Jump to content

PhD in geology (mining) ?


JrCaspian

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

It's been a while since I have been graduated in geology. I was unsuccessful for many jobs I applied for (mining or oil & gas indistries) for more than 1 year now. Even in the academic field, it's not easy to get a position considering I got many interviews also. However, it seems I've really good chances to be accepted for a PhD in mining (geomodeling/statistics).

Considering the market is not really good today for geologists in the mining industry, do you think it is worth making a PhD and loose 3 years without any conviction to get a job after being graduated ?

Thank you in advance for replying.

Jcasp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm doing my masters in mining geomechanics from a mining school right now. Here's my take on this issue. I'm EXTREMELY disillusioned by the quality of PhDs being churned out by even the top mining schools in geology/geomechanics. The 'best' quality of research comes from Aus/US/Canada and even that isn't anywhere close to the research being carried out by geologists in the petroleum/geosciences sectors. Most research in mining geology is qualitative and empirical (extremely site specific). Currently, there's a bad case of replacing apples with oranges for PhD dissertations to show 'new' work ("Oh look, XYZ software/model worked for sandstone. Why don't we hire a PhD student and do the exact same thing using ABC software instead and have a student graduate? They will have enough work to do because they'll have to run 300 simulations beofre they can graduate."). If your end objective is a job, you are better off with a masters and maybe an EIT/PE. You can easily land one in a consulting company or a mining company. Quite a few PhDs (recent graduates) that I know of are struggling to find jobs since they are being kicked out of interviews for being overqualified in technical areas and not sufficiently in 'leadership'. Mining companies/consultants want someone they can mould to suit their needs and a candidate with a BS/MS is best suited for that.

 

That said, if geostatistics is what you're interested in (which isn't what the conventional qualitative/observational geology is all about), most high quality research in geostatistics is being carried out in the petroleum and geoscience groups rather than mining research groups. A PhD should take anywhere from 4-6 years and you are more likely to land a $130k+ job with an oil or consulting company.

 

As far as the research itself is concerned, quantitative = good, qualitative = bad from the POV of landing a job.

Edited by trulytriaxial
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for this overview, I agree with you in most parts. Let's say I'm interested in making a PhD in the mining field to learn new technologies/software that would complete my current geological and geophysical background. Ending up in a consulting company is currently my objective since I'm established in Europe and companies here seem to look for high profiles with several experiences in geomodeling. Even in the O&G field, a geologist from a well-known company told me they are looking specifically people with a PhD specifically suited to their job requirements (which means specialization with ABC software). On the other hand, geostatistics is probably useless since I don't really know whether there is a need of people who can take sharp decisions and bring guidance on risk-assessment for exploration activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Learning new software is not a good reason to do a PhD in Earth Sciences. The requirement for a PhD is much greater than learning new software: you are better served just learning it on your own (even if you have to pay out of hand). 

 

 

 If the job you want requires you to get a PhD, then get the PhD. 

Edited by GeoDUDE!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with GeoDUDE. If the job requires a PhD (which is a little surprising for mining), get the PhD as quickly as possible. Learning a software is different from getting a PhD. Anyone can be trained to do that. If you want to learn a new technology, you are better off working in the industry because you'll be exposed to new technologies. Working inside a research group is probably going to only expose you to the technology being used by that group, which may not be representative of the industry.

 

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use