Delingpole: Green Jobs Collapse, Go to China Instead. What a Surprise!
By Paul Homewood
h/t Patsy Lacey
WOW – I did not see this one coming (not!!):
‘Green jobs’ in the German renewables sector have collapsed by 50 per cent in less than a decade. No prizes for guessing where they’ve gone instead – but here’s a clue: it begins with ‘C’ and ends with ‘-hina’.
According to Clean Energy Wire in their report of the findings of Europe’s largest trade union confederation:
The number of jobs in the German renewables sector (production and installation) has fallen from about 300,000 in 2011 to around 150,000 in 2018, the German Trade Union Association (DGB) found in an analysis of employment in the energy transition.
The drop in employment is mostly due to the collapse of Germany’s solar power industry over the past decade, as many companies were forced out of business thanks to cheaper competitors from China scooping up most of the market. The number of jobs in solar PV panel production and installation fell from a record 133,000 in 2011 to under 28,000 seven years later.
In the wind industry, the number of jobs dropped from its record of roughly 108,000 in 2016 to under 70,000 just two years later. “Employment with respect to construction renewable energy installations has been very dynamic in the last 20 years, both in a negative and in a positive way,” the DGB said, arguing that many more jobs could be created in the sector again.
There are two key points to be made here. First, China is not remotely interested in green issues — or ‘clean’ energy — except insofar as it enables it to gain a competitive advantage over the West while it continues full steam ahead with its fossil fuel-powered industries.
Second, the ‘green jobs’ promised by everyone from President Joe Biden to UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson as one of the benefits of their proposed Net Zero revolutions are a myth. Or, if you prefer, a blatant lie.
This was predicted in a Global Warming Policy Foundation report published ten years ago by Dr Gordon Hughes, Professor of Economics at the University of Edinburgh.
He wrote then:
For the longer term, there is little doubt that the primary beneficiary [of green energy policies] will be China. That is already apparent from the way the market is developing.
Renewable energy, he added, will always be a net jobs-killer because of its effects on the broader economy. By driving up the cost of energy — perhaps doubling it — and diverting capital spending from more efficient sectors of the economy, renewables destroy more jobs than they create.
In terms of the labour market, the gains for a small number of actual or potential employees in businesses specialising in renewable energy has to be weighed against the dismal prospects for a much larger group of workers producing tradable goods in the rest of the manufacturing sector.
We can’t say we weren’t warned. Net Zero is a looming disaster and the politicians steering us towards it are doing so with their eyes wide open – and their tongues as forked as a snake’s.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
The green guy on the right in the cartoon. Is he holding up a solar panel or is it a dust filter for his heat pump to operate efficiently? One made in China?
When you are busy saving the world from “climate change” no one is supposed to know that you ruined your own society. You know who you are.
How many times has the government and a majority of politicians, excepting maybe two or three, got to be proven wrong in their plans and predictions before it’s too late? Something has got to give – and soon.
Perhaps all politicians should put on the record their support for Net Zero. Knowing that they are ruining the chance for prosperity to grow in the UK should concentrate their minds. (Mind you: not one MP objected to the declaration of a climate emergency. How many demurred when the Statutory Instrument to replace the 80% cut to 100% was put in place? Are there any politicians in the UK who dare to speak out in favour of prosperity over Net Zero?)
Its the same locally – councils competing with each other to see how much more virtuous they can be, with very few reports of them asking their constituents if they want it. Even though they propose, in our case, policies that are even more draconian than national government’s, they have rejected out of hand calls for them to get a mandate.
Statutory Instruments are not subject to Parliamentary review – they are just brought into being. It was how EU Directives were enacted into UK legislation, without any debate.
As far as proving the lunacy to MPs goes, they sit in a bubble and only those approved to be in the bubble and have the magic ‘prestige’ will be listened to. Everyone with an ounce of common sense sits outside the bubble.
More pressure from the Alarmists. This time the council up in Cumbria are going back to “reassess” the plan for that coal mine. They are obviously under enormous pressure from Central Government, not to mention the threat of a judicial review.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-56001458
The sensible people of Cumbria should let it be known that their council must stand by their original and sensible decision and not be influenced in changing their decision to suit the idiots in the BBC, Greenpeace and the government. Rise up and march on the council building Cumbria to show councillors that you will not tolerate any change in their decision.
Hear hear!
And insist on being called Cumberland again.
Hear hear!!
It is also time for anyone who wishes to make statements about climate must do their own research to verify and validate what they say. It is not adequate to parrot IPCC models and others with a political agenda. This applies to CEOs, Managing Directors, Directors, exec and non-exec, board members and those in responsible positions. It is time for those to take personal responsibility for what they say.
Apologies for being off topic but had to note it. On the BBC news yesterday lunchtime the presenter said that the exceptionally cold January “not seen in ten years” was an example of climate change. This is total madness.
It seems that the science team at the BBC has not caught up with the latest paper from Nature climate change casting serious doubts on that hypothesis:
https://notrickszone.com/2021/02/09/journal-nature-refutes-piks-fantasy-rich-science-that-a-warmer-arctic-causes-extreme-cold-snaps/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-00954-y
Weakened evidence for mid-latitude impacts of Arctic warming
(published Nov 2020)
Do they not do any research based journalism at the BBC?
All those billions that they have, all those people at laptops in the background of the introduction to the News , and noone actually checks the science literature .
The science editor is clearly a poor manager of the enormous resources at his disposal.
Straight out of Paul Daniel’s Bunco Booth; ‘heads I win, tails you lose’.
I see that Andrew Montford has been fingered as <a href="https://twitter.com/aDissentient/status/1359055301434089472?s=20" a trouble maker requiring special treatment
£5 says his phones are also managed via caller ID….
The flat out whoppers, weaseling lies and all round indefensibility of “Net Zero” are driving defensiveness in the Civil Service.
The redistribution of wealth is obvious. The fact that many people don’t realize the goal of AGW theory is to facilitate the transfer is a shame.
Who’d a thunk it, eh, Dellers?
Whether jobs are in China or not is irrelevant – provided the economy here remains open and competitive. But it won’t. The key bit is this:
“Renewable energy will always be a net jobs-killer because of its effects on the broader economy. By driving up the cost of energy — perhaps doubling it — and diverting capital spending from more efficient sectors of the economy, renewables destroy more jobs than they create.”
That is an iron law of economics. Better, higher paid and more jobs are created by having higher productivity. Having higher cost, less effecient production will do the opposite. No matter what Biden, Johnson, the BBC and the others claim, they cannot and will not be right. That is settled science, because that law of economics has been shown to be true for 3,000 years.
Essentially, the rulers are pouring sugar into our collective petrol tank. When the engine stops, they will undoubtedly tell us the problem is a failed gasket – which nobody makes for your old banger.
Let’s face it, Trump knew about the ‘myths’; it’s why China needed him gone – and with prejudice, it now turns out.
WHO review finds that a lab making covid viruses in Wuhan was not the source and that there were no cases in China until December 2019. Wow. Called me shocked…..or maybe not.
Despite being right on these issues, Trump was his own worst enemy. An egocentric p#ick who was the sole architect of his own downfall
Trump cattied the right message, just the wrong messenger.
On balance – and I agree with your characterisation (though, narcissist rather than egocentric) – most, if not all politicians display similar traits, but Trump was not in the pocket of China or other despotic countries like Biden and his son. It must count for something that he polled the largest number of votes of any sitting President in history – millions more even than the sainted Obama. .
But they will only have to wait fourteen years until most of the wind turbines have to be replaced. That should create s few jobs.
Mainly in China as by then the UK will most likely have lost the ability to make anything.
Pah! We’ll still be able to make a fool of ourselves!
I haven’t watched any of DA’s latest predictable nonsense, but the relentless advertising has been unavoidable and offensive. Paraphrasing, but it goes something like this to emotional music etc.
“Planet Earth and nature used to be in perfect balance, then came a new factor, humans, upsetting and destroying it all…..”
It’s a manifestly absurd claim that the earth has ever been perfect or in balance, it’s always been a knife edge of survival – especially for the flora/fauna.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/02/10/david-attenboroughs-anti-human-miserabilism/
Now as a conservationist/lover of nature all my life, I value protecting the environment and critters more than most. Yet I don’t get the argument of saving the earth from humans. Saving it for what? In cosmic terms it makes not a jot of difference if it goes today or in millions of years. The only reason for protecting the environment is for entirely selfish reasons – to prolong the flourishing and pleasure of the human race – and we are the only species that even has a remote chance of ultimately surviving the end of the earth and taking other flora/fauna with us. So far it is evident that green policies and renewables are only destroying the natural environment at a massively accelerating rate.
Well said Mr Grim. I am regularly astonished by the sheer ignorance of the majority of so called ‘environmentalists’ when it comes to protecting or nurturing our environment. In fact, the current swathe of eco warriors dominating the media seem to have no knowledge of the past, no practical experience, and their solutions to the non problem of climate change are actually far more damaging than actually doing nothing.
Jaws III – the movie
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9244931/Climate-change-forcing-great-white-sharks-cooler-waters-north.html
Or at least the sharks are supposed to be on the move. More Hollywood fantasies I suspect. Imagine what La Niña will do to the water temperatures and their observations. Just as well they got their paper out beforehand.
When sharks get mentioned … I’m always minded of the dangers of coconuts – which kill more humans every year – due to gravity and the long drop – than sharks.
Global warming = higher winds = more coconuts … – for the right money I’ll author a paper on it.
I have never liked the sheer idea of ” Zero net Carbon”, since we are a carbon rich nation and it does good. Lose the Carbon component and you lose the green fields, Trees and all green grouth. By Bye the green fields, welcome sheer devastation.