With unemployment on the rise, new jobs are scarce. Creating jobs has become a top priority for politicians. One can hardly watch the news without hearing catch phrases like the “renewable energy economy,” “green jobs” and “leading the world in clean energy technologies.” In short, environmental policies have been rebranded as job creators.
Cascade Policy Institute’s new report, The Dirty Secret Behind Clean Jobs, reveals numerous flaws with this approach. The authors address the misconceptions behind creating “green jobs.” The definition of “green jobs” is vague, green job subsidies are based on flawed economic principles and, lastly, assumptions for job growth are inaccurate or downright false.
The report’s co-author, Nick Sibilla, states, “Our report focuses on Oregon, national and international attempts to create green jobs. Overwhelmingly, we found that green jobs are based on faulty economics and wishful thinking.”
The Dirty Secret Behind Clean Jobs reveals:
- Numerous definitions of the term “green jobs” exist. In fact, most government agencies interchange the terms “clean” and “green,” adding to the confusion of what really constitutes an environmentally friendly job.
- Proclamations about green jobs fixing the economy are exaggerated and misleading. Oregon employers predicted the number of green jobs would grow 14 percent between 2008 and 2010, which would have equated to 7,400 new jobs in the state. Meanwhile, statewide employment levels have dropped by 140,000 jobs over the same two-year period.
- “Clean jobs” turns out to be just another term for big government. According to The Brookings Institution, the industry of “regulation and compliance” (i.e., government employees) was the fourth largest source of clean jobs in the United States. Meanwhile, in Oregon, three of the larger green jobs employers are the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. All of those salaries are ultimately paid by taxpayers.
- One clear example of green job pork barrel spending is the Shepherds Flat wind farm under construction in Gilliam and Morrow Counties. The project has obtained $1.2 billion in federal, state and local subsidies but will create only 35 permanent jobs. Each job will cost over $34 million to American taxpayers.
- Green job estimates do not account for job losses in other sectors. Spain, a pioneer in renewable energy before the recession, is a sobering example. A recent Spanish economic analysis revealed that for every green job created, more than two jobs were lost.
- Many green job advocates claim that green industries are more labor intensive and thus create more jobs than other sectors of the economy. Although inefficiency is not something to be praised, the claims are still downright false. A recent Italian study suggests the green industry is a capital-intensive, not a labor-intensive, industry and that the data show that green investments generate fewer jobs than investments in other sectors of the economy.
Cascade’s vice president and co-author of the report, Todd Wynn, stated, “Despite the continued rhetoric from politicians, our report shows the utter failure of the green job movement. It turns out to be more about corporate welfare and government handouts than actual job creation.”
DOWNLOAD THE DIRTY SECRET BEHIND CLEAN JOBS REPORT
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Todd Wynn
T: 503.242.0900
F: 503.242.3822
Download PDF
“Clean jobs” turn out to be just another term for big government in yet another way. Green projects rake in millions or billion in subsidies, and the people involved are not unaware which side their bread is buttered on. The corporations and individuals involved have a deep personal investment in big and bigger government, and they become sycophants of, and sort of unpaid arms of, the government.
I have not read your full report, but there are several issues with the bullet points above. Here’s a breakdown by bullet point:
1. OK, so the term “green jobs” is ambiguous. The word “green” has been used too loosely to describe aspects that support “sustainability” or “environmentally friendly” practices. The building industry has been trying to develop levels of ‘green’ for the past 15 years and it’s still something that’s in progress. It doesn’t mean that progress isn’t being made or jobs aren’t being created just because a term doesn’t have a specific definition. I’m not sure what this proves.
2. Apples to Oranges. You are comparing a specific market sector to the whole economy. I would love to see projected job creation numbers within the sector vs. actual numbers within the sector. This may be hard because unless the projections specifically define the market sector.
3. I’m sure this initiative creates some government jobs and some private jobs. I’m not sure about the ratio. If you’re anti-big government that’s fine, but please don’t skew the entire initiative to fit your argument.
4. If you’re anti-big government that’s fine. You make a good point here. How much energy is being generated here? Was the energy previously generated using something that we import? If so, it seems like we could be reducing or demand for foreign energy.
5. Correlation does not equal causation. Just because a bee stings you when it’s hot outside doesn’t mean that the next time it’s hot outside you will get stung.
6. This bullet point is perhaps your strongest argument. I have not ready the study or your full report and therefore cannot comment on possible flaws. That said, I would rather invest the capital in regions around America and not elsewhere around the world.
For the next article or report, please remember to make direct comparisons and hone your argument to avoid loosely tied points that can’t stand by themselves. It’d be great to have a more thorough discussion about the government’s role in the sustainable energy economy, ‘green jobs,’ and their benefit to the state or national economy, but we need to bring the right information to the table.
I look forward to the next article. Thanks.
-Justin
Justin, you are good at writing but the substance is so left wing it hurts. William