Green-Collar Jobs or Rust-Belt Future?
by Summer Rayne Oakes on 06. 2.08
This week the US Senate will begin debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2007 and a new bill called Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act (iCAP). I gather Representative Ed Markey, Chair of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, who is introducing the latter bill, will no doubt receive opposition.
The bill goes much further than Lieberman-Warner in addressing the rising climate, low- and middle-income communities, and green-collar jobs. It borrows language and ideas from the Green Jobs Act of 2007, which is part of the current Energy Bill
While the Lieberman-Warner Bill is far from perfect and an important attempt to build consensus and address global warming—the Department of Energy estimates the Lieberman-Warner Act will save $180 billion on foreign oil expenditures by 2030—it needs to be strengthened and the billions of dollars of subsidies for nuclear energy be removed (uranium is not a clean renewable energy—just talk to the indigenous peoples whose land it is mined). Both these bills, however, actually hold part of the key to much-needed job growth in ailing job markets throughout America.
Today, much of our country is suffering from stagnant wages, increasing income gaps, a shortage of new industries and potential drivers of job growth. Plus, with the never-ending rise of gas and food prices, real wages have eroded by 1.2 percent according to the USDA’s chief economist. Worse yet, food prices are forecast to rise another 3 to 4 percent this year.
So how would a bill like iCAP create jobs?
Simple, it would create the jobs of the future, new local jobs, jobs that cannot be outsourced—in other words, Green Jobs. And these jobs span the gamut, yet with one important thing in common. From installing solar panels and constructing transit lines to retrofitting buildings for energy-efficiency, reclaiming mine sites, and refining vegetable waste oil into biodiesel, all these jobs benefit the economy and improve our environment.
Moreover, the rise of “green-collar” jobs is a growing national movement. Witness this past March’s National Green Jobs Conference held in Pittsburgh and April’s Dream Reborn Green Jobs Conference in Memphis—an important recognition that Green Jobs are a real opportunity for cities and states struggling to find new paths to job growth.
As a child, I learned first-hand what struggling families go through, growing up in a single-parent household in Northeastern Pennsylvania. For the latter part of my childhood, I was raised by my mom, who armed with no more than a high school degree had to take two jobs and maintain a 14-16 hour workday. We lived paycheck to paycheck and without a refrigerator, phone, or television for quite some time—not by choice, but by necessity. Finally, before I even turned 15, to find a better job that could sustain us and my dream of a college education, she had to make a choice—leave Pennsylvania for greener pastures.
It shouldn’t have to be that way. Pennsylvania and other struggling areas should be a land of opportunity. Much of the U.S. workforce is ideally suited to green-collar work—many are middle-skill jobs that are well within reach for low income workers if they have access to effective training programs and support. Whether it’s learning the new skills needed to become a renewable energy technician or retraining workers for a clean energy economy, i.e., fixing an electric engine, our universities, technical schools, businesses and governments need to lead the way.
But they won’t do so unless we lead first. That’s why it’s essential for us as citizens of the United States to make our voice heard in the green debate taking place nationwide. If a bill like the Green Jobs Act passes, it will provide 125 million dollars every year for green jobs training—that is 30,000-35,000 people being trained for good, sustainable jobs that cannot be outsourced. Additionally 20 percent of those dollars will be set aside for the most marginalized to help build green pathways out of poverty.
iCAP is slated to go even further. It will return over half of pollution allowance auction proceeds to low- and middle-income households to help compensate for any increase in energy costs as a result of climate legislation. It also proposes to invest the remaining auction proceeds to further reduce the costs of climate policy, through green job growth and training, clean energy technologies, and incentives for foresters and farmers to reduce their carbon footprint. It basically says that even though we are going to cut emissions drastically, those in low- and middle-income communities—those of us that have the most to lose—will not be left behind.
To repeat, green jobs are starting to pop up nationwide. And there is no excuse why cities and states across America cannot be a leader in this area. We have everything to gain and so much to lose. But it can only happen if we take this opportunity to speak up at town hall meetings, write letters and set up meetings with your Senators, Representatives, and Governors, and even start green job coalitions in your area. I suggest visiting greenforall.org and NWF’s fun site “It’s So Easy a Raccoon can do it!” to get started.
Now is the time to move beyond the challenges of our rust belt past and invest in the potential of a “green collar” future—a path to a cleaner, healthier environment and a more prosperous America.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Focus Earth: November 15, 2008: Navy Wins, Whales Lose? & Race for Energy and Commerce Chairman
- Sun, Nike, Starbucks and More Meet for Climate Action
- Czech President & Climate Denier Vaclav Klaus To Preside Over EU In 2009
- Will Next US President Consider A "New Green Deal" To Solve The Credit, Jobs, And Climate Crisis?
I agree with you completely. I think we need more a mainstream articles like this so people will begin to understand the economic potential of a "green" economy. I'm still amazed at the number of people who think we should relax environmental restrictions to encourage more old-school manufacturing, as if those jobs can't be outsourced and people around the world are clamoring for dirty, inefficient goods.
I live in VT where we have a strong "green" economy with state, national and international companies including Gro Solar, Draker Labs, Solar Works, Distributed Energy Systems, NRG and Earth Turbines, but people don't seem to know about them. These companies (and thus jobs) are growing while older technologies (like the IBM chip factory) are shipping jobs over seas.
I agree completely - green jobs are the way of the future, and funding and supporting them is critical (and a good way out of this recession). However, be careful when you suggest removing the subsidies for nuclear power. While not truly sustainable, nuclear power can last for hundreds to thousands of years (with less waste the longer you want it to go) - far beyond when it will be needed. In addition, while it produces nuclear waste (arguably a sizable problem, but a solvable one), it is to my mind the *only* developed energy technology that can create sufficient energy to quickly replace the baseline energy of the country. If you oppose nuclear, what are you using to replace the fossil fuel plants? Nuclear is not sustainable, but it is carbon free, and this makes it a very good transition technology.
I completely agree. We do need more green jobs.
But question: what will become of the rust belt? Cities can afford to go green, but what becomes of rural places that.. well, are even losing their not-so-green jobs due to outsourcing? A fine example: Indiana. My uncle had worked nearly twenty years at one company, but about two years ago, he got laid off. This was in a super small town that was literally at least an hour away from the nearest shopping mall. Small towns like those cannot afford to go green, and are even losing the jobs they do have. Though we should have more jobs that are environmental-friendly, what will become of the smaller, rural areas?
Well, with our oil import bill for 2008 probably going to be well in excess of $400 billion, not to mention our smaller but rapidly rising natural gas import bill, these "green collar" jobs will probably be significantly in our beneifit.
Hi Deepa, I agree with you, but I think green-jobs can be served well in both inner cities AND rural areas. I myself am from a town of 3,000 which was faced with its own hardships. The important part is that the Green Jobs Act of 2007 and iCAP conversations do not just include city areas, but also rural ares. We have to ensure that Green Jobs involves these communities, which is why it is all the more important to get our voices heard. It's very easy for these towns and communities to get rolled over, which is why it is important that we connect local action and issues to the larger national green jobs movement that is underfoot.
This article is a fantastic example of what I've been thinking about for quite some time. It alludes to the rust-belt, which is where I've called home for 22 years now. For the past three, I've been trying to think about how to bring jobs back here, but of the sustainable type. At least this article gives an instance of legislation on how to do just that.
Now's question time:
-where can I read an abstract of what iCAP calls for and proposes? I know lawmakers have a tenancy to slip in unrelated negatives to a proposed legislation's positives. I'm wondering if iCAP shares that feature.
-a mention of uranium mining was made in this article. Nuclear energy has more pitfalls than prowess, but what are some of the dust-to-dust issues with sustainable sources of energy, specifically solar? Obviously photovoltaic panels are made from a combination of resources. Are any of those particularly harmful to extract, refine, produce, distribute, or destroy? Is there anywhere I can go to take a look at this information?
-thus far on the energy front, every member of the American public has seen a complete lack of leadership and ingenuity on the Fed's part. Are there any other programs that will do more good than harm at any level of government?
Thanks in advance.