I worked for the "Canadian JPL" back in the previous "climate change" panic, "the ozone hole." Even though it was a government agency, working at a national la

I worked for the "Canadian JPL" back in the previous "climate change" panic, "the ozone hole." Even though it was a government agency, working at a national lab felt even more productive than the private sector. The reasons are that the departmental leadership is 100% done by research scientists who are ruthlessly efficient at doing science and writing papers about them. My department had approx. 4 senior scientists, a computer hardware engineer, a payload engineer, a CNC technician, a sysadmin, 2 technical consultants, and one administrative staff. We did custom payloads for the Shuttle, balloons and rockets which did atmospheric measurements. The software was primarily custom in C for telemetry and HP Basic/etc. for plotting. I highly recommend working for a national lab for a couple of years. Besides an unlimited budget, it's great having a sense of mission. Factoid 1: We used Fidonet to copy data from launch sites to the lab for quick turnaround and to ensure the instruments were functioning and calibrated properly. Factoid 2: Since this we pre-WWW, sample source code was often hard to obtain. So we had the world's shareware on a single optical disk with an index file so people could find sample code. Factoid 3: But since it was a national lab, if we needed, we had access to SOTA civil and military systems that came with source code. I was familiar with those systems, but we never needed them while I was involved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion What was more tractable about studying the ozone hole than climate change was that we could make direct observations and reducing CFCs had a fairly immediate effect. There wasn't an issue with "ozone hole deniers." To see the lab's papers, do a scientific search for Dr. Hans Fast and his co-authors.