5 Comments

Summary:

The issue of green jobs has risen once again to the top of the pile in Washington, D.C. in recent days: Most recently, the White House announced a plan on Wednesday to create “tens of thousands of jobs,” the Wall Street Journal reports, by providing $5 billion […]

The issue of green jobs has risen once again to the top of the pile in Washington, D.C. in recent days: Most recently, the White House announced a plan on Wednesday to create “tens of thousands of jobs,” the Wall Street Journal reports, by providing $5 billion in tax credits for manufacturers of wind, solar electric vehicle and other cleantech products. This comes on the heels of President Obama highlighting in his jobs speech last week the potential of energy and efficiency projects to help improve unemployment figures.

In his memo yesterday on the “clean energy economy,” Vice President Biden touted the creation of thousands of jobs across the renewable energy sector as a result of Recovery Act investments. It makes sense for this issue to take center stage this month. Green jobs, after all, offer a timely three-fer: a way for the Obama administration to promote energy legislation at home, warm up for the climate negotiations in Copenhagen (where President Obama is scheduled to arrive on Friday) and show plan for addressing the country’s dismal 10 percent unemployment rate.

But the question of how to officially define, quantify and track green jobs remains open at a time when this data is needed most to inform policy decisions that will directly affect how the clean energy economy takes shape. Divisions over what role green jobs can and should play in kick-starting the economy are wide. As Popular Mechanics notes, “Proponents say these jobs will ease not only unemployment but also climate change and the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. Skeptics question the sustainability of green jobs and the government’s ability to identify game-changing technologies.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has requested $8 million in its 2010 budget to help bridge the divide with hard data next year, with the first data slated for publication in 2011. The idea, according to the agency, is to provide the answers to basic questions for policy analysis and planning of job training programs, such as: What education and training do green-collar jobs require? How many green jobs are there now and how many are being created? And what demand can we expect “for workers in the  green-collar occupations of the future?” And what exactly is a green job, anyway?

According to the Labor Department’s working definition, the term encompasses “products and services that increase the use of energy from renewable sources, increase energy efficiency, or protect, restore, or mitigate damage to the environment.”

But billions of dollars in stimulus funds have already been allocated for projects that are supposed to create green jobs, and the feds aren’t waiting for the Labor Department’s analysis or official definition to start crunching the numbers to justify the investments — and push for additional initiatives like the tax credit plan announced on Wednesday. In Biden’s energy memo this week, he cited some impressive-sounding figures:

“Recovery Act investments in renewable generation and advanced energy manufacturing of $23 billion will likely create 253,000 jobs and leverage over $43 billion in additional investment that could support up to 469,000 more jobs, putting us on track to meet the goal of doubling our renewable energy generation, including solar, wind and geothermal, in just 3 years.”

Those stats should be taken with a grain of salt, however. A year’s worth of employment counts as one job — so a position working on a three-year project counts as three jobs. And the reality of the “shovel ready” projects that much of the stimulus package was designed to help finance is that some jobs end once the shoveling is done. And as Rhone Resch, who heads up the Solar Energy Industries Association, a trade group, pointed out Wednesday, jobs in the nascent renewable energy sector can be slippery at this stage, “moving fluidly between countries.” The U.S. solar industry, he notes, has seen jobs at older manufacturing plants go overseas, primarily to China, while adding other jobs related to newer technologies.

So at this point, green jobs advocates and policymakers have a fine line to walk. A growing green energy industry has real potential to put Americans to work, and thousands of people are already working on stimulus-funded energy projects. But touting the economic wonders of green jobs programs too much, too soon — or portraying environmental initiatives as job boosters when their near term net effect may be an employment decline — could spawn skepticism and hinder support for valid green programs down the road when more comprehensive data becomes available.

Green roof installation photo courtesy of Flickr user Greenforall.org

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. Rise & Shine: December 17, 2009 | Sweet Solar Home Thursday, December 17, 2009

    [...] Green Jobs Data in Catch-Up Mode as Feds Pump Cash into Energy The issue of green jobs has risen once again to the top of the pile in Washington, D.C. in recent days. [...]

  2. VP Biden’s announcement of $5B more for green tech investments is great news for this nation’s green economy. Focusing energy tax credits and targeting capital investments will allow for new jobs and more modern manufacturing facilities around the nation, and with a diversity of investments in wind, solar, fuel cells, and efficient batteries the Administration is showing new initiative in promoting green tech across the board.
    If you’re looking for ideas about taking your business green and creating more green-collar jobs, then try http://www.greencollareconomy.com. It has It’s the largest b2b green directory on the web, and lots of sustainability white papers for businesses trying to use in finding sustainable, eco-friendly product solutions.

  3. The creation of new nuclear power plants will produce most middle class jobs for America. These great jobs are created in both the building and running of a new nuke plant. This can not be said for the building of solar panels and wind mills parts which will be done in China in order to keep prices down.

    Note this comment by Jim Rodgers the CEO of Duke Energy:

    “In an operation of a nuclear plant, there [are] .64 jobs per megawatt. The wind business–and we have a very large wind business–is .3 jobs per megawatt. In the solar business–and we’re installing solar panels–it’s about .1. But the difference in the jobs is quite different, because if you’re wiping off a solar panel, it’s sort of a minimum wage type of job, [with] much higher compensation for nuclear engineers and nuclear operators. If our goal is to rebuild the middle class, nuclear plays a key role there, particularly if coal is out of the equation.”

    How are we being environmentally friendly when we purchase wind mills and solar panels from China? China electrical grid is run from power produced from the dirtiest coal plants in the world. They don’t even scrub their coal before they burn it. That means Solar Panels and Wind Mills = CO2 + heavy metal particulates + everyone’s favorite Mercury.

    Viva the Nuclear Renaissance,

    Jfarmer9

  4. Not one dime for the development of a fast Nuclear Reactor??????????????

    We need just three billion dollars to produce a Integrated Fast Reactor

    Are we really going to give up the technological advantage that an IFR would give us to countries like China, Russia, France and India? All these countries believe in this next generation reactor technology so strongly that they are currently building or planning to build IFR reactors.

    Did you know IFR reactor can be run on our old fuel rods and Depleted Uranium? We have enough of both these potential fuel sources to supply the US with all its electrical needs for 500 years without mining one additional gram of Uranium.

    Did you know an IFR will also be able to produce enough heat on a consistent basses to make Boron? Boron is a carbon free energy source that could power newly designed cars. The expected cost of Boron produced by the use of heat exchange with an IFR is to be equivalent to paying .50$ for a gallon gasoline. Also Boron is much safer as a fuel source than that of gasoline.

    Did you know an IFR could basically eliminate all proliferation issues?

    Did you know an IFR solves our current long term nuclear waste issues while producing an easy to handle ceramic by product that will be less radioactive than Uranium in 400 years? In 700 almost all of the original byproducts radioactivity will be gone.

    I can go on and on describing the advantages that IFR technology can offer this nation but I do not think this comment section would allow that many words. I will leave you with this fact. All of the above can be done at cost of 1,500$ per kilowatt/hour? There is no other energy source on the market that can even come close to this cost.

    God Bless Americas Nuclear Renaissance,

    Jfarmer9

  5. Stimulus Funds Almost Fully Tapped – Time For the Jobs Crunch Wednesday, January 20, 2010

    [...] in the short term, that the strategy will ultimately be able to prove that a green economy actually does deliver green jobs. [...]

Comments have been disabled for this post