Expanding North Carolina's green economy

There is much talk these days of the “Green Economy” and the “Green Jobs” it will produce, but what does that really mean for North Carolina?

This is the opening sentence of an experimental foray into the production of more formal policy recommendations, often referred to as "white papers." Any feedback from the readers here would be greatly appreciated. More below the fold.

For those who aren't aware, white papers are produced by think-tanks and advocacy groups and empaneled commissions in an effort to educate policy makers and shape the policy they make. Many pieces of legislation on both the state and federal level can trace their roots back to such creations, so if we want to see more progressive behavior in government, this is a route that should be explored deeply.

This particular paper in its current (and unfinished) form is not excessively long, but it's long enough that we've decided to break it up into (probably) three parts for more healthy blog consumption. Some questions or observations you have may be revealed in later installments, but please don't let that possibility keep you from expressing those thoughts. This is a work in progress and your help might be key in making it a better work.

Continuing:

While it is true there is a movement toward renewable energy generation and energy efficiency nationwide, and our state has the technological resources to capitalize on that movement, how many of our citizens will truly benefit from that process? How many jobs will be created? How can we expand the positive impact of this movement so that more businesses and citizens become involved, giving North Carolina a truly Green economy?

Just a note: These questions are not constructs to "set up" the rest of the paper; they've circled my consciousness for a few years now, chirping from time to time when this subject arises. A nut that needs to be cracked, as it were, before I could "envision" the goal as being obtainable.

At first glance, the green jobs sector would appear to encompass alternate energy generation research and applications, manufacturing of products that deal exclusively with green technologies, and energy efficiency services such as home weatherization, smart grid design, etc. While these businesses do present great opportunities for economic growth, and should be vigorously pursued and given priority within the targeted incentives program, the success of these businesses would still have a limited impact on the state’s overall economy as well as our double-digit unemployment situation.

As reported by the Fayetteville Observer recently, North Carolina is receiving a grant from the federal government via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that will provide training for 1,137 people for the green jobs industry. This is a great opportunity for those being trained, and will help our state attract new green companies, but with close to a half-million able-bodied North Carolinians out of work, the percent of our unemployed who can ride that green wave to prosperity is negligible.

You may find that information somewhat depressing, but it's important that people understand the folly of expecting benefits from a plan that lacks the structure to provide those benefits. You can fill in the blanks with faith, hope and prayer, but success is rarely achieved that way.

But I don't want to leave you with such a sour taste in your mouth; so, before I conclude this installment, I'll give you a taste of what to expect in the next:

The solution for this conundrum may involve something as simple as the definition of a word. We can allow a general consensus or narrow thinking to define what constitutes a “Green” business, or we can create a new definition of our very own. In doing so, we will also be creating a new definition of our state itself, which could attract more business and investment than we could possibly imagine.

There are currently state and federal grants, loans and tax incentives that are designed to encourage businesses and citizens to invest in small-scale renewable energy generation and energy efficiency steps, and many have taken advantage of these incentives.

But even with this assistance, such efforts are costly, especially for small businesses with limited resources. When they invest in making their business more green, are they not a green business? When a company installs a new heating and air conditioning system that uses less energy, or when another purchases newer, more fuel-efficient vehicles for their fleet, or when another installs low-flow toilets that conserve water, aren’t all these businesses “Green” businesses? The answer is: Yes, they are. By broadening the definition of what constitutes a green business, we are also populating the field of what can become a green economy.

More of this Blue Paper will be coming soon.

Share on Facebook

I think part of the answer will be in continually

honing evolving the definition of what "Green" really is. For example, when you deploy the cutting edge solar panel to the market, you are already working on the next design that is even more efficient.

The same can be true for building standards, continually working to reduce the carbon footprint will take many years until that footprint reaches -0-.

Also, I can see that employing 1137 people will have widespread consequences as the innovations take hold and are repeated all across the state.

Progressives are the true conservatives.

We definitely don't want

definitions to establish unbreakable paradigms. Momentum could be stifled if definitions favor the exclusive over the inclusive.

OK, maybe that wasn't the right word

honing should have been evolving. Does that work better?

Progressives are the true conservatives.

Evolving is good

And I really didn't mean to come off as critical of your comment, it was mostly just me typing out my thoughts.

Nice work

My own view is that an "all in" approach to the green economy is necessary. I'd like to see all incentives and all economic development recruiting aimed directly at green jobs, green businesses, green construction, green everything.

One happy benefit of that approach is that we wouldn't find our government spending their time and our money encouraging mercury polluters.

After 30+ years in marketing, I know this for sure: if you want to be known for something, stand for something.

You're my hero of the week!

That logo is fantastic, James. Love it!

My pleasure

I needed a break from a freelance writing assignment on advanced business analytics and foreign corrupt practices. Making up logos is WAY more fun.

PS You know this paper makes you a fellow, an expert, and a scholar, don't you?

Heh :)

I'm not above putting on airs, but I ain't wearin' no tweed jacket with the elbow patches, by God. Okay, I'll wear the jacket, but the Meerschaum pipe is out.

Wasted Energy

Your Blue Paper on Green Economy is such a fine idea! Thank you!

My two cents: The degree to which Zero Waste/Reduce, Reuse, Recycle can reduce energy requirements and add jobs, is being overlooked.

To counter efforts to site a mega landfill in the county, Scotland County Of Tomorrow hosted a meeting with Neil Seldman, President, Institute for Local Self-Reliance. He discussed establishing resource recovery systems, which bring valuable raw materials to our economy, which translates into new jobs and new small businesses.

For every 10,000 tons of garbage put in a landfill, 1 job is created. For everfy 10,000 tons of recyclables, from 5-10 jobs are created in processing, with many more related to value added and processing.

Looking forward to more Blue Paper on Green ...

Thanks, Zate

There is a huge amount of potential energy and raw materials being dumped every day, and those folks who develop methods for (re)using that stuff will be the billionaires of the future.

The UNC system should be dedicating an entire school for that research.