<p>I am just finishing up my Freshman year at UW-Madison and have to decide what I want to do in the College of Engineering. Currently my intended major is nuclear engineering, however given the recent events at ***ushima, I am unsure about its future. Would it be smart to change to Electrical Engineering instead? Renewable Energy sources like solar and wind seem to have a brighter futures.</p>
<p>Change to engineering physics and go into fusion research.</p>
<p>[Fusion</a> Technology Institute](<a href=“http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/fti]Fusion”>http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/fti)</p>
<p>@contramundum09 - What is the reasoning behind that?</p>
<p>@tysonwil - I know this is very cynical, but ***ushima haha</p>
<p>When we visited RPI a few weeks ago,somebody asked an engineering dean about prospects in nuclear engineering. She stated that despite recent world events, even if every country stopped their nuclear programs, we’re gonna have reactors and their waste around for a VERY long time. Ergo, we’re gonna need nuclear engineers for a very long time.</p>
<p>@MADad: while I do agree with you on that point, if that were to happen the demand would be very low. However despite what happened in Japan I still believe nuclear energy will rebound in 5-10 years when people start to realize it will be the most effective and environmentally safe energy option available. I feel like nuclear gets a bad rap just because of silly mistakes that the government could have easily avoided. I mean, chernobyl? It happened only because of poor construction, poor design and just outright stupidity. ***ushima could have been avoided if the nuclear company thought about the possibility that one of the many many tsunamis in Japan could destroy the plant. I am hoping after the events in Japan that governments around the world would invest more in the safety of nuclear facilities.</p>
<p>The US has 104 nuclear plants and is building a few more right now. The majority of nuclear engineers at these plants will be within retirement age in 5 to 10 years. Someone has to replace them. The operating nuke plants will continue to operate for probably another 20 years minimum. They will need nuclear engineers for some time to come.</p>
<p>Also, nuclear engineers are not only employed within the nuclear power utility field. There are needs for nuclear engineers in the nuclear medicine field. </p>
<p>We need more nuclear engineers to help design future nuclear power plants too. Nuclear engineering is not that big of a field and there are not that many students studying nuke engineering. Please don’t think that the recent events in Japan are going to kill the nuclear power industry. People will realize that the sun doesn’t alway shine and the wind doesn’t always blow and the world will continue to need the power provided by nuclear until we come up with something better.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure you mean the US is building a few more reactors. A new nuclear power plant hasn’t been built in over 30 years.</p>
<p>vcelts123:</p>
<p>Just to be clear, I wasn’t expressing my opinion, but that of an engineering dean at RPI. I don’t know enough this field to formulate an opinion!!</p>
<p>Mr. Steven Chu seems to be pushing the Nuclear Reactors very aggressively.</p>
<p>Good distinction, MADad. We should be building more nuclear power plants.</p>
<p>One catastrophe doesn’t mean the end of the word for nuclear engineers. If anything, nuclear engineers are in even more demand for safety designs concerning fission reactors. there is also nonproliferation, health physics, radiation imaging, fusion research, fission research, etc.</p>