Green Jobs

Credit: NASA's Earth Science News Team



I wrote the article The green jobs fallacy at examiner.com. Quoting from the article:

Alternative energy sources are more costly. That is why there currently is not widespread usage of them. Even when subsidized alternative energy is all too often not competitive. Higher energy costs add to the cost of manufacturing as well as other business expenses. Higher costs discourage hiring because there is an economic incentive to cut back on production. Less output lowers additional energy expenditures. But it also requires fewer workers.

There is another compelling reason not to have the state of New Jersey shoulder the burden of climate change. It is very practical and focused on the reality that New Jersey could not change the planet's climate even if it entirely eliminated the combustion of fossil fuels. The goal line cannot be crossed even in theory. A global effort to change climate is fraught with theoretical weaknesses but we should all at least agree that a global and not a local perspective is the correct approach.

Green advocates have it backwards. Businesses would likely leave the state if tighter carbon emission standards are enacted in New Jersey and would flow into the state if New Jersey reduces its tax and regulatory burdens imposed on business. If clean energy businesses are only economically viable when New Jersey is their source of income then they have greater business problems than Governor Christie's budget cuts.