Green jobs myth exposed

[VTmotoMike08 0]

See below, research from UC Berkley which concludes that jobs in PV and wind create more jobs per megawatt of power than any of the fossil fuels. Table is on page 3.
http://rael.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/very-old-site/renewables.jobs.2006.pdf

Furthermore, lets evaluate what you get without green jobs and with green jobs:

Without: mass traffic jams
With: mass transit

Without: foreign dictators who get rich off oil and want to kill us
With: energy independence

Without: blue collar jobs that can easily be outsourced
With: green collar jobs that have to be done here at home (granted not all of them fit this category)

I could go on. Futhermore, jobs in energy efficiency (which appear to be totally ignored in the study that was the origin of this post) have low entry level requirements but tremendous room to move up. Laid off blue collar works could get a job in solar or wind installation today, or retro fitting homes for efficiency, which requires no more than an HS diploma, and move up into designers and project managers, and eventually into owners and investors.

I suspect one of two possible reasons for the flows in the study from the OP. First, they might have deliberately or unintentionally not looked at the whole picture. Second, the are looking at the renewables industry while it was in one of its down swings. Just look at how the wind industry crashes every time the regulations change- we need set standards and non-volatile prices to encourage investment. I could expand on this but I've done enough research for tonight.

My experience with people who are afraid of green collar jobs has generally been that they are resistant to change and afraid of what they do not know or understand. Not saying this is the case with you because I don't know you but I think you should try to better understand the industry before you judge it.

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Sorry Bill, the thread is my thread about how green jobs are a myth, and have been proven to be so by the nations that have advocated for them. It is not about my horrible spelling.
The discourse goes as follows:

Me: I read in the WSJ that 2+2=4

K******: The WSG are a bunch of fascist Nazis

Me: well that may be, but can you discuss my point that 2+2 may equal 4

K******: You cant even use correct punctuation, you are below contempt and do not deserve a response.

Me: Yes I am an idiot, but can we get bact to the point of my post?

Actually you quoted a blogger on PAJAMASMEDIA (whose ability to add 2+2 is unproven), not the WSJ or the WSG (sic). You can't even remember what you type from one line to the next.

Who am I to disagree with your self assessment above?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,436]

>the thread is my thread about how green jobs are a myth . . .

As I've had green jobs (designing EV chargers) I'd have to say that's not true.

> It is not about my horrible spelling.

?? No, my comment was in reference to you not knowing I had already replied in this thread. You do not need to be able to spell to notice that (at least, you don't need to be able to spell exceptionally well.)

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

You seem to be confusing a blog site (PJM) with a TV channel (Fox).

Nope. It was pajama media who decided that Joe the plumber would be a good choice as their Gaza reporter. But now that I think about it, you're right. It is easy to get FOX mixed up with a blog site.

Odd - I couldn't find mention of him in their bloglist. Got a cite for that, or was it from mediamatters?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You seem to be confusing a blog site (PJM) with a TV channel (Fox).

Nope. It was pajama media who decided that Joe the plumber would be a good choice as their Gaza reporter. But now that I think about it, you're right. It is easy to get FOX mixed up with a blog site.

Odd - I couldn't find mention of him in their bloglist. Got a cite for that, or was it from mediamatters?

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/11/joe-plumber-starts-reporting-gig-israel/

Dozens to choose from, but I know you'll believe FOX

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

>the thread is my thread about how green jobs are a myth . . .

As I've had green jobs (designing EV chargers) I'd have to say that's not true.

> It is not about my horrible spelling.

?? No, my comment was in reference to you not knowing I had already replied in this thread. You do not need to be able to spell to notice that (at least, you don't need to be able to spell exceptionally well.)

Apparently he does need a double standard in order to criticize others for doing what he did a few days earlier.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

You seem to be confusing a blog site (PJM) with a TV channel (Fox).

Nope. It was pajama media who decided that Joe the plumber would be a good choice as their Gaza reporter. But now that I think about it, you're right. It is easy to get FOX mixed up with a blog site.

Odd - I couldn't find mention of him in their bloglist. Got a cite for that, or was it from mediamatters?

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/11/joe-plumber-starts-reporting-gig-israel/

Dozens to choose from, but I know you'll believe FOX

Evidently you're having the same confusion as idrankwhat - care to show where PJM is mentioned in the story?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Evidently you're having the same confusion as idrankwhat - care to show where PJM is mentioned in the story?

I apologize for the political correctness.
For the "google challenged" here:

search string = PJM "Joe the plumber"

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

You seem to be confusing a blog site (PJM) with a TV channel (Fox).

Nope. It was pajama media who decided that Joe the plumber would be a good choice as their Gaza reporter. But now that I think about it, you're right. It is easy to get FOX mixed up with a blog site.

Odd - I couldn't find mention of him in their bloglist. Got a cite for that, or was it from mediamatters?

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/11/joe-plumber-starts-reporting-gig-israel/

Dozens to choose from, but I know you'll believe FOX

Evidently you're having the same confusion as idrankwhat - care to show where PJM is mentioned in the story?

Your research skills really could do with improvement (along with statistics, dictionary,set theory....) Maybe someone will show you how to type "GOOGLE" into the little box at the top of your browser.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Evidently you're having the same confusion as idrankwhat - care to show where PJM is mentioned in the story?

I apologize for the political correctness.
For the "google challenged" here:

search string = PJM "Joe the plumber"

I *did* find mention of Wurzelbacher being a correspondent for PJTV.com, a site separate from their blog site - since that's evidently a bad thing, I'm sure you will post your scorn for the other networks using people like Markos Moulitsas and Ariana Huffington as commentators....right?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

You seem to be confusing a blog site (PJM) with a TV channel (Fox).

Nope. It was pajama media who decided that Joe the plumber would be a good choice as their Gaza reporter. But now that I think about it, you're right. It is easy to get FOX mixed up with a blog site.

Odd - I couldn't find mention of him in their bloglist. Got a cite for that, or was it from mediamatters?

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/11/joe-plumber-starts-reporting-gig-israel/

Dozens to choose from, but I know you'll believe FOX

Evidently you're having the same confusion as idrankwhat - care to show where PJM is mentioned in the story?

Your research skills really could do with improvement (along with statistics, dictionary,set theory....) Maybe someone will show you how to type "GOOGLE" into the little box at the top of your browser.

And maybe someone will show YOU how to type "pajamasmedia" - but it's doubtful, since you couldn't seem to provide a link that made any mention of it.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I *did* find mention of Wurzelbacher being a correspondent for PJTV.com, a site separate from their blog site -

There were only a few dozen to choose from.

Quote

since that's evidently a bad thing, I'm sure you will post your scorn for the other networks using people like Markos Moulitsas and Ariana Huffington as commentators....right?

Are you seriously going to try to compare Joe the plumber to Arianna Huffington?
And what do you have against Greeks

[rehmwa 2]

Green jobs -

1 type - faked up ideas that are not financially and technologically ready for the real world but make nice sound bites and leverage political power grabs - results in transfer of money via taxes and fees and do not improve our standard of living one bit

2 type - real ideas that improve efficiencies and will propagate in industry because they are the right thing to do from a business perspective - require zero government involvement and tend to be blocked so pols can make hay out of the first type

I'm all for type 2 green development.

One attitude towards the term depends on which type their mind clicks on when the term is brought up. Unfortunately, the type 1 is so in our faces all the time that the type 2 is bunched in with them and dismissed without regard.

Still a member of the "leave me alone" political party

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I *did* find mention of Wurzelbacher being a correspondent for PJTV.com, a site separate from their blog site -

There were only a few dozen to choose from.

Tv site vs. blog site - yup, exactly the same!

Quote

Quote

since that's evidently a bad thing, I'm sure you will post your scorn for the other networks using people like Markos Moulitsas and Ariana Huffington as commentators....right?

Are you seriously going to try to compare Joe the plumber to Arianna Huffington?
And what do you have against Greeks

I'm sorry - I thought your gripe was an untrained person doing commentary? Silly me - I should have realized that's only reserved for a CONSERVATIVE that's doing commentary.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Green jobs -

1 type - faked up ideas that are not financially and technologically ready for the real world but make nice sound bites and leverage political power grabs - results in transfer of money via taxes and fees and do not improve our standard of living one bit

2 type - real ideas that improve efficiencies and will propagate in industry because they are the right thing to do from a business perspective - require zero government involvement and tend to be blocked so pols can make hay out of the first type

I'm all for type 2 green development.

One attitude towards the term depends on which type their mind clicks on when the term is brought up. Unfortunately, the type 1 is so in our faces all the time that the type 2 is bunched in with them and dismissed without regard.

Still a member of the "leave me alone" political party

Type one and type two are both available but we have an affinity for propping up the black jobs which would fail in an open market without the transfer of our money via taxes, fees and the use of our military.

[brenthutch 388]

The Berkley report was what was SUPOSED to happen, in the real world this is what did happen:

"Some European economists took a look. In March, a research team from Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University produced a detailed, substantive, heavily sourced, two-method paper: “Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources.” The paper concluded that Spain’s “green jobs” program was an economic failure, in fact costing Spain many jobs."

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Quote

The Berkley report was what was SUPOSED to happen, in the real world this is what did happen:

"Some European economists took a look. In March, a research team from Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University produced a detailed, substantive, heavily sourced, two-method paper: “Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources.” The paper concluded that Spain’s “green jobs” program was an economic failure, in fact costing Spain many jobs."

Not really, if you look at the sources you can see that they used data from real PV and wind installations, not hypotheticals. And data on employment from coal and gas is everywhere.

We can each choose which report we want to believe, but I've pointed out some flaws in the OP report. Again:

1. It fails to address jobs created in the energy effieiency sector. Since we know that every dollar spent on energy effieciency saves you $3- $5 on renewable energy generation (for PV), this is a BIG hit on the study's credibility.

2. The PV and wind industry are currently too vulnerable to changing regulations that affect investor confidence. Depending on who is in power in congress, the feasability of these sources changes so often that no one wants to make the initial investments to get the industry off the ground and scaled up to a level where they can compete with fossil fues without recieving subsidities. If the idiots in congress would get around to making lasting regulations that don't expire every 3-5 years then you would see a lot more investment in clean tech which will bring the price down a lot.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I'm sorry - I thought your gripe was an untrained person doing commentary? Silly me - I should have realized that's only reserved for a CONSERVATIVE that's doing commentary.

She was a conservative. And she's quite well educated but only has a few decades worth of experience in American politics and commentary.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

The PV and wind industry are currently too vulnerable to changing regulations that affect investor confidence. Depending on who is in power in congress, the feasability of these sources changes so often that no one wants to make the initial investments to get the industry off the ground and scaled up to a level where they can compete with fossil fues without recieving subsidities. If the idiots in congress would get around to making lasting regulations that don't expire every 3-5 years then you would see a lot more investment in clean tech which will bring the price down a lot.

This echoes of something I read from one of our Congressmen recently, Tom Perriello:

One of the reasons why it made sense to move quickly is there's a tremendous amount of capital on Wall Street and elsewhere waiting to invest in energy. When I talk to investors, they say, "We need predictability." Whether it's financial regs or energy independence or the jobs bill, they're saying, "Look, if you tell us what the rules are going to be, we'll go do what we do best, which is create jobs and make profits. But we can't do that until you act." So it's less important to get some hypothetically perfect rules than to create the certainty that allows investors and innovators to move forward.

Every week the Senate doesn't act, it either freezes that investment and innovation or it sends it overseas. We're giving up jobs. The Senate -- the ridiculous tactics of the Republicans and the timidity of the Democrats -- is standing in the way of the kind of job creation we need.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm sorry - I thought your gripe was an untrained person doing commentary? Silly me - I should have realized that's only reserved for a CONSERVATIVE that's doing commentary.

She was a conservative. And she's quite well educated but only has a few decades worth of experience in American politics and commentary.

"Was" being the operative word. She still has no journalism training, just like Wurzelbacher.

I take back the reference to Moulitsas - turns out he *does* have a journalism degree.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

If the idiots in congress would get around to making lasting regulations that don't expire every 3-5 years then you would see a lot more investment in clean tech which will bring the price down a lot.

consistency in regulations takes away power from politicians - you won't see it happening

look at the nuclear industry - special interests have so strangled that area of energy it's nuts

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[VTmotoMike08 0]

There's a lot of discussion about this same topic on a linkedin group that I am a part of. I go there when I actually want to hear from people who have experience and education in the industry
Here's one post from there that I think fits well.

"I have seen some commentaries that compare the smart grid to the internet. I think this is a good (though not perfect) analogy. The creation of the internet spurred lots of innovation that ultimately created huge numbers of jobs. At this stage in the game, we cannot even begin to imagine the products and services that will evolve as the smart grid takes hold but we should be confident that the engine of innovation will find new ways to exploit the potential of the smart grid to create new products and services that will generate many more jobs than it eliminates through automation."

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Quote

Quote

If the idiots in congress would get around to making lasting regulations that don't expire every 3-5 years then you would see a lot more investment in clean tech which will bring the price down a lot.

consistency in regulations takes away power from politicians - you won't see it happening

look at the nuclear industry - special interests have so strangled that area of energy it's nuts

Probably right
But that does not mean we should give up. The most likely scenario seems that we will continue to have our balls squeezed by the Saudis until there is a REALLY BIG energy crisis, then we will have enough motivation to impliment smarter energy policies that we should have done a long time ago.

[brenthutch 388]

Here is a link to a PDF of the study. Not by some right wing jerk off mind you, but a high minded group of European academics

http://www.juandemariana.org/pdf/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf

Here is just one of the 24 points critical of Spain's Green Jobs experience"

"Optimistically treating European Commission partially funded data1, we find
that for every renewable energy job that the State manages to finance, Spain’s
experience cited by President Obama as a model reveals with high confidence,
by two different methods, that the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs
on average, or about 9 jobs lost for every 4 created, to which we have to add
those jobs that non-subsidized investments with the same resources would
have created."

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Ya, I got that the first time you posted it. Probably would have been better to post that PDF in the first place instead of pajama media. I read it, and then I listed two things that appear to be missing from the study and take away a lot from its credibility and I also posted another study that shows a different conclusion. Do you have any response to my previous points?