<p>"Also…I wonder about the future of petroleum engineering vs., say, a type of engineering that would relate more to developing solar or wind or other types of renewable technologies? "
-These are way too far in a future. They are too expansive right now. If some break thru occurs, then they may start being used more widely. Lots of Solar companies went broke very recently. Petroleum engineers are doing great. I know few kids who are about to graduate or still have another summer for internship. Oh, those are paid nicely and in most cases result in a future jobs, no working for free as lots of pre-meds do in Med. Reseach labs.</p>
<p>Yay another reminder of how important gas is and how unimportant our children are!</p>
<p>"Yay another reminder of how important gas is and how unimportant our children are! "
- Yep, our children will not need to go to work, they will not need a car, because the trend is to stay at home on parents dime. Having that much time, they might as well walk or bike everywhere. They definitely will not be important contributors, agree 100%, we making sure that less and less jobs are out there for them</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s sort of why I ask…engineers capable of improving these technologies so they are more affordable would be in high demand, I’d think.</p>
<p>Miami, I want to respond to you, but I honestly can’t figure out what you’re saying. Sorry :/</p>
<p>As I said, many lost their jobs, many companies went broke. When another Thomas Edison happen, then it is a possiblity. This research is very expensive, the money from oil / gas exploration, from being energy independent can be channeled to this research. Letting others to suck up our oil and gas, it will not make us safer / richer, just plain stupid to let them have it and them turn around and buy it from them.<br>
Roman, you know, you just not accepting the fact, i understand, many of your age are the same.</p>
<p>Ya Petroleum Engineering was a great degree to get bit now the market is saturated with too many. Because it’s lucrative many many students went for it across the US and now oil companies are over saturated and new graduates are not getting any kind of jobs or even internships. Strongly advise to not go into PE at this time. You will end up throwing 4 yrs. and money down the tube and possibly not find work.</p>
<p>Right and we are hitting another time when graduates are not getting jobs again due to the over saturation of PE graduates now. The degree got heavily marketed and now the jobs are taken up. Bad idea to go into PE right now.</p>
<p>Which is why top departments like the University of Oklahoma have placement rates approaching 97%.</p>
<p>Well, OU actually is in the top 17 for petroleum engineering.</p>
<p>But consider the working conditions.</p>
<p>Stem - stem - stem …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That always seems to be the problem with guessing demand 4 or 5 years out. Too bad trying the opposite tactic doesn’t seem very safe either – will journalism majors, for example, again be in high demand a half-decade hence? It seems unlikely.</p>
<p>My son’s currently a computer science major and it always seems to me that every other kid wants to major in CS. But he’ll finish with a CS/applied math/physics combination, so he should still stand out from the rest with a strong quantitative background.</p>
<p>STEM stem stem? What are you saying. I have a kid with an engineering degree who now has NO interest in working as an engineer…ever. She has a job, but not as an engineer. OTOH, her musician sibling is working in his field and supporting himself.</p>
<p>The most lucrative MAJOR doesn’t matter at all if you don’t get a job in that field.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is not just your imagination. Various schools are reporting record enrollment in their introductory CS courses for CS majors:</p>
<p>Berkeley CS 61A: 1,098 ( [UCB</a> Online Schedule of Classes: Search Results](<a href=“http://osoc.berkeley.edu/OSOC/osoc?p_term=FL&x=0&p_classif=--+Choose+a+Course+Classification+--&p_deptname=--+Choose+a+Department+Name+--&p_presuf=--+Choose+a+Course+Prefix%2FSuffix+--&y=0&p_course=61a&p_dept=cs]UCB”>http://osoc.berkeley.edu/OSOC/osoc?p_term=FL&x=0&p_classif=--+Choose+a+Course+Classification+--&p_deptname=--+Choose+a+Department+Name+--&p_presuf=--+Choose+a+Course+Prefix%2FSuffix+--&y=0&p_course=61a&p_dept=cs) )
Harvard CS 50: 664 ( <a href=“http://docs.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/reports/statistics/course_enrollment_statistics_icg.pdf[/url]”>http://docs.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/reports/statistics/course_enrollment_statistics_icg.pdf</a> )
Stanford CS 106A: 660 ( [Stanford?s</a> CS106A and the New New Economy | The Dish Daily](<a href=“http://www.thedishdaily.com/news/2013/09/24/stanford’s-cs106a-and-new-new-economy]Stanford?s”>http://www.thedishdaily.com/news/2013/09/24/stanford’s-cs106a-and-new-new-economy) )</p>
<p>You can’t just say STEM. We apparently have biologists coming out of our ears (all those Med school wanna bes). I have to agree with math and comp sci, espcially combined. “Big data” is a field that can be used in virtually any industry.</p>
<p>I think it’s helpful to have an idea of what majors offer the best employment prospects, of course. It’s an important piece of the puzzle. But does anyone think we should have mediocre or disinterested STEM performers forcing themselves into careers because job opportunities are less plentiful in the fields they’re more suited for? That can’t be good for STEM itself. If a potential journalism major decides to go into STEM instead, I hope he/she can become a good doctor or engineer for society’s sake; and I hope the student can find personal satisfaction in the field, as well.</p>
<p>Motivation, individual performance/talent, location, connections, and luck are pieces of the same puzzle. My kids have been fortunate but all of them - bio major, classical languages/poli sci major, and history major - have excellent jobs that pay well or, in the case of the law student, a federal clerkship and an associate position waiting after graduation. STEM is obviously not the answer for every student.</p>
<p>
That would sound impressive if there were more than 17 schools offering ABET accredited petroleum engineering 
Also I said that OU is a top school in the field. I was simply pointing out that Libertyinlight’s post is nonsense when one looks at the actual placement statistics.</p>
<p>You have to understand, in californiaaa’s world, STEM is the ticket to riches and happiness and everything else is useless. </p>
<p>Yes, these STEM fields pay well if you get a job. One of my good friends graduated from UMich this past spring with a degree in CS (through the engineering college- so the heavily quant/math/science degree) and only got a job in August- in a state he didn’t want to live in, getting paid far less than what a CS major “should” get paid. He was told by employers that CS graduates are oversaturated. Too many majors for too few CS jobs. Which isn’t surprising considering we started college at the very start of the great recession and my cohort was told to graduate in something “STEM”-related- or else!</p>
<p>Thank you for comments re: STEM. My older son probably would not be in college if he had to major in anything STEM-related. My younger son, OTOH, loves everything to do with science and math. I know several who graduated with degrees in biology and chemistry and other STEM fields who can’t find decent jobs.</p>
<p>
In the Gerogetown study, new grads in biology and chemistry had starting salaries of $31k and $32k. This was roughly the same starting salary as majors in general non-STEM fields, such as parks recreation and philosophy. I don’t find this result surprising for biology, considering the noteworthy oversupply. Of course various other tech fields are quite different, as discussed in the OP link. STEM is a nice sounding acronym, but grouping them together doesn’t work well for a thread titled “the most and least lucrative college majors” since different fields within STEM have completely different job prospects.</p>