Energy Data Analyst Career Training Guide

Question: Why is the EPA suppressing data they don't like from one of their own? http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432 "A new 2009 paper by Scafetta and West," the report says, "suggests that the IPCC used faulty solar data in dismissing the direct effect of solar variability on global temperatures. Their report suggests that solar variability could account for up to 68% of the increase in Earth's global temperatures." The report was the product of Alan Carlin, senior operations research analyst at the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE). He's been with the EPA for 38 years but now has been taken off all climate-related work. He is convinced that actual climate observations do not match climate change theories and that only the politics, not the science, has been settled. Thomas Fuller, environmental policy blogger with the San Francisco Examiner, wrote Thursday in a story developed in conjunction with Anthony Watts' Web site wattsupwiththat.com: "A source inside the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed many of the claims made by analyst Alan Carlin, the economist/physicist who yesterday went public with accusations that science was being ignored in evaluating the danger of CO2." All this is particularly interesting because of the charges by Al Gore, NASA's James Hansen and others that the Bush administration and energy companies actively suppressed the truth about climate change. One of the e-mails unearthed by CEI was dated March 12, from Al McGartland, office director at NCEE, forbidding Carlin from speaking to anyone outside NCEE on endangerment issues such as those in his suppressed report. Carlin replied on March 16, requesting that his study be forwarded to EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, which directs EPA's climate change program. Carlin points out the peer-reviewed references in his study and points out that the new studies "explain much of the observational data that have been collected which cannot be explained by the IPCC models." For saying the climate change emperors had no clothes, Carlin was told March 17: "The administrator and the administration have decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision. . . . I can only see one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office."

Answer: Though objectivity is an ideal of the scientific method, the reality of the history of science clearly illustrates a tendency for data to be 'fudged' to fit the dominant theory. Evidence and studies that don't quite match up to the most generally accepted theories tend to questioned or ignored; while those that mesh up nicely with the conventional view are readily accepted. It's only a tendency, though, and, eventually, enough contrary data builds up to bring down beloved but flawed models.

Question: Did You take the Pledge ? If you get bored take a look in this senate report.... Background: Only 52 Scientists Participated in UN IPCC Summary The over 400 skeptical scientists featured in this new report outnumber by nearly eight time the number of scientists who participated in the 2007 UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers. The notion of "hundreds" or "thousands" of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny. (See report debunking "consensus" Recent research by Australian climate data analyst John McLean revealed that the IPCC's peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired. Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called "consensus" view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the "consensus" statements. This report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of the process. And Here is the Pledge that Al Gore asked the world to take but he refused to do himself. This fact IS is in the Senate record. As a believer: · that human-caused global warming is a moral, ethical, and spiritual issue affecting our survival; · that home energy use is a key component of overall energy use; · that reducing my fossil fuel-based home energy usage will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions; and · that leaders on moral issues should lead by example; I pledge to consume no more energy for use in my residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008. Notice it says believer. And it is a spiritual issue. Not base on evidence or science. So I see the problem now. This has become a Religion. I give up. Like a great comic always says . You can't fix stupid. http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport

Answer: No I did not take the pledge, nor do I intend to.

Question: Why am I always pessimistic? Can any tell? I am 26 yrs old. I am working as Data Analyst with decent organisation. I used to be optimistic about life, people but lately I became pessimistic about everything. I feel like I am useless and my life has no ambition, no purpose. I am working like machine for no purpose, I feel like everything I do has no meaning. My heart is still aching from unsuccessful relationships from the past, I thought time will heal my injuries but it seem that time became like salt to my injuries. Sometimes I feel like killing myself and end this continuous unhappiness. I go home and it is empty although my family live with me but they live in their own world and never cross my side unless they need money and if I went their side of house, they talk about money. I found myself lonely in crowd house, I feel like I am having huge energy locked up in my heart and I do not find the right place, time to display it. I had three boyfriends during my adult time; I never was happy wit one of them, GOD I just remembered lately that none of my formers boyfriends knew me or knew how to make me orgasm. I started doubting that I will find peace one day, or find a guy who will hold me and murmur to my ear saying ( honey don’t worry things going to be okay). No one knew me at all even my parents. GOD ,no one knows my favourite ice cream flavour, or my favourite meal or book or whatever. I want to see and live optimistically but I am always scared because life never gave me the chance to be happy or to have the right to optimistic. When things go smoothly I always, know that something bad will happen and it dose happen. I want to live freely, enjoy myself, my work and everything around.

Answer: Perhaps you need the other part that completes you which you feel is absent. It is true that you can be poor but be happy and live with purpose. If you live your life ignoring what your "heart" dictates and listen to the mind then you find yourself in a s*itty place. We make choices like that. For example, lets say you are offered two jobs in two different places and one job pays you a lot of money and can afford you to live like a queen. The other does not pay you much but is fulfilling to you as a human being. Which do you choose? In our modern world, we'll make a choice for the cash but are left spiritually drained. Those relationships might have been unsuccesful because you were not in tune with yourself and your "heart" when you commited to them because we all reflect each other. So dont feel bad about that. Now is your chance to work on that. It seems like that is exactly what you are doing right now by asking this question. Once you figure yourself out then you will have plenty to give because you can not rely on what the world can offer you.

Question: what do you think about Predicting Apophis' Earth Encounters in 2029 and 2036 ? SUMMARY Researchers at NASA/JPL, Caltech, and Arecibo Observatory have released the results of radar observations of the potentially hazardous asteroid 99942 Apophis, along with an in-depth analysis of its motion. The research will affect how and when scientists measure, predict, or consider modifying the asteroid's motion. The paper has been accepted for publication in the science journal "Icarus" and was presented at the AAS/DPS conference in Orlando, Florida in October of 2007. The Apophis study was led by Jon Giorgini, a senior analyst in JPL's Solar System Dynamics group and member of the radar team that observed Apophis. The analysis of Apophis previews situations likely to be encountered with NEAs yet to be discovered: a close approach that is not dangerous (like Apophis in 2029) nonetheless close enough to obscure the proximity and the danger of a later approach (like Apophis in 2036) by amplifying trajectory prediction uncertainties caused by difficult-to-observe physical characteristics interacting with solar radiation as well as other factors. BACKGROUND Upon its discovery in 2004, Apophis was briefly estimated to have a 2.7% chance of impacting the Earth in 2029. Additional measurements later showed there was no impact risk at that time from the 210-330 meter (690-1080 foot) diameter object, identified spectroscopically as an Sq type similar to LL chondritic meteorites. However, there will be a historically close approach to the Earth, estimated to be a 1 in 800 year event (on average, for an object of that size). Arecibo Radar Image of Apophis Apophis Position Uncertainty The Arecibo planetary radar telescope subsequently detected the asteroid at distances of 27-40 million km (17-25 million miles; 0.192-0.268 AU) in 2005 and 2006. Polarization ratios indicate Apophis appears to be smoother than most NEAs at 13-cm scales. Including the high precision radar measurements in a new orbit solution reduced the uncertainty in Apophis' predicted location in 2029 by 98%. While trajectory knowledge was substantially corrected by the Arecibo data, a small estimated chance of impact (less than 1 in 45,000 using standard dynamical models) remained for April 13, 2036. With Apophis probably too close to the Sun to be measured by optical telescopes until 2011, and too distant for useful radar measurement until 2013, the underlying physics of Apophis' motion were considered to better understand the hazard. RESULTS OF THE STUDY (1) Extending the "Standard Dynamical Model" Trajectory predictions for asteroids are normally based on a standard model of the solar system that includes the gravity of the Sun, Moon, other planets, and the three largest asteroids. However, additional factors can influence the predicted motion in ways that depend on rarely known details, such as the spin of the asteroid, its mass, the way it reflects and absorbs sun-light, radiates heat, and the gravitational pull of other asteroids passing nearby. These were examined, along with the effect of Earth's non-uniform gravity field during encounters, and limitations of the computer hardware performing the calculations. One would normally look for the influence of such factors as they gradually alter the trajectory over years. But, for Apophis, the changes remain small until amplified by passage through Earth's gravity field during the historically close approach in 2029. For example, the team found solar energy can cause between 20 and 740 km (12 and 460 miles) of position change over the next 22 years leading into the 2029 Earth encounter. But, only 7 years later, the effect on Apophis' predicted position can grow to between 520,000 and 30 million km (323,000 and 18.6 million miles; 0.0035-0.2 AU). This range makes it difficult to predict if Apophis will even have a close encounter with Earth in 2036 when the orbital paths intersect. Present era through 2029 Small factors 2029-2036 It was found that small uncertainties in the masses and positions of the planets and Sun can cause up to 23 Earth radii of prediction error for Apophis by 2036. The standard model of the Earth as a point mass can introduce up to 2.9 Earth radii of prediction error by 2036; at least the Earth's oblateness must be considered to predict an impact. The gravity of other asteroids can cause up to 2.3 Earth radii of prediction uncertainty for Apophis. By considering the range of Apophis' physical characteristics and these error sources, it was determined what observations prior to 2029 will most effectively reduce prediction uncertainties. Observing criteria were developed that, if satisfied, could permit eliminating the 2036 impact possibility without further physical characterization of Apophis. Such observations could reduce the need for a visit by an expensive spacecraft and reduce the risk of Apophis being prematurely eliminated as a hazard under the standard model, only to drift b

Answer: too... much ... reading... did you mention anywhere in there that Apophis is only about 200 meters in diameter? i think its gonna miss.

Question: Based on Virginia, who's more out of touch, Obama or McCain? Obama is visiting Lebanon, Virginia today. Many in economically distressed rural southwest Virginia earn a living mining coal or farming. But Lebanon's success at attracting high-tech industry has landed it in the Democrats' campaign spotlight. Warner, who is running for Senate, carried the rural area for the Democrats when he ran for governor in 2001. And Warner persuaded CGI and Northrop Grumman Inc. in 2005 to locate in the coal-mining region. The two companies moved to the region as a less expensive way to do business without sending jobs overseas. Amid the rolling farmland, Northrop Grumman operates a call center and backup data center for Virginia's state government across from Canada's CGI Group center, which employs software developers, analysts and consultants. Former state Attorney General Jerry Kilgore, co-chairman of Republican John McCain's campaign in Virginia, said Obama is "out of touch" with the region. McCain is more committed to having coal as part of the nation's energy future than Obama, he said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/obama_rural_virginia;_ylt=AsQ6UKNo5ybAc7s6TQ9C91hh24cA Obama is focusing on the attraction of high-tech industry to the region. The McCain campaign's co-chairman claims Obama is out of touch with Virginia because McCain wants to use more coal power plants in the future. Who do you think is more out of touch, and why?

Answer: High tech is the wave of the future... McCain is way out of touch.

Question: The US is selling assets to keep the dollar afloat - or am I mistaken in the way I read that? "One thing that is clearly driving the oil price is that the U.S. dollar has gotten substantially weaker in the past several months and quarter," said Richard Batty, energy analyst at Standard Life. The dollar recouped some losses versus the euro Tuesday, after U.S. Treasury data showed foreigners increased purchases of U.S. assets in February. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/08041…

Answer: You are not mistaken. It is alarming.

Question: Do I even have a competitive advantage? I would like to get a graduate degree while I work in the DC area. I am an oil-and-gas analyst for a consulting firm. One aspect of my job deals with oil-and-gas infrastructure financing; the other deals with energy models used by government agencies. My background is in math/economics, so I've been thinking abotu doing an MS in operations research/statistics/computational data science. Alternatively, I could do an evening program in law at any of the law schools in the DC area. With an MS in operations research, statistics, and computational data science, however, I often ask myself, "Why bother? There are people overseas who are so much stronger in computation than I am. An US company can simply hire a Ph.D student from abroad who came to study in the US, and now wants to stay in the US to work." So it almost seems as though doing law would be better. However, I think that I would miss a lot of the math that I got to do in college. I think that I would enjoy both fields equally. Any advice? If I study law, I would specialize in project financing and take accounting courses first. Are there a lot of project financing lawyers out there? Is the job market for project finance lawyers that bad?

Answer: study oil and gas law, so that your prior oil and gas experience counts