Comments on: It Is About the Jobs http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2010/02/04/it%e2%80%99s-about-the-jobs/ Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:37:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Report looks at economic impacts of RES on North Carolina « SAFER renewSOUTH http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2010/02/04/it%e2%80%99s-about-the-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-361 Report looks at economic impacts of RES on North Carolina « SAFER renewSOUTH Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:43:51 +0000 http://blog.cleanenergy.org/?p=4770#comment-361 [...] the full report from the Center here and further analysis from Southern Alliance for Clean Energy here. February 9th, 2010 | Category: Agriculture, Biomass, Biopower, Data, Electricity, North [...] [...] the full report from the Center here and further analysis from Southern Alliance for Clean Energy here. February 9th, 2010 | Category: Agriculture, Biomass, Biopower, Data, Electricity, North [...]

]]> By: Nelson Paul http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2010/02/04/it%e2%80%99s-about-the-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-354 Nelson Paul Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:17:37 +0000 http://blog.cleanenergy.org/?p=4770#comment-354 I continue to be impressed with the disconnect these articles seem to have with reality. You can't adopt regulations on top of existing regulations and then expect the creative thinking necessary to solve our energy problems to evolve naturally. Similarly, you can't regulate solutions into existence when those "solutions" soon come into conflict with existing regulations. You end up with a colossal logjam whereby ideas cannot be brought to market. What is being proposed here is government mandates that cannot be met in the current regulatory environment. These mandates will not result in jobs; they will jam up the system and waste a lot of money. If mandates are enacted, there must also be a corresponding loosing of regulations in order for the mandates to be met. Why does the environmental community minimize the negative effect of regulations, thinking instead that they somehow "create" something useful? Regulations are intended to hinder and stop. You have to remove some of the "do nots" before you can "do". Why is this so difficult to understand? For example, you cannot stop coal and simultaneously stop wind at the same time. But that is exactly what we are doing and, predictably, the results are going to be disastrous! Jobs, and the businesses that produce them, evolve organically. They are like the fruits of a plant. But business needs certain things before it will grow. One of them is less government. Get government out of the way and business will produce the precious fruit of jobs. I continue to be impressed with the disconnect these articles seem to have with reality. You can’t adopt regulations on top of existing regulations and then expect the creative thinking necessary to solve our energy problems to evolve naturally. Similarly, you can’t regulate solutions into existence when those “solutions” soon come into conflict with existing regulations. You end up with a colossal logjam whereby ideas cannot be brought to market.

What is being proposed here is government mandates that cannot be met in the current regulatory environment. These mandates will not result in jobs; they will jam up the system and waste a lot of money. If mandates are enacted, there must also be a corresponding loosing of regulations in order for the mandates to be met.

Why does the environmental community minimize the negative effect of regulations, thinking instead that they somehow “create” something useful? Regulations are intended to hinder and stop. You have to remove some of the “do nots” before you can “do”.

Why is this so difficult to understand? For example, you cannot stop coal and simultaneously stop wind at the same time. But that is exactly what we are doing and, predictably, the results are going to be disastrous!

Jobs, and the businesses that produce them, evolve organically. They are like the fruits of a plant. But business needs certain things before it will grow. One of them is less government. Get government out of the way and business will produce the precious fruit of jobs.

]]> By: John Bonitz http://blog.cleanenergy.org/2010/02/04/it%e2%80%99s-about-the-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-352 John Bonitz Sat, 06 Feb 2010 02:01:12 +0000 http://blog.cleanenergy.org/?p=4770#comment-352 John Downey of the Charlotte Business Journal commented on the new Navigant study here: <a href="http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/power_city/2010/02/new_study_projects_carolinas_green_jobs.html?ana=e_du_pub" rel="nofollow">http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/power_city/2010/02/new_study_projects_carolinas_green_jobs.html?ana=e_du_pub</a> John Downey of the Charlotte Business Journal commented on the new Navigant study here: http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/power_city/2010/02/new_study_projects_carolinas_green_jobs.html?ana=e_du_pub

]]>