By Marita Noon

In Thursday night's Vice Presidential debate, the Administration's green agenda was, once again, part of the verbal sparring. The exchange ended with Congressman Ryan's unanswered question: "Where are the 5 million green jobs…?" Moderator Martha Raddatz cut him off mid-question, steering the conversation elsewhere: "I want to move on here to Medicare and entitlements. I think we've gone over this quite enough."

Ryan didn't finish his question. Vice President Biden wasn't pressed into an uncomfortable answer that would have wiped the smile off his face.

Had Ryan not been interrupted and been allowed to finished the question, he likely would have continued: "…Candidate Obama promised in 2008 when he pledged to jumpstart the economy with an influx of green jobs. Many times, he specifically stated: ‘I will invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy to create 5 million new energy jobs over the next decade-jobs that pay well; jobs that can't be outsourced; jobs building solar panels and wind turbines and a new electricity grid; jobs building the fuel-efficient cars of tomorrow, not in Japan, not in South Korea but right here in the U.S. of A. Jobs that will help us eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East in 10 years and help save the planet in the bargain. That's how America can lead again.' Where are those green jobs?"

Had Biden answered, he might have tried the same line Obama used in the 60 Minutes interview clip that didn't air on national television: "We have tens of thousands of jobs that have been created as a consequence of wind energy alone"-though that hardly adds up to 5 million. Try as he might, Biden couldn't have smiled his way through a recitation of green jobs created through the proposed $15 billion a year. It is not a happy story. In fact, through the 2009 stimulus, more than $15 billion a year was allocated for green energy projects-which in his four-year term would have added up to $60 billion. Instead, while the numbers quoted vary, $80-90 billion has been made available for green energy projects.

With the assistance of researcher Christine Lakatos, I have been chronicling Obama's stimulus-funded green energy failures. First we looked at the companies that have gone bankrupt, and then those that are heading that way-or, at least, have financial issues. Within those reports, we frequently addressed specific green jobs failures. For example, regarding Fisker, the electric car made in Finland, we say:
"ABC reported: ‘Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department's $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright, new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs.' Those jobs didn't materialize-at least not in America. … Two years after the loan was awarded, the Washington Post stated that Fisker ‘has missed early manufacturing goals and has gradually pushed back plans for U.S. production and the creation of thousands of jobs'… Now, in 2012, Fisker Automotive is laying off staff in order to qualify for more government loans. So, President Obama's ‘green' energy stimulus was supposed to create jobs; now it's destroying jobs so that companies can get more stimulus?"

About now-bankrupt, and under-investigation for fraud, Abound Solar, we wrote:
"President Obama, in July 2010, praised Abound Solar, which was to make advanced solar panels … He believed these plants would be huge job creators: ‘2000 construction jobs and 1500 permanent jobs.' In December 2011, CEO Craig Witsoe called Abound Solar the "anti-Solyndra" saying that his company is "doing well and growing." However, just months after that optimistic report, Abound Solar filed bankruptcy…"

Due to the various loans, grants, and subsidies, it would take an investigative team made up of dozens of people to ferret out each and every true green-energy job that was created, absent that, we are hitting the high points in attempt to answer Ryan's question: "Where are the 5 million green jobs?"

Short answer, even optimistically-and perhaps deceptively, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) news release, only 3.1 million green jobs were created. To reach this number, BLS counts jobs that "were associated with the production of green goods and services," specifically those which "are found in businesses that produce goods and provide services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources." It is important to note that most of these 3.1 million jobs are primarily pre-existing jobs that have been reclassified as "green." Once those existing jobs were shifted into the green column, through three-quarters of 2011 only 9,245 new "green" jobs were generated when the White House touts generating over 200,000 new jobs by 2010.

The House Oversight Committee wondered, just what are those jobs that are "associated with the production of green goods and services?"

On June 6, 2012, at a House Oversight hearing Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) questioned BLS Director John Galvin on his agency's green jobs numbers. Through Galvin's reluctant responses (he didn't want to be there), we learned that the Obama administration's labor department counts oil lobbyists, bus drivers, garbage men, etc., as green jobs-shameful, embarrassing, deceptive. According to how BLS rates green jobs, I have a green job. I qualify under several headings. After all, I do education and public awareness on environmental issues. Next time I am at a social event, where I am asked the inescapable: "What do you do?" I'll respond: "I have a green job."

Complete details can be found in a report on the "Green Job Myth" from the Institute for Energy Research (IER). It states: "the green-job definition is extremely broad and includes both direct and indirect jobs." Each of the following would qualify:
• A person who sweeps the floor in a solar-panel manufacturing facility
• A driver of a hybrid bus
• A school bus driver
• An employee who fills the bus with fuel
• An employee involved in waste collection or water and sewer operations
• A clerk at a bicycle repair shop
• A manufacturer of rail cars
• An oil lobbyist whose company is engaged in environmental issues
• An employee of an environment or science museum.

Now that we know what the BLS constitutes as a green job-even recycled ones; those that already existed-we'll look at the billions of taxpayer money spent on green jobs. We'll focus specifically on just two programs: the Loan Guarantee Program and the Renewable Energy Grant Program.

On June 19, 2012, Veronique de Rugy, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, testified at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearings on the Loan Guarantee program. Within her thorough assessment of the program, she states: "since 2009, Department of Energy has guaranteed $34.7 billion in loans, 46 percent through the 1705 loan program, 30 percent through the 1703 program, and 14 percent through the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program." And, that "some 2,378 permanent jobs were claimed to be created under the program. This works out to a potential cost per job of $6.7 million."

The 1603 Grant Program was implemented as part of the Obama stimulus, and is administered by the Treasury Department, with the goal of reimbursing eligible applicants for a portion of the costs of installing specified energy property used in a trade or business or for the production of income. Basically, 1603 gives billions in favored-businesses, tax-free cash gifts that do not have to be paid back.

The June 19, 2012 Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing on "The Federal Green Jobs Agenda," highlighted the "gimmick" accounting method used by the BLS. Testimony revealed that a multi-billion dollar stimulus program, the section 1603 grants for renewable energy, does not even include job creation among its primary objectives-which obviously contradicts the purpose of the 2009 trillion-dollar Obama stimulus package.

Congressional Research Services expert, Dr. Molly Sherlock, deflected direct questions regarding the total jobs created by the 1603 program. "If you're looking at the direct jobs, this one estimate has direct jobs created at 3,666 in the construction phase, and direct jobs created at 355. Direct jobs would just be the construction jobs and the ongoing operations and maintenance jobs. But if you wanted to look at the supporting jobs in other industries then you'd want to look at the other figures."

According to the Washington Free Beacon, Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO) pressed on: "I just want to know how many jobs were created"

Sherlock admitted: 355 jobs created a year, for $10 billion-which comes out to about $28 million per job.

These two programs have created a combined total of 2733 jobs (a recent Bloomberg Business Week tally of all green jobs through any program cites a total of 28,854 jobs) and are spending an approximate average of $9.1 million per job. (At this rate, to create the 5 million promised jobs, we'd have to spend $45 trillion-not the $150 billion proposed.) I'll quote Obama Campaign Official Stephanie Cutter here: "It's really impossible to do the math."

But, at least, as the 2008 campaign promise stated, these are "jobs that can't be outsourced," right? Wrong.

There are plenty of green jobs going overseas and taking our money with them. According to CNS News, "The Obama administration allowed millions of dollars in federal stimulus funds to go to foreign companies, despite recent statements by President Barack Obama that he opposes ‘shipping jobs overseas.'"

Billions from the 1603 Grant Program went to foreign wind turbine manufacturers-of the 8,317 turbines installed at major wind projects that received 1603 awards, 4,513 turbines (54.3%) came from foreign manufacturers.

Fisker Automotive received a $529 million ATVM loan that went in part to build their expensive Fisker Karma car in Finland, and according to ABC News, "Fisker may never build electric cars in the US." Meanwhile, First Solar received over $3 billion from the DOE's Loan Guarantee Program. During the May 16, 2012 House Oversight Committee hearing, Issa surmised that First Solar is "not an American company." It turns out that the numbers don't lie because CEO Mike Ahearn admitted: "in sheer numbers, most of our fulltime [employees] are outside the US."

Just a few examples of helping our economy by creating green American jobs. So much for "made in the USA."

Before his departure, Obama's routed green jobs czar, Van Jones, approved a $5 billion home weatherization program that supposedly outfitted homes (mainly for the economically disadvantaged) with the latest green technology in order to reduce energy prices. This was another part of the 2009-stimulus, which in February 2009, Obama declared: "We're going to weatherize homes, that immediately puts people back to work and we're going to train people who are out of work, including young people, to do the weatherization." Three years into the program, all we got was excessive waste, fraud and abuse, plus more cronyism and corruption-no "Americans back to work." In fact, "evidence gathered by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform suggests that the Department of Energy's (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program (Weatherization Program) is a stunning example of a management failure which has wasted billions of dollars, done little to achieve energy savings, and may have put people's lives and homes at risk. While the program may have been a "failure" in terms of the stated goal, Obama's pals back in Chicago came out winners

But there are other examples of total inefficiency on the dollars/jobs ratio-interestingly these can be found in another program designed to improve energy efficiency: Retrofit Ramp Up. This program, from the DOE, used "stimulus dollars to have homes insulated and made more energy efficient." Perhaps Biden remembers inviting Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn to the White House as a part of the Retrofit Ramp Up program. Seattle was one of 25 communities to receive a $20 million dollar slice of the $452 million program.

According to a report in The Blaze, the retrofit program used "Stimulus dollars to have houses insulated and made more energy efficient. The plan was to funnel cash into local economies with the intent to create good-paying green jobs while simultaneously reducing energy consumption. … Seattle's $20 million dollar allocation was projected to create some 2000 "green jobs" and retrofit at least 2000 homes." However according to Seattle's KOMO TV, Seattle's green jobs program is a bust. One year after McGinn joined Biden at the White House, KOMO reports: "Seattle's numbers are lackluster. As of last week, only three homes had been retrofitted and just 14 new jobs have emerged from the program. Many of the jobs are administrative, and not the entry-level pathways once dreamed of for low-income workers. Some people wonder if the original goals are now achievable."

You might be surprised to know that $500,000 of the taxpayer-funded stimulus spending went to a PR firm to "run a barrage of ads on White-House friendly cable programs." The ads promoted the green jobs training program. The cable shows? "According to government records, the Labor Department paid the money in late 2009 to a company that negotiated a media buy on MSNBC's ‘Countdown with Keith Olbermann' and ‘The Rachel Maddow Show.' The ad was set to run more than 100 times –– 14 times a week for two months," yet "the official online entry on the contract listed zero jobs created as a result of the payment."

There are other stories, such as the one reported by USA Today, in which, according to a government report, $500 million in green job training grants reached just 10% of its job-placement goal. Assistant Secretary of Labor Jane Oates defends the initiative, citing that "it was never designed to provide immediate results." One grant recipient, Jeffry Lewis of Pathstone Corp., a Rochester, N.Y. non-profit that spent $2.3 million of its $8 million grant and had trained only 25 people, "conceded that job placements have been much slower than anyone would have liked."

Then, there is the story from Fox News on a whistleblower, who says his college won millions in federal grants to train workers for green jobs that didn't exist.

Seattle's KOMO may have most aptly summed up the entire 2008 green-jobs campaign promise: "Some people wonder if the original goals are now achievable."

I don't think so.

There is one other part of the 2008 campaign promise that I must address. Obama talked about these jobs of the future: "jobs building solar panels and wind turbines and a new electricity grid … Jobs that will help us eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East." I have to point out that jobs "building solar panels and wind turbines and a new electricity grid" do nothing, absolutely nothing, to "help us eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East." Wind and solar produce electricity-with which Middle Eastern oil has virtually no connection (unless you tie in the failed electric car efforts). We have enough coal, natural gas, and uranium within our borders to provide for our electrical needs for centuries to come. Connecting electricity generation and Middle Eastern oil is at best a marketing campaign, at worst: a scare tactic. To "help eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East," we need to develop our abundant domestic oil resources, not subsidize wind and solar.

While millions of Americans were preparing to watch the debate, I was part of a group gathered in a restaurant to watch the debate between New Mexico's senatorial candidates: Republican Heather Wilson (my former Congressman) and Democrat Martin Heinrich (my current Congressman). Toward the end of our local debate, Heinrich accused Republicans of turning "their back on the jobs of the future." With the history of the "jobs of the future," as Obama called them in the 60 Minutes clip, the Republicans have been wise to turn their backs and run far, far away.

Where are the 5 million jobs Obama promised? I doubt that Biden's smiling now.


The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens' Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations' combined efforts serve as America's voice for energy.