Stimulate MORE green jobs

29 posts / 0 new

Green jobs will fuel the economy of the future!

Obama & DOE spent $9 Billion on wind and solar resulting in 910 new jobs. That is about $9.8 MILLION per job. If you count for the secondary jobs of another 4600

Combined (910 + 4,600 = 5,510), the direct and indirect jobs cost, on average, about $1.63 million each to produce.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/shock-9-billion-in-stimulus-for-green-pro...

If we only double the size of simulus I am sure it would work. Why give up now, I say DOUBLE DOWN!

liberalsyndrome's picture
liberalsyndrome
Joined:
Jun. 15, 2012 7:27 pm

Comments

Sorry that all YOU seem to care about is the JOBS that it creates! I happen to care about CLEAN AIR! I guess you also want the KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE to be built TOO so we can HAVE MORE JOBS (temporary) to level our beautiful forests and build that stinking pipeline that will transport the filthest TAR SANDS OIL and that will make darn sure that the Canadians will continue to level their beautiful boreal forest and kill thousands of wolves because they are being squeezed out of their habitat for the tar sands and God forbid you have MUST have the little habitat that's left over for the caribou so there are critters to hunt! And we can't forget the 20 jobs that will be permanent operating the stinking pipeline that will send the oil Texas to be shipped overseas. SCREW THE JOBS I WANT TO BREATH!!

SORRY.....BUT I HAPPEN TO THINK OF CLEAN AIR AS A GOOD INVESTMENT!

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Yeah more janitors at solar plants!

CollegeConservative's picture
CollegeConservative
Joined:
May. 4, 2012 2:22 pm
Quote MrsBJLee:

Sorry that all YOU seem to care about is the JOBS that it creates! I happen to care about CLEAN AIR! I guess you also want the KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE to be built TOO so we can HAVE MORE JOBS (temporary) to level our beautiful forests and build that stinking pipeline that will transport the filthest TAR SANDS OIL and that will make darn sure that the Canadians will continue to level their beautiful boreal forest and kill thousands of wolves because they are being squeezed out of their habitat for the tar sands and God forbid you have MUST have the little habitat that's left over for the caribou so there are critters to hunt! And we can't forget the 20 jobs that will be permanent operating the stinking pipeline that will send the oil Texas to be shipped overseas. SCREW THE JOBS I WANT TO BREATH!!

SORRY.....BUT I HAPPEN TO THINK OF CLEAN AIR AS A GOOD INVESTMENT!

Sorry you are off base on a couple of points here:

By the time the oil hits the US it has been hydrotreated by the Canadians just to get it to flow. That process removes a lot of the sulfur, nitrogen and heavy metals, so that this oil is no worse than the crude oil found here in the states.

You are ranting and raving about 0.2 percent of Canada's borel forest here! You must have a better use of your time. Besides, the companies have very strict rules on how they return the land to its natural state after they are done with it. See the following web site.

http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca.energy/files/files/OilSands-LandUseandReclamation_e.pdf

And lastly, the gulf coast refineries in Texas are going to run with the crude or without it. And they have very strict emmsions rules that are not going to get any easier. So your rants and raves about clean air are off the mark.

Yes, I also want to breath clean air, but I also want to drive my car and not have to pay $10 a gallon for gasoline!

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm
Quote CollegeConservative:

Yeah more janitors at solar plants!

Or more Indian engineers given H1B visas because US colleges don't train enough solar engineers.

Let's not be so one dimensional. There is an underlying problem here. We now have 7 billion people on the planet in societies designed at best to accomodate 3 billion. We need to re-engineer society to accomodate that number. The delimma is WHO gets to do that. Will it be the people or a few rich bastards?

My vision of the future is more lean and clean. We waste a lot here in the states just to have "diversity" of products that probably in reality aren't necessary. Just look at all the junk being sold in your local supermarket (and the marketing money spent on trying to get you to buy that worthless crap). Totally unnecessary.

Of course clean energy would be a big part of that vision. HOWEVER, I have a relative who has been working in the solar industry and GUESS WHAT? The snake oil salesmen have set shop there (Solyndra for example). There is a game where you propose some idea that you think will be a solution like a low cost solar cell. Never mind if the idea doesn't work, just get some VC's to pour money into it and you have a nice paycheck for a few years before it folds. Then move on to your next scam. That's how a lot of "new" business works nowaday. Buyer beware.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

You don't get sarcasm do u the senate just asked the administration what it calls green jobs and janitor insolar plant and bike shops count as green jobs.

CollegeConservative's picture
CollegeConservative
Joined:
May. 4, 2012 2:22 pm

Why didn't you factor in the temporary jobs? Or more to the point, why didn't you just stick with your first figure: its a bigger number. The point is, none of the figures in the article specified what the rest of the money went to besides the salaries that were paid, which only accounts for a fraction of the overall amount. Is that what the right-wing calls "reporting"?

nimblecivet's picture
nimblecivet
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Oh and the left has room tO talk after all nbcs selective edits

CollegeConservative's picture
CollegeConservative
Joined:
May. 4, 2012 2:22 pm

I was looking through the Green Party site this morning and in their video library I just discovered this interview Thom did with Jill Stein, currently the leading delegate holder as a Green Party Candidate for President. She discusses her vision for a Green Party presidency, and at the end Thom does an illustration of what's taking place in Germany after ten years of promoting solar panels.

Dr. Jill Stein interview with Thom Hartmann: 2012

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 7:50 am

mauiman58 wrote:

By the time the oil hits the US it has been hydrotreated by the Canadians just to get it to flow. That process removes a lot of the sulfur, nitrogen and heavy metals, so that this oil is no worse than the crude oil found here in the states.

You are ranting and raving about 0.2 percent of Canada's borel forest here!

You say that this oil is no worse than the crude oil found here in the states....WELL THEN TELL ME WHY IT DOESN'T FLOAT LIKE OTHER CRUDES? WHY DOES IT SINK TO THE BOTTOM OF RIVERS LIKE THE KALAMAZOO RIVER IN MICHIGAN? You can't clean up a spill of tar sands oil with a skimmer (like you can OTHER OILS) and last time I checked MICHIGAN is still in the U.S.

YES I am ranting and raving about 50 square miles of TOXIC TRAILING PONDS that can be SEEN FROM OUTER SPACE! YOU BET!

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am
Quote MrsBJLee:

mauiman58 wrote:

By the time the oil hits the US it has been hydrotreated by the Canadians just to get it to flow. That process removes a lot of the sulfur, nitrogen and heavy metals, so that this oil is no worse than the crude oil found here in the states.

You are ranting and raving about 0.2 percent of Canada's borel forest here!

You say that this oil is no worse than the crude oil found here in the states....WELL THEN TELL ME WHY IT DOESN'T FLOAT LIKE OTHER CRUDES? WHY DOES IT SINK TO THE BOTTOM OF RIVERS LIKE THE KALAMAZOO RIVER IN MICHIGAN? You can't clean up a spill of tar sands oil with a skimmer (like you can OTHER OILS) and last time I checked MICHIGAN is still in the U.S.

YES I am ranting and raving about 50 square miles of TOXIC TRAILING PONDS that can be SEEN FROM OUTER SPACE! YOU BET!

I must admit you make a good point. The spill in Michigan is described as diluted bituman. Bituman is the material that comes right out of the sand, and it has to be diluted before it will flow. Bituman definetely is heavier than water. I don't think that's what will be going through the XL Pipeline, but I could be wrong about that.

Don't live in Michigan. so I did not hear about the incident you are referring to. Yet another case of the oil industry shooting itself in the foot. I thought only BP did that.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm

Here are some links to videos and articles that may interest you and change your mind. I have done allot of research on fracking and tar sands.

2008 video & article…Canadians ponder cost of rush for dirty oil

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/11/fossilfuels.pollution?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Canada tries to hide Alberta tar sands carbon emissions

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/01/canada-tar-sands-carbon-emissions?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

IMPORTANT VIDEO Tar Sand Oil Extraction The Dirty Truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkwoRivP17A&feature=related

“Welcome to the Third World of Energy, the U.S.” by Michael Klare EXCELLENT!

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175523/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_welcome_to_the_new_third_world_of_energy%2C_the_u.s./#more

Who Killed the Electric Car VIDEO

http://thoughtmaybe.com/video/who-killed-the-electric-car

Tar Sands Spill & Clean-up Cover up in Michigan VIDEO’S

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4hlsGDfzpc

You might be most interested in the above video regarding the Michigan spill. It is quite telling.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Here are some more facts about tar sands enviromental impact.

· Apart from pollution, the mining causes deforestation, destruction to the land, and impacts the livelihood of indigenous communities.

· The extraction process is carbon-intensive as it produces three to four times green house gases than the conventional oil fields.

· Nobody knows for sure how long it would take to reclaim the land- if at all they could be restored.

· The Athabasca River passes through the mining areas of the forest. Water from this river is used in the mining operations and environmentalist fear for the aquatic life in the river.

· The process in very energy intensive and two to three barrels of water are used for every barrel of crude produced, to separate the bitumen from the sand. The waste water, filled with heavy metals and chemicals, are left in ponds called 'tailing ponds'. These toxic ponds are a source of environmental pollution, the clean-up of which is very expensive.

· Apart from the waste water other wastes like mine tailings- a mixture of water, sand, clay, and bitumen are produced which cause environmental damage too. Last month the Alberta government acknowledged that apart from the more than 500 migratory ducks killed in a toxic pond in 2008, there were more than 164 animals killed during 2000- 2008 because of the mining process.

Two decades ago, the Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred in the Prince William Sound, Alaska, when about 10.8 million gallons of crude oil spilled into the sea. And according to reports, the effects are still felt with Harlequin ducks living in the area showing effects of long-term exposure to the oil. And the Boreal forests are home to many animals like wolves, lynx, bears, and woodland caribou; to about thirty percent of North America's song birds and three to five billion land birds, including migratory ones and they have already created 50 square miles of toxic trailing ponds that need cannons to scare away the birds and wildlife so they don't land on it or drink it.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

I wish that was the answer (making them pay top dollar for spills) but I'm afraid that doesn't seem to work. I recently read an article (and I can't remember where I found it but if I find it again I will post it) where one oil company cause a huge mess in the Amazon rainforest & river and another (Chevron) purchased that oil company. The country was then trying to get Chevron to clean up the mess but they said it was not their mess to clean up. (I wish I had that article to post!) I might have read it in a flyer sent to my home instead of the internet. If I run across it I will post it. Your link above didn't work. Can you go to the site, copy it and repost it on your message again so it will work?

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Probably shouldn't do this, but here is an article out of Hydrocarbon Processing that is along the same lines. Clearly the industry has to clean up its act, these leaks are not only hurting the environment, but it is killing the public's perception of the industry. I still maintain that it is possible to run a pipeline that has little or no leaks or ruptures, but I can see why there are some who will state that the industry's track record along those lines really sucks.

However there is another side to this. We in the US love to drive our cars, and that takes gasoline and diesel. And pipelines are the cheapest way to move this material short of supertankers. So you can't completely shutdown this activity, or the entire economy would grind to a halt. But even I, right wing capatalist that I am, realize that we have to protect the environment because we all need to breath clean air and drink clean water.

Sounds to me like the penalties for a spill or leak are not high enough. Do you think if BP got hit with a 10-20 billion dollar fine on top of what they are going to have to pay the businesses along the gulf coast for their little spill in the gulf, that wouldn't catch a few people's attention? That the companies involved would not spend a few extra million to avoid such a fine? Just a thought.

Here is the link:

http://www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/Article/3049587/Latest-News/Canadian-oil-spills-raise-pipeline-safety-concerns.html

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm

I edited my previous post, the link should work now. The fact that it was in Hydrocarbon Processing is significant to me. What publication would be more friendly to the hydrocarbon industry and pipelines than Hydrocarbon Processing?

I still say that pipelines can be made to not leak or rupture, just a matter of how much you are willing to spend on maintenance. Perhaps it is a lot more complex than I think, I am a refining guy, not a pipeline guy. If you made a leak or rupture extreamly expensive to for the company involved, they would be willing to spend more to prevent them. Trust me, money is all they care about, so that's what it will take to get their attention.

I still say there is a way to build and maintain that XL pipeline in such a way that it won't leak or rupture. However even I can see why there is just a little skeptism from the other side of the arguement. This is an industry that does manage to shoot itself in the foot with regularity in it's public relations. Even the National Petroleum Refiners Associations had to change its name recently to American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers because the word refining had such a negitive connotation. That tells you something right there.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm

Here is an article I just read regarding a very large spill in Canada that I didn't know about. Pay attention to what the last paragraph has to say.

A major pipeline oil leak is the largest in Alberta since 1975, the province's energy regulator says.

More related to this story

About 28,000 barrels poured out of the Plains Midstream Canada Rainbow pipeline 100 kilometres northeast of Peace River, the Energy Resources Conservation Board said Tuesday, four days after the spill occurred. The spill raises new questions about the health of Alberta's aging pipeline system.

The spill represents 40 per cent more than the 20,000 barrels that leaked from an Enbridge Inc. pipe last summer, in a spill that fouled a Michigan river and cost that company hundreds of millions to clean up. It's bigger than the 19,000 barrels that spilled from a BP Canada line in 1993, but smaller than a 41,000-barrel leak in 1975, on a Bow River Pipeline Ltd. facility.

"It's certainly a very significant leak," said Davis Sheremata, a spokesman with the ERCB.

It's the second major spill from the Rainbow line, whose owner is a subsidiary of publicly traded Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. In late 2006, 7,500 barrels leaked from the pipe, which travels 770 km from Zama, Alta. to Edmonton. At the time, an investigation determined that "stress corrosion cracking, fatigue cracking and external coating failure caused the release." These issues are often related to age; the Rainbow line was built in 1966. It is designed to carry 220,000 barrels per day; last year, it averaged 187,000 barrels per day.

After the previous leak, operators of the pipeline were ordered to lower the system's pressure, increase ground surveillance and conduct internal line inspections.

The new spill occurred in a remote forested area, and crews had to build several kilometres of road to access it. The oil is largely contained on the 30-metre-wide pipeline right-of-way, the regulator said, although some has escaped into a nearby wetland. None has reached running water. The nearest residence is seven kilometres away, and the ERCB noted that pipeline failure rates had been in decline.

Critics say Alberta's aging pipe network is a cause for concern. The Plains spill comes within a week of a leak on a gas line near Fox Creek, that killed a maintenance worker who inhaled deadly sour gas, which is laced with hydrogen sulphide. In late April, another leak on the Trans Mountain pipeline system, which is also an aging pipeline, spilled a small amount of oil into an unnamed creek.

The Rainbow spill was detected by Plains Midstream crews early in the morning on April 29, the ERCB said. The Alberta regulator does not assess fines based on the amount spilled.

"What we do is we have an enforcement ladder ranging from fairly minor infractions, where we'll increase audits and inspections, right up to shutting a facility in," he said. "When you stop a company being able to generate revenue and employ people, we find we get results very quickly with them taking steps to get themselves back in compliance."

It's not clear what punishment, if any, may be used against Plains Midstream, whose outage has caused customers such as Penn West Petroleum Ltd. to truck and store crude, Bloomberg News reported.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Hey read your first link here that talks about the fact that even Hillary Clinton was in favor of the pipeline expansion at the time the article was written (Nov, 2010).

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm

I believe she still is and apparently so is Obama. I have written to them both. Sometimes you have to go back in time when you want to learn the truth. If we didn't look at the past we wouldn't learn anything.

I have spent allot of time researching the tar sands and the Keystone XL. I actually read the environmental impact reports on the web. I am amazed that anyone can justify that pipeline. Seriously, we are gaining nothing except loss of forest and wildlife habitat, loss of private land, loss of historical and archealogical sites, and we are risking our fresh water supply all across the nation where this pipeline is going in. Who built the pipes? I don't think we did so where were those jobs? Will it drive down our gas prices? NO! Our refineries in Texas stand to make a buck or two but the finished product is slated to go overseas and yet our citizens are being bullied by a foreign oil companie TransCanada into signing over portions of their land when they don't want to, and if there is a spill on their property or if it is abandonded the property owner is responsible to clean up the spill! Geez....how can this be MORE WRONG?

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Obviously there are others who feel differently than you do on this subject.

But even I agree that if it gets built it cannot spill or the owners of the pipeline should be held accountable BIG TIME.

Like I said, I remain convinced that the pipeline can be built and run to prevent leaks. Whether that will actually happen is another story. And sorry, you can't completely ignore the economic benefits. However I know in your mind the economic benefits do not justify the environmental impact, but that is a debate that will rage on and on forever. Not just on this project, but many more to come.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm

I guess you didn't read to the bottom of my last comment. I will show you in my next post when I have time to look it up again regarding property owners having to be responsible for spills or abandoned pipeline on their own property.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

What are you talking about in economic benefits? Not for Americans. This is about getting Canadian dirty oil to the international market where it will act to drive up our domestic prices. For this and some temporary construction jobs, we get all the environmental risk and your idea that should something go wrong, the owners of the pipeline should pay for it. OK, but they never have.

Some people will be making big bucks. It won't be coming back to us. Why take any risks for little or nothing?

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

Regarding AMERICAN property owners verses TransCanada please check out the following links and info.

Eminent Domain fight has a Canadian Twist

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/us/transcanada-in-eminent-domain-fight-over-pipeline.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

TransCanada Continues to Bully Landowners Despite Denial of Permit

http://texasvox.org/2012/02/17/transcanada-continues-to-bully-landowners-despite-denial-of-pipeline-permit/

All of this is wrong on so many levels!

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Didn't get enough to change your mind yet? Well here is more to check out!!!

Canada tries to hide Alberta tar sands carbon emissions

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/01/canada-tar-sands-carbon-emissions?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

IMPORTANT VIDEO Tar Sand Oil Extraction The Dirty Truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkwoRivP17A&feature=related

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Sorry there is private money funding this, so the person paying the money sees the benefits. That's how it should work. I simply do not see how the pipeline will drive up domestic prices, the refineries involved will sell the products to the highest bidder. And remember, the diesel made will not be exported. The only reason the gasoline will get exported is because of ethanol (what a government debackel that is, good for another thread al by itself).

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm
Quote MrsBJLee:

I guess you didn't read to the bottom of my last comment. I will show you in my next post when I have time to look it up again regarding property owners having to be responsible for spills or abandoned pipeline on their own property.

I don't know all the details of the deal, so I can't agree or disagree with this comment. On the face of it, that seems like a raw deal for the land owners, but something tells me there is more to this than meets the eye.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 6:45 pm
Quote liberalsyndrome:

Green jobs will fuel the economy of the future!

Obama & DOE spent $9 Billion on wind and solar resulting in 910 new jobs. That is about $9.8 MILLION per job. If you count for the secondary jobs of another 4600

Combined (910 + 4,600 = 5,510), the direct and indirect jobs cost, on average, about $1.63 million each to produce.

I support fully green energy investment, including goverment involvement in that investment, but I doubt "green jobs" will be the way to sell it. I just don't see how wind and solar will produce that many jobs unless the turbines and panels are made in the U.S. And the sad Solyndra story tells us all we need to know about that.

al3's picture
al3
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Germany is allowing individuals and communities to regulate their own grid, but they ARE a free country. That freedom may come to the despotic regimes, but I doubt it. Germany has elections, too! Novel idea, these things called elections. Their culture does not have nazi-lite radio like limbaugh either.

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Thanks for posting that video. I had read about Germany and how they are moving forward with clean energy. I applaud them for the strides they have made. With regards to solar....I have tried to get solar on my house but I don't seem to use enough electricity! (Darn, it must be all those darn eco-lights I have :-) Why do I have to spend at LEAST $150. per month on my electricity before a solar company will even talk to me?

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Currently Chatting

It’s Time for Bill O’Reilly to Get Real about White Privilege

It’s time for white America to get real about white privilege. Last night, Bill O’Reilly came from back vacation early to host a special edition of “The Factor”, one that he said would “tell the truth” about what’s going on in Ferguson, Missouri.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system