DOE Mulling Plan That Would Save or Create Green Jobs at a Cost of $23 Million Each

|

Still looking for those 5 million green jobs

Sean Higgins over at Investor's Business Daily is reporting that the U.S. Department of Energy may be on the verge of shoving $6.5 billion more in federal subsidies to support nine green energy projects: 

The number of full-time, permanent jobs they would create? According to the DOE's own figures, a grand total of 283. That is nearly $23 million per job.

It's also a drop in the bucket toward the five million green jobs President Obama promised as a candidate in 2008.

It's not clear how many of the loans will get approved. The DOE refused comment prior to the Thursday announcements.

In the last week, the DOE has approved three loans totaling $624 million and creating 110 permanent jobs. But two other big loan projects totaling nearly $2 billion reportedly fell through. …

So far, the DOE has issued over $10 billion in loan guarantees for 21 projects — including Solyndra — and claims to have created about 2,300 permanent jobs. 

Higgins adds:  

That the funds are loans, not grants, is often cited by green jobs fans. But the Solyndra failure has underscored the risks.

Well, yes.

Go here to read the article. Check out Reason's reporting on the green jobs delusion here, here, and here

NEXT: Meet the Star College Student Who Will Be Deported Tomorrow Despite Having Lived in the U.S. Since She Was 20 Months Old

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The risks? What risks? Risks like “being awesome”?

    Obama’s 2nd term is gonna be the most super awesome period of human history to date.

    1. He’s so cool. He plays basketball and stuff. I mean, he’s like so totally cool and stuff.

      1. He has perfectly-chiseled pectorals that glisten under the sun! The WaPo told me so!

        1. And have you seen his pant legs? Perfectly creased, I tell you. Perfectly.

    2. Now that he’s had four years to get the country on track how could it be anything else?

    3. Since we now have governors suggesting in public that we suspend elections, I think he’s playing for an extended first term.

      1. Huh?

      2. Don’t be paranoid, PL, she said Congressional elections, not Presidential elections. So there’s really no threat to our democractic republic at all.

        1. These are not the elections your are looking for.

        2. Oh, I see. I retract my comment then. The Republic is saved!

  2. The fact these “loans” have to be secured from the government instead of through private sources tell you all you need to know about their viability.

  3. Wow. This is after Solyndra? Just… wow.

    1. I know. The balls on these people . . . .

  4. Green jobs? I got some green jobs for ya. I got 25,000 stationary bikes hooked up to generators. Just give me $250 million, and send me some Welfare recipiants bitchez.

    1. I’ve actually thought about something like that for prisons (e.g. the prisoners could earn credits toward their sentence by generating electricity.)

      Then there’s also the liberal guilt angle. Have a building full of generator bikes and make it trendy enough that liberals will come in and earn some “green cred” and assuage their guilt about living in “such a horrible, horrible country”. I guess the business model would have to be selling coffee or sports drinks

      1. I’ve actually thought about something like that for prisons (e.g. the prisoners could earn credits toward their sentence by generating electricity.)

        This is actually done in Super Paper Mario on the Wii.

        1. Still waiting for that Super Paperless Mario I keep hearing about. The one where they’re both dressed like Luigi.

      2. Why aren’t we hooking up generators to treadmills and stationary bikes in private gyms? Could this possibly be practical?

        I can just see M. Obama’s head exploding over the possibilities should this be a federal program. Energy quotas for fat people.

    2. The Latest Style Juicy Couture Bags From http://www.outletsjuicycouture.com On sale. You can find all kinds of discount Juicy Couture. You Shop,You can get Save 60% Off & Free Shipping & No Tax. Other, Here have Woman’s Pretty and Fashion Juicy Couture Tracksuits On Sale.

    3. For the price of one of Obama’s jobs, I could hire every lefty hipster douche within a few hundred miles to suck the methane out of cows’ assholes to prevent it from escaping into the atmosphere. I suppose that might not be sustainable, but that could be a feature, not a bug.

  5. That is nearly $23 million per job.

    I’ll put a solar panel on my roof and read by LED lights for a mere fifteen million. Where’s my check?

    1. I’m in. I’ll even wear green shirts.

  6. This analysis is flawed. Producing clean energy is the point here. Who cares how many jobs are created? The jobs are just a happy side effect.

    1. Producing clean energy is the point here.

      “Clean” energy is already being produced in the market without government assistance. It simply cannot compete yet with fossil fuel in terms of energy production.

      Who cares how many jobs are created? The jobs are just a happy side effect.

      The problem is that the government has a bad habit of investing in operations that are neither profitable nor capable of standing independently in the market. This “creates” nothing but unemployed in the long run, and wastes BILLIONS of dollars in the process.

    2. “The jobs are just a happy side effect.”

      And the bankruptcy; that’s a happy side effect, too.

      1. Represent!

    3. No no, that was before Obama ‘pivoted’ to jobs. Now everything is about jobs.

    4. Producing clean energy is the point here.

      Then why did Obama say that he would create 5 million green jobs? and why did he say that the new green economy would stimulate the economy out of its slump?

      Obama and the Dems sold this bag of goods as a jobs/economic program and it has failed miserably to accomplish any of its goals.

    5. Bull. The goal is to peddle favors.

      If producing clean renewable energy was truly the goal, the government should simply announce a lump of prize money for the first person that can meet some “green” goal.

      It would be similar to how the X Prize foundation awards money for anyone who can meet some goal.

      It would be a simple way to spur innovation while keeping the cost to taxpayers fixed.

      1. Hell, they could just announce a targeted yearly energy use for each household (based on family makeup, presumably) and pay them a fixed rate for every kWh they come in under energy budget. Would probably be cheaper. And it would effectively be progressive in terms of how the money was distributed, much more so than bullshit like Solyndra.

  7. I think even the economic and business ignoramuses in DC know that there’s pretty good consumer demand for cleaner technologies. So why the huge push in that direction by the government? Is it just in order to once again claim credit when the credit is actually due more to private sector activity? Or is it something more insidious?

    1. Re: Pro Libertate,

      I think even the economic and business ignoramuses in DC know that there’s pretty good consumer demand for cleaner technologies. So why the huge push in that direction by the government?

      One word: Graft.

    2. I’m guessing something more insidious. Just my guess.

    3. Hookers and blow.
      So … the usual.

  8. Or is it something more insidious?

    I would count graft, cronyism, and the warm glow that comes from funding your hobbies with other people’s money as “more insidious”, yes.

  9. “I’ll put a solar panel on my roof and read by LED lights for a mere fifteen million. Where’s my check?”

    I’ll do it for 14 million! Race to the bottom!

    1. 13.999999999999999999999 million!

  10. It’s not the intial outlay that matters is the ROI on the spending which by my calculation is … oh snap.

  11. If we could figure out how to capture and recycle the energy expended by iPhone users’ finger flicks, Exxon wouldn’t stand a chance.

  12. I’ll do it for 14 million! Race to the bottom!

    You BASTARD!

  13. So far, the DOE has issued over $10 billion in loan guarantees for 21 projects ? including Solyndra ? and claims to have created about 2,300 permanent jobs.

    _______________

    So, the DOE does not understand the meaning of the word “permanent.” Nice.

    1. Let’s see, $10BB, divided by 2300, carry the one . . . .

      Isn’t that about $4MM per job?

      1. Per temp job. And you left off a few hundred thousand per.

  14. Why do these folks keep referring to ‘permanent’ jobs? It’s such an 80s term. There is no such thing anymore. Just ask the permanent Solyndra employees.

  15. That the funds are loans, not grants, is often cited by green jobs fans.

    The only way there wouldn’t be a grant component is if the government were offering the same terms as a private market.

    If anything, we have something even worse. All the companies got loans — some part of which was a subsidy — but Solyndra only received a greater subsidy when restructuring, as the government offered to go to the back of the line behind creditors (and likely behind plenty of employees, too). That’s the opposite of a meritocratic funding model.

  16. Obama: Really making em say uhh

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.