iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Green Jobs Numbers Failing To Match Expectations, Report Says

Wind Turbines

By SAM HANANEL   10/ 3/11 05:10 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON -- A $500 million Labor Department program designed to train workers for green jobs has come up far short of its goals, with only 10 percent of participants finding work so far, the agency's assistant inspector general has found.

The report said the low rate makes it unlikely the program will meet the goal of placing nearly 80,000 workers in careers in energy efficiency or renewable energy by 2013.

"Grantees have expressed concerns that jobs have not materialized and that job placements have been fewer than expected for this point in the grant program," said the report from Assistant Inspector General Elliott Lewis.

The report comes as the Obama administration has been on the defensive about making a $528 million loan to Solyndra LLC, a now-bankrupt solar panel maker that has become a target for critics of the administration's green energy program.

The $500 million for green jobs training was part of the $787 billion stimulus act passed in 2009. Although the money was awarded in a series of grants in 2009 and 2010, only one-third has actually been spent by grantees. Lewis' report said the rate of expenditures has been decreasing. He suggested the department should consider returning unused money that may not be needed.

"At this point, there is no evidence that grantees will effectively use the funds and deliver targeted employment outcomes by the end of the grant periods," the report said.

Jane Oates, head of the department's Employment and Training Administration, strongly disagreed with the report and said she expects the number of job placements to increase in the next few months. She said the numbers were low in part because of the initial lag time in the start-up phase.

"What we've seen with these green grants is because of limited employment options, people are staying in training longer," Oates said. "I'm still optimistic that we are going to be successful with these grants."

Oates acknowledged that the economy is creating jobs at a slower-than-normal rate. But she said if grantees have not spent all the money by the deadline, the funds would be returned to the U.S. Treasury.

Another problem the report highlighted is that workers who completed training and were placed in green jobs have had trouble retaining their posts. Of the 8,035 workers placed, only 1,336 – or 2 percent of the overall target – have held those jobs for at least six months.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who requested the audit, said the report "paints a pretty bleak picture of the program's effectiveness in job creation."

"It's hard to see how leaving $300 million in unused funding for the program in the hands of the Labor Department benefits either the taxpayers or the unemployed," Grassley said.

Grassley said the administration should focus on job creation "in all sectors of the economy."

But Labor officials have insisted that green jobs are part of a future wave of growing employment needs and that it would be a mistake not to invest in training workers for those jobs now, even if the economic recovery has been slow to create new jobs in that area.

___

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON -- A $500 million Labor Department program designed to train workers for green jobs has come up far short of its goals, with only 10 percent of participants finding work so far, the agency'...
WASHINGTON -- A $500 million Labor Department program designed to train workers for green jobs has come up far short of its goals, with only 10 percent of participants finding work so far, the agency'...
Filed by Benjamin Hart  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 220
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
11:21 PM on 10/10/2011
But the US program will be a brilliant success in China, where the lattice steel towers and conductor for all that unneeded new transmission will be made.
08:25 AM on 10/09/2011
There is always much misinformation about subsidies on these posts. Ethanol is the largest single recipient of federal subsidies and it is a tax incentive, not R&D.

Renewables also receive production tax credits and loan guarantees. On tax subsidies, in 2010, renewables received over $8.2B, coal, oil gas, nuclear COMBINED $4.1B, efficiency $4 B. Of the $8B for renewables, $5.7 B went to ethanol, only $1.5B to a production tax credit. Over the history of the DOE, nuclear is the largest recipient of R&D funds BY FAR, followed by coal and efficiency, renewables then oil and gas at a very distant last.

This is from an EIA report on federal subsidies issued in July of this year. It might be nice if people commenting on subsidies were actually informed with some fact.
09:43 AM on 10/09/2011
More information (facts not stupid rumors or ideologically driven "beliefs"):

Federal subsidies per unit of energy produces (2010 $ per megawatt hour):

Gas $0.64
Coal $0.64
Nuclear $3.14
Geothermal $12.85
Wind $56.29
Solar $775.64

I make no value judgments on these distributions and in fact think that immature technologies should receive the lion's share of subsidies, mature technologies should only receive subsidies where they cannot be relied on to meet clear public goods by virtue of, if nothing else, their fiduciary responsibilities to their shareholders. This does not explain nuclear or even wind which is relatively mature.

Having said that, if we continue to propagate myths about why renewables do not have larger market share -- because of the huge subsidies for the incumbents -- we will continue to try and solve the wrong problems. Renewables are very expensive and we need to reduce the cost. They are intermittent -- we need to invest in research for large scale storage which is also expensive. We do not have a grid that can easily accommodate intermittency, another necessary and long term option. Finally, RPS in the various states have serious unintended consequences eg forcing the cycling of baseload coal plants, a very bad thing to do. We need thoughtful, sequenced incentives and need to stop kidding ourselves that these are near-term options. They are not.
01:12 PM on 10/05/2011
Maybe BHO should make some more bets with our money. It's not his, so why should he care?
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
12:36 PM on 10/05/2011
Gee, give giant subsidies to fossil and nukes, and tiny ones to solar wind and waste, and mostly for R&D instead of installation.

Rooftop pv solar is already the cheapest electricity for millions of American roof owners. Lets, set up a green bank for offer them loans at the Bankster FED rate of .004% , even 1% would be great. efficiency too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Big Bill hayward
06:17 AM on 10/05/2011
The people can watch tv and listen to their ipods just like at the gyms. The amount of power people can physically produce working together with technology is staggering. It would be just like any other job doing manual labor.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
12:33 PM on 10/05/2011
200 watts for a couple hours. 7B people. 1.4GW, while the world uses 14TW, or 10,000 times as much. Still it's a couple large power plants, and would be good for overweight folks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Big Bill hayward
07:15 PM on 10/05/2011
the horizontal wheel would use the same engineering principles for generating electrical power that vertical wind mills use when those bad boys are spinning They can produce and store plenty of energy with no fossil fuels . It would create jobs you would not need A college degree and it would greatly improve the health of the work force.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Big Bill hayward
09:31 PM on 10/05/2011
Gear up the Apparatus with the same type of momentum technology they use on those fancy elliptical machines 15 of the apparatuses geared up with a vertical gear connected to the giant horizontal wheel will be Pumping out the GIGA WATTS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Big Bill hayward
06:12 AM on 10/05/2011
Ok you get a large wheel with gears set up horizontally and have people sit in in ergonomically engineered apparatus that they peddle that spins a vertical wheel with gears that connect to the large horizontal gear. The workers can work at 15 minute intervals then rest for 5 minutes. It would solve so many problems.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Big Bill hayward
06:05 AM on 10/05/2011
Solution to the worlds energy demand to produce electrical power .Also put everyone back to work , Have people manually Rotate a loop through a magnetic field. Pay people a livable wage to work 24 7 365 days spinning giant wheels .
12:20 PM on 10/04/2011
obama is the same, failing numbers, and not living up to expectations, his mom would be proud!
11:47 AM on 10/04/2011
Just a reminder, wind farms kill 440,000 migratory birds each year. Wind mills are responsible for killing more wildlife than any oil spill, ever.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LiberalBuzz
Voting republican is voting against America.
04:30 PM on 10/04/2011
But the continued use of fossil fuels is killing the ENTIRE planet.  Oil spills may be a footnote to the deaths caused by fossil fuels but they are killing us all in the long run.

As well more birds are killed by running into windows, cars, trucks and transmission wires.

It is a tragedy but nonetheless windmills kill less than all of those above.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
03:24 AM on 10/05/2011
Wrong.

cats 100M
cars 100M
overhead wires 150M
agriculture: 60M
oil and gas extraction 1M
Hunting 100M
Oil spills 1M each.

http://www.currykerlinger.com/birds.htm

Offshore wind kills pretty much zero birds. http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18167/

You have been listing to George will again haven't you?
photo
wetbonder
Educating liberals one day at a time
11:26 AM on 10/04/2011
Green: The color of failure


(TheDC) — President Barack Obama’s “green jobs” initiatives suffered another major blow late Monday, as the nonprofit National Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, Colorado, announced a plan to lay off roughly 10 percent of its staff through a voluntary buy-out plan.

According to the Denver Post, the lab plans to eliminate between 100 and 150 of its 1,350 jobs. The Obama administration supported the NREL in 2009 with roughly $200 million in stimulus grants. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu visited Golden in May 2009 to promote the NREL as a beneficiary of those funds.

At the time, the Associated Press reported that the stimulus grants included $68 million to build demonstration model of an energy-efficient office building; $19.2 million for solar, geothermal and fuel cell equipment; $10 million for testing and evaluation of wind technology; and $45 million to research and test drive-train systems for wind turbines.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/04/green-jobs-farm-in-colorado-sheds-jobs-after-receiving-200m-in-stimulus-funds/
photo
CivilDebate10
Low Info People = Statism's Best Friends
10:40 AM on 10/04/2011
The lesson: Don't leave the economy in the hands of a community organizer who has never been involved in a real business in his entire life.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tygartman
Hoping for Change in 2012
09:54 AM on 10/04/2011
An ineffective government program promoting an industry that isn't ready for prime-time is a failure? I'm stunned!!!
FreeHat
Really?
05:57 PM on 10/04/2011
Think it's more on Chu's shoulders. Doesn't change much though, he's also an academic.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dougaus1
09:44 AM on 10/04/2011
The real reason for the failure of green jobs is due to the subsidies that fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas receive from the government, which has been bought off by companies producing these types of dirty energy. And now TransCanada wants to build the Keystone XL Pipeline of about 1,700 miles long across the Great Plains, putting the livelihoods of farmers and ranchers at risk. Due to to the threat of oil spills, it would also endanger the drinking water of over 4 million people. The sites in Canada where the oil is extracted from also look like flatland versions of mountaintop removal coal mining sites. People living in these communities suffer from higher rates of cancer and other serious ailments. If we took away all the subsidies that fossil fuels get to expose their true costs, green jobs and green energy would really take off. Exposing the true costs of fossil fuels would mean making those companies pay for the health costs of people living in the communities where their environmentally destructive operations take place.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:42 AM on 10/04/2011
Of course there aren't nearly as many green jobs here as there could be when we're outsourcing every one of them to countries like China.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kcsujith
Dark clouds all around :(
09:33 AM on 10/04/2011
What else is new ?
Artificially cooking up green tech is not going to work (we have been telling this for a decade, but liberals wont listen) . When the technology evolves and economically viable and attractive to customer, all these will take off..They wont be successful just because bunch of liberals think so.