Analysis: Carbon Pricing in CLEAR Bill Will Generate U.S. Jobs

The Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal (CLEAR) Act, sponsored by Sens. Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Collins (R-Maine), would help to employ workers hit hardest by the housing bubble burst—generating jobs through increased consumer spending and green technology investment.

These are some of the findings of an analysis (pdf) released April 12 by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law.

By setting a price on carbon, auctioning pollution permits, and refunding most of the profits back to American households, CLEAR will send efficient price signals to businesses. These signals will open a vast new field of economic opportunities as companies and individuals rush to invest in energy-saving measures.

The construction sector, hard hit by the recent financial crisis, will see a particular bump as solar panels are installed, homes are re-insulated and new infrastructure like public transportation is built. Demand for manufactured products, such as solar cells, wind turbines, and heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems (HVAC) will also increase.

“These jobs will offer relatively high wages in industries that are experiencing overcapacity and unemployment. The economic incentives in the CLEAR Act will begin to mop up some of the slack in the market,” said Michael Livermore, Policy Integrity executive director. “Presently unemployed construction workers will find more opportunities as green investment kicks in.”

Compared to spending on fossil fuel-powered energy, investment in green technology produces more than twice as many jobs that at least $15 an hour, in large part because these industries rely on domestic labor.

Investment in green technology was found to generate more domestic jobs than similar spending on fossil fuels industries. A great deal of the fossil fuel base in the United States is imported from foreign countries whereas more of the inputs for renewable energy capacity occur in the United States. Energy efficiency jobs are largely geographically specific making it more likely that they go to Americans.

Scott Holladay, Policy Integrity economics fellow, said, “the CLEAR Act’s price signals would give economic actors the incentives they need to embrace existing green technologies, and invest in the most promising clean energy industries of tomorrow.”

Though other carbon pricing proposals could see similar job growth, the permit auction and taxpayer rebate in the CLEAR Act is particularly efficient because households are protected from rising energy costs. Lower-income households in particular will benefit from the program, spurring consumer spending that can provide an additional boost to economic growth, according to the institute analysis.

The Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law is a non-partisan think-tank that works with advocacy organizations and governments to use economics and law to protect the environment, public health, and consumers.

Comments

Mon, Apr 19, 2010

May the recent volcanic eruption in Iceland help drive home the fact that forces in nature far surpass anthropogenic carbon releases as the ultimate drivers behind climate change. Unfortunately, the climate change modelers and their legalist supporters choose to ignore history in their models and philosophy. After all, it's difficult to tax earthquakes, volcanos, shifts in ocean currents, changes in global tilt, and solar radiation patterns.

Fri, Apr 16, 2010 Environmental Engineer LA

This bill, which is Cap-and-trade disquised as a "jobs" bill, will by its own admission raise energy costs to make other forms of energy such as wind and solar cost competitive. Increasing energy costs make U.S. manufacturers less competitive, which will drive even more manufacturing to Mexico or China, where they are not regulated. End of story.

Thu, Apr 15, 2010 Ron TN

What a bunch of rubbish! What is CLEAR is that carbon cap-and-trade will cause all energy rates to rise dramatically in the U.S. That means higher utilities rates for residential and commercial customers, higher fuel costs, and higher energy costs to industry which will be passed on to consumers of all U.S. manufactured products. What isn't CLEAR are the other unintended consequences of a regulatory scheme designed mainly to generate tax revenue by taxing carbon and trading pollution credits.
It is not the government’s role to generate jobs. That is the job of the private sector.

Thu, Apr 15, 2010

Leave it to lawyers to come up with non-sense. Our economy & standard of living is dependent on low cost energy. Everything we have food, homes, vehicles etc. is dependent on energy. Wind & solar energy cost 3 to 8 times more than fossil fuel energy & are not reliable or even capable of base loading us. If you increase cost of fossil fuel energy via tax so wind & solar are competive, cost of energy be so high no way can compete on global scale. Jobs will not increase but decrease & U.S. will be in serious depression.

Thu, Apr 15, 2010

"Lower Income households" is not defined, and it is not specifified how they will benefit from the program.

Thu, Apr 15, 2010

So let me see if I understand this: By paying a much higher price for energy, my company is going to be able to take our diminished revenues, assuming we survive, and create more jobs. Of course, we may not survive, in which case, neither do the jobs, but then does anyone really care about creating new jobs, or just keeping people dependent upon the government? Happy re-distribution day!

Thu, Apr 15, 2010

I recently read of a solar panel factory in the US that recently closed due to competition form foreign imports. I also heard that many of the wind generators are being built in China and that Stimulus money was being used to create jobs in China. I believe the carbon tax will drive up the cost of power in the US and drive up the cost of gasoline. I live in a small town. Mass transportation will do me little good.

Thu, Apr 15, 2010 Frank Brunner Cle

Industry has been upgrading to energy efficient projects for 25 years, We have looked at so called green projects but to date they do not work for most facilities. Rather than taking carbon, the government should develop competative green energy projects that are attractive to Insustry. Taxes on carbon will only slow the process.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above