The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been hailed as an environmental triumph. Specifically, the stimulus package’s promise is in its potential to create green jobs, principally in the renewable energy and energy efficiency industries. And to most environmentalist’s joy, money for two hotly contested environmental issues, nuclear power and clean coal, were dropped from the final bill. Green jobs, in an energy industry which boasts more potential than IT, were going to simultaneously lift us out of an economic recession and fend off climate change. For the past month, however, the economy has shown signs of picking back up without the help of stimulus funds.
In the past month, the stock market has increased and the beginning of first quarter reports has been quite encouraging. A few days ago, Wells Fargo announced a big first quarter profit, an excellent sign from the troubled banking industry. The remainder of first quarter reports will have a big impact on whether investors think the market has bottomed out yet or not. This could very well be a short-term trend or perhaps an authentic road to recovery. At first blush it would seem the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act had started to make changes. However, as NY Times Columnist and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman explained on NPR, the act was signed six weeks ago so only an insignificant amount of stimulus money is in the economy; the positive outlook is due much more to the Federal Reserve board’s robust interest rate cuts.
It seems that green jobs might not be an economic savior. After all, the current economic crisis was thought by some to be the inevitable result of a fossil-fueled, speculation-based, over-consuming economic system. Terrible as the direct impact of the recession has been on the average American, it could have been a correcting measure for the economy as a whole. Americans were driving less and growing more gardens. But if everything returns to normal, very few results have been gained.
The fact remains, however, that even if the economy can rebound to its old form, its lifespan is limited. And even if the economy recovers without the salvation of green jobs and the clean energy sector, it is difficult to think that the federal government’s investments and the current administration’s priorities will let things go on as normal. Consider the Washington Post’s breakdown of the $48.9 billion spent on energy and water:
- $8 billion in federal loan guarantees for renewable energy systems and electricity transmission
- $18.5 for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs
- $ Other, including modernizing the electricity grid
Additionally, Obama’s climate change stance, energy policy, and the upcoming climate meeting in Copenhagen all set the stage for an unprecedented next couple of years.
We could wish that green jobs will bring our economy back to what it was a year ago, but really we should wish that green jobs create a better economy altogether. The changes that the stimulus package implements must be independent of the current economic model if it is truly to be sustainable. An economy that matures, that experiences growth to a limit, is sustainable. One that uses energy endlessly and is based upon constant growth is not. An economy that builds durable houses for people, not just for a developer’s profits, is itself durable. That is part of the appeal of stimulus funds for creating green jobs – it is based on programs like weatherization for low income homeowners, improved energy efficiency and conservation, and local transit systems. These are programs which can change our economics.
There are sensible monetary reasons to green, even if you think global warming or climate change are not important. The cost of home energy and water use is a big drain, so reducing them in this tight money time only makes sense. After public scrutiny, corporations such as General Electric, Wal-Mart and Dow made drastic changes to their energy and recycling policies; later those policies remained because those changes ultimately saved them a lot of “green”. Since 3M instituted water and energy efficiencies, they have saved over one billion dollars. Yes, that’s “billion” with a “b”.
The responsibility revolution is underway, argues Tim Sanders in “Saving the World at Work: What Companies and Individuals Can Do to Go Beyond Making a Profit to Making a Difference,” published in 2008. He points out that even small actions, whether of compassion or of leading by example, are vitally important for not only a business’s success but also for bettering the world. Both consumers and employers have turned away from price consciousness to demand that companies make a difference to society through their products, manufacturing methods, environmental efforts and community outreach. The new majority of mindful consumers have brought in a new value system, paying as much attention to a company’s environmental and social policies as to its pricing structures. Today, companies that do not transform will not be competitive losing customers who want their money to go toward good causes.
There’s no denying it any more: from climate change to fisheries crashing, the global environment is in crisis. Thanks to former Vice President Gore, the awareness of global environmental challenges has finally gone mainstream and responsible people everywhere are struggling for solutions. The magnitude of the problems can be overwhelming, yet the most exciting fact is that creating a healthy, profitable and sustainable world is possible. However, sustainability requires immediate attention in each workplace because we cannot afford to wait any longer.
in select states such as California to promote the growth of renewable energy, particularly for solar power that has helped the industry to expand, albeit in a limited fashion. At the beginning of the year, the federal government changed the tax credit to 30% of the cost of the solar system, but capped it at $2000. However, this measure made in the heat of the economic downturn has hardly advanced the solar industry.
