<p>My son believes that Nuclear Engineering will be the up and coming field in the future. Thoughts on whether or not it will be. Im clueless where engineering goes.</p>
<p>He is also looking into Chemical as well.</p>
<p>Just looking for some input on this. He is a rising sophomore in HS</p>
<p>I am also interested in nuclear engineering as a possibility.</p>
<p>Anybody have any thoughts? </p>
<p>Is it a dying profession?</p>
<p>boring? exciting?</p>
<p>I definitely think it will be more in demand in the future. They're building a new state-of-the art nuclear powerplant just 90 miles from Houston in Texas.</p>
<p>Wisconsin has a top Chem E and and a nuclear program complete with on campus reactor.
<a href="http://www.engr.wisc.edu/che/%5B/url%5D">http://www.engr.wisc.edu/che/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.engr.wisc.edu/ep/neep/%5B/url%5D">http://www.engr.wisc.edu/ep/neep/</a></p>
<p>I think cornell is known for nuclear, for what it's worth. I think it's only grad, though.</p>
<p>BLS says the job market for CE's will grow at the average rate, and NE's will grow slower than average. Those statistics are nation-wide though.</p>
<p>Thankf for the input. I think he may lead to engineering physics. But who knows - he has so many options.</p>
<p>if he is really into Nuclear I think Texas A&M should definitely be on his list. It was like #2 in it when US News last ranked unfortunately I don't know the new rankings. Also with its relative location to the Texas Nuclear project it is a huge hiring ground for the project according to one of my dad's friends(he is a manager on the project.) Plus the Aggie Alumni association is huge and you will never have a problem finding a job if an Aggie is hiring.</p>
<p>I'm a chemical engineer with 15 years of experience in all the major markets including nuclear power plants.</p>
<p>Chemical engineering is FAR superior to nuclear.</p>
<p>For one, there are a lot more opportunities for employment in chemical engineering. Nuclear is very limited and they even end up hiring chemical engineers too a lot.</p>
<p>Second, most of the best nuclear positions are filled from ex-military (usually Navy). Not for security reasons, but because all the nuke sub guys go there when they go private sector.</p>
<p>Third, nuclear engineering is incredibly impeded by government bureaucracy. It takes nuke plants 2 years to make changes that an oil refinery can make in 2 days due to all the regulations and paperwork that is required.</p>
<p>Fourth, chemical is much more leverageable if your son decides to go on to another field (e.g. law school, med school, etc.)</p>
<p>Between those two....definitely go with chemical.</p>
<p>Carth</p>
<p>Carth is right on all counts. Your competition is the Navys nuclear power program (of which I am an alum). Navy nukes spend a year in shore-based training, and four to five years operating a naval nuclear reactor. All US submarines and most aircraft carriers are nuclear powered. After that, if they choose to leave active duty, Navy nuclear engineers are much more desirable than a college graduate to a civilian nuclear plant operator.</p>
<p>No new nuclear power plants have been licensed in the US since the late 1970s. I believe the Texas facility is a Uranium enrichment plant. (These need nuclear engineers, too, so there are <em>some</em> jobs there.) The future may see a little growth, but I expect it will be slow for a loooong time to come. It's become completely politicized, and one political party opposes any expansion in nuclear power. </p>
<p>It is definitely a 'niche' field. If you feel compelled to enter the field, then sign up for Navy ROTC and go that route. I can guarantee you that reactor operations is much more interesting on a submarine than in a far-from-everything civil power plant. </p>
<p>As for Carth's other comments, it's surely slow-motion engineering, with maximum federal regulation and limited growth potential. If you're concerned that your job will be 'boring', then I would avoid it.</p>
<p>I have to add Carth is right on course my dad went into the Navy and became the guy in charge of the Nuclear reactor on his sub and when he left the Navy he had no trouble at all finding a job and now he doesn't even work with Nuclear Reactors instead he manages several power plants in Florida. So the Navy is another way to go.</p>
<p>carth-where do you currently work(company and state) and how much money do you make?</p>
<p>Is that all what students care about:-money?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is that all what students care about:-money?
[/quote]
I think you got it pretty much right.</p>
<p>Unless your son has a die hard passion for Nuclear Engineering its much safer to pick one of the big 3 engineerings majors (EE, ChemE or MechE) for undergraduate and then pursue Nuclear in graduate school.</p>
<p>I see, so they are "the big 3 engineerings majors"</p>
<p>These were some harsh comments about nuclear engineers...</p>
<p>Anything good about nukeEng?</p>
<p>
[quote]
its much safer to pick one of the big 3 engineerings majors (EE, ChemE or MechE) for undergraduate
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are actually four engineering disciplines that account for the large majority of engineering majors. ChemE is not one of the three largest.</p>
<p>Most commonly conferred engineering</a> BS degrees, 2003-2004:</p>
<p>14,123 Electrical
14,050 Mechanical
7,827 Civil
4,742 Chemical</p>
<p>Most commonly conferred engineering</a> MS degrees, 2003-2004:</p>
<p>9,511 Electrical
4,420 Mechanical
3,790 Civil
1,165 Chemical</p>
<p>nuclear engineering is dying unfortunately</p>
<p>in terms of finding a job</p>
<p>Actually, it's not dying at all. Many people who are currently nuclear engineers are retiring soon, and they need replacement. Plus, with our current oil "drought", I believe that we're going to see more nuclear plants sprouting up in the US</p>