Pushing for a greener jobs plan
Environmentalists are urging politicians to green up the wish lists of "shovel-ready" projects they're giving the incoming Obama administration for inclusion in its plan to jump-start the slumping economy by boosting public works spending.
As reported today in The Baltimore Sun, mayors across the land have toted up more than 15,000 projects, estimated to cost $96 billion, that they say could create more than 1 million jobs. Baltimore and Annapolis chipped in more than 50 projects in our area alone, costing a total of $380 million.
Environment Maryland, meanwhile, held a press conference in Hunt Valley yesterday to make its case that investing a big chunk of that stimulus money in renewable energy, energy efficiency and "cleaner" transportation would fight climate change while also providing work for more than 3 million people. Among the ideas touted by the group: install a two-megawatt solar farm at Baltimore's Back River sewage treatment plant, which could reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also saving the region's ratepayers on the costs of treating their waste.
In a similar vein, the Chesapeake Bay Commission, which represents legislators in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia, adopted a resolution last week urging Congress and the new administration to be sure the stimulus goodie bag directs some billions to clean up the beleagured bay. They urge spending on upgrading sewage plants, retrofitting stormwater controls, upgrading transit systems and rebuilding oyster reefs. The Blue Plains sewage treatment plant in Washington, D.C., the commission notes, needs something like $3.2 billion alone to improve its ability to keep harmful nutrients out of the Potomac River.
While greenies argue that economic recovery and environmental cleanup go hand in hand, some economists are warning that massive public works spending is not such a good idea. John Whitehead, an economist at Appalachian State University and author of the Environmental Economics blog, argues in Salon.com that mixing the two goals is misguided.
What do you think? Can we help the planet while also helping ourselves? Or should we take care of putting bread on the table first, and save for later figuring out how to bake it from organic grain?
I report on the environment and Chesapeake Bay. A native of West Virginia, I have focused mainly on Maryland's environment since moving here in 1983. Along the way, I've crewed aboard a skipjack in the bay, canoed under city streets up the Jones Fall from the Inner Harbor, and gone deep underground in a western Maryland coal mine. Recently, I have been covering the growth and development transforming the landscape. I love seafood, rambles in the country and good stories. I hope to share some here.
Comments
I agree that Green jobs are more likely to modify the economy - they hold the promise of multiplying the job growth by their new technology and efficiencies -
The 'shovel ready' infrastructure jobs are short term, project done, either jobs gone or needing refunding - only the new roads make the costs of business decline -
Posted by: Jack Lynch | January 14, 2009 4:08 PM
As a greenie, I think the two go hand in hand. With the new administration, our nation has the chance to shift our focus to energy and the environment in such a way that will create jobs and address issues that - if left on the back burner - will become a bigger and bigger problem in the future. We have to stay basic, folks, and understand the paramount role of natural resources (the bay, the air we breathe, etc) in our survival. If we don't, our children will be fighting over the bread - instead of working and earning it.
Posted by: Deborah | January 16, 2009 10:49 AM