Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Green Spain Is Getting Rusty

In its ongoing efforts to be more like the Europeans and less like traditional Americans, the Obamacrats have frequently pointed to Spain as a nation that jumped into the green movement with both feet. Bold, daring, far-thinking. All of which might have had some validity, if it weren't for the miserable state of the world economy, and the American unemployment rate.

Conservatives have questioned the wisdom of "going green" on numerous occasions, but particularly during this very serious economic recession. In fact, we have done so on this blog. Sensible conservation measures and new technology are wonderful things. Switching to new ways of doing things are always somewhat painful. But there is a difference between making adjustments and committing labor suicide. We have warned of zealotry in the greening of America, and now Spanish officials have joined us.

The issue for the Spaniards is very similiar to the problem we face. Unemployment. Spain created all sorts of new "green jobs" in industry, and President Obama has frequently cited Spain as a model for what America should be doing. Now, the Spaniards are telling the delusional Obama that maybe it wasn't such a hot idea after all. In a booming economy, many workers put out of work by new technologies can rebound and move into some other area of work. Right now, the economy worldwide is a bust.

So what has Spain concluded? Spanish economist Gabriel Calzada has estimated that for every green job created by Spain's investment in renewable energy, 2.2 jobs are permanently lost without anything to replace the lost jobs, given the pitiable growth rate of European and American economies at the present time and for the foreseeable future. Many critics have estimated the ratio of gains to losses as high as two to four times as many jobs lost as gained. But what is important to note here is that Calzada was one of the earliest advocates of moving to a green economy, and is now very troubled by the result.

At the governmental level, the president of Spain's National Commission of Energy, socialist Maite Costa calls the current policy "unsustainable." Obama listened to the "go green" message. Will he now listen to the "red light" message? Highly doubtful. The leftist agenda in America is less idealistic than it is a pure power grab. With the EPA poised to determine which businesses will survive based on their carbon emissions, and the Obamists directing government contracts to Obama-friendly "green businesses," it is unlikely that the statists will give up on their power-grab any time soon.

11 comments:

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, Excellent points! This whole green economy things is a hoax. First of all, the history of technology is that it reduces the number of jobs because less labor is needed. Secondly, when you force a technology that the market won't bare, then you cause economic problems, i.e. loss of jobs in other sectors.

The idea that we are all suddenly going to get rich making solar panels is just silly.

That said, if we were to shift from oil to natural gas, that would dramatically improve our economy as we would stop exporting $500 billion a year to Middle East and Central America, and would instead spend that in places like Arkansas and Texas.

StanH said...

You know, I think it’s a great idea that we be good stewards of our planet, and we should use every opportunity to make our environment better. But that’s not what’s going on here, IMO this is nothing but a bald faced power grab, too make the world more fair, and equitable place, spreading the wealth. This is a wonderful schoolhouse debate, but completely disregards human nature, and by bringing down the first world, this will only further diminish the lives in the third world. Great post.

Hey Lawhawk, Barry’s coming to SF to campaign for Babs…aren’t you excited?

LawHawkSF said...

Andrew: "Hoax" is the word I was looking for. The power-grab even has its own internal power-grabs. It's almost institutional paralysis.

Let's use nuclear power to replace oil and coal fueled power. Then the other wing of the environmental/government coalition says "you're not going to dump those spent fuel rods here."

Then let's use wind power. Then the other wing of the environmental/government lobby says "but you're killing the raptors; and, you're not going to ruin my view (the late, unlamented Ted Kennedy)."

Well, solar power is good. And the other wing of the environmental/government loons says "you can't put those huge solar panels in the desert, it will destroy the habitat of the unheard-of mystery lizard and the unheard-of mystery snake."

Obama weakened for a moment, and seemed to support "sensible" development of American oil resources. Oops, BP spills oil all over the Gulf, and now all domestic plans are on hold. And God forbid we should consider the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge for drilling. Coal? Ooh, coal is nasty.

So what's the answer? Do nothing, just like everything else the Obama administration has accomplished (not counting the health-care power grab and the financial power grab). The largest supply of natural gas comes every day in the halls of Congress and the White House. I'm not sure how to harnass that. LOL

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, I think you put your finger right on the other problem with "clean energy" -- that not matter what you do, the environmentalists will complain. What they want is an impossible thing -- they want something completely different, power with no pollution, to be gotten without disturbing the environemnt in any way. And even then, they would be upset that there is too much power which encourages people to do things.

I think it's time to stop listening to these idiots and just move forward without them.

LawHawkSF said...

StanH: I think all intelligent human beings, including us conservatives, believe in being good stewards. But every time the government comes up with one of its hare-brained schemes, it makes things worse. The key is intelligent stewardship, and nothing this administration and the green weenies have done is intelligent.

I'm speechless with indifference about the Big O's visit to La La Land today. I'll be staying home of course. The visit is expected to raise about $1.5 million for the loathsome Boxer.

LawHawkSF said...

Andrew: Supply and demand making things work? Are you one of those crazy capitalists who believes in the market rather than government planners?

Anonymous said...

LawHawk, let's hope the Big Zero's visit will have the same effect on Boxer's campaign that he's had on others. Now that's CHANGE I can believe in! LOL!! TJ

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, Yeah, I'm a confirmed capitalist. . . I like to do things that work.

LawHawkSF said...

TJ: I really wanted to attend the event, but I came up two or three dollars short on the $35,000 per person admission charge. LOL

Anonymous said...

LawHawk, I'm sure you were heartbroken that you couldn't attend (NOT)! Wow, $35,000.00, where do people get that kind of money? My husband and I made less than that combined last year. If I had that much money, I certainly wouldn't spend it on politicians. TJ

LawHawkSF said...

TJ: This is where the term "limousine liberals" emerged. These people have money to burn, but somehow think by giving huge sums to leftists causes, they are somehow staying in touch with us "little people." God forbid a single one of them should ever get on a MUNI bus, and make the trek downtown to the fancy hotels where these events are held. They'd find out quickly that the homeless people stinking up the bus, the thugs robbing the riders, the bus that showed up forty-five minutes late, and the bus drivers who don't speak English aren't such a charming thing. But then, they actually already know that, which is why they're called "limousine" liberals.

Post a Comment