photo: Todd Woody
Here’s a talking point in the green jobs debate: The wind industry now employs more people than coal mining in the United States.
Wind industry jobs jumped to 85,000 in 2008, a 70% increase from the previous year, according to a report released Tuesday from the American Wind Energy Association. In contrast, the coal industry mining employs about 81,000 workers. (Those figures are from a 2007 U.S. Department of Energy report but coal employment has remained steady in recent years though it’s down by nearly 50% since 1986.) Wind industry employment includes 13,000 manufacturing jobs concentrated in regions of the country hard hit by the deindustrialization of the past two decades.
The big spike in wind jobs was a result of a record-setting 50% increase in installed wind capacity, with 8,358 megawatts coming online in 2008 (enough to power some 2 million homes). That’s a third of the nation’s total 25,170 megawatts of wind power generation. Wind farms generating more than 4,000 megawatts of electricity were completed in the last three months of 2008 alone.
Another sign that wind power is no longer a niche green energy play: Wind accounted for 42% of all new electricity generation installed last year in the U.S. Power, literally, is shifting from the east to west, to the wind belt of the Midwest, west Texas and the West Coast. Texas continues to lead the country, with 7,116 megawatts of wind capacity but Iowa in 2008 overtook California for the No. 2 spot, with 2,790 megawatts of wind generation. Other new wind powers include Oregon, Minnesota, Colorado and Washington state.
But last year’s record is unlikely to be repeated in 2009 as the global credit crisis delays or scuttles new projects because developers are unable to secure financing for wind farms. Layoffs have already hit turbine makers like Clipper Windpower and Gamesa as well as companies that produce turbine towers, blades and other components.
The Obama administration’s $825 billion stimulus package includes a three-year extension of a key production tax credit that has spurred the wind industry’s expansion. But given the dearth of investors with tax liabilities willing to invest in wind projects in exchange for the credits, the stimulus is unlikely to be stimulating to the industry unless the tax credit is made refundable to developers.
The U.S. wind industry is dominated by European wind developers and turbine makers – General Electric (GE) and Clipper are the only two domestic turbine manufacturers – and those companies’ fortunes rise and fall with the global economy. As the U.S. market has boomed, European companies have been moving production close to their customers – the percentage of domestically manufactured wind turbine components rose from 30% to 50% between 2005 and 2008, according to the American Wind Energy Association.
Green Wombat 
this is a Great Story Todd, LOL!!! If this is not a clear gauge of where we are going, I don’t know what is.
On the other hand of course, I am disapointed that the US did not sign on with the newly-formed International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) this week, a missed opportunity that Madame Secretary should rectify soon.
Most energy comes from coal. Wind accounts for only a few percent of total energy supply (if that). The wind employment figures include all manufacturing and associated jobs. The coal figures include only workers involved in the extraction of coal. To get the true ratio we can either only include wind field technicians (several hundred, maybe?) or we can include all steps of the coal production process and multiply the coal figures appropriately.
Anything posted by the Green Wombat is suspect. It is a site for all those that are beyond reason. Sure we need better sources of energy that don’t pollute – thats not debatable. But when you have 45-50% of your electrical needs satisfied by coal, year in and year out, how can this site and its authors (Mr Todd Woody) blithely ignore the reality that coal is going to be around for a long time. It will take DECADES to replace coal with wind and/or solar. The best that wind and solar can do is a short-term bandaid to match the increase in electricity consumption that happens in this country every year.
If Mr Woody would get off his pulpit and deliver a reasoned argument (one based on fact, one that does not ignore the current reality), he might actually help the situation.
I agree with Adam. Include the jobs for everyone building all the equipment used at coal mines and the numbers would be apples to apples. Not including the employees of companies like Caterpillar that create the heavy equipment used at mines but including the employees of companies that build wind generators is unfair. Employees of coal-fired power plants should also be included, as should employees of all companies that make equipment for coal-fired plants, plus all construction workers that build coal-fired plants. If these numbers were included you would have the total employment it takes to produce all the coal energy in America versus the total employment it takes to produce all the wind energy in America. I would bet with these true numbers coal would dwarf the wind power industry.
Not that I am against wind; just the opposite I am for it. But I think this article is really inaccurate and overstates wind power in America.
For: “Bob in Vally Forge”… “If Mr Woody would get off his pulpit and deliver a reasoned argument (one based on fact, one that does not ignore the current reality)”…
Dear Bob…Perhaps you should go back to a community college and re-learn (assuming you did in the first place) the difference between “fact” and “the current reality”… I’m pretty sure that “facts” are different from whatever is assumed or presumed is the “current reality”. It would appear based on your inability to discriminate between the terms… that you failed to take or perhaps failed your courses in basic philosophy, argumentation & debate, and scientific presumptions.
The tax credits need to be refundable as the the current House bill has proposed. There are very few tax equity investors to support wind/solar development. The amount of business created by making this adjustment would offset most of the cost to the government (See GE study), create jobs immediately, clean the environment and make the U.S. more Energy Independent. Or we can but Citigroup a jet and ensure that Goldman Sachs employees’ bonuses don’t go down too much.
Brilliant article. Too often the facts and figures are lost in the pursuit of liberal change. This is why I’m excited to participate in thePower Shift 09 conference. Over 10,000 people are gathering in DC to learn, train, network, and lobby for a clean just energy future in America. This is a historic and much needed paradigm shift in the way government deals with both climate issues and the ever increasing powerful young voter block.
>>42% of all new electricity generation
That’s actually a huge amount of energy. I wasn’t aware the figures reached that high
—-
Ecosearch: http://www.blackoogle.us
You would have to be on crack to believe this misleading and delusional bullshit.
Wind generates about less then 3% of the energy consumption in the United States. But this article (and the ill-informed author) would have you to believe that it employs more people then coal.
Maybe it does, but at only 3% (and less) of U.S. energy consumption, what’s the friggin point in stating this as if it were some milestone?
More stupidity in the article (feeding in the delusions of mindless sheep): “Wind accounted for 42% of all new electricity generation installed last year in the U.S.”
All this statement means is there is a switch over to wind power .vs. other forms of energy generation. BFD, also another totally meaningless “statistic” which suggest a lot but means absolutely nothing at all.
Wind is STILL (after all these years) producing less then 3% (far less) of total demand!!
From http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html
“Coal-fired plants contributed 48.2 percent of the Nation’s electric power, year-to-date. Nuclear plants contributed 19.3 percent, while 21.6 percent was generated at natural gas-fired plants. Of the 1.1 percent generated by petroleum-fired plants, petroleum liquids represented 0.8 percent, with the remainder from petroleum coke. Conventional hydroelectric power provided 6.5 percent of the total, while other renewables (primarily biomass, but also geothermal, solar, and wind) and other miscellaneous energy sources [combined] generated the remaining 3.4 percent of electric power”
From http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/year_end_wrap_up_22dec08.html – 56k –
the wind industry (2008) employees “60,000 employees and counting”
So, 60,000 people combine to produce/install/maintain < 1% of US electrical power. At that ratio, to produce the power currently derived from coal (admittedly not a good thing) would require 60,000 x 50 or 3-plus million ‘jobs’, which is in the range of 5 to 7% of the entire US labor force (roughly). Even the entire automobile industry in its hey-day couldn’t claim that stupidity.
Maybe fast-food, or military industrial complex or the (so-called) combined ‘health care’ industries can (at one time) claim this, but I rather doubt that too. Wonder (not really) if anyone has done a EROEI calculation that factors in mining, smelting, refining, manufacturing, construction, maintenance (huge issue) and end of duty-cycle demolition costs for wind turdines (sic). I rather doubt that too. If they did (honestly) it would come back with a really big number albeit with a negatives ign preceding it.
In fact, what an obscene waste of metals and labor NTM hot air – all for human ‘comfort’ (and early extinction).
300 million Americants
2.2 kids per household (avg)
so, less than 140 million ‘adults’ or 80 million households (approx)
including us us old-farts, disabled, insane, welfare, drug dealers, military, prisoners (% LEO industry) etc – NTM unemployed by choice and/or ‘homemakers’ – plus (minus) part-timers, seasonal work, students, self-employed farmers/ranchers, etc
Also not all two parent households have (or did have) 2 incomes/jobs.
US labor stats -(12/2008) http://www.economagic.com/blsemp.htm
total non-farm jobs 135.489,000 (includes military, part time, government etc) total private sector jobs 112,975,000 coal mining 86,300 (do you see a problem with the article’s claim?) mining support 340,700 automobile manufacture, incl parts 1,754,700 auto dealers/repair 1,105.600.
wow, Wind kicking polluting coal butt
its about time we go clean as a nation
There are 81000 coal miners. That doesn’t include the people that sell the coal, up to the people employed at the plants that use coal which produce 57% of the electricity in this country. So wind still has a way to go before it surpasses those employed by coal. Nice job comparing apples to oranges tho.
What ISN’T amazing about the fact that wind now employs more people than coal?? If the source of only 3% of our electricity (wind) employs more people than a source of 48% of our electricity (coal), then how is that not amazing?
And why, when we’re losing 50,000+ jobs per month (65,000 in December alone), would we not be pushing for more wind development?? Home-grown manufacturing and construction, not to mention reduced medical bills by reducing our use of coal for electricity.
……Duh!
I just read a wonderful new book called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now by author Jeff Wilson. It is without a doubt the best book out there. We seriously need to get on with utilizing alternative energy. The high cost of oil this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. The trickle down effects will be felt for years to come. The cost of fuel affects the price of every consumer product. Oil is finite it will run out one day in the not too distant future. We are using oil globally at the rate of 2 X faster than new oil is being discovered. We have so much available to us in the way of natural energy, wind , solar, wave plus the modern technologies of hybrid etc. What America seems to lack is a plan. This book even outlines a plan, a legislative agenda. It is fascinating and brings the act of weaning America off oil into perspective.
http://www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com
Thank you JustMe Amerika
Thats great, the coal industry needs to be stripped!
http://www.internet-privacy.us.tc
WHAT ABOUT CLEAN COAL–HUH?????
“Now” employs? Most of the jobs were temporary: clearing and excavating sites and building access roads.
No such thing as clean coal. Clean coal is a myth. Do your research.
Those big fans kill birds, man !
The only way you can kill a bird
with coal is to hit them with
a chunk.
“The only way you can kill a bird
with coal is to hit them with
a chunk.”
Or cut down all the trees where they live to mine the coal. Or build coal roads through their habitat. Or put NOX, SO2, Mercury, arsenic, etc. etc. out through the smokestacks from burning the coal. Or just let global warming continue unchecked and keep burning that coal… that will kill all the birds. 🙂
Really, really bad math. I won’t restate what the other commentors have included other than to agree with how ridiculous this article is. Facts will win / convince people that we should shift to alternative energy, not this insane marketing spin.
You people can complain all you want about the numbers and statistics in this article, but the bottom line is that a shift to renewable energy sources must take place. Any increase in wind power is good news.
The wind industry is growing tremendously. If you drive on I-80 through Iowa the number of turbines that have popped up in just the last year is incredible.
The U.S. DOE examined the issues, costs, and potential outcomes associated with expanding wind energy production to the point that it would provide 20% of U.S. electricity, or 1.16 billion Mwh, by 2030. They concluded that “while ambitious could be feasible if the significant challenges identified in this report are overcome.” http://newsburglar.com/2008/07/06/the-economics-of-wind-power-in-the-united-states-300-gw-by-2030/
Actually, Clipper Windpower is a British company headquartered in London and is listed on the London Stock Exchange. It’s formation was to primarily sell turbines in the US. And I believe BP has big bucks in it.
Sadly there is only ONE true US wind turbine manufacturer, GE. And in true GE fashion, they bought it from someone else instead of developing turbines on their own. GE WInd used to be Enron’s.
Clipper is a U.S. company headquartered in Carpinteria, Calif. It is listed on the London AIM.
It truly is hard to tell the company of original for some companies.
Although Clipper has headquarters in CA and are incorporated in Delaware (who isn’t), Clipper Windpower Plc is primarily a British company operating under UK corporation laws. It’s on their website. Likely, to get BP funding, the Clipper management team had to make it a UK company. Just making an educated guess on that one.
BTW, I own farmland in Indiana with a Clipper on it that is part of a BP-owned wind farm. The tower is made in Korea, blades made in Brazil, nacelle housing made in Slovaka, and the generator assembled in Iowa.
About those birds: This claim about jobs does not include replacing any jobs in coal, so wind energy is not replacing any coal generation. So the birds killed by wind turbines — not just directly but also by fragmentation, degradation, and loss of habitat — are in addition to those killed by coal.
How is this a good thing? We’re now spending more man power to generate 5% of our energy from wind than we are using to produce 45% from coal. Wind power is only commercially viable due to massive subsidies. Unless you can convince the average American and major companies to pay several times more money on electricity, wind power will never be more than a green propaganda tool.
If people took the time to read, the wold would be a hapier place.
The article does not say that Wind energy employs more people than coal energy. It almost certainly does not. The article, and the study it quoes, state that wind energy employs more people than coal MINING.
Big difference.
Sorry for my typos.
Those fans move so slowly, any bird that dies because of them should probably be out of the gene pool anyway.
The lack of regulations and pollution controls (or enforcement of the ones that exist) at all phases of coal production and use amount to HUGE subsidies for coal.
Comparing an industry to one segment of another industry? That’s like saying Orange Juice industry outnumbers Apple Growers.
This story is VERY misleading. Comparing an entire industry to one segment of another is completly about misinformation and political power plays.
There is no debate that wind is more eficciant (when there is wind that is) but it isn’t more reliable. When the wind dies, you will need a back up.