Page 8 The Skanner Portland & Seattle June 5, 2019
CAREERS
Do Climate Policies ‘Kill Jobs’?
An economist explains why climate policies don’t
cause massive unemployment
Garth Heutel
The Conversation
C
limate change will
hammer the U.S.
economy
unless
there’s swift action
to rein in greenhouse gas
emissions from burning
fossil fuels, according to
the latest  National Cli-
mate Assessment report.
But  President Donald
Trump has dismissed
this
forecast,
even
though his own admin-
istration released a  com-
prehensive synthesis  of
the best available science,
written by hundreds of
climate scientists and
other experts from aca-
demia, government, the
private sector and non-
profits. Like most oppo-
nents of policies aimed
at slowing the pace of
climate change, he has
long wanted actions to
reduce these emissions
off the table because,
in his opinion, they are
“job-killing.”
As an  environmental
economist  who is study-
ing the relationship be-
tween regulations and
employment, I find this
question vitally import-
ant both economically
and politically. What
does the research on this
question say?
Arguments
Opponents of climate
regulations 
embrace
a straightforward and
long-standing argument.
In their view, anything
the government forc-
es businesses to do will
negatively affect their
ability to employ work-
ers. To them, everything
from safety regulations
to raising taxes makes it
costlier and harder for
businesses to operate.
Trump has taken this
philosophy to heart by
pledging to eliminate
what he calls “job-killing
regulations” across the
board.
Some supporters of
strong climate policies
counter that the costs of
climate change are high
enough to justify climate
policies even though
they might negatively af-
fect workers.
They base this argu-
ment on observations
that environmental rules
and  clean energy can
benefit public health,
even by  saving lives.
They also point out that
these policies could
counter the economic
damage the National Cli-
mate Assessment fore-
casts.
Evidence
What about those jobs,
though?
The evidence on how
environmental policies
affect
unemployment
is generally mixed. The
book “Does Regulation
Kill Jobs?,” edited by
University of Pennsyl-
vania professor Cary
Coglianese, covers reg-
ulations generally. It
concludes that “regula-
tion overall is neither
a prime job killer nor a
key job creator.”
Michael Greenstone,
a University of Chica-
go economist, found
that  1970s-era environ-
mental
regulations,
which in some ways re-
semble the climate-relat-
ed rules debated today,
led to the loss of more
than half-a-million man-
ufacturing jobs over 15
years.
Another team of re-
searchers, which re-
viewed the impact of en-
vironmental policies on
four heavily polluting
industries, found that
environmental regula-
tions have no significant
effect on employment.
To be sure, the number
of coal mining jobs has
plummeted, falling from
over 150,000 in the 1980s
to about 53,000 in July
2018.
But this mainly has to
do with two other fac-
tors. Due to  increasing
automation, it now takes
far fewer workers to
mine coal than it used to.
And a drilling boom
has increased not just
oil output but natural
gas production. The in-
creased natural gas sup-
ply cut prices for that
fuel, prompting a raft of
coal-fired power plant
closures. It also eroded
coal’s  market share  for
electricity
generation
while
creating  new
jobs  in other energy in-
dustries.
Greener job growth
A weakness I often see
in the standard regula-
tions-kill-jobs argument
is a focus on the regu-
lated industries that ig-
nores the fact that those
same regulations tend to
spur growth in other in-
dustries.
In this case, climate
policies are proving to
be a boon for jobs in re-
newable energy indus-
tries like wind and solar,
as well as in  efficiency
efforts  like weatheriza-
tion.
For example, the stim-
ulus bill enacted during
the Great Recession in-
cluded provisions de-
signed to bolster renew-
able energy.
That spending helped
spur the creation of  mil-
lions of new jobs. The Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics, a
federal agency, predicts
that the number of so-
lar panel installers will
increase by 105 percent
and the number of wind
turbine technician jobs
will rise by 96 percent
between 2016 and 2026,
making those the na-
tion’s two fastest-grow-
ing professions.
The power the U.S. gets
from wind, which  in-
creased more than 30-
fold  between 1999 and
2017,
now
accounts
for  6.3 percent of total
electricity.
One study conclud-
ed that retraining all coal
workers to become solar
panel installers is fea-
sible and in fact would
mean a raise for most of
these American work-
ers.  More than twice as
many Americans  work
in the solar energy in-
dustry than in the coal
industry.
The whole employment
picture
So what is the net effect
on jobs when some ener-
gy industries shrink and
others grow?
Resources for the Fu-
ture, a think tank that
researches economic, en-
vironmental, energy and
natural resource issues,
has developed complex
computational models of
the economy that clarify
the whole picture on the
connection between reg-
ulations and jobs.
The nonprofit, nonpar-
tisan group  assessed the
impact on unemploy-
ment, something that –
believe it or not – these
large-scale
economic
simulations
usually
don’t do.
The think tank pre-
dicts that a hypotheti-
cal US$40 per ton carbon
tax, which would trans-
late into an increase of
about 36 cents per gallon
of gasoline, would in-
crease the overall unem-
ployment rate by just 0.3
percentage points. The
effect is even smaller,
at just 0.05 percentage
points, if the government
were to uses the carbon
tax’s revenue to cut other
tax rates.
This effect is one-third
as large as previous es-
timates, such as a  2017
study from NERA Eco-
nomic Consulting, a glob-
al firm, that were not as
detailed in their unem-
ployment modeling.
Some studies have even
detected a net gain in jobs
from climate policies.
For example,  Univer-
sity of California, Berke-
ley  researchers found
that California’s efforts
to cut emissions have
bolstered the state’s
economy and created
more than 37,000 jobs.
And the  University of
Massachusetts,
Am-
herst  Political Economy
Research Institute has
determined that every $1
million shifted from fos-
sil fuel-generated power
to “green energy” creates
a net increase of 5 jobs.
Based on my review of
the research, I see little
evidence that policies to
reduce pollution from
fossil fuels have or will
likely result in wide-
spread job losses.
Different options
Different types of pol-
icies can have different
effects – and some can
minimize labor market
disruption more than
others.
Read more at
TheSkanner.com
Briefs cont’d from pg 7
Vancouver Juneteenth
Celebration Includes
Diversity Job Fair
Job fair booths still available
Vancouver NAACP is hosting the 7th
Annual Vancouver and Clark County
Juneteenth Celebration June 22. June-
teenth is the oldest known event cele-
brating the end of slavery on June 19,
1865, two and a half years after Abra-
ham Lincoln’s 1863 Emancipation Proc-
lamation. Juneteenth focuses on cele-
brating freedom, recognizing African
American achievements and encourag-
ing continuous self-development and
respect for all cultures.
The event takes place from 10 a.m. to 6
p.m. at Clark College, Hanna and Foster
Halls, 1933 Fort Vancouver Way, Van-
couver.
Events include an art gallery, writer’s
forum, special musical performance
by David Watson and Rebirthing the
Cool, kid’s corner, food and community
vendors, as well as a diversity job fair
from 10 a.m. to noon.
Employers interested in sponsoring
a booth at the job fair should contact
Carol Collier, NAACP Branch 1139 Trea-
surer and Job Fair Chairperson at (503)
880-5807 or contact NAACP Vancouver
at naacpvancouver@gmail.com.