Advanced Search
September 27, 2021
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) held a briefing about the current state of the climate workforce and the job creation potential of key climate policies.
Decarbonization provides an opportunity for job growth in multiple sectors, including energy efficiency, renewable energy, transmission and storage, and clean transportation. As businesses and government agencies seek to understand and mitigate their climate risks, climate adaptation and resilience are likewise rapidly emerging as attractive career options. EESI’s recent Climate Jobs fact sheet examines 2020 climate employment and provides further context for the briefing.
Climate policies currently being considered in Congress--including a clean energy standard, tax policies for renewable energy, and the Civilian Climate Corps--have potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, build resilience to a changing climate, strengthen environmental justice, and contribute to job creation.
Panelists discussed the state-of-play for climate jobs and explored the benefits that could come with well-designed and durable climate policies.
Hannah Traverse, Communications Manager, The Corps Network
Danielle Owen, Director of Government Relations, The Corps Network
For more information about the history, benefits, and current work around conservation corps, check out EESI’s Issue Brief: Conservation Corps: Pairing Climate Action with Economic Opportunity.
Kate LaTour, Director of Government Relations, National Cooperative Business Association CLUSA International (NCBA-CLUSA)
For more information about the Rural Energy Savings Program and on-bill financing, check out EESI’s Access Clean Energy Savings Program.
Uday Varadarajan, Principal, Carbon-Free Electricity, RMI
Yvonne McIntyre, Director of Federal Electricity and Utility Policy, Natural Resources Defense Council
Q&A Session
Q: Many of the policies you have mentioned already exist in some form: there are already corps across the country improving our environment, clean energy tax credits have helped accelerate clean energy adoption, and many states have their own version of a clean electricity standard. How could additional federal investments, such as those proposed in the Reconciliation Bill, build on existing efforts at the state and local level?
Owen: Additional funding at the state and local level could help with capacity building. From a corps perspective, it could help build more career pathways for corps members and allow them to engage more youth in the corps movement.
LaTour: I think capacity building will be hugely important. I also think that these investments could build on existing efforts to make these programs more accessible. The Build Back Better Act could help the lowest tier of housing stock get up to the grade it needs to be eligible for energy efficiency upgrades.
Varadarajan: I think that state and local officials, particularly regulators and those who oversee local utilities, are the ones who face the unenviable task of finding how to transition our economy in a way that still keeps rates affordable. These tax incentives will be critical tools for these people so they can make the transition happen in a way that will bring the benefits of clean energy, especially new jobs, to their communities.
McIntyre: There are a number of states that have Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) or Clean Energy Standard (CES) type policies or programs in place, but none of them have been taking us out to the 2030 or 2035 timelines. These programs are also not across the entire country—not every state has an RPS and a CES. The CEPP would be a national program that would drive every state to move to clean electricity and allow for a faster transition. I worked in the power sector for 30 years before moving to NRDC, and I am heartened by the fact that many utilities are making substantial commitments. Still, the fact is that you can make these commitments and not move forward to actually achieve these goals. Providing a financial incentive will give the utilities money to help with the transition, which will allow them to make a stronger argument to their public service commissions.
Q: How could investment into these programs contribute to improve energy affordability or reach other environmental justice goals?
Owen: One of our goals with the Civilian Climate Corps is to help frontline and environmental justice communities. We would like to see these communities be a large percentage of the ones getting the project work and funding.
Traverse: The main way to promote environmental justice is to create employment opportunities and empower communities to address past climate injustices. There is so much impact that can happen when you are empowering young adults with the knowledge and the skills they need, as well as the recognition that they can make a difference in their communities. There are already a lot of corps doing this work in communities right now, training young people to weatherize homes and make our housing stock more sustainable.
LaTour: In addition to the provisions from the Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP), I also think a provision that will help to move the needle is the Rural Partnership program. The Rural Partnership program will help local governments partner with nonprofits, for-profits, and other entities to build capacity and carry out projects. There is flexible funding proposed in the Build Back Better Act that would allow local, state, and regional government or quasi-government entities to take a more holistic approach, whether that is advancing energy affordability specifically through RESP or looking at housing or small business more broadly.
Varadarajan: I think the connection is most clear with the tax incentives and the Clean Energy Performance Program (CEPP). These programs are fundamentally about making sure that we are not financing global climate action on the backs of those who cannot afford to do it. They are designed so that the financing is coming from those who can afford it so that those who cannot afford it can have the jobs and lower energy costs that will allow them to grow their local economies. You could ask why aren’t you doing this with carbon taxes? By focusing on clean energy and not only on carbon, we can acknowledge the historical injustices associated with environmental impacts that are not related to carbon. This would provide financing in communities that might not be relevant from a carbon perspective but could benefit from clean energy rather than just carbon emission reductions alone.
McIntyre: CEPP is not an emission reduction program, but obviously you would get substantial emission reductions because as you increase your clean electricity resource deployment, you are pushing out fossil fuel plants. There was a study done by NRDC and the Environmental Defense Fund that showed that reaching 80 percent clean energy by 2030 will lead to an over 80 percent reduction in carbon emissions, 93 percent reduction in SO2 emissions, and 76 percent reduction in NOx emissions from 2005 levels. The Clean Energy Futures study found that achieving 100 percent clean energy by 2040 would lead to $1.8 trillion in climate and public health benefits. We are going beyond talking about jobs and economic impacts, we are also talking about public health and a cleaner environment in general.
Q: The four things we have talked about today might not come together naturally. We would love to hear more about how these four separate policies could work together or how they could impact emission reductions or climate resilience across multiple sectors.
McIntyre: The power sector is the key to driving emission reductions economy-wide. For example, policies that promote electric vehicles will not be clean if the vehicles are charged with energy generated using fossil fuels. The rural electric programs can work in tandem with CEPP tax credits. Rural electric cooperatives are primarily powered by fossil fuels, so providing funding to help them transition is very important. There are a lot of components throughout the reconciliation package, which all work in tandem.
Varadarajan: The CEPP does not provide additional benefits until the utility has done basic investment in clean energy, which provides that extra incentive for utilities to go above and beyond the existing incentives. The existing tax incentives may not be enough to drive change as quickly as we need to, or make sure that a transition to clean energy does not raise rates for customers. We also have a workforce which does not just need money, but also support and training, and this is where the Civilian Climate Corps is complementary. Finally, this is not just about utilities making investments alone: there is an opportunity to improve the building stock, for example for households and businesses in rural areas, so they can be a part of the solution.
LaTour: We need to make sure tax credits are reaching the right entity. Electric co-ops are nonprofits, so tax benefits would not reach them like a for-profit company. The Corps Network talked about improving workforce development for licensing and skill building. Ideally, this could help form worker co-ops, allowing them to be the workforce that partners with the implementers of the Rural Energy Savings Program.
Traverse: As we transition to a more sustainable energy system, there is a lot of opportunity to do workforce training, which is something that corps are already doing. Some of our corps are doing pre-apprenticeships and working with different industry partners.
Owen: The Civilian Climate Corps has the potential to make that workforce look like the face of our country today. It is a wonderful opportunity for all of us.
Briefing highlights compiled by Isabella Eclipse and Roshni Vora