The Channel Tunnel project to link Great Britain and France has been under consideration since the 19th century. Several attempts have been made, but until recently no project had been supported sufficiently to ensure success. In 1986, in response to British and French government invitation, a twin bored rail‐tunnel scheme submitted by the Anglo‐French promoter Channel Tunne Group‐France Manche was accepted. The scheme is privately financed and will be owned by Eurotunnel—a private sector Anglo‐French group—which is required to build and operate the fixed link under a 55‐year concession. The scheme is called “Eurotunnel” and incorporates two rail tunnels and an interlinked service tunnel and terminals near Folkstone in England and Coquelles in France. The system is based on rail transportation but permits private and commercial road vehicles to be carried on a shuttle system in addition to transporting rail passengers and rail freight by conventional means. The capital cost is just under £2.8 billion and a mix of equity and loan finance has been raised of just over £6 billion.

The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop regulations that limit the level of contaminants in public drinking waters. The 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act further expands the agency's role in specifying numerical limits for physical, chemical, and biological parameters. The effect of changing water policies in the United States is illustrated by using the proposed Surface Water Treatment Requirements Rule (SWTRR) as an example. The SWTRR will affect every surface water system in the United States. Those systems which do not currently filter will need to satisfy an ongoing set of rigid requirements to avoid filtration. For systems that already filter their water, new degrees of disinfection and treatment are being proposed. Information is also presented regarding the assistance that research centers and foundations can provide for both developing and developed nations. In particular, the roles of the American Water Works Research Foundation and the Water Research Centre of Great Britain are examined.

Major water projects are encountering increasing public resistance owing to some past failures to take into account all impacts during project evaluation. New delaying factors include undergoing the public consultative process, paying intervenors, seeking public‐policy decisions, and taking government polls to measure public perception. Worthwhile works are being held up beyond reasonable time frames such that the public safety may be put at unnecessary risk. Public perception seems to be replacing sound engineering judgment, B/C ratios, and man‐years of employment as yardsticks for evaluating projects. The engineer must act as an innovative catalyst to better educate politicians and the public in order to create better public perception. The public must obtain the best value for their money. Project delivery systems are available to determine the legitimacy and appropriateness of specific capital proposals. Methods are suggested for streamlining evaluations so that projects will be funded and constructed.

Water and the need for water are different in important respects from transport, energy, and hazardous waste disposal. Water has developed into a monopolistic position since no other alternative to water for its intended domestic use exists. In any water policy, not only the technical elements, but the political and financial element must be recognized as well. The role civil engineers play in the formulation of water policy and the need for civil engineers to understand and interact with politicians and financiers is discussed.

It is contended that there is no need for a general strategy towards transport infrastructure, since expenditure on infrastructure is simply a subset of expenditure in the transport system as a whole. Transport policy is considered as a governmental or societal response to technology and consumer preference, applying to the whole transport system. Aspects of policy relating to the control and management of various transport modes are discussed, first for the United Kingdom and then for the later developing countries. A distinction is drawn between regulatory policy, which is seen as fundamental, and policy arising from public ownership, which is seen as accidental. In the light of the discussion on policy, civil engineers are judged to have no unique role in decisions on policy. There is discussion of the important contribution that civil engineers can nonetheless make arising from their orientation towards practical achievement. Ways and means of increasing the influence of civil engineers are discussed, inter alia by increasing the number of women in the profession.

Infracture needs are growing and are dominated by transportation requirements. About 70 percent of the urgent needs are accounted for by highways and bridges. Civil engineers must take a concerted approach including education, technology, innovation, decision‐making, and research. Civil engineers should be leaders in formulating plans for innovation and research. New tools are becoming available to provide in‐depth analyses of total transportation systems. The projects must be planned and programmed for the entire life cycle, including construction operation and maintenance. Because of retirements, there will be a tremendous turnover among senior transportation engineers. This will provide opportunities to exploit this period of change and execute improvement programs. The education and training programs should be oriented to this change. Of vital importance is research in the design and construction of transportation facilities.

The civil engineer has traditionally played a leading role in energy development. His technological achievements in energy‐producing facilities formed the bases for the growth of energy industries that have helped to propel and shape our advanced societies. Today, the civil engineer's role has shifted dramatically in response to society's concerns over the environment, safety, and social policy. The civil engineer must reshape his role to address the planning and establishment of energy policies, education of the public in risk and reliability assessment, long‐term energy needs in developing countries, the management of engineering, and interaction with the nonengineering disciplines and aspects of society. This will require the engineer to rise to his full status as a professional and leader of society.

Current forecasts of energy and electricity demand growth to the end of this century are critically reviewed and attention is drawn to the heavy burden that financing this expansion will impose, especially on the developing countries. Supply‐side investment is likely to be constrained by financing problems and by growing sensitivity to the environmental impact of energy production; both will need to be addressed if the world demand for energy is to be satisfied. The prospects for the exploitation of domestic energy resources in the United Kingdom are then examined and the different scenarios that might be set up are discussed. The major part of the energy sector will eventually pass into private hands and increased weight will be placed on market forces to balance a multienergy economy. Finally, the scope available to suppliers of goods and services is briefly mentioned, as is the support to be sought from aid and financing agencies to overcome the funding problems that potential developers are likely to face.

The control of hazardous waste, particularly the cleanup of past disposal sites, ranks as the foremost environmental problem in the United States. Only recently have most industrialized nations realized the serious impact of the land disposal of hazardous wastes. This paper seeks to address the chronology of events that led the United States to confront its disposal problem and the subsequent legislation that was developed to remedy the situation. Brief discussions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, and the Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) are included. The presentation concludes with a summary of the current cooperative efforts being undertaken by the U.S. government and the private sector as well as a commentary on the legal ramifications to civil engineers.

Various satisfactory methods for the disposal of different types of wastes—liquid and solid, toxic and nontoxic—are described, including incineration and land burial. The main principles for the design and safe operation of land‐based burial sites to prevent pollution are stated. For radioactive wastes, sea dumping is no longer acceptable in European countries, and the principles for the design of low‐ and intermediate‐level wastes accepted in Europe are also given. For high‐level wastes, vitrification is proceeding in the United Kingdom and France. Data on the quantities of wastes produced in Great Britain and a brief history of the legal controls on waste disposal are supplied. It is concluded that civil engineers may be increasingly confident that a variety of safe and satisfactory disposal routes for all forms of toxic and radioactive wastes are available.

The work carried out by the Tlatelolco Democratic Reconstruction Program included the demolition of eight buildings, the reconstruction in structure and foundation of 32 buildings, and the renovation of the finishings in 60 others, all out of 102 residential buildings. Such work, for its logistic complexity and magnitude, represents an exceptional work in the annals of the construction industry. It constitutes a synthesis of knowledge and experience in seismic engineering matter, structural design, and adaptation of construction techniques, among other disciplines used for the service of society, for its security and protection. This work was performed with part of the population occupying their apartments, while the rest of the residents were housed outside the urban unit, so the level of difficulty in the project's execution reached exceptional levels. It was necessary to establish actions of democratic harmony among the Tlatelolco residents and the reconstruction authorities, proving that there is no way other than a civilized understanding and democratic agreements, to reach success in all work being done in our world, which grows more complex and fallacious day by day. The Nonoalco Tlatelolco work has been called “a work of giants.”

The results of a survey conducted for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities on the condition of urban infrastructure in Canadian cities and towns are presented. The major emphasis was on roads, bridges, sewage collection and treatment, and water distribution and treatment systems. The Canadian findings are also compared with the reported U.S. situation. Although not as serious as in the U.S. cities, the survey shows that a significant decline has occurred in the condition of some infrastructure Systems in Canadian urban areas. Costs to bring the most seriously deteriorated components of infrastructure (roads, bridges, sewer, and water systems) back to acceptable levels are high. Even when spread over a 10‐year recovery period, these costs will require an increase in current public works budgets of about 25%.