Florida Energy Code: Fill & Download for Free

It is difficult to say what jobs will not be around in five years for an Economics and Math double major graduate. large companies use economists to do forecasting to adjust their product offering to changing sales environment. More people hire math majors for interest and rent rate calculation and, for those who pass the battery of tests, actuarial services. Personally, I don’t see any of those jobs disappearing within five years. One job that probably will not be available is the estimated payout on mining a coal deposit as this fuel is under attack by the environmentalists and recovery of the coal ore is out of favor due to deep mine accidents.A couple of continuing education courses in Computer Science and coding might be helpful for your resume. These are usually 3 to 4 day courses but it is an opportunity to learn and also network. The University of Wisconsin puts on a variety of courses as does the University of Florida Energy Extension.

There are some really good answers but I'd like to offer my perspective as someone who has dealt with California's building departments as an electrical designer.I loathe dealing with California.I have worked on projects in Washington, Minnesota, New York, Florida, Arizona, Texas, and a few in California, and California is the worst by far.Why? Because California has silly building codes that insist you can't use nomenclature or procedure that other states have otherwise universally adopted. Greatest of these is their energy code, Title 24. The Department of Energy has free software to help calculate energy usage to meet compliance that is accepted in almost every jurisdiction EXCEPT California. Everything must be checked by hand and is ludicrously strict. Designs that fly in other jurisdictions require pouring over the code, unique to California, hunting for allowances and exceptions.In addition, their departments often hunt for anything that requires resubmitting the plans, because they make a lot of money for each sheet. It's enough we have professional engineers whose main focus is California and the unique problems associated with it. They're also paranoid, because unless another engineer takes over a project, you're tired to that project for life. Other states have a statute of limitations for projects, but you can be fined and sued years later because of something that happened 30 years ago.All in all, California is a tough state to deal with, and it's no wonder that businesses have a tough time coming with the myriad of regulations constantly being thrown at then.

The development cycle of a modern fighter is astoundingly long. The F-35 is just entering UK service now, having started development in 1992, 27 years ago.In that quarter century, ‘stealth fighter’ has gone from this……to this:(C) Rob ShenkBy the time the Tempest enters service, the game will have changed again. There will almost certainly, for instance, be no such thing as a ‘stealth fighter,’ because every fighter will be stealthy; the term will be as redundant as calling an F-22 a ‘missile fighter.’ And that change will be the same across every aspect of military aerospace technology: weapons, connectivity, materials, maybe even propulsion. The cutting edge blunts remarkably fast.Second, the Tempest is, as Alex Patrick points out, not an F-35 replacement but a Typhoon replacement, just like the original Hawker Tempest. F-35s were conceived as Joint Strike Fighters, replacing the RAF’s Tornado GR-4, Jaguar and Harrier, and the RN’s Sea Harriers (and arguably its long-gone Phantoms). The Tempest is not the next F-35, it’s the next step from the F-22.Third, it’s a technology demonstrator but also a technology stimulator. Remember the moon landings and all the technology that spun off from them? Set yourself a bunch of scary but maybe-just-achievable targets, and you’re likely to solve some big problems along the way. If BAe and its international partners never build a combat-ready Tempest as proposed, but get to the point where they could, they will have developed the ability to control drone swarms, build militarised deep learning AI, deploy directed energy weapons on a fighter scale and design and support a trustworthy variable cycle engine.And finally, F-35 was a politically unhappy experience for the UK. Tons of money and a lot of BAe know-how were invested; the UK was the only Tier 1 partner on the project, with BAe building 10–15% of every aircraft. But cost overruns were exaggerated by changes in the exchange rate, delays stateside put delivery beyond the MoD’s control… and then it turned out that Lockheed and certain US politicians were going to play silly buggers with the operating code needed to maintain the planes. The agreement had been “that the UK will have the ability to successfully operate, upgrade, employ, and maintain the Joint Strike Fighter such that the UK retains operational sovereignty over the aircraft.” Instead, Lockheed insisted that the code wouldn’t be released and that the fighters would have to go back to Florida for programming work.If you were the Ministry of Defence, looking back on that palaver and bad faith, and looking at the private business practices of the present incumbent of the White House as a guide to what the US public finds acceptable… wouldn’t you start work on rebuilding your own capabilities and reducing reliance on the likes of Lockheed?I just hope that, in the aftermath of Brexit, Tempest doesn’t go the way of TSR-2…