Bishop Hill Green jobs cost you more
Feb 28, 2011 Economics Greens Politicians As if any further evidence were required to demonstrate the point, the Scottish Government has received a report showing that their policies are costing us dearly.
Government support for the renewable sector in Scotland is costing more jobs than it creates, a report has claimed. A study by consultants Verso Economics found there was a negative impact from the policy to promote the industry. It said 3.7 jobs were lost for every one created in the UK as a whole and that political leaders needed to engage in "honest debate" about the issue.
I'm reminded of what Green MSP Patrick Harvie said at the Environment Question Time at Strathclyde University when I pointed out that the concept of green jobs were topsy-turvy in economic terms, representing a cost and not a benefit (H/T Timmy). He said that it was "not about bean-counting jobs", or words to that effect.
So I guess the response to this news will be a collective shrug of the shoulders from Holyrood.
(H/T Jimmy)
Bishop Hill
Obama's green crusade looks like it has reached its end:
Barack Obama may be forced to order a two-year delay in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) action on climate change to try to avoid a complete government shutdown, an environmental conference has been warned.
President Obama faces the prospect of a government shutdown by 4 March, with a funding gap leading to federal employees being sent home and government services temporarily closing down, unless he can reach a deal with Congress Republicans who are demanding a crippling $61bn (£38bn) in budget cuts.
Bishop Hill
Still more at GWPF, reporting a Bloomberg article
You won’t get offshore wind money, you won’t get tidal energy money, you won’t get carbon capture and storage money because it’s all got to come from these same pension funds and they won’t trust the government.
This sounds promising, very promising indeed.
Reader Comments (46)
I guess it depends on who pays for the study and which consultants you hire. As most alternative energy projects are built on emerging (and thus rapidly changing) technologies, it's a bit early to claim either success or failure. Like climate science, emerging technologies are fraught with uncertainties. We should all be very wary of those who claim they have all the answers - especially politicians and industry consultants.
If Patrick Harvie was one of the "beans" losing his job, I'm sure a bit of attitude correction would occur.
Pointman
I've had enough of this. This morning I wrote to my MP, William Hague, about the UK's pathetic energy policy. This is just confirmation of the economic madness.
I don't even have to look at the data, because the Socialist Republic Of Vietnam has more nuclear facilities planned or proposed than the UK, and that certainly tells the entire story.
http://world-nuclear.org/info/reactors.html
Salmond was a banker (economist with RBS) before he turned to political crime, so he will be very keen on anything to do with green energy / carbon trading etc.
There is also something 'holier than thou' in the Scottish character that translates easily to 'greener than thou'.
It's good to see the damning report hitting the BBC website.
I'm staggered that it needs special reports to tell governors this. Someone needs to do a report about "service sector" economies too. From first principles:
If I take some essentially worthless rock and turn it into steel I ADD VALUE. I can sell the steel for more than the rock. If I take the steel and turn it into a washing machine I ADD VALUE. I can sell the washing machine for more than the steel. Therefore I'm creating wealth.
If I sell a service I'm merely redistributing weath earned by MANUFACTURING from service user to service provider. I'm selling an intagible convenience but not ADDING VALUE.
Unless we develop a MANUFACTURING base we're destined to just shift money around without creating real wealth. Since we can't manufacture low value products competitively, we must manufacture high tech product. Unfortunately UK history on this is poor. We tend to have good ideas which are exported to others to capitalise on.
Tim 'Timmy' Worstall's book should be forced down the throats of many. After they have been made to read and memorise it ;-)
Re the GWPF piece - I have been following the 'Cornish solar gold rush' with rapidly mounting horror over the last six months or so. IF the government reduces the solar FIT for >50KW arrays, then well and good. But they are still just talking about it.
There's so much confusion about this. And yet it's so simple:
Good energy policy should not be a roost for parasites, opportunists and liars.
@timheyes - Just be glad your not a school or Uni leaver as i think job creation in this country is over. If you've got a job try and keep it, if your hunting for a job my condolences.
This is in many respects "old news". The Spanish found this out to their some time ago.
From the above-cited article:
In other words, our "green energy" is not really an imposition on UK consumers, because it would cost them more to meet the fiat-imposed quotas elsewhere. A bit like a thief returning a pound to you after stealing your wallet, and expecting you to be grateful for it.
"There is also something 'holier than thou' in the Scottish character that translates easily to 'greener than thou'."
Can we please refrain from verging into racism on this. This is about greedy ignorant politicians, not their nationality.
˙ǝsıʍɹǝɥʇo ɹo ,,uǝǝɹƃ,, 'sqoɾ ,,ǝʇɐǝɹɔ,, ʇ,uop sǝıpısqns puɐ sʇuǝɯuɹǝʌoƃ ʇɐɥʇ dsɐɹƃ ʇouuɐɔ ʇsnɾ sǝıʇɟǝ˥
˙ssǝuɥsıʇɟǝ˥ ɹıǝɥʇ sɐ ɥɔnɯ os ssǝuɥsıʇʇoɔS ɹıǝɥʇ ʇ,usı sʇoɔS puɐ puɐlʇoɔS ɥʇıʍ ɯǝlqoɹd ǝɥ┴
Fascinating what old links you find on a PC when you clean the memory out, isn't?
http://www.upsidedowntext.com/
¿ʇ,usı 'ʇno ʎɹoɯǝɯ ǝɥʇ uɐǝlɔ noʎ uǝɥʍ ƆԀ ɐ uo puıɟ noʎ sʞuıl plo ʇɐɥʍ ƃuıʇɐuıɔsɐℲ
The GWPF yet again reports on the whining of those trying to cash in the renewables subsidies scam. The more they whine, the better it makes me feel.
I'm off to a renewable energy seminar this evening where those with their fingers in the subsidy jar will be trying to get landowners in Devon to sign up to having their fields full of wind turbines and solar panels. I will do my best to put a spanner in the works by asking a few searching questions about the subsidies.
Stopit J4R. If I drop my laptop from holding it upside down I'll send you the bill.
The problem with making racist remarks is that it plops you straight into the right-wing nutter camp ('amusing' upside down text or not) - which is a shame for the scientific debate.
When they talk about jobs do they mean working class jobs? Green cost more to govern with audits, compliance, enforcement, etc. So government positions should increase while working class jobs will decrease. Do the 'elite' call their government positions jobs?
I'm seeing a rotund Scottish politician, really disappointed-exasperated even look on his face, he's banging a big [global warming-green jobs] bass drum strapped to his chest (maybe with a hockey stuck) with the drum skin breaking through - the party [policy] went with a bang! the rest of the band is running away in the distance, and a pola bear was playing the trumpet :)
AKA the Josh effect :^)
Kevin
You raise a key point. Government jobs are funded from tax revenue (ie our money). Green jobs likewise. 'Working class' jobs are the result of enterprise and wealth creation. Couldn't be more different.
Perhaps this is why politicians don't 'get' the simple economic truth that jobs are a cost and not a benefit.
Either that or they are just ignorant and stupid as well as mendacious and self-serving.
@sunderland steve
Indeed
http://www.juandemariana.org/pdf/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf
'The study calculates that since 2000 Spain spent €571,138 to create each
“green job”, including subsidies of more than €1 million per wind industry job.'
Kevin,
It's very easy to work out. When the green movement decimate an industry then there has to be an increase in carers, social workers local public sector workers to take care of the families that the workers used to provide for. Anyone not actively seeking assistance from the state, whatever their position in life is an outcast requiring counselling/re-education.
Patagon
There are problems with that study. While the fundamental truth is correct (green jobs have a tangible opportunity cost in the non-subsidised sector) the numbers are contested. Even so, the point is well made: 'green' economics is rubbish.
Hydro-electric power generation in Scotland is truly a great renewable success. It transformed the North of Scotland whereby remote, isolated and relatively large communities for the first time were able to benefit from having electricity on demand.
Not all renewable energy sources are bad. Wind power and bio-fuels give renewables a very bad name because such technologies do not work from an economic standpoint and are as a consequence ultimately unsustainable. However the potential of tidal power derived from Scotland's Pentland Firth due to the tidal races is truly staggering.
From a fossil fuel perspective Scotland has 62.4% of the EU's proven reserves of oil, 12.5% of the EU's proven reserves of gas and 69% of UK coal reserves. It is an energy rich country with some of the highest levels of energy poverty in Europe.
timheyes
Before giving an opinion on wealth creation please learn some economics. If a car is manufactured on Tyneside and the buyer of the car is in London somebody has to provide the SERVICE of transporting the car to London. It's an "intangible" which somebody values so much they'll voluntarily pay for it. If Honda exports a car to Sweden it will want to ensure that, if the ship goes down or if the car's damaged, it's insured against those eventualities. Honda will voluntarily pay an insurance company or Lloyds to arrange or provide the insurance SERVICE.
Please don't tell us that provision of SERVICES is useless consumption of wealth because you'll make yourself look as foolish as those claiming that subsidised jobs "created" in, for instance, the wind-generation of energy are "real" and not the make-work they actually are.
BBD & Lord B,
Good stuff. We speak the same language. The trouble with ultra-lefts seems to be a semantical game. They use the same words as everyone else, but those words have different meanings.
'Political leaders need to engage in honest debate on the issue,,,'
Er... This would be a new phenomenon - right..??
@Umbongo -- I think you're missing the point made by timheyes. The examples you cite are services in support of wealth creation by manufacturing. I agree that there is value to these services. However, when the manufacturing economy shrinks and the service economy becomes dominant, then I think there is validity to the argument that much of the service economy is not creating wealth or adding value.
The manufacturing line is silly. Are farmers not adding value? At the end of the day, there is nothing to show (in terms of tangible wealth) for what they produce.
Transporting people is just as valuable as transporting things. Trying to make a distinction is really silly.
Exchanges which are freely made increase human satisfaction and improve our living standards. Exchanges forced by govt appropriation do not (whether by taxation or regulation).
"Hide the Decline" I reckon!!!
Umbongo - yes of course you are right about all the peripheral jobs attached to any area of work. They are real jobs while the lead activity remains and as we all know (or should do) the collateral damage is often large when a big business closes down. Not just suppliers, but all the other services that we all need.
The trouble comes when, increasingly, the balance of, say manufacturing, reduces to a point where all the service jobs can no longer be funded. The UK passed the point a while ago. Will we ever fully recover?
Our main problem is that we had a group of politicians (party is irrelevant) who thought we were a post-industrial nation, living off financial services with the rest of us selling each other a skinny latte.
Green jobs? Don't get me started.
The answer is...and always was thorium reactors.
Now what was the question?
@Umbongo et. al.
You're only half right. If the cost of delivering a car is rolled up into the price, then the value added to me in having the car to collect from a forecourt to drive away on purchase is partly paid for the delivery service. But this is delivery of a manufactured item. Ultimately the wealth generated is driven by the manufacture not the service.
You want talk about insurance? How often is insurance a mandatory requirement? The answer is often. It's a trite but nevertheless valid fact that the only insurance that can be bought is from service providers who've calculated that they'll never have to pay out in all probability. So here's a situation where I'm forced to purchase something which almost by definition won't be used. Some insurance is useful and a godd idea. Other insurances are a license to print money on the back of entrepreneurship. I don't have much of a say in many cases whether the real risk justifies the expenditure on insurance.
@stan
No. Farmers are manufacturing food supplies not providing a service.
The main point I was making though not expicitly is that if you have a 99% service economy then you can't readily grow it because the source of the growth (manufacturing) is not in the economy. To grow the economy due to demand you need to rely on the wealth generated in another company to meet it. All of the wealth ends up in the other economy. What passes as you own economy is just money moving around the system. It's bound to end badly.
Justice4Rinka -
I echo Jimmy Mac's comment - there is no need for racism, or even sad generalisations about national characteristics. Scotland is a country with many beliefs and points of view.
Hold on to your CO2, could be a market for it soon!
“Mass. company making diesel with sun, water, CO2”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110227/ap_on_bi_ge/us_growing_fuel
“CAMBRIDGE, Mass. – A Massachusetts biotechnology company says it can produce the fuel that runs Jaguars and jet engines using the same ingredients that make grass grow.
Joule Unlimited has invented a genetically-engineered organism that it says simply secretes diesel fuel or ethanol wherever it finds sunlight, water and carbon dioxide.”
Not holding my breath, or maybe I should be:-)
There's a report out today from the Irish academy of engineers which is more or less calling for no more windfarms here in Ireland...
http://www.iae.ie/news/article/2011/feb/28/new-report-energy-policy-and-economic-recovery-201/
From Rupert Soames speech in the Scottish Parliament - the FULL speech (not just the reported version is wellworth as read)
My prescription would be as follows.
First, as our ship heads towards the rocks, it is important that people who talk nonsense are not allowed on the bridge to distract the Captain and Navigator.
Before anyone is allowed onto the bridge, they should be asked the following questions:
Do you believe that we can de-carbonise power generation without significant amounts of nuclear power?
Do you believe that we can cut domestic electricity consumption by over 30% by 2020?
Do you believe that the first new nuclear power station can brought into full production by 2018?
Do you believe that it is feasible that we could have more than 10% of our power generation coming from wind?
Do you believe that tidal energy is going to make a meaningful contribution in the next fifteen years?
Do you believe that the world is going to run short of gas in the next forty years?
If they answer yes to any of these questions, they should be banned from the bridge.
Secondly, we have to set about mobilising the finest brains in our diplomatic and civil service to either reduce the level of, or delay the dates of, our commitments to reductions in CO2 intensity in power generation. I hasten to add that I think the problem is more with the timescales associated with the targets rather than the targets themselves. Broadly, we need to add ten years to all of them.
http://www.aggreko.co.uk/news---events/rupert-soames-speech.aspx
off topic but
http://climateaudit.org/2011/02/28/the-muir-russell-contract/
is interesting. UEA spent £300k on Muir Russell. If your kids are going through university and paying tuition fees, maybe we have a dog in this fight.
just posted on a CAGW site too...watch the bluster - a waste of £300k...just so we have to keep Phil and co
http://shewonk.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/skeptic-faux-pas-and-epic-fails/#comment-4725
Can we please refrain from verging into racism on this. This is about greedy ignorant politicians, not their nationality.
**
I was expressing a genuine opinion. I think you are being over sensitive. I live in the People's Republic of Paisley myself. We are the good guys. Always have been.
Wha’s Like Us – Damn Few And They’re A’ Deid
Not important, but why are we confusing racism with nationalism? From my point of view (which is open to correction) racism is a much graver sin than ripping on someone's nationalism. I'm not condoning either one. Just wondering why the word racism was used in reference to a joke about Scots? Was this an attempt to severely discredit the joke?
nationality, that is...
Some good news - the idiots in SSE have come to their senses and abandoned their plans for their off-shore farm just off Macrahanish on the Kintyre peninsula -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-12610901
But they haven't totally regained consciousness, as they still plan to build a smaller one off Islay. So this may have been a tactical retreat - they have been getting lots of bad publicity for the way the contempt they have shown to locals affected by the Griffin wind farm currently under construction in Highland Perthshire -
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Perthshire/article/11345/griffin-wind-farm-development-blamed-for-causing-disruption-and-polluting-water-supply.html
Abandoning Macrahanish is a smart move by SSE though - their share price will surely rise and it will be interesting to see how long it takes Iberdrola / Scottish Power to also come to their senses over the unbelievably hideous and expensive Tiree array they have proposed -
http://www.no-tiree-array.org.uk
Good news from Canada also - though it seems to have gone unreported here - the Ontario government declared a moratorium on development of off-shore wind farms a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110213/wind-farm-moratorium-110213
( thanks to Alan Harper who put the link up at http://www.no-tiree-array.org.uk/?p=519#comment-351 )
lapogus
Very interesting. Thank you for posting this up.
Well, if you live in Paisley, you have enough problems, so forgiven.
Where I do agree with "holier than thou" is the SNP and Scottish Labour, who seem to have cornered the market in that smarm.
Sorry, yes, I am hypersensitive about it. I recall asking a BBC Have Your Say comment, which called for the re-patriation of all Scots from England, deleted due to breaking house rules. The Beeb (or the underpaid social science graduate lackey who was doing the moderation) decreed that it didn't. Since then I've been a bit jumpy on the issue.
Some insurance is useful and a godd idea. Other insurances are a license to print money on the back of entrepreneurship.