Economics and the Migration to Clean Energy

In response to my post: If the Move To Renewables Is Inevitable, Why Not Do It Now?  frequent commenter Larry Lemmert writes:  “The birth of the solar age will not come without a lot of birth pangs. It is too simplistic to think that the economics do not matter and that the jobs created as the new paradigm kicks in will offset the jobs lost in industries impacted negatively by the change.”

Thanks, Larry.  The most credible things I’ve seen suggest a significant  economic boom associated with the development of cleantech — starting with energy efficiency, but expanding into clean energy.  I base this on a large number of interviews, but principally with my talk for my second book with Dr. Robert Pollin.  The link above will take you to a few of his most recent publications.

Tagged with: , ,
One comment on “Economics and the Migration to Clean Energy
  1. Larry Lemmert says:

    I can see an economic boom from anything that translates to the bottom line. Increased energy efficiency can potentially reduce the margin on a product. But if the new fangled energy saving device costs more over the life cycle of its generation…. not so much.

    Switching to anything that costs more over the life cycle is not going to happen without government coercion. Government coercion is generally accomplished by throwing tax dollars or better yet, throwing borrowed money into subsidies.

    The reason that some green technology ideas will not be economic because of hidden energy costs that are not accounted for by shallow thinkers. Just using carbon as a counter of green potential, look at the inputs that go into poorly sited wind turbines that do not pay back enough over their life cycle. Concrete bases for turbines are made from limestone that has sequestered CO2 for millions of years. That is dumped into the atmosphere just so we can say that our electricity is greener than from a gas fired turbine.
    Rushing to green the horizon too quickly will fund a lot of half baked proposals that make sense only when the thumb of government subsidy balances the equation.
    I do believe that there are many locations that can reach a better than break even point with solar and wind but they will be financed through normal channels by venture capitalists.