• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Van Jones’s Misguided Defense of Green Jobs

    Last Friday, Van Jones debated Andy Morriss, Law Professor at the University of Illinois in The Economist on the topic of green jobs. Surprisingly, Morriss says, there’s one thing we can all agree on:

    Van Jones and I agree that ‘the private sector, not the government, can and must be the main driver in creating green jobs.’ We agree that government subsidies for coal, oil and nuclear power are a serious problem.

    With the exceptions of their sentiments on corn-based ethanol and the need for innovation, the agreement stops there. Van Jones’ solution to the problem of existing subsidies is piling more on instead of peeling them back. Morriss refutes, “Far from leveling the playing field, these new subsidies dwarf the old ones: solar and wind receive subsidies of over $23/Mwh compared with the $0.44/Mwh for conventional coal and $0.25/Mwh for natural gas.”

    Worse, even with massive subsidies wind and solar make up a very small fraction of America’s energy supply. It’s plausible for renewable energy sources to help meet America’s growing energy demands, but it should be done absent of taxpayer assistance.

    Morriss goes on to give readers an important lesson in public choice and why once we go down the green jobs road, it will be very difficult to stop:

    Special interests have the advantage because the benefits received are concentrated and valuable enough to make hiring lawyers and lobbyists to manipulate the legislative and regulatory processes worthwhile. The general public, on the other hand, loses too little on each subsidy to motive a lobbying trip to Washington. As I noted in my opening, we see this in Mr Jones’ field of alternative energy: the wasteful, environmentally damaging corn-based ethanol programme now deeply entrenched in our regulatory system is the result of the 1990s versions of the arguments for green energy Mr Jones makes now.”

    Jones’ assertion that renewable energy creates more jobs and thus is good economic policy is a common claim made by advocates of green jobs legislation. He says, “There are simply more jobs per dollar and per kilowatt hour in producing clean energy and rebuilding for efficiency than there are in producing dirty energy and wasting energy.”

    This logic supports Morriss’ argument than it does Jones’. It proves that clean energy sources are an inefficient use of human capital and these resources could be more useful in other sectors of the economy. NPR recently ran a piece called “The Jobs Of Yesteryear” which shows pictures and provides descriptions of obsolete occupations that disappeared because of improvements in efficiency and technology. Examples include an iceman and pinsetters at a bowling alley. If the goal were simply to create jobs we could rid the world of mechanical equipment and hire workers to dig our ditches. But the result would be a less prosperous United States and a lot of lost value creation which would ultimately destroy more jobs than it created. The same holds true for green jobs.

    The stimulus money used to improve energy efficiency and weatherize buildings is failing to create the clean energy jobs the White House said it would - costing tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars per job created. Further, studies from the National Black Chamber of Commerce, The Brookings Institutite, the Energy Information Administration, the Congressional Budget Office, the Environmental Protection Agency, and The Heritage Foundation all agree that overall net effect of a cap and trade policy (aka: the ultimate green jobs plan) will be lost income, consumption and employment. The debate within these studies is the magnitude of the losses.

    Van Jones said he shares “Mr Morriss’ preference for market-based solutions” but his entire arguments suggests quite the opposite.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to Van Jones’s Misguided Defense of Green Jobs

    1. Pingback: GREEN ZONE (2010) « Crazy Movie Site

    2. Pingback: Yahoo! News Search Results for medicare supplement plan f |

    3. bigdave says:

      To the knucklehead moron Vann jones. There is nothing yet discovered on this planet that is as efficient and cheap as OIL/coal/natural gas, none of which, with the clean air systems we now have, cause polution! GO GREEN, GO BROKE! ASK SPAIN! ASK ENGLAND! ASK ANY COUNTRY THAT TRIED IT you COMMUNIST FOOL! You are about ONE(1) thing only: CONTROL! By the way mr jones, carbon dioxide is 94% WATER VAPOR you complete idiot! Real dangerous stuff ain't it! Man -made global warming or stand alone GW is a HOAX and LIES and ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT CONTROL! All the good communists are at room temperature!

    4. Don Mitchel says:

      A report was just created for the 111th congress suggesting they may again address ballast water with a national policy. The report suggest that the cost of foreign made goods would increase as a results of the need to retrofit ships. This would help create jobs, if a quick time line to provide the protection needed for our waters was created. Inspection and study of these new foriegn technologies must be done to determine saftey, both from short term use and long term use. Saddly the deliberate procrastination by this administration to go green on this issue is allowing the oppertunity for foriegn shipping to gain the edge. This Administration has only shown an interest in a plan that mirrors the International Maritime Organization for ten years, so China a large influential member of the IMO has major influence determining our environmental policy. This is being allowed because of the ponzi scheme set up by previous administrations allowing China to peg their currency value to ours, so at alleged international auctions of treasury notes, that we keep creating, for sale, China can then buy them at attractive prices regardless of the low interest rates, so our politicians can keep offering entitlements and cheap goods in the big box "China outlet stores" that are now our largest employers. This is being done while, continually increaseing our national debt allowing for more economic domination by China.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.