A new Center for American Progress (CAP) report finds that in a study of 12 states, there are people that work in jobs that could be “green jobs”.  And collectively, accross the country this is over 14MM people, or nearly 10% of the U.S. work force.  Wow… that’s impressive…. 10% of Americans work in jobs that could be employed in green industries… could be…, hmmmm,… could be….  waaaaait a minute.  

That’s right folks - if you were hoping for some good data on green collar labor statistics you have come to the wrong place.  CAP just realeased a report that shows how many electiricians there are in Florida as a proxy for the green collar job potential for electricians in Florida (somebody needs to wire up all those solar panels - oh wait, Florida lacks tax subsidies, net metering and has ridiculously low power prices so solar penetration in Florida is negligible (oh the irony Sunshine State) - oh well…)  

Did you know if you drive a truck, you too could be part of the green revolution?  This silly report takes BLS numbers for certain industries (mostly construction or industrial related), totes them up and then pronounces that all these jobs “could be green” if we had the necessary resources and investment in that sector.

Of course, they all could be employed in the amusement park industry if there were enough resources and investment made in building a giant inter-city roller coaster…  

The saddest part - apparently some important people think this is useful information.  The best is from the American Association of Truckers - which …

This post over at The Big Picture got me thinking more about how far we are away from a rational market for green investment - public or private.  The problem - opacity - or the opposite of transparency for those of you in a negative mood.  Sure there are lots of alternative energy technologies that look great when oil is $135 a barrel - but its hard to make a rational case for investment - whether on Wall Street or Sand Hill Road when a market as fundemental as oil can be turned upside down by the actions (or inaction) of a few government officials or foreign oil ministers. 

For instance, after driving solar company stocks through the roof, investors have started to figure out that solar is primarily a demand driven business (one that is completely and utterly tied to tax credits)  - no federal tax credit - no solar market.  And, BTW why solar?  Why are we trusting the politicians to make decisions as to what are affordable renewable technologies and not?

 Oil - I did a back of envelope analysis of how much marginal pressure the government is putting on oil prices through its management of the strategic petroleum reserve here a few days ago.  So, by a.) not releasing oil from the SPR or b.) buying oil from the SRI - the government is driving marginal demand - speculators be damned.

What this underscores …

This is way cool.  Its not immediately clear from the post at Businessweek that Envision operates as a PPA (power purchase agreement) - where the property owner signs a long term purchase agreement for the power that is generated from the solar units - offsetting the capital costs of the company installing them and eventually generating profit.  Why a big real estate company, or any real estate company for that matter, wouldn’t do this themselves, however, is beyond me - its not like they pay some one to build the building for nothing and then lease it from the construction company for eternity…  The smart play for REITs and commercial building companies is to do this themselves - move a recurring expense to a more maneagable capital expense.

Buried within the 1000+ page Warner-Lieberman climate change act is a provision for something called “international reserve allowances” and what is quickly being dubbed a “Carbon Tariff.”  Essentially the provision applies a cross-border, per ton, carbon tax on imported goods that are manufactured in countries that do not have limits on carbon emissions.  If an item creates 2 tons of carbon dioxide in its manufacture and a 1 ton carbon credit trades for $30 - then the tariff would be $60 on that item.  I don’t know if the bill requires the government to use the revenues to purchase carbon offsets - though that or putting it into an environmental clean up fund would be sensible.

I think this is a very important, if not the most important, development in green economic policy that I have seen to date.  As Frank Zappa would say the Carbon Tariff, “gets to the crux of the biscuit”, regarding the challenge to success that renewable energy and other green technologies face - unwinding the entrenched subsidies and externalities, which are ecouraged or created by government policies, that traditional approaches enjoy as a barrier to competition from green alternatives. 

That this provision is in a cap and trade bill is exceptionally smart (and I really never thought I would say that about something coming out of congress).  The provision exists to level the competitive playing field for manufacturers that bear the cost of clean manufacturing under a cap and trade system with those that do not.  Carbon emissions, and pollution in general, is an perfect externality to …

CNNMoney had a piece on “are we in an oil bubble” which polled a bunch of analysts about oil prices (unscientifcally) - comparing the price of oil to the tech stock and housing price bubbles.  What stuck out at me is that optimists amongst the analysts quoted (from the consumer’s point of view those would be the ones who believe we are indeed in a bubble that is due to pop) felt that oil might go back to $100 a barrel - and that $70 or $80 dollar a barrel oil was off the table. 

What does this mean?  First off, investors should take anything analysts say with a grain of salt - aside from some seen as “outlyers” - its not like they were predicting $100 oil even a year ago.  I think its almost impossible to get much more than a hand grenade or horseshoe’s level of accuracy (if that) when predicting prices of something as complex as oil (parsing out demand, supply, the weather, government policy, global events… its impossible).

Odds are that there is some speculative pressure in the market from commodities traders.  Supply is drawn very tight, there is a ton of excess capital not being invested in real estate, commodities are going through the roof and so excess capital chasing oil is having a big effect on oil prices at the margin.

That said, it was only October when oil broke the $70 level, so I think we have yet to really …

Cnet’s Green Tech Blog has a post I missed a few days back about a Iowa State University study claiming that Ethanol has had a big impact on lowering gas prices for consumers. Is ethanol lowering prices at the pump for consumers? It cites a study done by Iowa State University (pdf link) that shows that ethanol has lowered pump prices between $0.29 and $0.40 per gallon. The post also then states:

I find their $0.29 to $0.40 per gallon results a surprisingly large number, indicating that ethanol production, while providing on average well less than 5% of our gasoline supplies over their study period, could have affected prices at the pump downward to the tune of greater than 2 to 3 times that percentage level. That result is a huge win for ethanol proponents, as it suggests that adding ethanol to the US fleet has significantly benefited consumers (as one would expect), and also suggests that the ethanol subsidy program (at about $0.40 per gallon for 5% of the US gasoline production works out to around a 1 to 2 cent effective tax on gasoline at current levels) may well have paid for itself up to 20x over or more.

Taking aside the contentious issue of net petroleum usage in the production of corn ethanol, the above statement about the beauty of corn ethanol and the value of our subsidy of that industry is flat out ridiculous as it ignores the true economic costs to get that $0.40 …

Daily Green Investing Round-up
Nissan and NEC Invest $115M in Lithium Ion batteries; Carbon Trading Exec Explains that Carbon Markets Work; $30MM Raised for GeoThermal; Spanish Renewables Company Planning to Invest $8B in US.

Nissan and NEC are investing $115M in a Li-ion battery manufacturer JV with the catchy but functional name Automotive Energy Supply Corporation (AESC). This company will focus on building large format Li-ion batteries for… well, automotive applications. It is part of Nissan’s push to leapfrog Toyota and Honda in the race to roll out the next generation of vehicles in electric/hybrid market. Renault has already agreed to use AESC batteries in one of their electric car projects. via Wired

CNET Contributor, and Cleantech Blog founder, Neal Dikeman interviews Marc Stuart, one of the founders of EcoSecurities plc - a carbon credit generation and trading firm, to explain the U.S. carbon trading market. It does get a bit jargony for the unitiated, but there is some good info in here for those that don’t know carbon trading that well, or particularly the U.S. carbon trading market. via Cnet’s Greentech Blog

EnLink Geoenergy raises $30M for geothermal heat pump installations. VentureBeat is reporting that Houston, Texas-based EnLink Geoenergy Services has raised $30MM for continued development of its heat pump technology from Craton Equity Partners and Medley Partners LP. This is interesting because EnLink claims a …

I have been reading up a bit on the potential of Algae BioDiesel. For those of you not familar with Algae and its potential as a biofuel - this Popular Mechanics article has many of the basics. It’s a technology still in its infancy, but provided some of the challenges of refining and consistent production can be worked out, it has some promise compared to other potential Bio-Fuels - including Bio-Diesels from Soy, Switch Grass or Sugar Cane or Corn Ethanol - particularly from an land efficiency standpoint.

Bio-fuels are seen as an potential next step toward renewable transport by many because they could slot nicely into much of the existing petro-infrastructure with less of a leap than electric or hydrogen - from cars design and manufacture, down to fuel distribution. For instance, (for better or worse) ethanol is alread highly integrated into our fuel food chain at this point - being blended with gasoline.

However, there are some significant hurdles for these fuels to actually make a dent in our oil consumption pattern. To date ethanol has been primarily corn-based and generally inefficient to produce from a oil consumption basis e.g., (ethanol’s need for more than a gallon of oil to produce a gallon of ethanol). Bio diesel similarly suffers from the challenges and expense of moving lots of feed stock from where they grow well to where it makes sense to refine those …