Chemical Engineers (and All Who Knew Him) Mourn the Passing of Nick Chopey

Feb. 27, 2007
I was saddened to learn that Nicholas P. Chopey, with whom I'd had the pleasure of working several years ago, just passed away.  Nicholas had been the Editor in Chief of Chemical Engineering magazine for many years, and was Executive Editor of that publication when I was there in the 1990s.  Nick was the antithesis of the stereotypical engineer, with wide ranging interests.  He travelled widely, was a voracious reader, and a conoisseur of opera and classical music.  But he was also a very fine engineer, the author of numerous reference books and articles,  and an extremely meticulous editor, who applied red ink very liberally whenever a technical concept was not explained as correctly or clearly as possible.   However, unlike so many editors, and engineers, he was as tactful and diplomatic as could be in making his point, whether he was criticizing a writer, an editor, or a distinguished engineering expert; it was this quality that endeared him to so many people.  Whenever heated technical discussions or debates began to cross the boundary into argument, his was the quiet voice of reason that  returned everyone to the topic at hand and made the instigators feel ashamed of themselves. He was, in short, one of that disappearing breed: the gentleman. I'm one of many who will miss him, and send heartfelt sympathies to his family and colleagues.  
I was saddened to learn that Nicholas P. Chopey, with whom I'd had the pleasure of working several years ago, just passed away.  Nicholas had been the Editor in Chief of Chemical Engineering magazine for many years, and was Executive Editor of that publication when I was there in the 1990s.  Nick was the antithesis of the stereotypical engineer, with wide ranging interests.  He travelled widely, was a voracious reader, and a conoisseur of opera and classical music.  But he was also a very fine engineer, the author of numerous reference books and articles,  and an extremely meticulous editor, who applied red ink very liberally whenever a technical concept was not explained as correctly or clearly as possible.   However, unlike so many editors, and engineers, he was as tactful and diplomatic as could be in making his point, whether he was criticizing a writer, an editor, or a distinguished engineering expert; it was this quality that endeared him to so many people.  Whenever heated technical discussions or debates began to cross the boundary into argument, his was the quiet voice of reason that  returned everyone to the topic at hand and made the instigators feel ashamed of themselves. He was, in short, one of that disappearing breed: the gentleman. I'm one of many who will miss him, and send heartfelt sympathies to his family and colleagues.  
About the Author

pharmamanufacturing | pharmamanufacturing