Opponents say the law should not be implemented until California’s unemployment rate is much lower.
(Photo courtesy of NASA)
There’s a new ballot initiative
underway that is trying to repeal
the nation’s leading global warming
law. The law seeks to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by
close to a third by 2020. Mark
Brush reports the opponents of
the law say it will cost jobs:
Transcript
There’s a new ballot initiative
underway that is trying to repeal
the nation’s leading global warming
law. The law seeks to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by
close to a third by 2020. Mark
Brush reports the opponents of
the law say it will cost jobs:
Conservatives and some Republican lawmakers are behind the petition effort in California. If they’re successful, they’ll suspend the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act. They say the law should not be implemented until California’s unemployment rate is much lower.
Supporters of the law say it’s the one thing that’s actually driving innovation and creating jobs in the state. Tom Soto is with Craton Equity Partners which invests in clean tech businesses. He says the backers of this ballot initiative are hanging onto the past.
“I think it is a shameless last ditch effort of the oil companies and industry who are clinging by their bloodied fingernails onto something that simply is no longer sustainable.”
Opponents of California’s global warming law are hoping to capitalize on growing skepticism about climate change science.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced the biggest state-funded green jobs training program in the nation. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
California is putting together
a huge green jobs training program.
Lester Graham reports it will mean
thousands of workers trained for a
growing part of the economy:
Transcript
California is putting together
a huge green jobs training program.
Lester Graham reports it will mean
thousands of workers trained for a
growing part of the economy:
Last week, lost in the news of wildfires and state budget problems, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced the biggest state-funded green jobs training program in the nation. California is leveraging federal stimulus dollars with state money and public-private partnership matching funds.
“This $75-million program will train more than 20,000 workers for clean and green jobs in the future.”
Green jobs – such as repairing hybrid and electric cars, installing solar panels and building wind turbines.
Governor Schwarzenegger says this Clean Energy Workforce Training Program is where economic growth starts.
“There are still people out there who think that protecting the environment will slow the economy down, but it’s quite the opposite here in California and all over the United States.”
Some business leaders say the green sector likely will be the only growth sector in this economy for a while.
President Obama has said that a move toward clean energy production has enormous job creation potential. But some researchers say that’s overblown.
(Source: Kmadison at Wikimedia Commons)
At the heart of President Obama’s economic recovery plan is the promise of new green collar jobs. Workers concerned about being laid off from their blue collar jobs are starting to wonder what those new jobs will look like. Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
At the heart of President Obama’s economic recovery plan is the promise of new green collar jobs. Workers concerned about being laid off from their blue collar jobs are starting to wonder what those new jobs will look like. Julie Grant reports:
Michelle Forte has been a dye maker at the General Motors plant in Parma, Ohio for 15 years. She says everyone at work is worried about the future of the plant, and the prospects of the whole company.
“It’s a scary industry to be in right now. They keep on sending our work to China. And my job could be next, you just don’t know. It’s scary to live in that environment every day. You go into work and it’s negative all the time.”
Forte hasn’t gotten a raise in 6 years. And in the future, if she stays as autoworker, she’s going to be making a lot less.
“I will tell you what I made last year, and that was $80,000. And this year, with the concessions that we’ve took and the overtime that we’ve lost, I will be lucky to make $60,000. So, yeah, it’s a drastic cut.”
Forte decided to take advantage of job training money available at GM. She gets up a five in the morning to start work, then after her shift she heads to school.
She and two co-workers have started taking courses at the new Green Academy at Cuyahoga Community College. They’re learning what it takes to install solar panels, wind turbines, and to make buildings energy efficient. It’s tough getting home after 10 at night. But Forte says learning to work in the clean energy field is a positive step for their future.
“Because we wanted to get in on the ground floor. If it breaks open like we think it is, we want to have the education under our belt already.”
But most autoworkers aren’t betting on an explosion of green jobs. At least, they aren’t spending their time in training classes – even if they’ve already been laid off.
Joe Rugola is president of the AFL-CIO of Ohio. The union represents everyone from musicians to office workers to electricians.
Rugola says people who’ve been laid off have to make impossible choices if they decide to start training in a new industry – do they continue looking for jobs to keep the unemployment check coming in – or do they go to school for retraining?
“Am I going to go for training, if I’m already laid off, am I going to risk my unemployment benefits, and go for training in an industry that may or may not produce real work down the road? A person in that situation should not have to make that choice.”
And that’s the big gamble. Do they invest time and effort to retrain for jobs that might never materialize?
President Obama has said that a move toward clean energy production has enormous job creation potential. But some researchers say that’s overblown.
Andrew Dorchak is a researcher with the Case Western Reserve University law library. He coauthored a study titled Green Job Myths.
The first myth: that there is a common understanding of what makes something a green job.
“We’ve figured out that there wasn’t a really good definition of green jobs. Especially if there are political subsidies involved that might be problematic.”
Problematic because many of the jobs classified as green today aren’t making wind turbines and solar panels in the Midwest. They’re lobbyists, administrative assistants, and janitors working for environmental organizations in New York and Washington.
And he’s concerned the definition of green jobs will get even wider as government pockets get deeper.
“It’s subject to maneuvering. To people fighting to classify their jobs as green.”
Dorchak says companies will chase the subsidies. That could take away from government money to create productive jobs.
Jobs that could help people like Michelle Forte find work – and improve the environment at the same time.
A Gallup poll finds people feel the economy should be given priority over the environment (Photo by Rebecca Williams)
A new poll shows Americans put money over Mother Nature. Lester Graham reports it amounts to a real shift in attitudes:
Transcript
A new poll shows Americans put money over Mother Nature. Lester Graham reports it amounts to a real shift in attitudes:
A Gallup poll finds people feel the economy should be given priority over the environment.
51% think so. 42% still think the environment is more important.
Frank Newport, Gallup Poll Editor-in-Chief, says Gallup has been asking this same question every year for 25 years.
“This is the first time that we have had more Americans say growth should be given the priority not the environment. So, it’s a fairly dramatic and significant change this year.”
Newport says the results reflect people’s concerns about keeping their jobs and keeping their homes in this economy.
He concedes the issue is not just black and white – the environment versus the economy.
Jobs are being created in a shift to greener fuels and energy efficiency. But apparently that’s not clear to the American public. Newport suggests that might be the challenge facing people in the environmental movement.
Congress will soon debate a carbon-cap-and-trade program. Lester Graham reports that debate will renew arguments about jobs versus the environment:
Transcript
Congress will soon debate a carbon-cap-and-trade program. Lester Graham reports that debate will renew arguments about jobs versus the environment:
This is an old argument with a new twist.
It goes like this. The economy is a mess. We need jobs. So right now we should worry less about the environment and more about jobs.
Putting a price on carbon emissions will gradually make fossil fuels like coal more expensive to burn.
That will cost big corporations that use a lot of energy. Opponents of cap-and-trade say it’s a job-killer.
But at the same time, carbon-cap-and-trade will make solar and wind more attractive. And that could create green collar jobs.
Environmental activists such as the Environmental Defense Fund’s Tony Kreindler say that won’t stop the critics.
“You’re always going to have defenders of the status quo claiming that it’s going to be economic ruin.”
But, a growing number of business leaders see carbon-cap-and-trade as a way to invest in an energy future that pollutes less and makes the U.S. more energy independent.
At least 62-billion of the 789-billion dollar package are for green investments (Source: Man-ucommons at Wikimedia Commons)
The stimulus package before Congress spends an unprecedented amount of money on issues important to environmentalists. Lester Graham reports it looks like the interests of the environment and the economy are aligning:
Transcript
The stimulus package before Congress spends an unprecedented amount of money on issues important to environmentalists. Lester Graham reports it looks like the interests of the environment and the economy are aligning:
The stimulus package is packed with things that make environmentalists smile.
There are billions for renewable energy and research for alternative energy sources. There are billions for making federal buildings and homes more energy efficient. There are billions for mass transit and Amtrak, and a half-a-billion to training workers for green collar jobs.
Melinda Pierce is with the Sierra Club.
“Well, I tell you, what has struck me is the ‘billion’ word instead of ‘million’. So many of these projects – in terms of weatherization, energy efficiency, high-speed rail – have suffered from a lack of funding for the last eight years. This package will funnel literally billions of dollars into the programs that we think are America’s clean energy future.”
So, how many billions total in green investments? At least 62-billion of the 789-billion dollar package.
And many environmentalists, some economists and business leaders, and, apparently, a good number of the Members of Congress think the growth sector of the economy is going to be the green sector.
Christians for the Mountains field worker
Robert "Sage" Russo standing on Kayford Mountain overlooking an MTR
site in West Virginia (Photo courtesy of Christians for the Mountains)
Environmentalists have been fighting to stop mountain top removal coal mining for
decades. They say they want to preserve the mountains, the water that’s polluted by the
mining and the people. But many of the people don’t want the help. They want the jobs
provided by the mining operations. Sandra Sleight Brennan reports the struggle
between the two sides is complicated. Now churches and synagogues are introducing
religion into that struggle:
Transcript
Environmentalists have been fighting to stop mountain top removal coal mining for
decades. They say they want to preserve the mountains, the water that’s polluted by the
mining and the people. But many of the people don’t want the help. They want the jobs
provided by the mining operations. Sandra Sleight Brennan reports the struggle
between the two sides is complicated. Now churches and synagogues are introducing
religion into that struggle:
The line drawn between environmentalists who want to stop mountain removal
coal mining and the coal miners who depend on it for jobs has always been
smudged.
Often the environmental activists had relatives and close friends who worked for
the mining companies. There aren’t a lot of jobs in the Appalachian Mountains.
Of the jobs that are there, the coal mining jobs pay the most.
In the small Appalachian towns in the coal fields, the God-fearing families who
depended on the mining jobs have often seen the environmentalists as people
who were out to destroy their way of life.
But lately some people are seeing things differently. More than a dozen churches
and synagogues have passed resolutions against mountaintop removal mining.
Allan Johnson is the co-founder of Christians for the Mountains, a group that’s
sided with the environmentalists.
“It’s a serious issue, ultimately it is a moral issue and, as a moral issue, we’re appealing
to the religious communities, the Christian communities. We’ve got to do right. We
cannot destroy God’s creation in order to have a temporal economy.”
And Johnson is getting help from other Christians. Rebekah Eppling is an
Ameri-Corps VISTA volunteer. She’s working with Christians for the Mountains.
“We present ourselves that we are a Christian organization and we are working for
Creation Care and we are following the Biblical mandate to take care of God’s planet – it
brings a different sense of what we’re doing to people. So a lot of people who
traditionally wouldn’t be interested all the sudden start to realize the different aspects of
it. It kind of hits a different spark for them.”
Creation Care is how some Evangelical Christians describe their brand of
environmentalism. One of the most prominent spokesman for Creation Care is
Richard Cizik. He’s a former Vice President of the National Association of
Evangelicals.
“We say Creation Care because first of all we believe the earth was created and
second of all we know from God’s word in Genesis that we are to care and protect
it. So, we call it Creation Care.”
The group, Christians for the Mountains, works with many different
denominations. They teach people who want to get involved about the issues
surrounding mining. They go into detail about how the short term benefit of the
destructive form of mining not only alters the mountains, but pollutes the streams
and ultimately the drinking water. They point out that once the coal fields are
mined, the jobs are gone and the communities are left to live with the damage to
the environment.
Volunteer Rebekah Eppling says there’s resistance to the message.
“The term environmentalist is kind of a dirty word in the coalfields region. Since we are a
religious organization that puts us in a unique spot.”
“We do get some pretty harsh criticism.”
Allen Johnson with Christians for the Mountains.
“We are concerned about people’s jobs. We want to have a healthy economy. And it is
not a healthy economy in that area. If you go down into the area with the mountaintop
removal is going on it in some of the impoverished areas in the country.”
Like the more traditional kinds of environmentalists, these Creation Care
environmentalists have ties to the community. Eppling says her family comes
from an area that’s targeted for coal mining in the near future.
“My family is very supportive of what I’m doing. Because they see the place where they
used to live are now being destroyed. The mountain very close to where my
grandmother and father grew up its being blasted away. My father and his family are
from Boone County – which is one of the big coal producing areas. Coal River runs right
behind his house where he grew up.”
The Christians for the Mountains know the families that depend on the coal
mining don’t always understand why anyone would want to stop one of the very
few industries that offer good paying jobs in the region. But Rebekah Eppling
says there has to be a better way than blowing up the tops of the mountains and
filling the valleys with rubble.
“It’s not just environmentalist versus workers. It’s a very complex. It’s not just about
stopping coal – it’s about bringing in more options for people.”
And some of those options include preserving the environment by finding alternatives for
the region – such as wind energy, tourism, and not letting the mining companies decide
the fate of the Appalachian Mountains and the people who live there.
For The Environment Report, I’m Sandra Sleight-Brennan.
A manufacturing job in a wind or solar plant sometimes pays
as little as $11 an hour - much lower than the national
average for workers making other durable goods (Source: Man-ucommons at Wikimedia Commons)
One of the big plans for kick-starting the nation’s economy is to invest in green jobs: solar and wind energy projects, mass transit, and energy efficiency. But a new report finds some of those jobs might not pay as well as some people expect. Julie Grant has the story:
Transcript
One of the big plans for kick-starting the nation’s economy is
to invest in green jobs: solar and wind energy projects, mass
transit, and energy efficiency. But a new report finds some
those jobs might not be pay as well as some people expect.
Julie Grant has the story:
A manufacturing job in a wind or solar plant sometimes pays
as little as $11 an hour – much lower than the national
average for workers making other durable goods.
Kate Gordon is with the Apollo Alliance, a group that
advocates jobs in renewable energy. She helped to write
the report on green jobs.
“Just because something’s a green job does not necessarily
mean it’s a good job. There are a lot of jobs emerging in
renewable energy and energy efficiency companies where
the workers are being paid minimum wage or slightly more
or don’t have benefits.”
At the same time, the report finds that some U.S. wind and
solar companies are already outsourcing jobs to China and
Mexico.
But Gordon says the government can change this direction
with its investments – by requiring local job creation, labor
standards, and domestic content.
Obama delivering the American Recovery and Reinvestment speech on Thursday, January 8, 2009 (Photo courtesy of the Obama Transition Team)
Some top business leaders
expect there will be only one growth
sector during this recession: energy
efficiency. Some call it the dawning
of the ‘green economy.’ Lester Graham
reports many are calling on the
government to invest heavily to get
the economy going again. But some are
worried that billions will go to ‘make
work’ projects with no long-term gains:
Transcript
Some top business leaders
expect there will be only one growth
sector during this recession: energy
efficiency. Some call it the dawning
of the ‘green economy.’ Lester Graham
reports many are calling on the
government to invest heavily to get
the economy going again. But some are
worried that billions will go to ‘make
work’ projects with no long-term gains:
Just as computers and the information age defined the economy many business leaders believe alternative fuels and energy conservation will define the green economy.
During a recent speech at George Mason University, President-elect Barack Obama indicated he wants to encourage that growth in green collar jobs.
“Jobs building solar panels and wind turbines, constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to even more jobs, more savings and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain.”
There’s no doubt that much of President-elect Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is green.
The AFL-CIO has its own Green Jobs for America Program. The union wants 100-billion dollars of government money to be invested in the kind of jobs Mr. Obama talked about.
Pat Devlin is with the AFL-CIO’s Michigan Building Trades Council. He says he hopes Congress moves on the Obama plan soon.
“We’re hoping ASAP. Were looking to get something kicked off in the next six months. And like I said, we’ve got the projects. We just need the infusion of the investment behind it and we’re ready to go. We got to be smart when we do get the dollars, too. That they’re spent in the right place to get people back to work, get our economy headed in the right direction.”
The AFL-CIO has been talking to the Obama administration… and the union likes what it’s hearing.
President-elect Obama says making buildings and homes more energy efficient will mean jobs now and save billions in natural gas and oil in the future making us less dependent on foreign fossil fuels… and reducing greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming.
But the government has a nasty habit of screwing these things up. Members of Congress want the money for their states even if they don’t have the kind of shovel-ready plans that will mean those kind of long-term benefits and that could sabotage the effort.
“You just can’t throw money at the problems and somehow magically it’s going to work.”
Eric Orts directs the Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership, part of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He says the investments should go to projects that mean more energy and economic efficiencies in the future have long-term benefits that will benefit the economy. Otherwise it’s wasting an opportunity.
“You might create short-term jobs for some time, but that’s not going to lead to the long-term foundation growth that I’m talking about. That’s going to require some intelligent allocation of the funds so you get the payoffs.”
The Obama administration will have to be picky the jobs, very cautious about how the taxpayer money is invested if we’re going to see those payoffs.
Obama delivering the American Recovery and Reinvestment speech on Thursday, January 8, 2009 (Photo courtesy of the Obama Transition Team)
President-elect Barack Obama
is calling on Congress to get busy on
his American Recovery and Reinvestment
Plan. Lester Graham reports energy
and environment are top items in the
plan:
Transcript
President-elect Barack Obama
is calling on Congress to get busy on
his American Recovery and Reinvestment
Plan. Lester Graham reports energy
and environment are top items in the
plan:
Speaking at George Mason University, President-elect Obama called for dramatic
action to overcome the recession. The plan starts off with investments in new forms
of energy and energy efficiency.
“We will double the production of alternative energy in the next three years. We will
modernize more than 75% of federal buildings and improve the energy efficiency of
two-million American homes, saving consumers and taxpayers billions on our energy
bills.”
Obama says building solar panels and wind turbines and fuel-efficient cars will mean
more American jobs and improve the environment at the same time.
Obama warns those investments, and others he outlined, means spending a lot of
government money. But, he says doing too little or nothing at all will mean losing
even more jobs and watching the recession get worse.
For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.
Opponents say the law should not be implemented until California’s unemployment rate is much lower. (Photo courtesy of NASA)
