Will AI replace Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians?

Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 29 official task statements scored for Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians (United States, SOC 19-4043), 27% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 31 out of 100 (range 27–37, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.

What should someone working in “Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians” do about AI?

Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 27% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 65% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.

US dataswitch to UK

Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians

testing and analyzing samples to determine their content and characteristics, preparing or reviewing professional and creating photographic recordings of information. If that's your week, this page is about your job.

The honest answer

AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: compiling log or recording testing or operational data for review and further analysis. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.

Your move: what you can actually do about this ↓

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 27%
changing shape: 7%
staying human: 65%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

Whole-job exposure score 31 out of 100 (27–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 29 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.

How we know this

What is measured: Every published task statement for geological technicians, except hydrologic technicians is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.

Your week, as this page understands it

Assist scientists or engineers in the use of electronic, sonic, or nuclear measuring instruments in laboratory, exploration, and production activities to obtain data indicating resources such as metallic ore, minerals, gas, coal, or petroleum. Analyze mud and drill cuttings. Chart pressure, temperature, and other characteristics of wells or bore holes. The job title says “geological technicians” or “except hydrologic technicians”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis. That is the thing someone has to be right about.

The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But geological technicians, except hydrologic technicians is not one task. It is 29 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis, and the ledger below shows exactly why.

Where the work sits, by task weight

shifting to AI: 27%
changing shape: 7%
staying human: 65%

These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.

How we know this

How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.

Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.

Your job, task by task

These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.

1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Shifting to AI

7 tasks

Tasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.

Compiling log or recording testing or operational data for review and further analysis
This is reading one thing and writing another: log in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Compile, log, or record testing or operational data for review and further analysis.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 69 out of 100 (65–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Logging and compiling test data into records is exactly the kind of routine work software already does.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing or reviewing professional, technical or other reports regarding sampling, testing or recommendations of data analysis
This is reading one thing and writing another: professional, technical or other reports regarding sampling in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Prepare or review professional, technical, or other reports regarding sampling, testing, or recommendations of data analysis.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up sampling and testing results is document work AI drafts well before a geologist signs it off.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reading and studying reports, compile information and data for geological and geophysical prospecting
This is reading one thing and writing another: reports, compile information and data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Read and study reports in order to compile information and data for geological and geophysical prospecting.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Reading through reports and pulling out the relevant data is one of the things AI does most reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Plotting information from aerial photographs
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Plot information from aerial photographs, well logs, section descriptions, or other databases.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Plotting well logs and photo data onto maps is computer work that is largely automated already.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Changing shape

2 tasks

Tasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.

Preparing notes, sketches, geological maps or cross-sections
The software now makes the first pass at notes, sketches, geological maps or cross-sections, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Prepare notes, sketches, geological maps, or cross-sections.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (49–63 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Drawing up maps, cross-sections and notes from survey data is screen work that software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Applying new technologies, such as improved seismic imaging techniques, to locate untapped oil or natural gas deposits
The software now makes the first pass at new technologies, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Apply new technologies, such as improved seismic imaging techniques, to locate untapped oil or natural gas deposits.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Seismic imaging methods are well documented and computers already do much of the heavy lifting, with specialists interpreting.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.

Staying human

20 tasks

Tasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.

Testing and analyzing samples to determine their content and characteristics
This work happens in the physical world: samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · Core
Source: “Test and analyze samples to determine their content and characteristics, using laboratory apparatus or testing equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running lab tests means handling samples and instruments at the bench, even though the results are data.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis
This work happens in the physical world: solid, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Collect or prepare solid or fluid samples for analysis.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Collecting and preparing rock or fluid samples is physical work in the field or lab.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Adjusting or repairing testing electrical or mechanical equipment or devices
This work happens in the physical world: electrical or mechanical equipment or devices, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Adjust or repair testing, electrical, or mechanical equipment or devices.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Fixing testing or mechanical equipment is done with tools in hand.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Participating in geological, geophysical, geochemical, hydrographic or oceanographic surveys, prospecting field trips, exploratory drilling, well logging or underground mine survey programs
This work happens in the physical world: geological, geophysical, geochemical, hydrographic or oceanographic surveys, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Participate in geological, geophysical, geochemical, hydrographic, or oceanographic surveys, prospecting field trips, exploratory drilling, well logging, or underground mine survey programs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Taking part in surveys, drilling trips and mine programs means physically being at the site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

Show the other 19 tasks

Assembling, maintaining or distributing information for library or recording systems
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · Core
Source: “Assemble, maintain, or distribute information for library or record systems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 93 out of 100 (89–97 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Organizing and distributing records and library material is routine information work software does very well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Compiling data used to address environmental issues
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Compile data used to address environmental issues, such as the suitability of potential landfill sites.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Pulling together landfill suitability data from existing sources is desk research software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating and interpreting seismic data with the aid of computers
shifting to AI
This is reading one thing and writing another: seismic data in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Evaluate and interpret seismic data with the aid of computers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Seismic data interpretation is already heavily computer-assisted and the methods are well documented.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Recording readings, compile data used in prospecting for oil or gas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: readings, compile data, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Record readings in order to compile data used in prospecting for oil or gas.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: The recording and compiling side is easy to automate, but reading instruments at the well means being there.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Assessing the environmental impacts of development projects on subsurface materials
staying human
The ratings behind this row put the environmental impacts of development projects well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Assess the environmental impacts of development projects on subsurface materials.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Impact assessment follows documented methods AI can draft, though the site-specific evidence and sign-off come from people.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collaborating with hydrogeologists to evaluate groundwater or well circulation
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles hydrogeologists and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 2 · Supplemental
Source: “Collaborate with hydrogeologists to evaluate groundwater or well circulation.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: The analysis can be drafted by software, but the work happens through back-and-forth with specialist colleagues.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Interviewing individuals and researching public databases, obtaining information
staying human
The value here is that a specific person handles individuals and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · Core
Source: “Interview individuals, and research public databases in order to obtain information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Database research is easy to automate, but getting people to share what they know still means talking to them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Collecting data on underground areas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: data, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Collect data on underground areas, such as reservoirs, that could be used in carbon sequestration operations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 29 out of 100 (22–36 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Handling the data is a computing task, but getting readings from underground reservoirs involves field equipment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Participating in the evaluation of possible mining locations
staying human
The ratings behind this row put the evaluation of possible mining locations well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Participate in the evaluation of possible mining locations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: AI can weigh documented factors, but the decisive evidence about a specific site is private and often gathered on the ground.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Planning and directing activities of workers who operate equipment to collect data
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: activities of workers who operate equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Plan and direct activities of workers who operate equipment to collect data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Software can build the plan and schedule, but directing a field crew happens with people on site.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting geological data from potential geothermal energy plant sites
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: geological data, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Collect geological data from potential geothermal energy plant sites.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 10 out of 100 (3–17 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Gathering data at a candidate geothermal site means physically visiting and surveying it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Setting up or directing set-up of instruments used to collect geological data
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: or directing set-up of instruments, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Set up or direct set-up of instruments used to collect geological data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Setting up field instruments is physical, though directing someone else's setup can partly happen remotely.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Evaluating and interpreting core samples and cuttings
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: core samples, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Evaluate and interpret core samples and cuttings, and other geological data used in prospecting for oil or gas.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (1–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Reading core samples and cuttings depends on examining the actual rock in front of you.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting geophysical surveys of potential sites for wind farms or solar installations to determine their suitability
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: geophysical surveys of potential sites, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance not published
O*NET hasn't yet published importance ratings for this occupation's tasks, so the ordering here is ours, not theirs.
Source: “Conduct geophysical surveys of potential sites for wind farms or solar installations to determine their suitability.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Running a geophysical survey means taking equipment out to the site and working across it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising well exploration, drilling activities or well completions
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: well exploration, drilling activities or well completions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Supervise well exploration, drilling activities, or well completions.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 5 out of 100 (0–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising drilling means being on the rig where decisions have to be made in the moment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Operating or adjusting equipment or apparatus used to obtain geological data
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: equipment, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Operate or adjust equipment or apparatus used to obtain geological data.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Operating and adjusting field data-collection equipment means being there with the machine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Creating photographic recordings of information
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: photographic recordings of information, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Create photographic recordings of information, using equipment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Taking photographic records of sites and samples requires a person with a camera on the spot.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Measuring geological characteristics used in prospecting for oil or gas
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: geological characteristics, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · Supplemental
Source: “Measure geological characteristics used in prospecting for oil or gas, using measuring instruments.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Taking physical measurements with instruments has to be done at the location.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inspecting engines for wear or defective parts
staying human
This work happens in the physical world: engines, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · Supplemental
Source: “Inspect engines for wear or defective parts, using equipment or measuring devices.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Inspecting engines for wear is done with hands and gauges on the machine.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.

What this job pays, and how many people do it

Median pay: $53,350a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
People doing this job: 6,980in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)

What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.

Why this is shifting

The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: professional, technical or other reports regarding sampling in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: compiling log and preparing or reviewing professional. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where solid gets done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.

Your move

Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend

Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Compiling log or recording testing or operational data for review and further analysis is going; collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis is not.

So, given all that: 27% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 7% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 65% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 29 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.

The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.

This week: one thing

Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.

What you end up holding: your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
How long it takes: about twenty minutes

If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.

Over the next 90 days

Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.

Over the next 12 months

Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles collecting or preparing solid or fluid samples for analysis, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.

The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them

I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.

I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to geological technicians, except hydrologic technicians (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was geoscientists, except hydrologists and geographers: only about 7% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 31/100 here, with only 27% of the task list in the top band, and “test and analyze samples to determine their content and characteristics, using laboratory…” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.

How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.

3 moves I checked and rejected

These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.

Geoscientists, Except Hydrologists and Geographers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already participate in geological, geophysical, geochemical, hydrographic, or oceanographic surveys, prospecting field trips, exploratory…, and their equivalent is to plan or conduct geological, geochemical, or geophysical field studies or surveys, sample collection…. Across both published task lists that is about 7% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 7% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Environmental Science and Protection Technicians, Including Health
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already prepare or review professional, technical, or other reports regarding sampling, testing, or recommendations…, and their equivalent is to prepare samples or photomicrographs for testing and analysis. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step.
Look at that job’s page anyway →
Weighers, Measurers, Checkers, and Samplers, Recordkeeping
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already collect or prepare solid or fluid samples for analysis, and their equivalent is to collect product samples and prepare them for laboratory analysis or testing. Across both published task lists that is about 5% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 5% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $46,380 against your $53,350, 13.1% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Look at that job’s page anyway →

What I’d stop worrying about

A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.

The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 27% of its task weight, across 29 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The whole-job doom story
Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.
Panic-buying a course
Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.

You are reading the United States figures

The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Laboratory technicians is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.

Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match

The other groups this work is counted across:

Physical scientists

In UK official statistics this job is counted as Laboratory technicians and Physical scientists. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.

Your route through this

Where to go next, and what it costs

Free, and complete

The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.

Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
American Job Center locator
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
- CareerOneStop local help hub
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop
Free

No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it

Nothing Collab365 runs is built for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.

There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 27% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.

Try The AI Authority free →

7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.

The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.

Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians launches. Nothing else.

That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.

We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.

No Space for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians yet. Should there be one?

Collab365 Spaces is built by the same people as this site. We find the problems that AI and automation are creating inside one kind of work, then solve them as short courses, briefings and Blueprints. Each Space is the community too, so the research and the people doing your job are in the same place.

What a Space actually is, in full

Collab365 launches new communities where the need is real. If one for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians existed, with researched problems, courses and people in the same boat, would you want in?

Your email

We use your email address for one thing: to tell you if a Space for geological technicians / except hydrologic technicians launches. We never sell it, never use it for unrelated marketing, and every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Our privacy policy has the full version.

This unlocks nothing. Every figure, every row and every step on this page is already yours, whether you fill this in or not.

No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.

Questions people ask about this job

Will AI replace Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians?: Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 29 official task statements scored for Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians (United States, SOC 19-4043), 27% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 31 out of 100 (range 27–37, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
Which tasks in “Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians” can AI already do?: The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Assemble, maintain, or distribute information for library or record systems” (93/100, very high); “Read and study reports in order to compile information and data for geological and geophysical prospecting” (75/100, high); “Plot information from aerial photographs, well logs, section descriptions, or other databases” (75/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
Which tasks in “Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians” stay human?: About 65% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Inspect engines for wear or defective parts, using equipment or measuring devices” (0/100, minimal); “Measure geological characteristics used in prospecting for oil or gas, using measuring instruments” (0/100, minimal); “Create photographic recordings of information, using equipment” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
What should someone working in “Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians” do about AI?: Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 27% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 65% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
How is the AI exposure score for Geological Technicians, Except Hydrologic Technicians calculated?: Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 29 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.

Where these numbers come from

Worth knowing about these figures

The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.

Task statements: onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
Task weights: onet-db (im-rt-with-imputed)
Scores: Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
Pay and employment: bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))

Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.

The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.

The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.

How we score a job Download this release Look up another job

Using these figures?

Cite this

Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.

Plain text

Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).

BibTeX

@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
  title        = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
  author       = {{Collab365}},
  year         = {2026},
  url          = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
  note         = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}

Permalink

https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1

Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.