George Jonas: The
environmentalists need to stop crying wolf
Last
Updated: Apr 26, 2011 10:53 PM ET
AFP/Getty Images/PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU
A Frontier Centre study showed that each green job cost Spain $791,597.
A study released this week concludes that government “green-job”
programs aren’t the yellow-brick road to happiness in Europe. “Green
programs in Spain destroyed 2.2 jobs for every job created,” write
Kenneth P. Green and Ben Eisen in their paper for the Winnipeg-based
think-tank, Frontier Centre, “while the capital needed for one green
job in Italy could create five new jobs in the general economy.”
Pity the Greens, here and around
the globe. Things haven’t been going their way in the last couple of
years, ever since those pesky e-mails surfaced in Britain — the ones
showing that Green-tinged scientists at the climatic-research unit of
the University of East Anglia got carried away with the nobility of
their global-warming mantras. All in a good cause, of course, but
still, “it’s no use pretending this isn’t a major blow,” as George
Monbiot wrote in Britain’s The Guardian in the fall of 2009.
Actually, 2009 may have been the first year of serious reversal for the
Green movement that has gone from triumph to triumph for the past 50
years. The astrologers and alchemists of ecology have been merrily
reading tea leaves and crying wolf for almost half a century.
Like many millennial movements, the Greens started out as a mixed bag.
They included concerned citizens, calculating statists and hysterical
sentimentalists. Some were sober and practical enough, trying to
identify genuine problems; others had a variety of issues and agendas,
espousing or pretending to espouse the Earth’s cause with religious
fervour. Masquerading as scientists, spouting scientific jargon and
aping scientific methods, they caught the fancy of the zeitgeist,
gradually advancing from the partisans of the Earth to its
administrators and police.
In Europe, Greens became a direct political force, while in North
America they piggybacked their politics, policies and rhetoric on the
traditional political parties. Their influence extended across the
spectrum. All parties mouthed their shibboleths, with the parties on
the left — in Canada, the NDP — making the loudest noises.
The Frontier Centre’s paper quotes
U.S. President Barack Obama still singing the praises of the greening
of Spain in 2009 — “particularly around key issues like renewable
energy and transportation, where Spain has been a worldwide leader” —
just before a group of researchers headed by Gabriel Calzada Alvarez at
the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos released their findings about the
actual cost of each “green job” created by Obama’s “worldwide leader.”
It was a staggering three-quarters of a million dollars ($791,597, to
be precise), indicating that the Middle East isn’t the only region
where America’s Commander-in-Chief is sorely in need of a reality check.
Alvarez and his researchers also
found that each “green” megawatt installed “destroys 5.28 jobs on
average elsewhere in the economy.” This week Green-Eisen conclude that
“far from generating a new source of economic growth, job creation and
government revenue, Spain has found its foray into renewable energy to
be unsustainable.”
Italy and Germany, if anything, fare worse. “As with Spain, corruption
runs rampant through the renewable-energy sector,” write Green-Eisen.
“In Italy, however, rather than having numerous individuals defrauding
the government, the Mafia is involved.” As for Germany, utilities are
required by law to purchase solar energy at 59 cents per kWh.
Conventional electricity costs range from a high of 10 cents to a low
of three. Federal subsidies for electricity have risen 300%, and
household costs on average by 7.5%. That’s in a country where the
Greens are political heavyweights. In the United Kingdom, “for every
job created in renewable energy, 3.7 jobs are lost.”
What price “green” energy? That price, and worse, assuming Green and
other researchers are right, as I suspect they are. And what are we
paying this price for? We’re not boiling the globe like a lobster, as
they led us believe we were, so what are we paying it for? What are we
paying it for if we’re not running out of fossil fuels, and our nuclear
reactors aren’t melting us down all the way to China as we were told
they might in the 1970s?
Are we paying for the paranoia, self-righteousness and dictatorial
ambitions of a quasi-religious, pseudo-Luddite, bio-worshipping
ideology? It seems like that and maybe it is — but I wonder. The Earth
can sustain more than Al Gore, the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Alberta
Federation of Labor and their little green friends claim it can, but it
can’t sustain everything. It may, for instance, not be able to sustain
American levels of energy consumption by seven billion people.
The wolf isn’t at the door — but there is a wolf. There’s a whole pack
of them out there. They’re hungry and they’ve big teeth.
The boy in the fable who cries wolf doesn’t do much damage when he
sounds his false alarm. He’s just a nuisance — maybe a bloody nuisance,
but that’s all. The damage comes when his alarm is real but nobody
listens. I suspect this may yet become the story of the Green lobby.