Renewable Energy Powers Jobs For Almost 10 Million People (bloomberg.com)

According to the International Renewable Energy Agency's (IRENA) annual report, the renewable energy industry employed 9.8 million people last year, which is up 1.1 percent from 2015. The strongest growth was seen in the solar photovoltaic category with 3.09 million jobs. Bloomberg reports: Here are some of the highlights from the report: Global renewables employment has climbed every year since 2012, with solar photovoltaic becoming the largest segment by total jobs in 2016. Solar photovoltaic employed 3.09 million people, followed by liquid biofuels at 1.7 million. The wind industry had 1.2 million employees, a 7 percent increase from 2015. Employment in renewables, excluding large hydro power, increased 2.8 percent last year to 8.3 million people, with China, Brazil, the U.S., India, Japan and Germany the leading job markets. Asian countries accounted for 62 percent of total jobs in 2016 compared with 50 percent in 2013. Renewables jobs could total 24 million in 2030, as more countries take steps to combat climate change, IRENA said.

Comments

Re:Which comes at the cost of environmentalism.

[Maxo-Texas]

Not really... coal is just more expensive than natural gas.

In at least a half dozen places, coal seam fires have rendered hundreds of square miles uninhabitable. We freak out when nuclear power renders hundreds of square miles uninhabitable.

The trump administration is directly assaulting the Appalachian regions. Cutting jobs programs and their safety net. The proposed republican budget cuts the benefits, food subsidies, and state to state tax transfers which have previously benefited Appalachian regions even further AND gives the money to wealthy people (almost all to the top 0.1%- not even to the top 1%) .

Re:Only w/ fetters on environmentalist-unblessed j

[Cipheron]

Fetters? Coal + Oil get massive tax subsidies, as well coal not having to pay market rates for water (coal power uses a ton of water, they're giant steam engines basically).

Re:Which comes at the cost of environmentalism.

[jblues]

Agree. That's why sustainable development goals aim to factor in externalities in the cost of goods.

In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit. Economists often urge governments to adopt policies that "internalize" an externality, so that costs and benefits will affect mainly parties who choose to incur them. . .Voluntary exchange is considered mutually beneficial to both parties involved, because buyers or sellers would not trade if either thought it detrimental to themselves. However, a transaction can cause additional effects on third parties. From the perspective of those affected, these effects may be negative (pollution from a factory), or positive (honey bees kept for honey that also pollinate neighboring crops). Neoclassical welfare economics asserts that, under plausible conditions, the existence of externalities will result in outcomes that are not socially optimal. Those who suffer from external costs do so involuntarily, whereas those who enjoy external benefits do so at no cost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...