-510-5113
Fax: (416) 510-6875
email: apotal@annexbusinessmedia.com
Mail: 111 Gordon Baker Rd., Suite 400 Toronto, ON M2H 3R1
EDITOR
Peter Saunders (416) 510-5119 psaunders@ccemag.com
SENIOR PUBLISHER
Maureen Levy (416) 510-5111 mlevy@ccemag.com
MEDIA DESIGNER
Lisa Zambri
EDITORIAL ADVISORS
Darryl Boyce, Todd Busch, Guy Bruce, Andrew Macklin, Sadaf Parvaiz
ACCOUNT CO-ORDINATOR Cheryl Fisher (416) 510-5194 cfisher@annexbusinessmedia.com
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
Beata Olechnowicz (416) 510-5182 bolechnowicz@annexbusinessmedia.com
GROUP PUBLISHER
Danielle Labrie (226) 931-0375 dlabrie@annexbusinessmedia.com
CEO Scott Jamieson sjamieson@annexbusinessmedia.com
CANADIAN CONSULTING ENGINEER is published 5 times per year by Annex Business Media 111 Gordon Baker Road, Suite 400, Toronto, ON M2H 3R1 Tel: (416) 442-5600 Fax: (416) 510-6875 or (416) 442-2191
EDITORIAL PURPOSE: Canadian Consulting Engineer magazine covers innovative engineering projects, news and business information for professional engineers engaged in private consulting practice. The editors assume no liability for the accuracy of the text or its fitness for any particular purpose.
SUBSCRIPTIONS: Canada, 1 year $56.10, 2 years $110.00. Single copy $11.22 Cdn + taxes. (HST 86717 2652 RT0001). United States $130.00 (CAD). Foreign $155.00 (CAD).
PRINTED IN CANADA. Title registered at Trademarks Office, Ottawa. Copyright 1964. All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may not be reproduced either in part or in full without the consent of the copyright owner(s). Annex Privacy Officer: Privacy@annexbusinessmedia.com Tel: 800-668-2374.
ISSN: 0712-4996 (print), ISSN: 1923-3337 (digital)
POSTAL INFORMATION: Publications Mail Agreement No. 40065710. Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Circulation Dept., Canadian Consulting Engineer, 111 Gordon Baker Road, Suite 400, Toronto, ON M2H 3R1.
PRIVACY: From time to time we make our subscription list available to select companies and organizations whose product or service may interest you. If you do not wish your contact information to be made available, please contact us. Tel: 1-800-668-2374, fax: 416-510-6875 or 416-442-2191, e-mail: vmoore@annexbusinessmedia.com, mail to: Privacy Officer, 111 Gordon Baker Road, Suite 400, Toronto, ON M2H 3R1.
Member of the Audit Bureau of Circulations.
Member of Magazines Canada
By Tom Giovannetti, P. Eng.
The British North America Act (BNA) of 1867 was transformational, marking the creation of the Dominion of Canada, with a distribution of power between a central parliament and provincial legislatures. The origin of the profession acts in Canada began with the development of self-regulation for administration of the BNA to improve governance of society. Unlike legislation, industry regulation is not made by Parliament, but by bodies authorized by Parliament to do so (such as Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO), which regulates the practice as per its province’s Professional Engineers Act).
In the colonial years following the BNA, the lieutenant-governor relied on the professions crafted by legislation to govern themselves within the objects of the act. As professional engineering in Canada began in the late 19th and early 20thcenturies, it was driven by natural law of procedural fairness, scientific knowledge, moral obligations and the use of legislative acts for the development of self-regulation and authority.
In 1925, the tradition of the iron ring ceremony became a symbol for people becoming part of the engineering profession. ‘The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer’ at the ceremony is the oath or obligation as a commitment to integrity, public service and upholding high standards of professional conduct.
The profession’s code of ethics was originally developed by Engineers Canada and then adopted by provincial associations, seated in the concept of an obligation of moral duty to both the public and the profession.
This year, marking the 100th anniversary of the iron ring ceremony, what kind of report card would we receive from the public—or from our profession—about acting upon our code of ethics?
As engineers, we were called and we were presented with an iron ring, symbolic of our obligations to the profession. There is a moral contract between the offer (the ring itself), the acceptance (wearing the ring) and the consideration (the privilege of practising engineering) whereby we accept the obligations of being a professional engineer. Thus, wearing the ring means agreeing to uphold these obligations as per our code of ethics, which we proclaimed at our ceremony.
When we wear the iron ring in public, we are proclaiming our acceptance of our oath and our compliance with our moral duties to the pu blic and the profession. It is a privilege, not a right, to practise engineering.
This year marks the 100 th anniversary of the iron ring ceremony. It is a privilege, not a right, to practise engineering.
When wondering how well we rate in our calling as an engineer, we need look no further than legislation
and our code of ethics. While the objects of professional engineers may not always be clear in our acts, the literal rule of interpretation is nevertheless attainable without particularly adventurous deciphering of the law.
Here in Nova Scotia, as in other provinces, understanding the objects of the Engineering Profession Act is crucial for compliance with our moral duties. Examples include the following objectives:
1. “Promote and improve the proficiency of professional engineers in all matters relating to the profession of engineering.” This means all professional engineers must promote proficiency to achieve a prominent level of competence with and within government agencies that are regulated by the act.
2. “Do all such matters and things that will advance and protect the interests of professional engineers in the profession of engineering.” This means consulting engineers need to keep regulations and standards updated, so as to avoid implementing antiquated specifications and, for that matter, regulations that were created without engineering expertise but are still in place today. We have a moral duty to support up-to-date specifications.
3. “Assure the general public of the proficiency and competency of
professional engineers in the practice of engineering.” There is no hidden meaning here. Engineers must act in service to the public in a manner reflecting competence, proficiency and security. We have a duty to protect the public’s well-being through practical and efficient designs.
4. “Do all such other matters and things as may be necessary for—or incidental or conducive to—the welfare of professional engineers and their usefulness to the public.”
The welfare of professional engineers depends on ensuring societal needs and well-being are met by conducting sustainable, ethical engineering practices. Again, this may involve suggesting updates to engineering specifications, guidelines and regulations, so as to overrule antiquated bylaws or specifications created by non-engineers.
These and other objectives should be read with close interpretation of their literal meaning as drafted in legislation. They were generally written to ensure that engineers are (a) competent in the profession, (b) supportive of advancing it and (c) protecting it, as its stewards. This is the basis for practising the profession with authority, as useful for the public’s well-being.
Reflecting on our obligations while wearing our rings, can we say in confidence we are living up to the commitment of the Calling of an Engineer, as intended over the ceremony’s first 100 years?
We present our fourth annual roster of winners!
By Peter Saunders
Earlier this year, Canadian Consulting Engineer once again reached out to the community to recognize promising young consulting engineers across the country—and the industry again responded with many worthy nominations. The following are 2025’s lineup of winners, as selected by members of our editorial advisory board (EAB), presented in alphabetical order by surname.
Amin Asgarian
Amin Asgarian, 39, is a technical compliance manager in transportation advisory services for AECOM, based in Toronto and currently leading a 50-plus-member multidisciplinary project team. His po rtfolio has spanned the infrastructure gamut, from the Gordie H owe International Bridge to a Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) station accessibility program.
Asgarian grew up in an engineering family in Iran.
“ My parents were both in the field,” he explains. “I sometimes accompanied my mom to her civil engineering classes, which made me familiar with building materials. My older brother and I also used to build things at home. Engineering felt like a natural way to bring ideas to life and contribute something meaningful.”
He earned his bachelor’s degree at the same school as his mother— Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)—and gained early experience in consulting before moving to Canada and continuing his education at Montreal’s McGill University, where he earned his master’s and PhD in civil, struc-
tural and earthquake engineering.
“Growing up in Tehran, a seismically active city, I was always aware of the risks,” he explains. “I saw an opportunity to make an impact on the safety and resilience of cities.”
He went on to conduct seismic testing and assessments for Montreal’s Sainte-Justine Hospital and Eaton Centre and participated in
Habitat 67’s restoration. He joined Sensequake to help develop seismic analysis software before moving to Toronto, where he returned to consulting with Stephenson Engineering and AECOM, bookending a stint with Egis in D ubai, U.A.E.
“Dubai offered exposure to multidisciplinary co-ordination, international codes and fast-track delivery models,” he explains.
“Working in that environment significantly accelerated my technical growth and marked a shift in my career, from a purely technical role to a more strategic management position I continue to build upon today.”
In addition to leading the Finch light-rail transit (LRT) project team following his return to Toronto, Asgarian has continued to educate the next gener ation of civil engineers as a seasonal instructor at Seneca College.
“I’ve been teaching a str uctural design course, helping students bridge the gap between theory and application,” he says. “It’s been a deeply rewarding way to contribute to the profession and remain engaged with emerging talent and ideas.”
Simon Glass
Simon Glass, 36, is a senior project manager with Ainley
Group’s office in Mississauga, Ont., specializing in water and wastewater systems.
“I have family history with engineering,” he says. “My great-grandfather and grandfather were engineers, as are some of my cousins. When I was looking at what to study in university, my grandfather said, ‘People are always going to need water!’”
After graduating with distinction from the University of Waterloo with a bachelor’s degree in environmental engineering, Glass joined Ainley’s office in Collingwood, Ont., as an engineer-in-training (EIT).
“I learned about Ainley through my parents’ neighbour, who was an accountant at that office,” he recalls. “It was
exactly what I was looking for.”
Continuing his focus on water, Glass contributed to modelling projects for Ontario’s municipalities of Meaford, Orillia and Wasaga Beach and asset management strategies for Bradford West Gwillimbury and Timmins. He also contributed to the firm’s expansion to the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) with a new office in Brampton, which was later relocated to Mississauga.
Within the company, Glass has become known for embracing a culture of learning, showing gratitude for guidance from others and committing himself to fostering the next generation of engineers. He has played a key role in mentoring junior engineers and
fostering their professional development.
“I’ve had the privilege of working with a lot of great mentors over the years,” he says, “and I’ve had my opportunity to provide the same.”
Glass is currently managing a $30-million water supply program for the town of Erin, close to his home in Halton Hills. This multi-phase, multi-contract initiative will support the town’s modernization, urbanization and growth with long-term infrastructure, including new transmission and watermains, booster pumping stations, a wellhouse and a reservoir.
“One of my first environmental assessments (EAs) was in Erin,” he says, “and now
Simon has distinguished himself as a forward-thinking problem-solver and trusted mentor, known for his dedication to technical excellence and mentoring emerging talent.
We are proud to recognize his outstanding contributions and his role in shaping the future of engineering at Ainley Group!
they’re one of the biggest clients I have. We’re developing w ells, building out infrastructure and connecting communities. It’s like seven projects all in a single program. The scope and scale are well beyond any other projects I’ve led. It’ll be my next six years!”
Anthony Ho
Anthony Ho, 36, is an associate director and principal with HH Angus & Associates, based in Toronto, with a focus on building science.
H o immigrated with his family to Canada from Hong Kong, China, in 1994.
“Our family came from a humble background,” he says, “and I learned the value of hard work from my parents’ ex-
ample. They wanted me to ha ve a stable career path. I happened to watch ‘How It’s
Made’ on the Discovery Channel, which sparked my curiosity and paved my way toward engineering.”
Upon graduating at the top of his class at the University of Waterloo with an honours degree in mechanical engineering, Ho joined HH Angus in 2012 as an engineer-in-training (EIT). He soon developed a penchant for building commissioning services, in particular, an area where he helped the firm expand with a dedicated team able to reach a variety of construction sectors. He is now responsible for HH Angus’ commissioning leadership, business development and training.
Ho currently leads long-term construction projects spanning
more than 1 million sf. He collaborates with international consultants and clients to deliver multidisciplinary designs, with responsibility for multiple scopes of work.
Within HH Angus, Ho is known not only as a technical expert, but also as effective and supportive manager of junior engineers, who empowers his team members to find creative solutions to challenging problems.
“ What’s important to me now is to spread knowledge and interest about a field that’s very rewarding,” he says.
Robert Jackson
Robert Jackson, 36, is one of two new partners at Fast + Epp who are poised to lead the
P.Eng., CPP, Principal
Since joining our firm in 2012, Anthony has had a significant positive impact on his co-workers, clients, and industry partners through his passion for engineering and leadership.
Anthony - this recognition is richly deserved and we look forward to your continued professional and personal growth! Expanding What is Possible. Together. For a Better Future.
www.hhangus.com
Vancouver-headquartered firm “into its next chapter” when they eventually succeed its founder, Paul Fast.
As a structural engineer, he has played a central role in advancing mass- and hybrid-timber construction through such projects as the University of British Columbia’s (UBC’s) TallWood House, The Hive’s timber seismic systems and the Pacific National Exhibition (PNE) Amphitheatre’s clearspan timber arch, reportedly the longest in the world. These and other pioneering projects have called for new research and field testing to bridge the gap between theory and the construction site.
“I grew up with a dad who’s a carpenter,” he explains. “He had a company called Jackson Woodworking, with a shop in our backyard. Working with him and doing framing through high school helped me learn some tricks of the trade. I loved the design and engineering side of things and went on to study at UBC.”
That education led him to
intern with Fast + Epp before joining the firm as a full-time project engineer. Over the years, he rose to associate, associate principal and partner.
Working with architects, contractors and fabricators, he developed a r eputation for empathy, trust and rigour when addressing technical challenges.
“I’ve received fantastic mentorship here and a lot of opportunity has been put in front of m e,” says Jackson. “If opportunity comes and you meet it w ith ambition, usually great things happen!”
In another example of this approach, he helped establish the ‘concept lab,’ a facility dedicated to research and testing within Fast + Epp’s Vancouver offices. Here, a broad array of construction professionals can gather for hands-on experiments with new materials and systems.
“The marker of a good engineer is knowing how things come together and get built,” he says. “My past life in construction has helped me tremendously when designing.”
Appana Lok, 33, is a process engineer, project manager and associate with R.V. Anderson Associates Limited (RVA) in Toronto, specializing in drinking water projects. At press time, she is on parental leave, scheduled to return in October—but she nevertheless made time to speak with us
Lok grew up in Tokyo, Japan. Like many engineers, her childhood aptitudes included problem-solving and math.
“As weird as it sounds, math homework was fun and relaxing,” she says. “It was rewarding
to find each correct solution. But I didn’t have a strong idea of what I wanted to do. I ended up pursuing engineering later than most people do.”
Indeed, when Lok came to Canada to earn her bachelor’s degree in environmental chemistry at the University of Toronto (U of T), she focused on research laboratory internships well before pursuing a master’s degree in civil engineering at the same school.
“D uring an internship in Germany, I had the opportunity to visit local drinking water and w astewater plants,” she says. “Those tours piqued my interest in water treatment and solidified my career path. Upon my return to Canada, I applied for graduate studies, which marked the beginning of my journey in engineering.”
After Lok had acquired the academic credits to become an engineer, she joined RVA as a process designer in its water department. In addition to her interest in the firm’s projects, she was attracted to its employee ownership model, which would allow her to become a
shareholder.
Once she was at RVA, Lok enjoyed performing many functions, including design, project co-ordination, contract administration and site inspection. While working on such major pr ojects as the Deseronto Water Treatment Plant and Durham Region’s Newcastle Water Supply Plant, she became certified by the Project Management Institute (PMI) as a Project Management Professional (PMP).
In addition, Lok became a member of the Ontario Water Works Association (OWWA), where she has served as young professional (YP) chair and has mentored up-and-coming water professionals.
Nico Malfara, 34, has been HDR’s transit sector leader for Canada since July 2024, overseeing a $40-million portfolio of infrastructure projects and a team of 90 professionals. He is based in Vancouver.
Malfara’s connection to public transit runs deep. Grow-
ing up in Toronto, he travelled with his grandmother for an hour by bus, subway and streetcar to reach a textile store; and in high school, his hockey team hauled its bags onto a city bus to the arena. When studying civil engineering at University of Toronto (U of T), he commuted 90 minutes via bus and subway. To this day, Malfara has never owned a car.
“I was also fascinated with construction and development,” he says. “My grandfather emigrated from Italy and built sew ers in the Toronto area. He told me all the time to become an engineer.”
Soon after graduating from U of T with his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil engineering, Malfara joined HDR as a transportation planner.
“HDR was one of the few engineering companies at the time with an office in downtown Toronto,” he says. “I really wanted to live and work downtown, commuting by bike, foot or transit. That was one of the driving forces behind the change.”
He also already knew about HDR and its strong reputation for transit projects through a former mentor.
“When I joined, the amount of support, respect and opportunity for growth and the atmosphere of collaboration blew me away,” he says. “I’ve been here for 10 years now and that’s a lot of the reason why. HDR is a large firm with 13,000 employees around the world, but has the feel of a close-knit family.”
His work since joining has involved complex, multidisciplinary initiatives, including the Ontario Line subway project in Toronto, the Hazel Mc-
Callion light-rail transit (LRT) line’s north extension in Brampton, Ont., and the Lakeshore Connecting Communities bus rapid transit (BRT) m aster plan for Mississauga, Ont.
“In my current role, I’m getting to lead projects in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario,” he explains, “and members of my teams are working internationally, as well.”
As one HDR manager puts it: “Nico’s name is associated with success.”
Jeffrey Ng, 38, is an electrical engineering lead for Stantec, based in Toronto, where he was born and raised.
“I was good at math and science,” he recalls. “When the time came to apply to university, my highest grades and the minimum thresholds led me to engineering, but I was clueless as to what that meant. It was only at some point during my first year that I realized I was in the right place!”
As Ng earned his bachelor’s
degree in electrical engineering at the University of Waterloo, he gained disparate co-op experiences, working at Bell Mobility, Toronto Hydro, the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA), Christie D igital Systems and Jana Laboratories. He planned to become a programmer until he discovered consulting engineering through a final co-op term at Smith + Andersen.
“Because of my exposure to different sectors of electrical engineering, I was able to pick and choose what my career would be,” he says. “Walking onto a building construction site in a hard hat, vest and boots and seeing contractors installing raw materials inspired me to go into consulting
rather than programming from behind a desk.”
After graduating, Ng worked full-time for Smith + Andersen and then Mantecon Partners, a smaller outfit in Dundas, Ont. A headhunter brought him to Stantec in 2020, where he rose from associate to senior associate to principal.
“I rarely get to work on-site in a hard hat anymore,” he says, “but I never want to let go of managing a team, mentoring, peer-reviewing and stamping work. I probably spend 30 hours a week on projects and 20 supporting the team and on business development.”
His current focus is primarily on health-care projects, including the Peter Gilgan Mississauga Hospital. With
construction beginning this year, it will reportedly be the largest hospital in North America.
Beyond his practice, Ng participates in volunteer programs to help students and young professionals (YPs) develop and learn about science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). These include the Emerging Green Professional (EPG) initiative and the Architecture, Construction and Engineering ( ACE) Mentor Program of Canada. Through his involvement, he hopes to inspire young professionals (YPs) to adopt sustainable practices.
Mathew Reynolds, 37, is a senior bridge engineer based in North Vancouver. As head of the national roads and major crossings discipline for COWI, tackling projects across North America, he enjoys combining a technical focus with people
management.
“My father owned a construction business in Edmonton,” he recalls. “I enjoyed spending time on job sites and learning not only how things were built, but also how he dealt with issues as a business owner.”
Following his father’s guidance, Reynolds earned his bachelor’s degree in civil engineering at University of Alberta, working one summer as a sur veyor for Associated Engineering. He then switched gears dr amatically with a master’s in biomedical engineering at the University of Oxford.
“I was considering going into medicine, but I saw a video of knee surgery and immediately fainted,” he laughs, “so it was not the right route for me!”
He returned to consulting engineering, conducting structural field reviews for RJC in Edmonton before joining COWI in North Vancouver as a bridge engineer. One of his standout projects was outside Canada: the Abraham Lincoln Bridge over the Ohio River in downtown Louisville, Kentucky. Its combination of single-row piles for the tower foundation and a three-tower arrangement resulted in a uniquely flexible cable-supported bridge.
“I worked on that project for more than four years and got to see it from start to finish,” he says. “Seeing the entire lifespan of a project was eye-opening.”
In 2016, Reynolds took a sabbatical from consulting to earn a PhD in structural engineering at University of California (UC) San Diego. Following
a stint with Kiewit, he returned to COWI, feeling better-prepared to lead projects and collaborate with experts.
“I’m more involved in the earlier stages now, especially for progressive design projects,” he explains. “In terms of detailed execution, I tend to back away and let other people do the fun stuff!”
Inspired by his academic experiences, Reynolds is also a regular guest lecturer for graduate seminars at the University of British Columbia’s (UBC’s) faculty of civil engineering and volunteers to mentor student teams involved in the faculty’s steel bridge design competitions.
Stapleton
Jessica Stapleton, 33, is an engineer, project manager and shareholder with Tatham Engineering’s office in Orillia, Ont. In addition to leading municipal improvement projects across Simcoe County,
she cont ributes to the firm’s employee recognition and young professionals (YPs) resource groups—the latter of which she is now transitioning to a corporate committee she will chair.
“My goal when I entered engineering was to contribute to the physical outline of the Toronto skyline,” she says. “I achieved that goal during summer internships with EllisDon, working on medical facilities for SickKids and Toronto Western—but as I took more courses at the University of Toronto (U of T), I discovered I didn’t want to be a str uctural engineer. I pivoted to the question of how I could improve the communities in which we live and work.”
As her drive shifted toward social purpose, Stapleton graduated with a clearer desire to become a consulting engineer. Early roles had her working on water and wastewater infrastructure and transportation projects.
“I wanted to combine those experiences into one package, which is how I found my way to Tatham,” she explains.
Another factor in that decision was moving north from the Gr eater Toronto Area (GTA) to Oro-Medonte to raise a family. Far from downtown Toronto, Tatham’s offices a re in Orillia, Barrie, Bracebridge, Collingwood, Guelph and Ottawa.
“It was important to find an organization that not only did the work I wanted to do and contributed to its communities,” Stapleton explains, “but also aligned with my values. I was fortunate to find one where I get to develop my passions on a foundation of
social causes.”
In another alignment of values, she became involved in Tatham’s internal mentorship program, as well as mentoring engineering students and new graduates externally, sharing her knowledge and providing guidance and support.
“I’m a people person,” she says, “and as I've progressed in this industry, I’ve appreciated how many avenues there are to network and collaborate. At my core, helping others is what recharges my batteries and fills my cup.”
Tom Woodcock, 38, is an instrumentation and control (I&C) manager and senior associate with R.V. Anderson Associates Limited (RVA) in London, Ont. He is also the newly elected president of the Ontario Water Works Association (OWWA).
“I started in the water industry young,” he says. “In my high
school years, I got a job reading meters in the summer. Eventually, I worked in the pipeyard, where I got to know a lot of the same valves and fittings I spec out now!”
It was his high-school chemistry teacher, meanwhile, who introduced him to engineering as a suitable profession.
“He was an engineer who had previously worked for ExxonMobil,” Woodcock recalls. “He recognized my skills and guided me along.”
Woodcock earned his bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering at Western University. During his third year, he interned at Labatt.
“I had my sights set on working at the local brewery,” he explains, “but while I was there, they merged with Anheuser-Busch and everyone I worked with got laid off!”
Perceiving greater stability in working on public infrastructure, Woodcock joined RVA as an engineer-in-training (EIT) after graduation. He went on to become engineer, associate, senior I&C engineer and lead I&C engineer.
“What’s kept me engaged is the culture of ownership,” he says. “Knowing about the associate program from the start, I could really impact change in business processes.”
One of the first projects Woodcock completed at RVA was a $12-million series of dewatering upgrades to London’s Gr eenway wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). He contributed to process and I&C design, site inspection, contract administration and commissioning. The project won a t echnical innovation award from the Ontario Public Works Association (OPWA).
Woodcock’s involvement in OWWA, meanwhile, began with volunteering for its young professionals (YPs) committee in 2011, where he organized leadership forums for university students across Ontario. He went on to chair that same committee in 2016 and to join OWWA’s board of
directors in 2020.
“Tom is dedicated to the success of all of those around him,” says Tyler Lahti, the RVA associate vice-president (AVP) to whom he reports. “He is instrumental in mentoring by sharing his technical knowledge and actively helping them grow their own careers.”
Make sure to nominate them next year!
By Stan Ridley
In reviewing the present and possible future for hydroelectric energy, both globally and particularly in Canada, I must confess that, with a more than 40-year career as a P.Eng. involved in major hydroelectric projects, I have a technical, environmental, operational and esthetic love for this water-driven technology.
Waterpower provides highly reliable, efficient and quickly dispatchable clean energy. The average carbon footprint of hydroelectric projects across their life cycle (LC) varies from about 20 to 30 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) greenhouse gases (GHGs) per megawatt hour (MWh)—representing only about 3% of the carbon footprints of fossil fuel-based energy generation systems—based on data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the International Hydropower Association (IHA).
While overall energy conversion efficiency for fossil fuel systems varies from about 20% to 60% and wind and solar energy generation ranges from 20% to 40%, large hydroelectric plants are typically 80% to 90% efficient, while smaller hydro systems are typically 60% to 80% efficient.
Globally, hydroelectricity accounts for about 7% of total primary energy consumption (TPEC), while fossil fuels represent about 81%, nuclear about 4%, wind 4% and solar 3%, based on statistics from the Energy Institute for 2024.
According to the Energy Institute, the top countries generating hydroelectricity in 2024 were China (30%), Brazil (9%), Canada (8%), the U.S. (5%), Russia (5%) and India
(4%). China operates the highest-capacity plant in the world, the Three Gorges development, which generates between 90,000 and 100,000 GWh/year.
Today’s total hydroelectric generation, however, is a fraction of the world’s theoretical potential. Global estimates vary considerably, but reasonably suggest a total of about 52,000 TWh/year. For a number of hydrological, geological, social, financial and environmental reasons, however, the realistic total that could be developed might be only 20% of the theoretical total or about 10,000 TWh/year—still more than double the 2024 hydroelectric total of 4,580 TWh.
There are many positive aspects about hydroelectric energy, including efficiency, relatively fast response time in ramping output up and down, small carbon footprint, high-capacity reservoirs, flexibility
with pumped storage and long operating lives for plants (typically 50 to 100 years). Further, water-driven power plants currently provide the largest storage capacity for intermittent renewable energy (e.g. wind and solar); more on that later.
However, there are also negative implications of large hydroelectric plants, including the high costs of developing them; the large land areas required for reservoirs, dams, plants, tunnels and spillways; the displacement of people, flora and fauna from flooded valleys; and emissions during construction and methane from decomposing biomass in reservoirs.
One must also be conscious that hydroelectric dams are tall, human-made structures that can fail, with devastating consequences. Engineers, including geologists, seismologists and hydrologists, spend time, energy and due diligence to (a) place these massive structures on geologically impervious foundations,
at significant distances from earthquake faults, and (b) design spillways with extra capacity to accommodate probable maximum floods (PMFs) in each reservoir catchment area.
In countries like China, India and Brazil, major hydroelectric developments are achieved at reasonable cost. Brazil’s 11,230-MW Belo Monte project, for example, reportedly cost $25 billion, equivalent to about $2,200 per kW. In Canada, unfortunately, the reported cost for British Columbia’s major new Site C hydroelectric development is about $14,000 per kW. We need to address this enormous disparity if we are to take advantage of our potential hydroelectric bounty.
Given the large capital investments, long timeframes for development, licensing, engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning (EPCC) and associated challenges, major hydroelectric projects with large reservoirs should be developed by provincial governments with the backing of the ratepayers who will inevitably foot the bill through their electricity bills.
EPCC contracts should be used for above-foundation facilities, with stringent liquidated damage (LD) requirements for non-performance
against completion schedules and performance thresholds, backed by ‘performance bonds.’
Foundations, including abutments, are much more indeterminate for geological and hydrological reasons and therefore require more flexible contractual arrangements.
I have witnessed the strength of EPCC contracts and the effect of LD payments to protect the owner and help maintain operations and maintenance (O&M) and economic viability for a project over its lifetime.
Indeed, while major new hydroelectric projects face significant financial challenges upfront, over time they produce some of the least expensive and cleanest electricity. On a global basis, their levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) averages about $80/MWh—though it is typically about $140/MWh in more developed countries.
Smaller ‘run-of-river’ hydroelectric projects involve much lower capital costs, shorter development timelines and less intrusive environmental and social impacts, but generate ‘non-firm’ and non-dispatchable electricity by allowing normal river flows to pass directly through their turbines. With little or no storage capacity, however, high flows often cannot pass through the turbines; instead, they must be released
downriver.
Such developments are more suited to private-sector development and financing.
7%
In my May/June 2025 column, I mentioned how pumped-storage systems and large reservoirs provide the lion’s share of viable storage for energy from intermittent solar and wind sources. They can be ramped up and down relatively quickly in response to the vagaries of the wind, sunshine and cloud cover, offering reliability and security for clean energy.
Such developments are fraught with a number of significant challenges, however, including the natural locations of reservoirs relative to the suitable wind and solar farm sites, interconnection requirements, frequency control, synchronization, spinning reserves and the resulting need for ‘smart’ transmission and distribution systems.
Significant research and development (R&D), investigations, analyses and projects are underway in many jurisdictions to develop viably scalable solutions to these challenges.
Canada is extraordinarily blessed with significant hydroelectric resources, intermittent renewable energy potential (particularly for wind power) and fossil fuels. With global warming and climate change, however, we will need to significantly reduce our consumption of fossil fuels over the next few decades. While Ontario enjoys the benefits of nuclear plants, which can significantly displace fossil fuels, and such facilities may also soon be developed in Alberta and Saskatchewan, the mix of energy sources in British Columbia and Quebec is more likely to marry hydroelectricity to intermittent renewables.
By Scott Belton
On the surface, the future of consulting engineering l ooks bright. Total spending on new construction continues to rise. In Ontario, for example, five mega-projects are expected to reach completion this year, including the Gordie Howe International Bridge (pictured).
Yet, despite some optimistic figures, industry leaders are apprehensive. U.S. tariffs may have a chilling effect on business investment in Canada, at the same time as other potential risks to an engineering firm’s bottom line, from skilled labour shortages and a challenging claims environment to insolvencies across the construction industry. Uncertainty is high and resilience may be in short supply.
Consulting engineering firms that can demonstrate ada ptability and flexibility will be positioned to come out ahead in terms of profitability. One crucial—and sometimes volatile— factor is insurance pricing to secure appropriate insurance coverage.
The following is a forecast for ratings in 2025:
Professional liability
Flat to down 5%. While the claims environment is deteriorating, insurers are largely in growth mode, so we a re seeing them deploy new or additional professional liability capacity. This is leading to increased competition and driving down rates.
The market softening will be more evident for certain engineering disciplines and in the small to mid-market business segment. Higher-hazard disciplines and project types will continue to attract additional scrutiny from insurers. There is a more limited number of insurers that have the appetite and expertise to handle the primary exposures for larger consulting engineering firms, which means they are likely to see less competition and downward pressure on rates.
It is also worth noting that with their increased appetite for new business, we are seeing more insurers enter—or re-enter—the single project professional liability space, which has been very limited in the past five years.
Liability
Flat to down 5%. Carriers are looking to diversify their business, so terms and pricing are flexible and competitive.
Flat. These policies have remained relatively stable, although firms with significant exposures may face difficulty.
Flat to down 10%. Most segments are seeing rate reductions, but many properties are not insured for full rebuilding costs. Firms should check to be sure they have appropriate coverage.
Flat to up 5%. An increase in catastrophic weather events is pushing some rates higher, especially in areas known for climate change issues.
Flat to down 10%. Insurers are looking to broaden their client base, but are also tightening their coverage requirements and renewal restrictions. It is particularly important here to pay attention to the details before adopting a new policy.
Flat to down 10%. As long as there is competition for business and sufficient capacity, these policies remain competitive
Cyber liability
Flat to down 10%. The cyber market is improving, with increased coverage
options available, so rates remain competitive.
As consulting engineering firms look to successfully navigate roadblocks, it is important to understand the right ways to counter risks. The following are some best practices to consider:
1. Invest carefully in technology to improve productivity. With so many technology solutions promising to aid in productivity, it is crucial to consider them while still staying wise to their dangers. Issues with privacy and quality abound. Cybercrime is a real risk to the industry and very few engineering firms are truly prepared to protect their businesses.
Develop a cybersecurity response plan to explore your technology-related risks. Don’t forget to train all employees to spot red flags and avoid
costly mistakes. Then your firm will be well-positioned to benefit from technology’s promises of greater productivity.
2. Invest in people for stronger engagement.
Consulting engineering firms looking to enhance employee well-being and productivity should place some focus on personal insurance. Personalized benefits are a strong way to differentiate one firm from another and drive employee engagement and retention.
Firms that take the time to develop a customized workforce solution can ensure they are providing the kind of coverage their employees truly want and need, from child care to education to mental health supports.
3. Invest in finding the right broker. Take the time to find an experienced specialty broker who can identify appropriate insurance options and
alternative risk transfer options for your business. Specialty brokers are especially useful for reviewing contract language to minimize liabilities.
New and evolving project delivery methods have implications for insurance programs. If you are working on a very large project, for instance, the broker may become even more important, as risk management becomes increasingly complex with each additional partner that joins the project team. With this in mind, project-specific insurance can protect the rest of the firm from a major incident.
Scott Belton is vice-president (VP) of professional l iability at g lobal i nsurance b rokerage Hub International. His team provides risk management an d ins urance solutions to Canadian professional services firms and technology companies, as well as advice and actionable insights on professional liability, errors an d o missions, c yber an d p rivacy liability, directors and officers liability and commercial insurance. For more information, visit www.hubinternational.com.
By Shirley Xiao
In today’s electrical power distribution market, busway—also known as ‘busduct ’—has emerged as an efficient alternative to traditional cabling, especially in high-rise commercial buildings, industrial plants and data centres. It is important for engineers to understand busways’ technical characteristics and variations, how they compare to cables and how to choose the right solution for a specific project.
Busway is a prefabricated, modular electrical distribution system where busbars— typically copper or aluminum—are enclosed in a grounded metal housing. These systems are designed to efficiently transport electrical power across long distances within buildings or industrial facilities. They are especially effective in scenarios requiring high amperage and frequent electrical transformer load changes (i.e. ‘tap-offs’).
Busways offer advantages of easy installation, compact size and scalability. They support plug-in or tap-off units at various intervals, allowing new circuits to be added without requiring the system to be shut down.
There are a variety of system and application types.
Feeder busways transport large amounts of
power from the main switchgear or transformer to distribution panels. They are designed for high current ratings and typically not accessed frequently for tap-offs.
Feeder busways are common in facilities with high electrical loads, such as automotive plants, steel mills and data centres. They can run both horizontally or vertically; the latter configuration is also referred to as ‘riser busway.’
Plug-in busway
These feature access points at regular intervals, where plug-in units can draw power. They provide a high degree of flexibility, allowing for the addition or removal of loads without having to shut down the system. This makes them ideal for manufacturing floors and laboratories, among other dynamic workspaces
Lighting or track busway
Specifically designed for low-power loads like lighting fixtures, these busways are particularly compact and easy to install. They often use a track-style mounting system, enabling fixtures to be repositioned without the use of tools. Such flexibility is ideal for retail environments, galleries, commercial office spaces and, increasingly
commonly, data centres for the power distribution of server racks.
Cabling and busways can both connect, protect and distribute power effectively. The type of application and certain use cases are key factors in system selection.
Electrical engineers may specify busway (a) when a project requires frequent load changes/tap-offs, (b) in space-constrained environments or existing distribution footprints, (c) when a project prioritizes installation speed and/or compact design or (d) if scalability is needed or future reconfigurations are expected.
Cabling, on the other hand, may be preferred when (a) the power distribution routing is complex or irregular, (b) there is constant vibration or movement in the environment or (c) the project needs readily available inventory. (Busways, by contrast, are typically made to order.)
Choosing a busway system also involves evaluating its safety, durability, cost and digital reading.
Safety and endurance
To balance compact installation and high performance, modern busways for power
distribution are usually a ‘sandwich’ type, whereby the phase-phase and phase-ground are segregated by an insulation material. The insulation, commonly an epoxy, is critical to ensure long-term safety for the system.
Different manufacturers use different processes for ‘coating’ the epoxy layer between bars. It is important to review the manufacturer’s data sheet for safety and performance indicators like thermal class, dielectric strength, flame resistance and moisture resistance. A high-quality coated epoxy insulation also offers strong mechanical properties in terms of adherence, durability and the prevention of cracks when bending
Another important consideration is the area where two busway sections join together. After years of operation, these joint connections can become loose, short-circuit and
break. A fully enclosed and enforced ‘joint guard’ design will help provide protection and reduce the risk of failure over long periods of operation-related stress.
Some manufacturers offer colour-coded bolts to indicate the proper toque, making it easier to perform routine checks and maintenance and help extend the life of the busway.
While the pricing of materials is important to consider upfront, a system’s long-term performance can yield significant savings in terms of total cost of ownership (TCO).
Superior epoxy coatings reduce energy losses and current leakage. Low-impedance joints help minimize voltage drops and operating costs. And again, high-quality insulation increases system lifespan and reduces maintenance and downtime.
Like other building systems, busways have become ‘smart.’ Some integrate smart sensing and metering, support remote diagnostics and enable communication via tap-off units.
Selecting the right busway system for a given project is important in helping ensure safe, efficient and cost-effective power distribution. The decision involves assessing current and future needs and then ev aluating the various options’ technical features, TCO and manufacturer support.
Ultimately, the right solution will deliver the most advantageous combination of performance and longterm value.
By James Little and David Leck
In an ideal world, engineers are not asked to replace or supplement each other’s work. Circumstances may arise, however, where an owner or contractor disengages one engineer and asks another to complete their work. Such a request could be related to the first engineer’s product or to external interference.
There are risks to this scenario that both outgoing and incoming engineers may face, which need to be managed effectively
This column will examine some of the intricacies from the perspective of an engineer who assumes responsibility for another’s work.
Professional engineers in Canada face a number of obligations, including those required by law. Indeed, they are held to a professional standard of care through both common law and provincial legislation.
They are not held to a standard of perfection; the mere fact of a failure does not imply fault or impropriety on their part. However, an engineer’s design will have fallen below the standard reasonably required in circumstances if the materialized risk was both foreseeable and avoidable by use of a design that matched stateof-the-art standards.
Engineers in Canada are also subject to an ethical framework that governs their actions to ensure they maintain trust with the public and uphold the integrity of their profession. In Ontario, for example, an engineer r eviewing or supplementing another’s work has a statutory obligation to inform the other practitioner of their engagement to do so, where they both work for the same employer (but not if the other practitioner has been terminated).
Engineers in Ontario also have a statutory obligation to give the other practitioner proper credit for work. These standards and obligations exist whether an engineer’s product is derived from another’s work or prepared entirely from scratch.
Standards and obligations exist whether or not an engineer’s work is derived from another’s.
Whenever an engineer is asked to assume another’s work, the risks that come into play are:
• Legal: The incoming engineer may be held liable for any defects or deficiencies in the work product, even if they were not originally responsible for creating them.
• Professional: Taking over another engineer’s work can lead to conflicts, especially if the outgoing engineer was disengaged due to performance issues.
• Financial: Errors or omissions in the assumed work can result in financial losses for the owner or contractor, which may be attributed to the incoming engineer.
The incoming engineer will not be excused from liability simply because their work was derived from another’s faulty work. An engineer
issuing a design or opinion can be held liable for negligent misrepresentation when that design or opinion is faulty or inaccurate—and if another party, who may foreseeably rely upon such design or opinion, incurs losses as a result of reasonable reliance on it.
Engineers have an obligation to exercise due diligence. If they rely upon information from others that turns out to be false or insufficient, they must take the consequences. An exception may arise where an engineer’s scope of services to complete another engineer’s work is limited by contract.
The following scenarios may present risks that require a thorough review of the existing work, clear communication with all stakeholders and a detailed understanding of legal and professional obligations:
Reliance on site condition reports
Where the incoming engineer accepts the site condition report of a previously engaged engineer, they may be liable if a failure arises out of their reliance on such a report.
Reliance on prior conformance reports
Where the incoming engineer accepts prior conformance reviews completed by a previously engaged engineer, they may be liable for mishaps arising out of components previously been deemed in conformance with standards or legislation. In such circumstances, the scope of services they are retained to perform is particularly relevant.
Interfacing with existing project components
Engineers may be consulted to prepare designs that interface with existing project components or designs prepared by others. The manner in
which they exercise due diligence is particularly relevant, as they may be expected to ensure the components are fit for their intended purpose.
Risk mitigation practices
There are steps incoming engineers can take to manage the aforementioned risks.
• Avoid issuing professional opinions or certifications without conducting due diligence.
• Speak to in-house (or external) legal counsel, if available, about the risks and requirements of your retainer.
• Wherever practical, conduct an independent review of any critical prior work (e.g. soils reports or structural analysis).
• Clarify and document the scope of services and exclusions in the engagement letter.
• If possible (and if approved by the client), make sure to communicate with the prior engineer.
• Use written disclaimers where appropriate to document the limitations of your reliance on the prior engineer’s work product.
ACO Qmax has been developed to satisfy the demand for a versatile, high capacity slot drainage system for a wide range of applications to any load class. The system is specifically designed to form an integral part of modern, sustainable surface water management solution requiring effective collection, storage, or attenuation. ACO Qmax is also economical compared with traditional drainage methods. Email: info@acocan.ca
As a leader in sustainable solutions, Rheem Canada is committed to empowering engineering professionals in building a greener future. With significant investments in R&D, our portfolio features high-efficiency heat pumps and tankless water heaters, achieving industry-leading performance metrics like 96% energy efficiency and 20+ SEER ratings. Rheem's technologies enable substantial reductions in energy consumption, contributing to Canada’s national decarbonization targets and fostering the development of resilient, sustainable infrastructure. Learn more at www.rheem.ca/sustainability
The decision by an owner or contractor to replace or supplement one engineer’s work with another’s is significant. If this situation occurs, both the outgoing and incoming engineers should proceed with caution and work collaboratively, so as to ensure the incoming engineer is fully aware of the existing work.
From the perspective of the incoming engineer, a number of measures should be undertaken to mitigate risk—each of which may warrant the replacement of the other engineer’s work if it cannot be confidently relied upon.
Lightweight, no burnthrough Champion Fiberglass® Elbows protect data center cables while minimizing elbow repairs. They offer a fast, seamless installation that contributes to a lower total cost of ownership for projects. Download the updated Elbow eGuide today. Championfiberglass.com/281.655.8900
In July, Hatch became the first consulting engineering firm to invest in R-LABS, a real estate venture builder established in 2018 to co-create and scale up new companies. Examples to date have included: Assembly, which prefabricates wooden modular housing as a product; Noah, whose software platform uses physics-based modelling to assess localized flood risks; and HomePorter, which deploys visual artificial intelligence (AI) in home inspections to modernize the resulting reports.
Hatch, with its new investment, aims to help address further challenges relating to real estate across C anada. We spoke about such opportunities with George Carras, founder and CEO of R-LABS, who has a background in both civil engineering and real estate.
Why did you found R-LABS?
Pronounced like ‘our labs,’ it represents a unique partnership—the only one in the world— of corporations and institutions that believe big pr oblems in real estate and housing need novel solutions from companies that don’t exist yet. We work with entrepreneurs to assess and validate ideas until a new company can be born to solve a particular problem. We build ventures and then help fund them as they become true companies.
The partners within the lab bring what we call the four Cs: capability, capital, a co-creation mindset and commitment.
What is the lab working on now?
We’re following an ‘innovation map’
we developed last fall for the industrialization of housing in Canada, where there is a natural need for land registry, insurance, financial and engineering capabilities, among others.
Another area we are focusing on is urban surge water and resiliency, where Noah has been doing property-level flood risk assessments. These companies have their own business models, but are strategically related in the problem sets they’re addressing.
How can engineers take part in this process?
We’re excited to have Hatch join us as an engineering partner. Their culture is both entrepreneurial and technical and they’ve realized what they can do by bringing novel think-
“The industrialization of housing in Canada needs engineering capabilities.”
ing and working with others.
I would say it comes from a place of enlightened self-interest. Not everyone cares about everything— there are certain problem areas, ventures and companies that are more strategic for some partners than others—but synergies can be formed when we all get together. Ideas go into the lab and then can move forward.
Our partners remain involved in new companies as part owners. They can help them grow and, in turn, the growth of these companies helps their core business in ways they couldn’t do on their own. They are direct beneficiaries.
Engineers are gifted with capabilities they can apply in new ways. We’re at a point in time in Canada where a lot of that is needed!
No burn-through eliminates elbow repairs
Light weight facilitates a smooth, safe installation
Fault resistance makes repairing cables easy
Durable and corrosion-resistant for lower total cost of ownership
LEARN MORE ABOUT CSA LISTED FIBERGLASS CONDUIT
