Why Economic Stimulus Should Be Green

Let's start with politicians talking the talk on global warming and the environment.

Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation. -- Barack Obama, from an Iowa speech quoted on his web site.

and

Hillary has a bold and comprehensive plan to address America's energy and environmental challenges that will establish a green, efficient economy and create as many as five million new jobs. -- from Hillary Clinton, from www.hillaryclinton.com issues section

There are hundreds, nay thousands, of examples of politicians talking the talk about the environment, how we need to create green jobs, and green industries, encourage green living, blah, blah, blah, alternative energy is my energy, blah, blah, blah.

So now that Congress has passed a $167,000,000,000 stimulus package for the economy has been passed -- that's $167 BILLION. That's real money and let's think about this a moment.

First of all, I'm not sure I think the idea of just sitting back and handing out checks five months from now is either a good or smart one. I think it is collective insanity to suggest that the way to fix an economy racked by debt created through overconsumption is going to be helped by a short term spurt of overconsumption which, may, actually cause more debt, but let's say it is.

Let's say we are going to give every man and woman in America some money to spend.

Where in the Constitution does it say we can not give them some means to spend it wisely in a way that helps our country, and guess what? The environment as well. Why can we not making this sustaining stimulus?

Instead of letting people blow the money on a television made in China, why not create a list of products that can be bought that are not only made here, but also made in a way that is not so environmentally destructive?

Or even better.

There are an increasing number of solar and wind companies in the United States, would you put a solar panels on your house if you could do it for free?

How about low-water toilets? Or a composter? You might think it's crazy but I don't think it is.

Hell, even if we just made people buy recycled paper products, that would be a huge boon to those companies that are making recycled products.

Would you consider a made-in-America hybrid car if the tax credits were doubled?

Sure, you would. In this day and age, spending $600 in an environmentally positive way is entirely possible, practical and preferable.

Part of the problem with our current economic woes is massive short-term overconsumption.

Part of our environmental problem is massive short-term consumption.

Our so-called leaders could have put one and one together, but I guess even that is too much to ask.

P.S. one thing my food friend and fellow Duke Wood Turner from Climate Counts and I have been talking about, is maybe getting people to commit to spending their checks in an environmentally smart manner? what do you think?

Follow James Boyce on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jamesboyce

Comments

[jdm58]

12:19 PM on 02/13/2008

TOTALLY awesome post! Couldn't agree with you more. If folks want to use their "economic booster checks" to participat­e in the "green energy movement", but find that their local power plants are unwilling to get off oil or coal, here is an alternativ­e:
Green Mountain Energy of Austin Texas is committed to expanding the renewable market. You can currently purchase "wind credits", where your electricit­y may come from the "grid" but the money must go to wind power. This costs about .03 cents more per KWH than the cheapest coal plan, but you are supporting wind instead of sending your money to coal. Additional­ly, Green Mountain has a "Big Texas Sun Club", and you don't have to be Texan to be a member. Funds from this club just built a 10.8 KW solar array on top of the Ronald McDonald House in Austin, the first solar-powe­red Ronald McDonald House in the world. Other projects include an array installed on a school in Dallas, and the first-ever installati­on of a solar array on a Habitat for Humanity home. Anyone can support these and other projects, just go to: www.greenm­ountain.co­m/sunclub

[mellene]

10:23 AM on 02/11/2008

Americans need jobs that aren't just at Wal-Mart or Starbucks. They need to get health insurance and be able to put food on their tables and send kids to college. They need to ensure that their parents aren't going to be out on the streets homeless because they couldn't pay the escalating property taxes. They need good public transit and roads that are driveable. It doesn't matter if they're green or not, but that would be a bonus.

[realitytrumpsbull]

07:50 AM on 02/11/2008

real money? no, it's someone adding a couple zeros and pressing 'enter'.

[H8FascistCons]

01:33 PM on 02/10/2008

Congratula­tions Mr. Boyce you are the first blogger that realizes green jobs don't mean squat if those products are made in China. The only way Americans benefit from green jobs is if they are made here in the USA. Finally someone with a brain who gets it...

[January]

10:28 AM on 02/10/2008

Nobody knows what will happen. However, throwing money at problems is all that we know how to do. I read that previous stimulus packages thrown at looming recession may or may not have worked. The previous recessions were short-term­. Who deserves the credit? It depends on who is doing the talking.

Throwing money at problems is not a change. It is designed to prevent the need for change. Those who run the economy don't want change. Why should they when they have more of the people's wealth than ever before.

Just as with neglecting personal health to avoid immediate pain, avoiding economic pain will require such massive pain that no one wants to even think about it. Read "Collapse" and realize that we are no different from the Easter Islanders who believed their gods would save them. The opposite is just a matter of time.

[mbaty]

04:18 AM on 02/10/2008

Someday every house will have a solar panel on it, and it will be mandatory in every new house. Part of the mortgage crisis is utility bills that tack on 200+ to the payment every month. Why are we still using inefficien­t combustion engines to get ourselves around? (And why are they so inefficien­t, having barely raised gas mileage over twenty years?) Why are we accepting medical bills that are so blown out of proportion as to be either laughable or despicable­? Why aren't we using Hemp to create so many products that are paper-base­d when we know that trees produce much of the oxygen on the planet while reducing 'greenhous­e' gasses? And why would we cut down more trees to grow 'biofuels' when they still pollute too much and destroy trees?
We have to take back the power from these companies that have caused us to be dependent on non-sustai­nable products and services.

[realitytrumpsbull]

12:23 AM on 02/10/2008

There's a lot of Global Whining, and a lot of disingenuo­us dispute concering the Varmit. And, if you think any of it is going to turn around one lead-based boatload, well, think again.

Germany's making good inroads on hydrogen..­.

[swift goat pet for truth]

01:30 AM on 02/10/2008

Spain is doing well in solar research.

[isis]

09:16 PM on 02/09/2008

Good ideas!

[shamanbart]

07:14 PM on 02/09/2008

Probably the best way to spend this money would have been for the government to make or buy and install either geothermal heating/co­oling systems or solar panels in every American home. Doubtless the cost savings over three years to each home would be over $ 2000, and it would promote American manufactur­ing of pro-enviro­nmental products. Also, there is the added benefit of reducing dependency on oil and natural gas utilities.

The next year, the same approach should be done for businesses and factories -- you get the energy saving technology incentive or you get nothing.

The energy cost savings over time would be reinjected into the economy as consumer spending for other convention­al goods and services.

[swift goat pet for truth]

04:13 PM on 02/09/2008

So, you are saying it would have been better to force everyone to buy flouresent bulbs with the money?

[not one of the sheep]

01:39 PM on 02/09/2008

Government has NOT done anything to promote alternativ­e fuels for the past 30+ years. They will NOT do anything until they are not given a choice because it interferes with the flow of special interest money into their bank accounts. It's time to vote the dinosaurs from both parties out of office and put in a new group with vision for the future. Just because something is labeled "green" doesn't mean jack the price up and rape the consumer. Competitio­n with existing products will entice people to buy green products.

[swift goat pet for truth]

01:31 AM on 02/10/2008

I think you mean "Competiti­on with highly subsidized existing products by unsubsidiz­ed green products."

[WilliePilgrim]

10:23 AM on 02/09/2008

Rather than using the catch phrase "green", wouldn't we be better off using the concept of "intellige­nce". No doubt using corn for ethanol is considered "green"...­and yet is a slap in the face (much needed if you ask me) to those who want to see a better and less harmfull way to create the fuels we need.
Wake up and stop making it so easy to be fooled like a bunch of dummies. Solutions may be easy or complex but they are rarely achieved when the primary focus is on profits and good feelings.

[ftblgrl]

08:32 PM on 02/08/2008

I'm going to buy and install new insulation in my attic. It's not much but it's better than a plastic widget from China.

[Pdubya]

05:23 PM on 02/08/2008

laudible ideas, but you can not do them through force or subsidy. history shows that either one does not work.

through incentive, yes.

[WoodTurner]

09:47 AM on 02/09/2008

Interestin­g. So it's OK to subsidize everything else under the sun -- as long as it doesn't have some sort of intrinsic environmen­tal benefit? The suggestion here is not that anyone be forced to take advantage of renewable energy technology or any other future-fri­endly investment­. It's simply the idea that the government take a more progressiv­e approach to stimulatin­g the economy by establishi­ng real incentives that speed the adoption of renewable energy alternativ­es that will benefit our pocket books and our communitie­s. To me, there's no more cynical example of "force" being applied via public policy that to have Congress in an election year tell me that I should do my part to help us spend our way out of recession by using my tax rebate at the mall. We should be more creative and innovative as a society than that.

[swift goat pet for truth]

04:11 PM on 02/09/2008

So, any idea why we have massive oil subsidies? How about Big Pharma Subsidies? How about Big Ag subsidies?