Seeking Alpha
About this author:

Many indicators show that clean techs may lead any potential worldwide economic recovery. For example, since 2005 many of the leaders in turbine manufacturing have opened U.S. facilities; of the top 10 global suppliers in 2007, seven — Vestas Wind Systems (VWDRY.PK), GE (GE) , Gamesa (GCTAF.PK), Suzlon Energy, Siemens (SI), Acciona (ACXIF.PK), and Nordex (NRDXF.PK) — have an American manufacturing presence. (The other three — Enercon, Goldwind, and Sinovel — do not yet sell into the U.S. market.) In addition, the homegrown Clipper Windpower (CRPWF.PK) has joined GE Energy as a major domestic player in the production of utility-scale turbines, with the two companies together capturing 50% of the 2008 domestic market.

Domestic manufacturing for large components in particular, such as towers and blades, has increased significantly over the past several years, with the majority now produced in the U.S. As for the thousands of smaller and midsized components, while the U.S. continues to import some of them (mostly from Europe) many more can now be sourced from American companies.

Once again, the numbers tell the story: between 2005 and 2008, the percentage of domestically produced components in a turbine increased from around 30% to nearly 50%, based on cost. Continuing that trend, nacelle components will increasingly be produced domestically.

A strong Renewable Energy Standards commitment that would require utilities to obtain 25 percent of the electricity they generate from clean, renewable energy sources by 2025 will:

  • Save consumers $64.3 billion by 2025 and $95.5 billion by 2030 in their electricity and natural gas bills;
  • Create at least 297,000 - 350,000 new, green jobs;
  • Produce $263.4 billion in new capital investment; and
  • Take the equivalent of 45.3 million cars off the road through global warming pollution reduction.

This trend has resulted in well over 100 companies now producing components for wind turbines, employing thousands of workers in the manufacture of parts as varied as towers, composite blades, bearings and gears. Thus, many existing companies in traditional manufacturing states have retooled to enter the wind industry and produce components for the green economy. Their manufacturing facilities are spread across 40 states, employing workers from the Southeast to the Steel Belt, to the Great Plains and on to the Pacific Northwest.

And with plans for 30 new manufacturing facilities announced in 2008, the wind industry expects to see a continued shift towards domestic manufacturing in the coming years. In total, 70 manufacturing facilities have come online, been expanded, or announced since January 2007. Yet although enhanced manufacturing capacity and associated jobs are part of the foundation for a strong U.S. wind industry and contribute to strengthening the U.S. economy, wind jobs reach far beyond component production.

With those 8,300-plus MW of wind installed at over 100 different wind projects in 2008, many construction workers found work in the wind industry. Wind project construction jobs are often a blend of specialized wind industry construction companies and management that work alongside local construction companies near the wind project site. In 2008 alone, approximately 8,000 construction workers were needed for the many aspects of wind farm construction, including those for building access roads, securing turbine foundations that typically use 900 tons of steel-reinforced concrete, erecting towers made of up to 300 tons of steel plate, and driving massive cranes to secure 100-ton nacelles and rotors to towers. Given that new wind projects came online in over 25 different states in 2008, these construction jobs were widely distributed across the country.

Another area that saw inevitable job growth was in operation and maintenance, or O&M. With the 2008 capacity addition, the U.S. now has over 25,000 MW of wind in the ground, all of which must be operated and maintained. Wind turbines are massive and complex machines, and skilled workers are needed to keep them running for 20 years or more. In 2008 approximately 800 "wind technicians" joined the existing 1,600 workers in long-term, full-time jobs operating and maintaining the nation's wind turbine fleet.

In addition to such positions, the wind installations completed at over 100 wind projects in 2008 were possible only with the participation of thousands of highly skilled workers across varied professions to work in the areas of site assessment, permitting, siting, developing, financing and electric grid interconnection.

Finally, the entry of 35,000 new employees within a single year into the various facets of wind energy has continued to make training a key focus of the industry. At the end of 2008, over 100 different educational institutions offered or were developing programs for wind and renewable energy, ranging from certificate programs and two-year associate's degrees to bachelor's and graduate degrees. For example, the specialized wind technician jobs require months and sometimes years of training in a wide range of areas including hydraulics, electronics, safety, and troubleshooting. In addition to having to possess this valuable skill set, workers must use such skills at heights of 250 feet in the air, either on top of the turbine in the elements or inside the nacelle, which is the size of a relatively small office.

Strong Net Gains

Now in 2009, announcements of job losses in various industries have become a familiar part of daily media reports - yet bright spots continue to shine through in the form of more news of new jobs in wind, even during the first few months of this year. Not surprisingly, the wind industry is not entirely insulated from a declining economy, and some companies in fact have announced job losses following short-term industry challenges such as increased difficulty financing projects due to the banking credit crisis and the devaluation of the production tax credit (enough companies need to be earning a profit and paying taxes in order to utilize such credits).

Still, net growth in wind power remains in the double digits-even in the face of an economic downturn that has hit manufacturing (and even construction) hardest. Across the U.S. economy in 2008, nearly 2.6 million jobs were lost; while wind industry growth alone of course did not singlehandedly counteract the losses, it did counter the negative trend. And better still, some of those companies that had laid off workers are already hiring some of them back.

Only a Preview

While 35,000 jobs is clearly nothing to sneeze at, perhaps just as important is that the job numbers the industry produced in 2008 serves as a telling indicator of potential. Last year the wind industry demonstrated its remarkable potential for both generation capacity growth and job creation. Investing in the wind industry creates a new engine for the nation's economy, driving growth in manufacturing, supporting construction jobs, and promoting economic development; thus, its potential cannot be ignored.

The wind industry can and will continue to grow, given a stable policy environment that levels the playing field for all generating sources. Legislators have the power to ensure continued expansion of wind power and jobs though a national renewable electricity standard (RES) and legislation to create a national transmission system that accesses the nation's vast renewable energy resource. As shown in a recent Department of Energy report, policies that will help the U.S. reach 20% wind penetration by 2030 will create at least 500,000 jobs in our economy; all that is the broad committment to signal that we are ready to make this commitment.

Print this article with comments

This article has 12 comments:

  •  
    It is irresponsible to mention Clipper and GE in the same sentence--Clipper's products have been proven to be of poor quality and its management team is filled with unqualified people. I think a cursory glance at Clipper's chart will backup my opinion.

    "In addition, the homegrown Clipper Windpower (CRPWF.PK) has joined GE Energy as a major domestic player in the production of utility-scale turbines, with the two companies together capturing 50% of the 2008 domestic market."
    Apr 21 09:45 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    This kind of article doesn't do anyone any good because it presents a polyana view of the green initative. I guess turbine blades are made using renewable energy sources and the creation of 35k jobs for an industry which is claimed to be growing by double digits/yr might really make a significant dent in the 2.6 million jobs lost this year if it doesn't displace existing jobs in the energy creation cycle from other sources. Providing 25% of the electrical energy needs by 2025, which is 16 years is a wish given today's investment amounts and legal and political impediments and is not quick or sufficient enough to eliminate our current economic structural problem. While I am for step increases in wind and solar power generation, I believe that natural gas powered transportation is the best near term solution where many more jobs can be created using a commodity the USA has in abundance and by quickly converting our cars,busses and trucks to natural gas vehicles make a significant reduction in green house gas emissions. No other alternate energy plan can match this one for near term reduction of our negative account balance which is ultimately the driving issue in our current economic morass. 51% of our electrical energy today is provided by coal-powered plants and another 20 % by nuclear and the rest by all other. Today, the all other includes .9% by wind and solar. Double digit growth from such a small base is what makes the problem solving statements questionable. On the other hand, 40% of the oil we use is for transportation. So replacing this commodity, 66% of which is imported with one which we produce, should be a clear winner.
    Apr 21 11:06 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Social engineering is one thing. Stimulating economic recovery ALWAYS requires that one can make more of what someone wants for less than what it used to cost. Green things don't do that. If it requires more to make the same amount of energy, as all green initiatives I've seen do, it is in fact a drag on the economy.

    Making more for less is the key to economic recovery.
    Apr 21 11:20 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Keithfeather,
    You need to count ALL costs or your analysis is flawed. The world is waking up to the fact that we have been ignoring/underpricing pollution costs with respect to energy use. In addition the cost trajectory of green technologies is down while the cost trajectory of fossil fuels is up--even if you continue to ignore pollution costs.
    Apr 21 12:09 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Oil needs to stay above $60 a barrel before many of these projects make economic sense. You are also missing that Statoil (STO) of Norway, a major oil industry player, has working and installed alternative power wave, tidal, and wind energy systems. While the little players might gain in the short term, unless they become targets of M&A, the big companies will be best positioned to exploit demand for alternative power. Companies like ABB (ABB), who enable power distribution, could benefit. However, as others noted, this is slow moving technology.
    Apr 21 02:48 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The claims made for wind energy in tis article are total BS. Consumers and ratepayers will pay more for the energy, not less. Taxpayers are already paying for this boondoggle in the form of higher subsidies for wind than any other energy source. Without these high subsidies, production tax credits, and accelerated depreciation no one would build these inefficient turbines.
    GE bought Enron's wind business and Clipper was founded by an Enron exec. Clipper turbines have had problems that required thier entrire 2007 production to be taken down and replaced. Problems with blades and gearboxes have caused further refits.
    This industry is cutting down forests, destroying habitat of wildlife and human beings,creating stormwater runoff, and devaluing and making some properties worthless.
    Emissions released in manufacture, transport, mixing and pouring the tons of cement, etc. as well as all the manyadverse impacts need to be considered when touting this scam. This article sounds like it was written by the wind industry.
    This scam will be the next bubble to burst. Worse than ethanol.
    Apr 22 09:00 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    agree on the insights. It's a virtuous cycle that green clean tech will create here:

    www.wealthalchemist.co.../
    Apr 22 01:21 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    An overly rosy view of wind power for sure. Much of the wind power industry, not only in the US, but around the world relies heavily on government subsidies for viability.

    Wind power is perhaps the least viable of all the alternate technologies because it is unpredictable and so power stations capable of handling the total load regardless of wind power need to be built.

    Consider a situation where 10% of an area's power is wind generated. If there is no wind the local power grid has to handle the deficit or power has to be purchased from elsewhere. It works in Europe because they have the capacity via nuclear power stations to cover shortfalls.
    Apr 22 02:05 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    www.ted.com/index.php/...
    Apr 22 02:12 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Why is it that when I read a positive article, there are always a bunch of jackasses commenting on it?
    Apr 22 05:03 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Nice article thank you!!
    Apr 22 10:10 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Wind power in New England will destroy the quality of place of this part of the country. RGGI agreements call for 10% wind power by 2018. The ISO NE grid has a capacity of 33,000 MW and operates at the daily demand of about 20,000 MW during the day. Since wind power has a capacity factor of 25% in order to achieve 10% of daily demand 8000 MW of installed capacity of wind power will be required. 5,333 turbines of 1.5 MW capacity spaced approximately 1/5 mile apart will require over 1000 miles of New England's mountain ridges. The devastation to fragile mountain ecology, maceration of flying creatures, obscene alteration of magnificent scenic vistas are the price we pay for a minuscule impact on GHG emissions. The impacts of noise on rural communities which will have previous dead quiet nighttime background noise levels interrrupted by low frequency turbine thumping sounds which will cause sleep disturbance for many people living within range of this sound. The magnitude of this assault by the greed driven, subsidy supported wind industry is almost incomprehensible.
    Apr 24 11:00 PM | Link | Reply