Today’s most productive energy workers are in coal and gas, not solar

The NYTimes is churning out so much fake news it getting hard to keep up. From the Washington Examiner:

In an April 25 New York Times article (“Today’s Energy Jobs Are in Solar, Not Coal“) reporter Nadja Popovich wrote that “Last year, the solar industry employed many more Americans [373,807] than coal [160,119], while wind power topped 100,000 jobs.”

…Here are some important energy facts that help provide a more complete picture about how much energy is being produced in different sectors, how many workers it takes to produce a given amount of electric power, and which sectors receive the most generous taxpayer handouts.

To start, despite a huge workforce of almost 400,000 solar workers (about 20 percent of electric power payrolls in 2016), that sector produced an insignificant share, less than 1 percent, of the electric power generated in the United States last year (EIA data here). And that’s a lot of solar workers: about the same as the combined number of employees working at Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Apple, Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft, Pfizer, Ford Motor Company and Procter & Gamble.

In contrast, it took about the same number of natural gas workers (398,235) last year to produce more than one-third of U.S. electric power or 37 times more electricity than solar’s minuscule share of 0.90 percent. And with only 160,000 coal workers (less than half the number of workers in either solar or gas), that sector produced nearly one-third (almost as much as gas) of U.S. electricity last year.

In contrast, it took about the same number of natural gas workers (398,235) last year to produce more than one-third of U.S. electric power or 37 times more electricity than solar’s minuscule share of 0.90 percent.

…to produce the same amount of electric power as just one coal worker would require two natural gas workers and an amazingly high 79 solar workers.

If Hillary had been elected, that one coal worker would be unemployed and our coal industry would be “out of business.” (H/t Climate Depot)

Read rest…

Comments (9)

  • Avatar

    MCPR

    |

    These must be the “shovel-ready” jobs. If you want to give people work in non-productive jobs, put them to work digging ditches with spoons and then filling them up. Don’t screw up our energy supply.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Why doesn’t the NY Times run it’s printing presses from solar panels ?
    Why does the NY Times continue to be one of the largest tree massacre corporations in the country yet preach the oh so scary global warming spin ?
    ” All the news that’s fit to print ” as long as it’s their one sided NY snob
    opinions that is .
    Climate change is obvious , it’s warming …yippie and despite the climate fear industry propaganda a clique of human convention goers are not about to take Mother Earth’s 6 billion year job . Ever .
    Balance your reporting NY Times or your business model is toast .

    • Avatar

      Jack Bacchus

      |

      tsk,tsk,tsk!
      If you keep this up Amber, you’ll start confusing the whole issue of Global Warming with facts.

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    Socialists don’t care about return on investment. They specialize in make – work policies. At election time the beneficiaries vote to protect their paycheck. Productivity? Dirty Capitalist thing.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Jack Bacchus … re facts…. As long as it’s coming from the NY Times
    the fewer the facts the stronger the opinions . Who is leading this once great paper over a cliff ?

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      The NYT were all-in for the first woman POTUS. Aye Aye captain, full steam ahead for another 8 years of cheerleading. The old gray lady wasn’t built for turning ,so off the edge of the world they go.

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    Now if we could only harness all that Hot Air then Al Gore all those eco-wacos and the Useful Idiots Climate March could be used for energy production

Comments are closed