Fastest Growing Jobs 2007-11 Are Energy-Related
The EMSI group (Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc.) has analyzed job growth for 800 occupations during the 2007-2011 downturn, with some interesting results:
For job growth over the last four years, six of the top eight occupations and nine of the top 15 fastest-growing occupations are related to the boom in domestic oil and natural gas extraction in places like North Dakota and Pennsylvania. Here are some details on the energy-related jobs:
1. Extraction workers for oil and natural gas: #2 overall, 46% growth, median hourly wage of $16.62.2. Geological and petroleum technicians: #4 overall, 42% growth, median hourly wage of $18.86
3. Mining machine operator: #5 overall, 40% growth, $17.52 wage
4. Mining and geological engineers: #6 overall, 31%, $27.42 hourly wage
5. Petroleum engineers: #7 overall, 31% growth, $48.68 hourly wage
6. Gas compressor and gas pumping station operators: #8 overall, 31% growth, $19.50 hourly wage
7. Wellhead Pumpers: #11 overall 28%, $17.34 hourly wage
8. Oil and gas service operators: #12 overall, 27% growth, $18.18 hourly wage
9. Oil and gas roustabouts: #14 overall, 25% growth, $15.23 hourly wage
MP: This study provides further, detailed confirmation at the occupation level that the domestic drilling boom has created an accompanying jobs boom in a variety of occupations, and this doesn't include the additional job growth along the energy supply chain (equipment, sand, pipes, etc.) or all of the support industries (retail, restaurants, housing, etc.).
18 Comments:
unfortunately, so are many of the fasted growing costs:
"It's been 30 years since gasoline took such a big bite out of the family budget.
When the gifts from Grandma are unloaded and holiday travel is over, the typical American household will have spent $4,155 filling up this year, a record. That is 8.4 percent of what the median family takes in, the highest share since 1981."
"Electric bills have skyrocketed in the last five years, a sharp reversal from a quarter-century when Americans enjoyed stable power bills even as they used more electricity.
Households paid a record $1,419 on average for electricity in 2010, the fifth consecutive yearly increase above the inflation rate, a USA TODAY analysis of government data found. The jump has added about $300 a year to what households pay for electricity. That's the largest sustained increase since a run-up in electricity prices during the 1970s.
Electricty is consuming a greater share of Americans' after-tax income than at any time since 1996 — about $1.50 of every $100 in income at a time when income growth has stagnated"
Notice not a green job in the bunch. Meanwhile, the listed are the kinds of jobs Obama and his apparatchiks at the EPA demonize and are working to stamp out of existence.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Where do the rapidly increasing ranks of energy workers turn to deal with their nice income streams? Personal Financial Advisors. These advisors are the #1 fastest growing jobs, according to the linked study.
It is intersting that there has been a growth of 57% in Personal Financial Advisors since 2007. This happened, inspite of the worst financial downturn since the Great Depression. Current count is 1,436,958!
morganovich, your statement is quotation marks. What is its source?
Sex workers make more than energy sector workers.
buddy-
1st quote:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45727242
second quote:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/story/2011-12-13/electric-bills/51840042/1
sorry, it can get tricky putting links on CD. if you add more than one you run a real risk of getting blocked as spam.
""Electric bills have skyrocketed in the last five years, a sharp reversal from a quarter-century when Americans enjoyed stable power bills even as they used more electricity."
What about natural gas bills?
I have a commercial property that is heated by a natural gas burning boiler. As of November, I pay 25% less for natural gas, than previously. Just the thought of a 25% reduction gives me a warm feeling.
buddy-
my understanding is that NG bills were up about 4% last winter.
keep in mind that because the pipelines are full, gas prices at the home do not nesc reflect those at the wellhead.
i also think that far fewer homes use gas than other modalities, but i'm not entirely sure.
gas prices vary a great deal by locality.
a 25% drop is very extreme and i doubt that such is anything like typical.
prices here are up.
Here's the historical and projected prices for natural gas in our area per 1000 cu ft (Consumers Energy). There is also a $2.63 delivery charge per 1000 cu. ft. Theer is also a security charge, sales taxes, and various other charges tacked on to your gas and electric bill.
I computed an 11% change (drop) from Jan 11 to Jan 12 (but some of the other charges have went up in the last year). The maximum rates are fixed by law (Michigan Public Service Commision).
Jan-12 $6.14
Dec-11 $6.16
Nov-11 $6.16
Oct-11 $6.17
Sep-11 $6.28
Aug-11 $6.30
Jul-11 $6.39
Jun-11 $6.37
May-11 $6.36
Apr-11 $6.35
Mar-11 $6.43
Feb-11 $6.79
Jan-11 $6.93
Dec-10 $6.91
Nov-10 $6.93
Oct-10 $6.99
Sep-10 $6.99
Aug-10 $6.99
walt-
it seems to vary a ton based on locality.
is suspect this has as much to do with local pipeline capacity and utilization as wellhead price.
i can't seem to find any good national data, so i'm a bit stumped on what the national trend is.
for some reason this data seems much more fragmented than electricity data.
"prices here are up."
"Questar Gas asks Utah PSC to cut natural gas rates by $18.9 million"
"The cost of heating a home in Utah continues to drop."
Individual results may vary, but you appear to be unlucky, as far as nat gas rates.
morganovich,
Yes, the rates vary widely even in the same state because the rates are based on a cost-plus-factor and some suppliers have lower costs than others. Additionally, some rates are set by local government instead of the state public service commission. Even the heat content of the natural gas varies (BTUs/cu.ft.), so direct comparison of heating units are very difficult to compare at the retail level.
buddy-
around here, a lot of it has to do with absolute usage.
if you are heating a big house, then you do not get the rate cuts unless you go below X in consumption. the break points are very aggressive, and only the low end get cuts. still, at $300ish a month, my nat gas bill is not terrible for a house this size. heating this place at san francisco rates would be a killer.
of course, if you have a heated driveway, like my neighbor, then you easily jump to $1200 a month in gas (that's what he pays). woof.
water is the same. in the summer, when i turn on my irrigation system, my water bill goes up 5X even though it only roughly doubles my consumption.
morganovich,
I think you might be looking at it wrong. Say if your rate is 5 cents per unit for the first 100 units, 6cents per unit for the next 100 units, and 8 cents per unit for everything above 200 units, you save 8 cents per unit for every one you cut at the top end of the scale but only 5 cents per unit at the bottom end of the scale. Of course, all energy cost savings are good.
walt-
no, i get that.
the issue is that if average usage is 100 units and you tend to use more like 500, sure, you save on the bottom 100when they cut prices. but if the price for units over 300 actually goes up, as it has, you wind up paying more anyway.
lots of utilities have cut low end rates and made up for it by steepening the curve and upping the costs to big users to try and drive conservation.
if you don't have the ability to drop usage, this winds up stinging you.
my bill for november was up from a year ago despite my usage being almost exactly flat.
"my bill for november was up from a year ago despite my usage being almost exactly flat."
Then anything you do to lower your usage just got cheaper :) You have more incentive to reduce usage now. Almost anyone can use less energy if they really try.
Home energy auditing is a class I helped develop. I might teach it.
"You have more incentive to reduce usage now. Almost anyone can use less energy if they really try. "
walt-
this seems like sort of a bogus argument. you could say this about anything where prices went up.
price of food up? hey, great incentive to go on a diet! you can eat less if you try!
price of gasoline up? great incentive not to drive!
sure, you can do those things, but they affect your quality of life.
saying overall expense stayed constant buy i got less for it is exactly the same as saying "price went up". sure, you could eat 200 grams of beef instead of 250 to offset a price hike, but that has real quality of life impact.
in my case, it would be pretty much impossible to get down to the next break point. i am so far over as to make it unreasonable unless i want to keep my house at 60 degrees, and i don't. it's the price you pay for having a big house, (i probably have 4x the square footage of an average utah house) and again, i don't feel like $300/mo is that unreasonable, i was just pointing out that it's higher than last year because prices are up.
morganovich,
Half-full glass or half-empty glass? My point is that you don't need to get to the next break point to save money. The more energy you use, and the more you pay, the more options you have that you can save money. You can compare that to your diet example of a person who only has a free cracker a day to eat and someone at an expensive all-you-can-eat buffet every day :)
You are happy, and that's all that really counts. If you become unhappy, I can almost assure you that you have numerous ways to save money.
Post a Comment
<< Home