Category Archives: Green Jobs

Renewables Are Better At Creating Jobs Than At Creating Energy


Anericanexperiment blog posted”Energy Industry There to Produce Energy, not Jobs” written by John Phelan..The author begins by quoting Gregg Mast of Clean Energy Economy Minnesota who is boasting about clean energy jobs growth.  Mast says:

 “The fact is,the number of clean-energy jobs has grown every year since the release of the first Clean Jobs Midwest-Minnesota report in 2016, and these good-paying jobs have been added at a faster pace than the statewide average.”

 

Countering Gregg Mast’s boast,  Phelan responds by saying:

“This might sound like great news, but there is something missing from this celebration. It is something vital. Indeed, from an economic point of view, it is the most vital thing of all: How much energy are these workers actually producing?  Increasing productivity — the ratio of outputs produced to inputs used — is key to economic growth and raising living standards”.

So, how productive are these new clean-energy workers? How much energy does each produce?  Sadly, the answer seems to be “not much.” According to data on electric-power generation by primary energy sources from the Energy Information Administration and figures for employment in each sector from the U.S. Energy and Employment Report, we can see that, in 2017,   the 412 workers employed in Minnesota’s natural-gas sector produced an average of 16,281 megawatt hours of electricity each. For coal, the figure was 13,230 megawatt hours produced for each of the 1,722 workers employed in the state.

But for renewable wind and solar, the numbers are far less encouraging. In terms of megawatt hours produced per worker, Minnesota’s wind sector came in a somewhat distant third. Each of the 1,966 workers here generated an average of just 5,665 megawatt hours in 2017. This was just 43 percent of the amount of electricity a Minnesota coal worker produced annually and 35 percent of that produced by a natural-gas worker.

For solar, the numbers are even worse. In 2017, each of Minnesota’s 3,800 solar-energy workers produced an average of just 157 megawatt hours. This was just 1.2 percent of the energy produced by a coal worker and only 1 percent of that which a natural-gas worker produced.

The chart below illustrates the above:

 

 

 

In terms of that vital ratio of outputs (energy generated) to inputs (number of workers), wind energy is a low-productivity sector compared to natural gas and coal. Solar is even worse. Piling more inputs into these sectors when they could be more productive in other sectors lowers productivity and economic welfare. This is certainly not something to be celebrated — from an economic point of view, at least.

Mast and Clean Energy Economy Minnesota need to remember that the point of an energy industry is to generate energy, not to generate jobs.

A response by supporters of wind and solar is that there are workers out there insulating homes.  How many of solar’s 3800 jobs are insulating homes?

cbdakota

Renewable Energy Uses 100X Manpower Compared to Fossil Fuels


solar-panelsThe International Renewable Energy Agency of the US Bureau of Statistics provided employment data for three categories–Solar; Oil and Gas Extraction; and Coal Mining.  Bloomberg drew a chart of employment over the period of 2012 to 2015.  That chart is shown below:

Energy Jobs

Stanislav Jakuba looked at the employment in each of these three endeavours to compare electricity production versus manpower in his posting “Renewable Energy: High Jobs, Little Power (inefficiency personified”.  He offered this analysis:

Ever wondered why has our standard of living not been improving?

The upward-aiming line in the above chart indicates one reason: growing employment in the renewable-energy sector. That employment contributes a miniscule amount to power production, and it does so at a dreadfully high operating cost.

Here are the numbers.

As illustrated, 200,000 people work in the solar industry (Photo-voltaic and Concentrated Solar Power combined), and they enabled the generation of 3.0 GW in 2015, which comes to 15 kW per employee. The down-sloping lines, combined, represent the 400,000 employees in the fossil fuel industry.

Assuming that about a half of those are needed just to supply fuel to generate the 310 GW electricity reported for that year, then the remaining 200,000 employees were responsible for 1550 kW per employee.

In other words, one employee in the fossil fuel industry produces 1550 kW, while it takes 100 employees in the solar business to produce roughly that amount.

Solar is thus the most expensive source of electricity. Plus, its output varies daily, sometime randomly (because of clouds and storms) and always intermittently (because of nights). Its inexhaustibility parallels the abundance of nuclear fuel, but the latter provides cheap and steady electricity, as well as heat, and is no less “clean” than solar.

The true cost of renewable energy is presently covered by subsidies drawn from our taxes, from Government borrowing abroad, and from various fees attached to our monthly utility bills.”

Jakuba has some addition thoughts on this topic in his  posting which can be read by clicking here.

I keep reading that solar and wind are now competitive with natural gas and coal.  Show me the cost number when they remove all the subsidies and when they  include operating cost and investment for the backup fossil fuel generated power–because these renewables not reliable supplies.

I am not sure that I completely  agree with the comparison technique, but they do have one heck of a lot of manpower for such a puny output of electrical power.

The politicians said these renewable projects would create jobs.  They sure were right about that.  Although, it looks like they carried it too far.

cbdakota

 

 

Letterman versus Lomborg—Interview on Letterman’s Late Show


Bjorn Lomborg was invited on the David Letterman show to discuss global warming. The video, below, sheds little new light on the issues, but the contrast wave generatorsimagesbetween two global warming advocates is pretty striking. Lomborg never pretends that he is a scientist but he is quite knowledgeable about the topic of global warming. He is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming but with a difference. The difference is that he does not buy into the alarm that many, if not most, of his fellow believers use routinely when discussing global warming.

Letterman is not a scientist nor is he knowledgeable about global warming. Letterman is an alarmist. And worst of all, Letterman is an anti-capitalist, or he gives a very good imitation of one. According to him, the industrialists of the world are all in a cabal where they wont let anything get out that might improve the world if they can’t make a profit of it.   I bet Letterman bought many of those kits that would allow you to make gasoline out of water—the ones that those industrialists suppressed.  And how about those batteries that always stayed charged.   Oh, yes,  and those tires that never went flat. Cars could be so much better if Ford and GM would be forced to put those secrete things out on the market. Just think what we could do with those wave machines that David would like to work on, if only those………..

So, have I biased you enough, if so, click on watch the video.

cbdakota

 

 

UPDating: Skeptics Are At A Huge Disadvantage Regarding Funding.


(This 11/03/2013 posting is being updated to include more comprehensive information regarding non-governmental organizations environmental contributions. The updates will be obvious as they will be in color.)

growing_money-resized-2It is misinformation, largely based upon purposeful lies, that a giant conspiracy funded by Big Oil is making people skeptical of the theory of man-made global warming. Accordingly, this supposed campaign has been so good that the majority of people do not think that global warming is a significant issue. Surely that must be the explanation, they say. How else could such an insignificant number of people (skeptics) be so persuasive?

Lets assume that the premise that enough money can buy opinion is factual. If so, who is getting the money? The skeptics or the warmers?

This posting looked at Federal Government funding of the Warmers. It also looked at funding by non-governmental groups. But a new book”Cracking Big Green” by Ron Arnold and Paul Driessen has more comprehensive information about non-government funding and I think the reader will understand how vast the funding for the Warmers is. The amounts of moneys that the Green Organizations have is breathtaking. One small section is lifted from the book to supplement my original information. It follows:

Cracking Big Green: to save the world from the save-the-earth money machine “This is where we open our inquiry in detail. More than 26,500 American environmental groups collected total revenues of over $81billion from 2000 to 2012 according to Giving USA Institute, with only a small part of that coming from membership dues and individual contributions. 

Continue reading

IPCC Draft Of The “Summary For Policy Makers” Leaked


The hype around the soon to be released UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Summary for Policy Makers  (SPM) does make me a little ill.   The last such report was issued in 2007 and it does not seem that the assemblers of the report have learned much in that time.  It is not that they have completely ignored reality but just mostly ignored it.

Continue reading

July EV Sales Down But Still Some Hope For 100,000 Sales By Year End


July sales for the leaders, Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf were off compared to their June sales.  The Volt sold 1,788 in July versus 2,698 in June.  The Leaf sales were 1,864 in July versus 2,225 in June.

The table below shows the models having sold more that 1000 vehicles year-t0-date.  (Tesla would be in this table but they only report sales quarterly.)

MODEL JULY SALES YEAR-TO-DATE SALES
Nissan Leaf 1,864 11,703
Chevy Volt 1,788 11,643
Toyota Prius Plug-In     817   5,035
Ford  C-Max Energi    433   2,915
Ford Fusion Energi    407  1,991
Ford Focus Electric    150  1,050

Continue reading

European Renewables Bubble Is Collapsing


The European nations have led the world in the installation of wind and solar, the renewable technologies.  But now the high subsidies that were imposed to make these renewables look attractive are becoming intolerable.

Peter Glover has posted “The ‘Great Renewables Scam’ unravels” on thecommentator.com.   Glover writes:

Energy insiders have long known that the notion of ‘renewable energy’ is a romantic proposition – and an economic bust. But it is amazing what the lure of guaranteed ‘few strings attached’ government subsidies can achieve. Even the Big Oil companies bought into the renewables revolution, albeit mostly for PR reasons. Like Shell, however, many quickly abandoned their fledgling renewable arms. Post-2008, they knew, the subsidy regimes could not last. Neither was the public buying into the new PR message.

Continue reading