<p>Please Dont drill me on how I should not choose my major over starting salary b/c i already kno im be either Biomedical or Chemical Engineer.</p>
<p>I heard from a professor that Petroleum Engineers make like 70K starting.</p>
<p>depends on Job market....niche fields will usually have higher salaries but usually it goes Chem E ==> EE ==> Comp E ==> ME ==> others ==> Civil E</p>
<p>Years ago someone once wrote in a journal to the effect that anyone graduating with a Chem E degree and expects a well-paying, stable and rewarding job will soon be in for an unpleasant surprise. This is true today. Avoid this field. I read that the situation for Chem E is as follows: 5000 graduate to replace 1000 retiring. Choose insteand: Honours Math with Computing or Honours Math with Physics, or HM with Economics (good for Wall Street and financial modeling). More opportuinities and not limited (or focussed) on the CPI (which are being shipped overseas).</p>
<p>I don't know about that, toronto_guy. ChemE is actually one of the hottest fields right now because the price of oil is so high. Oil companies are hiring ChemE's like gangbusters.</p>
<p>The thing is, you have to be willing to move, and it would help even more if you happened to live where the oil is. In your case, that would be Alberta. Heck, I'm sure you've read about the massive hiring that is happening around the Athabascan tar sands region. In the case of Americans, it would probably be the Gulf Coast. The numbers don't lie - ChemE's get the 2nd highest starting salary of any bachelor's degree (behind PetE), and significantly more than do physics, economics, or math degrees. </p>
<p>This is even more impressive when you consider that places like the US Gulf Coast are very cheap places to live. For example, I believe that the median price of housing in Houston (the oil technology capital of the world) is about 120k, which is dirt-cheap, when you consider that you can graduate with a ChemE degree from a school in Texas or Louisiana and make around 55-60k working for one of the many refineries/petrochemical plants in the area. </p>
<p>Look, I'm not saying that engineering doesn't have its problems, but I maintain that it's still a quite sweet deal if you have just a bachelor's degree. </p>
<p>Now, if you insist on living in a place like Toronto, then I agree that you are probably better off doing something like banking or consulting and basically becoming a businessman. But you have to ask yourself, how wedded are you to Toronto?</p>
<p>I would say petrolium. Some guys at oil fields in northern alberta make $120K Canadian (about $107K US) in their first year, and I'm not even sure he was an engineer, might just have been a grunt. </p>
<p>Of course Northern Alberta means almost to the NW territories</p>
<p>petroleum engineers tend to have the highest. How widely are chemical engineers employed in the petroleum industry?<br>
On another note, I think toronto_guy has a point. For a stagnant field (not necessarily dying), there will be more rookies than those retiring. There hasn't been a petroleum refinery built in the last what, 20 years or so and there will probably <em>not</em> be due to environmental laws, at least in the US.<br>
I don't know how widely chemical engineers are used in the pharmaceutical industry. It seems to me that they employ more chemists than chemical engineers.</p>
<p>EDIT: I just read sakky's post on the other thread.</p>
<p>My friend is a software engineer and his starting salary was $62K</p>
<p>Reason petroleum eng has a high average is because in many cases you may be living on an oil rig or in some other undesirable location - hence higher salary to compensate.</p>
<p>ecnerwalc3321: A chemical engineer can do anything a chemistry student can do, plus some more.</p>
<p>Petro > Nuclear > CpE (hardware) > AE > EE > ChemE</p>
<p>
[quote]
petroleum engineers tend to have the highest. How widely are chemical engineers employed in the petroleum industry?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Very widely. Basically, petroleum engineers get the oil out of the ground, whereas the chemical engineers actually process that oil into useful products. Unprocessed crude oil is practically useless, and in fact, for thousands of years, was considered a useless waste product, It was only because of advances in chemistry and chemical engineering that mankind found ways to transform crude oil into useful products. </p>
<p>
[quote]
On another note, I think toronto_guy has a point. For a stagnant field (not necessarily dying), there will be more rookies than those retiring. There hasn't been a petroleum refinery built in the last what, 20 years or so and there will probably <em>not</em> be due to environmental laws, at least in the US.
I don't know how widely chemical engineers are used in the pharmaceutical industry. It seems to me that they employ more chemists than chemical engineers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First off, it is NOT STAGNANT. Look at the boom in the oil industry in the last few years. True, no new refineries in the US have been built in awhile, but existing refineries have greatly expanded their capacity. After all, the US consumes far more gasoiline than it did 20 years ago. How do you think that gasoline was supplied, if no new refinery capacity was created? Furthermore, again, because of Katrina, I think the US now recognizes that it needs to diversify its refinery base, and that is happening now.</p>
<p>Furthermore, chemE's don't just work in refineries. Like I said in other posts, chemE's also work in petrochemical plants, natural gas processing facilities, plastics factories, and the like, and these facilities have been proliferating for years now. Not to mention all of the ChemE's now going into the semiconductor and high-tech (materials) industries. </p>
<p>And besides, if you are enterprising, you can work overseas. The Persian Gulf States in particular are hiring ChemE's like madmen to create their own petrochemical industries, and they are building refineries at a pace you wouldn't believe. Trust me, Persian Gulf States pay a LOT of money for Western engineers.</p>
<p>I do not want to demean ChE and/or engineering in general. Maybe the market dynamics are very different in the US or elsehwere in Canada (Alberta was mentioned) but in Ontario there is a serious oversupply problem. Check out the link: </p>
<p>It kind of affected me whenI had a discussion about reaction kinetics with a cabbie from Eastern Europe (who could not find gainful employment).</p>
<p>I support MAth and Computing because the people I know who have taken these fields have done much (albeit for less starting money) over the long term. A friend of mine is a senior manager with a big firm and he has a maths degree. All the engineers (I know) in the same company have good jobs but have somewhat plateaued in their technical fields. I think this is because the company values their contribution and is reluctant to move them up the ladder. A friend of my Dad's with a Maths degree also finished his career way higher than most engineers in the company. Anecodatal evidence you might say? Yes, I agree with but this is only my impression. </p>
<p>I took a Chem E degree and live to regret it every day of my life and still view it as the worst decision I ever made (incidentally, many of classmates feel the same way). When people cite statistics from published sources I am very wary. I have no doubt that starting salaries from Big Oil/Petrochem are in the range of 50 to 60K plus. Make no mistake, these are not easy jobs to get and the competition is keen.</p>
<p>The field of engineering is perhaps a field with a lower standard deviation in incomes and a higher average, but that doesn't mean engineers can not go into other industries. I'd reckon that engineers have the widest opportunities by far upon graduation and beyond.</p>
<p>I would agree with toronto_guy. There are far better opportunities than what chemE has to offer including job environment, compensation, etc...Especially if you're good at math and comp. sci.</p>
<p>With today's economy people should into structuring, modelling, and other quant. fields on wall-street. A math/comp. sci. major should do well and take advantage of these options. Furthermore, the IT industry is doing very well right and now and a person with a comp.sci. background could use that as fallback options.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The field of engineering is perhaps a field with a lower standard deviation in incomes and a higher average, but that doesn't mean engineers can not go into other industries.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Engineers usually cannot go into other fields unless they do something about it before graduation. The low GPA hurts many and most engineers and they get cut out of the law/med school options. Very few engineers end up in savvy business jobs. The ones that do usually end up having to get MBA's at top schools several years down the line. I personally have had friends who're forced to do engineering right now and have no nice exit options. This is especially the case if you're a chemE or EE.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the job and work environment isn't exactly comfy when it's a one sided male/female ratio with many and most foreigners beings coworkers. For great looking gals, it's the other around. Engineering is the place to be for them. They usually get far more respect and job security because they're such a wanted minority in the profession. So engineering can be the perfect thing to do for certain kinds of people.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They usually get far more respect and job security because they're such a wanted minority in the profession. So engineering can be the perfect thing to do for certain kinds of people
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is actually very wrong, as a matter of fact, many female engineers often get 'bullied' by their male counterparts. They are often targeted as first suspects whenever there's any bug/problem in engineering/software projects.</p>
<p>I'm no expert in the area so I could be wrong.</p>
<p>The information I garnared was from what I saw and heard from female engineers.</p>
<p>I still stick to my opinion.</p>
<p>Just curious. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to optimize the area under the curve and not the intitial value of x?</p>
<p>Toronto_guy, your posts have really made me reevaluate my intended choice of major. Could you please give your opinion on the following majors:</p>
<p>1.) Economics and Computer Science (I am really good in both fields but not veryy good in math). Secondly, can i pursue these courses in an LAC?
2.) Materials Science and engineering - do they have better or worse prospects than Chemical Engineers?
3.)Industrial Engineering
4.) Computer Science and Engineering</p>
<p>I will be soo grateful if you could help me with this. I want to make sure I make the right choice..</p>
<p>waleed- you have to remember that toronto-guy lives in Toronto. Job prospects for chemical engineers over there may be different from job prospects for chem E's in the U.S.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I do not want to demean ChE and/or engineering in general. Maybe the market dynamics are very different in the US or elsehwere in Canada (Alberta was mentioned) but in Ontario there is a serious oversupply problem. Check out the link: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ospe.on.ca/gr_submission...ct_24_0%5B/url%5D">http://www.ospe.on.ca/gr_submission...ct_24_0</a> 5.html
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that's the key right there. If you want to stay in Ontario, and specifically, in Toronto, then I agree that ChemE may not be a great choice. If you're not willing to move to where the jobs are (i.e. Alberta), then, sure, you should take a degree that is valued in the place you want to live in. For example, I certainly wouldn't recommend a PetE degree for somebody who wants to live in New York. On the other hand, I wouldn't recommend a finance degree for somebody who wants to live in rural Texas. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I support MAth and Computing because the people I know who have taken these fields have done much (albeit for less starting money) over the long term. A friend of mine is a senior manager with a big firm and he has a maths degree. All the engineers (I know) in the same company have good jobs but have somewhat plateaued in their technical fields. I think this is because the company values their contribution and is reluctant to move them up the ladder. A friend of my Dad's with a Maths degree also finished his career way higher than most engineers in the company. Anecodatal evidence you might say? Yes, I agree with but this is only my impression.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would point out that ChemE's also have the ability to move into many of the same fields that people with math/computer degrees can. I know plenty of ChemE's who now work in investment banking and management consulting, for example. Engineering is basically just applied math. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I took a Chem E degree and live to regret it every day of my life and still view it as the worst decision I ever made (incidentally, many of classmates feel the same way). When people cite statistics from published sources I am very wary. I have no doubt that starting salaries from Big Oil/Petrochem are in the range of 50 to 60K plus. Make no mistake, these are not easy jobs to get and the competition is keen.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First off, the competition really ISN'T that keen - at least not anymore. Again, look at what's happening with the tar sands in Alberta. Companies there are basically hiring anybody with a pulse. US oil companies are massively expanding their oil operations in the Texas Gulf Coast because of the high price of oil and gasoline. They are also basically hiring anybody with a pulse. But, again, the catch is, you have to be willing to move to where the jobs are. </p>
<p>Furthermore, it's not even a matter of 'Big' oil. I have actually found that the highest paying companies by far tend to be small ones, especially the startups. That's because I have found great variance in the kinds of pay that startups pay. The big multinational oil companies all pay basically the same pay (holding geographic location constant). However, small companies tend to be highly variable. Some will pay less than the average. However, others will pay more, in many cases, substantially more. For example, I know one ChemE with just a bachelor's degree who is starting at 85k, working for a small specialty chemical startup. </p>
<p>In fact, I would say that as a general truism, the big companies in any field tend not to be the highest paying. In the computer industry, companies such as Microsoft, Intel, Dell, Cisco, IBM, HP, and other large multinational companies all tend to be only average-paying, or many a bit above average. The big money tends to be paid by certain small companies. For example, during the dotcom boom, many startups were luring people from the big established computer companies by offering substantially higher salaries - in some cases, double or even triple the salaries. I knew one guy who worked at Oracle making about 70k, and then, within a short period of time, jumped to a dotcom who offered him over 150k. Goldman Sachs is not the highest paying bank out there - most of its bankers could make substantially more elsewhere. The big companies know they don't have to pay high salaries because they are basically partially paying people in prestige. Having a company like Microsoft or Intel or Goldman Sachs looks good on your resume, and the companies know that, so the companies know they can get employees without having to pay high salaries. Startups don't have that 'resume cachet', so they often times have little choice but to offer high pay to entice people to work for them. </p>
<p>The point is, you should stop looking at the Big Oil companies if you are interested in high pay. If what you want is money, find those aggresive startups who are throwing money around. Again, there's a LOT of money being thrown around in Alberta right now. </p>
<p>
[quote]
With today's economy people should into structuring, modelling, and other quant. fields on wall-street. A math/comp. sci. major should do well and take advantage of these options. Furthermore, the IT industry is doing very well right and now and a person with a comp.sci. background could use that as fallback options.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Engineers usually cannot go into other fields unless they do something about it before graduation. The low GPA hurts many and most engineers and they get cut out of the law/med school options. Very few engineers end up in savvy business jobs. The ones that do usually end up having to get MBA's at top schools several years down the line. I personally have had friends who're forced to do engineering right now and have no nice exit options. This is especially the case if you're a chemE or EE.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The flaw in your argument is that while you say that ChemE and EE grading is tough (which I agree with), you say that people should study math or CS. Uh, grading in math or CS is ALSO tough. Somebody who got bad grades in ChemE could just as easily get bad grades in math or CS, and thus get stuck with no exit options too. This is especially so with math, which I would argue may be the toughest major of all. That's because the major in math inevitably ends up becoming a long series of proofs, and the nature of math proofs are that you either get it or you don't. If you just don't get it, you are going to get an F. At least in engineering, you can sort of grind through the work by taking design classes or lab classes which involve a lot of work, but as long as you do the work, you will pass. Maybe not with a great grade, but you will pass. In upper-division math classes, if you just don't have that certain intuition to be able to see the proofs, you will get an F. The same thing is true of many kinds of CS, especially the more theoretical types of CS, which are similar to math. Again, if you just don't see how a particular algorithm works, you will get an F. If your computer project just doesn't work, you will get an F. </p>
<p>Now, of course, you might say that there are some people who have the gift of math or the gift of CS such that they have the insight and they can see the proofs, and hence math/CS are easy to them. True. But on the other hand, there are also some people who have the gift of ChemE, for which ChemE comes very easy to them. I've seen these people - they seem to glide through top ChemE programs with little effort and still get top grades. So it's a wash. All of these programs have their geniuses.</p>
<p>But the point is, I don't see how you can indict ChemE for having difficult grading and then recommend people choose math or CS instead. That's a case of 'out of the frying pan, into the fire'. If all you care about is easy grading to maximize your chances of getting into law/med-school, and you don't care about anything else (i.e. a backup career), then choose one of the cheesepuff majors like American Studies or Leisure Studies. Those majors are not particularly valuable, but at least they're easy. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, the job and work environment isn't exactly comfy when it's a one sided male/female ratio with many and most foreigners beings coworkers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That depends strongly on what kind of lifestyle you want. I don't see anything particularly wrong with working with foreigners. I've had to work with a lot of extremely rude Americans, such that I would often times prefer working with foreigners. </p>
<p>Furthermore, if your goal is to work with lots of women, I REALLY don't see how you can recommend math or CS. ChemE may not have a lot of women, but it almost certainly has more women than math or CS does, as math/CS are the true male nerd disciplines. </p>
<p>If you want to meet lots of women, then forget about all of the technical fields. I don't want to stereotype, but you should then major in something like Art History or French Literature or Fashion Design or Dance or things like that. A LOT of women major in those fields.</p>