• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Government-funded Study Shows Net Loss of Jobs From CO2 Policies

    Wind generators

    For his sake, let’s hope that Bruce Arnold at the Congressional Budget Office doesn’t get the Gabriel Calzada treatment from the American Wind Energy Association and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

    To freshen your memory, Gabriel Calzada is the economist at the King Juan Carlos University who got out his calculator and analyzed the green job situation in Spain—the same Spain whose job-crushing subsidies are supposed to be a model for our green recovery. The professor found that subsidizing green energy costs more traditional jobs than are created in the green sector. More than two jobs were lost for every single green job created by subsidies.

    Because his scholarship raised important red flags, it caused quite a stir in the policy debate. Such a stir that it appears the American Wind Energy Association (funded by the wind-power industry) helped coordinate a smear job on Calzada by the tax-payer-funded National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

    Googling “Gabriel Calzada” will provide many links to pages quoting the supposed rebuttal by the NREL. What the NREL and AWEA can’t rebut is that Spain’s unemployment rate exceeds all its European neighbors and just passed 20 percent. Further, the deteriorating economic situation is leading Spain to reduce or cancel those very subsidies that are supposed to help the economy. They are admitting the fraud, at least implicitly. That is, the cost of the subsidies exceeds the benefit to the economy. When the times get tough, it’s time to stop pretending.

    Which takes us to Bruce Arnold. In his recent “CBO Economic and Budget Issue Brief: How Policies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Could Affect Employment,” Arnold points out the negative impact of CO2-cutting policieslike cap and trade or carbon taxes,

    In particular, job losses in the industries that shrink would lower employment more than job gains in other industries would increase employment, thereby raising the overall unemployment rate.”

    So the CBO says pretty much what Calzada said about the green stimulus—there isn’t one. Carbon cuts lead to net job losses. The CBO author, Arnold, goes further and notes that those who keep their jobs will get reduced pay,

    The increases in prices caused by a tax or a cap-and-trade program would cause workers’ real (inflation-adjusted) wages to be lower than they would otherwise be. Nearly all workers would choose to remain in the workforce and accept those wages.”

    This sounds like a twist on that old Lite Beer ad, “Which is it: fewer jobs or less pay? It’s both!” No green job gain, no green stimulus. Of course, this is just what we’ve been saying. For example see:

    • “A Renewable Electricity Standard: What It Will Really Cost Americans,”

    • “What Boxer-Kerry Will Cost the Economy,”

    • “Impact of CO2 Restrictions on Employment and Income: Green Jobs or Gone Jobs?,”

    Though other regulator agencies have also noted the economic hit from carbon caps, it will be interesting to see what the NREL does with this new brief from the CBO.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Government-funded Study Shows Net Loss of Jobs From CO2 Policies

    1. DOV SUSSMAN, TAMPA, says:

      The President is clearly a leftist and is not in favor of most of the amndts, particularly the 1st, 2nd, & 10th; it is no suprise that he would select jurists who are inclined to carry out his social agenda without regard to constitutional principles.

    2. Pingback: » Financial News Update – 05/11/10 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter

    3. Pingback: Now It’s Fannies Turn To Again Feed Off Of The Taxpayers

    4. Pingback: The Absurd Report » Loss of Jobs From CO2 Policies

    5. Pingback: Kerry and Lieberman Unveil Their 1000 Page Cap and Tax Bill Supported by GE and BP :: The Lonely Conservative

    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.