Published on May 27th, 2010 | by Zachary Shahan


American Power Act = More Jobs

May 27th, 2010 by  


Republicans opposed to clean energy in the US (who knows why?) have repeatedly put forward the idea (and claimed it was absolutely true) that a climate change and clean energy bill would cost the US jobs.

A new non-partisan report out by the Peterson Institute for International Economics finds that the American Power Act would actually result in an increase in jobs, hundreds of thousands of them per year (on average) from 2011 to 2020.

More Jobs Through the American Power Act

203,000 jobs per year, on average, are to be created by the APA, according to the report.

It found that 72,000 jobs would be lost in fossil fuels industries, but that with 165,000 new jobs in the nuclear industry, 19,000 in renewable energy sectors, 28,000 in the biofuels sector, and 96,000 for clean coal projects, the net increase far outweighs the loss.

Although some of these jobs may be lost with these markets maturing, the total is still expected to be a net increase of 6,300 jobs in 2030.

Energy Tax? No

Again, although Republicans accuse the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act of imposing an “energy tax” on Americans, this new report by the Peterson Institute shows that the net financial benefit to American families is greater than the cost.

There may be an average price of energy increase of 3% from 2011-2030 and an average price of fuel increase of 5% in that time, but with greater household and vehicle efficiency, the net financial effect on households would be them walking away with $35 more a year. Maybe not a ton of money, but it is not a loss!

Cutting the Oil Habit

As I’ve discussed previously on Cleantechnica, the US is addicted to oil from countries that are unfriendly or even hostile to the US. The American Power Act would cut oil imports 33-40% below current levels by 2030 (compared to 19% under a business as usual scenario). This would cut annual US expenditures on foreign oil by $51 billion to $93 billion a year.

Including the pricing of carbon into the equation, the bill would “cut greenhouse gas emissions from sites covered by the proposed emissions trading scheme by 42 per cent compared to 2005 levels by 2030.”

This non-partisan, major economic analysis clearly shows that the American Power Act is good for Americans.

This article was originally published on Earth & Industry.

Image Credit: Stephen Poff via flickr/CC license

Check out our new 93-page EV report, based on over 2,000 surveys collected from EV drivers in 49 of 50 US states, 26 European countries, and 9 Canadian provinces.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

About the Author

is tryin' to help society help itself (and other species) with the power of the typed word. He spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as its director and chief editor, but he's also the president of Important Media and the director/founder of EV Obsession, Solar Love, and Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and energy storage expert. Zach has long-term investments in TSLA, FSLR, SPWR, SEDG, & ABB — after years of covering solar and EVs, he simply has a lot of faith in these particular companies and feels like they are good cleantech companies to invest in.

  • Paul

    “The average green job takes away 2-3 jobs from every other sector, and that was proven which the Spanish model”

    That’s a hilarious stat! where’s the link?

    That’s like suggesting every job created in the PC industry during the PC boom put 2-3 jobs in “old technology” sectors out of work. That’s got to be the biggest BS stat I’ve ever heard!

    Spain, which imports approx 80% of it’s energy, in fact has been able to reduce coal imports by 20% this year…. due to increased renewables. So who is that putting out of work, coal miners in South America? LOL Good argument!

  • krissy

    for nuclear poisoning for jobs, yay! Chernobyl is a great payday.

  • CC

    Seriously, guys, if you guys didn’t have that simple-minded notion that climate policy is a left vs right rthing, this would’ve been an interesting read.

    Bet you didn’t know that the EPA would be founded by Richard Nixon, that alone would probably make some of you sneer, but moving on…

    If only denmocrats themselves would stop bullying Reps when they voice their opinion, all would be fair game.

    About the Peterson institute, no offense, but for an institute that painted the Euro as the next major global currency, without ever mentioning the negative effects of the European Union, clearly does not know it’s thing.

    Anyway, here’s a nice countar article for what you guys are saying:

    And more jobs, really?

    The average green job takes away 2-3 jobs from every other sector, and that was proven which the Spanish model.

    And here’s a nice counter to an article that was posted here before: You want the US to stop buying oil from other potentially hostile countries and yet complain about when the US tries to drill oil in it’s own country.

    May I remind you how Democrats were so hostile themselves when Bush tried to drill oil in a completelty barren zone in Alaska?

    So which is it?

    Peace out.

Back to Top ↑