Can Green Jobs Fix the U.S. Economy?

It is ultimate silliness that environmentalists spout. Al Gore flies around the world, attracting hordes of adulating sycophants who burn tens of thousands of gallons of fuel to hear him say not to fly and drive. Then Al is off again in his private jet.

There are hundreds if not thousands of "environmental" conferences worldwide, where hypocrites do the same thing, flying and driving to pat each other on the back for their "concern" and brilliant ideas. I rode my bicycle to one and handed out fliers asking why they didn't videoconference instead of flying and driving there. Nobody could answer.

Famous luminaries besides Al Gore fly hundreds of thousands of miles annually to collect greenbucks to lecture on this nonsense.

After these EcoHypocrites have cut their own energy usage 80%, then they can start lecturing the rest of us.

The Global Warming Scam can be examined in part at www.theglobalwarmingscam.blogspot.com

John Jaeger of CA 11:57PM February 24, 2010

Government jobs are the last thing we need. Oh, excuse me I was just ranting.

We hear about tax cuts and tax credits for doing things like insulating and replacing windows. If it was cost effective we wouldn't need Government to help. How about "Cash for Clunkers"? That was really cost effective, wasn't it?

Let's bring back the Constitution and live by it. Shrink the Federal government by about 80% and we'd find that our economy would flourish. Oh, there I go again.

J Roberts of AL 9:31PM February 22, 2010

In the March edition of U.S. News and World Report ("Clean Energy Already Paying Off"), Jerome Ringo (former president of the Apollo Alliance, "a coalition that promotes clean energy and green jobs"), writes "a new study published in the journal 'Energy Policy' found that non-fossil fuel technologies create more jobs per unit of energy than coal and natural gas do." Eureka! For a long time I had been under that illusion that improved efficiency was a good thing for our economy. From my skewed perspective, I would have expressed the findings cited by Ringo something like this: "non-fossil fuel technologies cost more man-hours per unit of energy to produce." Of course, because these technologies are more costly, the government will have to subsidize them so they can compete with older, more efficient technologies. And, as Ringo himself points out, Congress will have to do something to keep these jobs from going overseas (google "Hawley-Smoot"), as well as provide financial support and job training for those who lose their jobs, but, as he also points out, we've done that kind of thing before.

Now this is all well and good, but I'm not sure that even Ringo himself realizes the full potential of his insight. Living here in timber country, I have long been concerned about the plight of the logging industry.Many former loggers struggle to find work and adjust to the economic changes that have transpired over the last few decades. Many have not only lost their source of income, but a whole way of life. Congress could fix this immediately by simply outlawing the use of chainsaws to cut down trees. Imagine how many jobs would be created if every board-foot of lumber had to be harvested by hand-saw and axe. And, it would reduce the output of greenhouse gases and our dependency on fossil-fuel to boot. Of course we would have to put a high tariff on lumber imports from Canada, but Congress has done this sort of thing before (google "Hawley-Smoot"), and it fits exactly into Ringo's template.

This is just one example. There are many application. I want to encourage some brainstorming of possibilities. Were we to apply just a fraction of them, just imagine the ways in which our economy would be revolutionized overnight.

Tom Frieze of MT 9:29AM February 21, 2010

Obama promises 1,000,000 new "green" jobs. But that is only part of the story. As the ecomony transitions from conventional sources of energy (oil, gas and coal) to "green" energy, jobs will be created in the green energy sector but jobs will be eliminated in the conventional energy sector.

The ecomony will have new jobs but also a loss of existing jobs. The net effect on jobs could be slightly positive or slightly negative. Building wind turbines instead of offshore oil platforms will creste "different" jobs. There will never be a "net" gain of 1,000,000 jobs from green energy.

The US has traditionally been a leader in technology development for conventional energy sources. If we don't attain a leadership position in technology for green jobs, the economy will se a net loss of jobs.

Bob of TX 12:17PM February 20, 2010