[Madison, Wisc...] Although they are touted and promoted by policy makers and opinion leaders across the state, accurately defining and keeping track of ‘green jobs’ has proven nearly impossible in Wisconsin.

Take, for example, ‘green jobs’ associated with the wind industry.

Wisc. Governor Jim Doyle (D)

“Clean energy technology and high-end manufacturing are Wisconsin’s future,” Governor Jim Doyle said in his final State of the State address.  “We have more than 300 companies and thousands of jobs in the wind industry.”

That statistic is impossible to verify.

The State of Wisconsin does not track those companies nor the jobs within the industry.  When contacted, the Office of Energy Independence (an agency created by Governor Doyle in 2007) directed MacIver News to Wisconsin Wind Works, a self-described “consortium of manufacturers representing the wind manufacturing supply chain within Wisconsin.”

The advocacy group maintains an online wind energy-related supply chain database, although a routine examination of the data proved just how unreliable the figures are.

When the online, searchable database was utilized earlier this summer, it listed 340 companies in Wisconsin connected to the wind industry, a fact which, without additional investigation would appear to be in line with the Governor’s statement.  However, further examination showed many of those companies were not currently serving the wind industry and were only listed because they someday could serve the wind industry.

For example, the database listed 38 manufacturers, but only 24 of them have anything to actually do with the wind energy sector presently.

Of those 24 Wisconsin manufacturers, only eight were categorized as primary suppliers.  Another four companies were listed as both primary and secondary suppliers.  A MacIver News Service reporter contacted all eight primary suppliers and the four companies listed as primary/secondary suppliers in our initial query and what we found further eroded the credibility of Governor Doyle’s claims.

When contacted, the companies listed as both primary and secondary suppliers all described themselves merely as secondary suppliers.  That means they produce products that are not exclusive to the wind energy.  For example, Bushman Equipment manufactures lifts that move heavy pieces of equipment, which, among many other uses, can be used to handle wind turbines.

Wisconsin Wind Works’ database is not only generous with the number of companies within their supply chain it associates as being primary suppliers, there are issues with the actual job numbers listed for each company as well. Many of the figures are either inflated,  the jobs are not located in Wisconsin, or they cannot be tied to wind energy.

For example, Rexnord Industries was one of the eight Wisconsin manufacturers listed in our query as directly serving the wind energy industry.  The database shows the company has 6,000 employees.  Yet a Rexnord official told the MacIver News Service that the company only has 1,500 employees in Wisconsin, and only five of those have jobs which are directly tied to the wind industry.

Wisconsin Wind Works’ database says Orchid International has 600 employees, but a company spokesperson told MacIver it only has 150.  Amsoil Inc. in Superior has 236 employees listed in the Wisconsin Wind Works database, but a company representative told the MacIver News Service that only 6 of them work on wind energy-related products.

In all, at the time of our search, the database claimed 7,632 jobs among the eight manufacturers that were current primary suppliers to the wind industry.  Yet, the MacIver News Service was only able to identify 31 jobs at those companies which were specifically tied to wind energy related products.

Manufacturers told MacIver News that other employees might work on wind-related products occasionally, but it does not represent the bulk of their workload.

Another 1,077 workers are listed among the secondary suppliers and we did not investigate that claim.

VAL-FAB, one of the companies listed as both a primary and secondary supplier, explained to MacIver News that it initially had high hopes for the wind energy industry that never materialized.  The company specializes in fabrication for the energy sector.

William Capelle, Director of Business Development at VAL-FAB, said “At first we thought we might be able to manufacture the actual towers, but it turns out 90 percent of those are imported from Spain.”

Since the MacIver News Service first examined the Wisconsin Wind Works database, the number of companies listed has increased to 360.  A reporter attempted to contact the organization for comment about the veracity of their data, but Wisconsin wind Works, which solicits members by selling itself as the  “preferred partner of wind energy professionals,” did not respond.

They are, however, holding a Wind Energy Symposium in Milwaukee on October 13th.

Meanwhile the Office of Energy Independence continues to pursue the Doyle Administration’s green energy policies.  As Doyle said during his final State of the State address, “anyone who says there aren’t jobs in the clean energy economy had better open their eyes.”

There is no doubt that some jobs in the wind industry exist in Wisconsin. The accurate number of these ‘green jobs’ is proving to be, at best, elusive

Representatives of Doyle’s office did not respond to repeated request for comments regarding the information contained within this article.

By Bill Osmulski
MacIver News Service Investigative Reporter

Wisconsin Wind Works’ directory

Keep informed about the events in Madison and Washington that impact you.

Click here to sign up for weekly updates.

Share

“The goal of the project is to give teachers, and through teachers the students, basic information that they use to explore the topic of climate change. Obviously it’s in the news a lot, so they can explore and decide for themselves what they believe about it,” said Mary Hamel, one of the guide’s co-authors.

The book quotes the beleaguered United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and includes images of the planet Earth on fire, a polar bear stuck on an ice-floe and a gasoline pump tied up in knots under the heading: Causes of Climate Change.

Hamel says the guide presents straight facts and allows students to draw their own conclusions about whether or not climate change is even occurring. However, Representative Jim Ott (R-Mequon), who worked as a meteorologist for several decades prior to becoming a legislator, argues the guide only presents one side of the story.

“It completely leaves out the fact that there are some very respected scientists who take the opposite view of the view they call the consensus, the overwhelming evidence,’ Ott said. “Well there are some very respected scientists that take an opposing view. That in itself, I would think is not accurate science.”

Ott says many of the practical exercises in the guide involve students taking up the role of environment activists, aggressively pursuing global warming policy changes.

“They basically are telling students to lobby for climate change legislation,” Ott said as he quotes from the book. “‘‘Everyone, including young adults, can bring about change by being active and engaged citizens. They can encourage lawmakers that alleviate or lessen the impacts of climate change.’ The DNR is telling students they should be calling me and telling me that I should enact policies that will fight climate change that they assume is happening and being caused by us? I have some real problems with that.”

The DNR wrote the 86-page guide two years ago to address a perceived need in the classroom. A grant from the Wisconsin Environmental Education Board (from UW-Stevens Point) helped pay for its production.

The DNR does not keep track of how the guide is being used in classrooms. Officials with the department say they are looking for ways to encourage teachers to provide feedback, which has been lacking.

So far, 6,000 copies of the guide have been mailed out or downloaded, although DNR officials said they could not identify which schools were using the guide.

Bill Osmulski has more in this video report from Madison; and, the MacIver News Graphic, seen below, includes excerpts from the text book.

This online and video material is free to be reproduced, with attribution.

Share

I don’t know how one’s conscience could allow for anything but.

The incident in the Gulf is obviously a tragedy from which lessons must be learned, but it shouldn’t scare us away from the natural resource that is oil.

The Left seems to think sun and wind are free gifts from mother earth but that oil is some nefarious un-natural concoction created by Dick Cheney and Dow Chemical. Oil, too, is from the earth. It is just as natural as the sun or the air.

Our ability to harness the earth’s petroleum resources has perhaps been the single most impactful discovery…ever. It fueled the second Industrial Revolution; helped end society’s acceptance of child labor; brought clean water and heat and electric light to the masses; helped us advance from an agrarian society where our lives were dictated by the seasons; helped women become recognized as productive wage earners; lengthened the life expectancy and increased the standard and quality of life for peoples across the globe.

We can’t run away from Oil because it is icky or because people and animals die when tragedies like this happen.

We must appreciate that our ability to safely and efficiently harness natural resources helps promote freedom, liberty and equal opportunity for prosperity. We must do all that we can to manage and mitigate the risk associated with this endeavor, but we cannot walk away from it. Oil is essential to fuel prosperity in a modern world. Certainly, the oil supply is extremely volatile both due to the risks associated with exploration and the political realities of OPEC. While we obviously need to continue to explore more politically-viable sources of energy for the future, we can’t abandon the resources we know are available.

Oil and natural gas account for sixty percent of our energy supply. Disrupting this equation would result in a massive transfer of wealth from the private sector. Trendy ‘green’ sources of energy like solar and wind are heavily subsidized and not particularly efficient (I’ve  written in the past about the inefficiencies and high cost of solar and wind). When consumers pay for solar and wind, a substantial portion of those monies go to fund the government subsidies which promote their use.

We need oil. We know where to get it. We shouldn’t let accidents scare us off from pursuing it. Instead, when a mess like the Deepwater Horizon disaster takes place, we need to fix it, learn from it and prevent it from happening in the future.

But the Left, predictably, simply uses tragedies like the one on the BP rig as an opportunity to bash business once again, and to push for a Luddite-inspired, pre-Industrial Revolution, horse-and-buggy/windmill economy wherein citizens must rely upon the State, and not themselves, for opportunities to improve their lot in life.

Each week, the website WisOpinion.com asks me and lefty Scot Ross of One Wisconsin Now to engage in exchanges on a topic of our choosing.

From my latest ‘That’s Debatable’ entry, wherein oil exploration was the topic:

You offer the false choice of no drilling or status quo.  Personally, I support the “Drill, Baby, Drill” and everything else plan. Let’s build some damn nuke plants while we’re at it.  We should be pursuing all domestic sources we know exist; that includes the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, ANWR in Alaska and public lands in the Dakotas and elsewhere. And we should invest in creating new technologies and exploring new sources of energy that make economic sense. Scot, how is our national security improved if we fail to tap into the resources we have here and instead are beholden to foreign government cartels like OPEC?  How is our economic security improved if we abandon oil and coal and instead rely totally on the more expensive, less reliable and less efficient solar and wind?  I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m obviously not silent about this. The incident in the Gulf is a tragedy, but it shouldn’t scare us away from the natural resource that is oil. I thought PROGRESS was the root of progressive? Why the call for retreat?

The Left’s demand for a risk-free world is not only pure fantasy, it is dangerous. A retreat from proven sources of energy, without affordable and efficient alternatives, not only denies the benefits society has reaped from oil, it destabilizes our economy and our national security.

But it certainly won’t stop the Left from using this tragedy as a bogeyman.

By Brian Fraley
A MacIver Institute Perspective

Share

“Environmentalist are like car alarms now,” notes  Christopher Horner, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “People hear them all the time but nobody pays attention.”

Horner, who two weeks ago warned that the bill would be introduced this month, says the ‘doom and gloom’ mantra has severely hurt the environmentalists’ credibility. Because of that, he explains, they now have changed tactics–packaging and marketing environmental bills as economic development proposals.

“Well now they realize it’s not selling, so they’re changing the title,” said Horner. “It’s exactly what they did in Wisconsin; I know it’s now called the Clean Jobs Bill, yeah, that’s it, it’s about jobs.  No it isn’t it’s about power. These guys have always wanted to control your lives. ”

The latest proposal by Senators John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) and Joe Liebermann (I-Connecticut) is expected be marketed as a pollution reduction and investment plan.

“Their [Environmental activists’] whole life is dedicated to claiming global warming is the greatest threat to mankind, except for all the others,” Horner says as he deconstructs the problem with that line of logic.

“Climate Change: The greatest threat facing mankind. Ok, great, so we’ll replace that coal with nuclear power right now, right, it’s the only thing we can do. But, your atoms, they frighten me.  Ok, so millions will die [from global warming] but you atoms frighten you? I sense a moral tension there.  So nuclear power is a greater threat than the GREATEST threat. Ok.

“Let’s go on down the list. Lot’s of dams, then right? No! We need to fish. Nature didn’t want our rivers to run that way. Ok, so dams, a greater threat than the greatest threat to mankind. How about Windmills?  Well, ok, but just not where birds fly or where Kennedy’s live. Alright, so the Kennedy’s’ having their views ruined is a greater threat than the greatest threat facing mankind….and it goes on down the list”

Horner made his comments after appearing at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh earlier this month to deliver a speech sponsored by the UW-Oshkosh College Republicans and the Young America’s Foundation. He is the author of several books including Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed and the recently-released Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America, which he describes exposé of the green movement’s rise to political power and the consequences of green-friendly energy mandates on the economy and social order of our nation.

Update:  The Hill has posted an advance copy of the bill online, here.

Share

“The Cap and Trade bill will pop any day,” said Christopher Horner, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “It won’t be the one that ultimately goes to the floor, because [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid is going to write that, but, this is about our last chance to stand up and stop this and make a statement, before you have an opportunity to vote.”

Horner is outraged that Congressional leaders appear willing to circumvent the traditional committee work in order to speed up the process.

“Harry Reid has vowed to suspend the committee process once again, for Cap and Trade, because Cap and Trade it turns out would impact every aspect of your life so Cap and Trade would have to go through six senate committees,” said Horner.  “Oh and it would allow scrutiny and public input and it would never get through so he is going to write the bill behind closed doors.”

Horner made his comments after appearing at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh last week. He is the author of several books including Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed and the recently-released Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America, which he describes exposé of the green movement’s rise to political power and the consequences of  green-friendly energy mandates on the economy and social order of our nation.

Horner’s speech, sponsored by the UW-Oshkosh College Republicans and the Young America’s Foundation was well attended and, despite some concerns to the contrary, went off without incident.

“There’s often an organized, nasty element to campus because that’s what the Alinskyites are about, speech threatens them., they want a monopoly on it,” said Horner. “The tolerant left is highly intolerant, but ultimately, it’s usually the good folks who show up and that’s what happened when I came to Oshkosh.”

In an interview with MacIver News, Horner elaborated on his claim that the debate over Global Warming has little to do with the environment.

“This is not about the climate. It isn’t,” said Horner. “What we have is something else. In Power Grab, I explain what it’s about. The title gives a pretty good hint. It’s about stealing your freedom.”

Horner said his concerns are not hyperbolic and that to the contrary the heated, apocalyptic rhetoric from the left is merely an attempt to pass liberty-limiting legislation through fear.

“When they have to make up the reason for such a power grab, you know it must be bad,” he said.

Horner drew parallels between the evolving debate in Washington, D.C. and how the terminology and rationale for legislation changed in Wisconsin over many months.

“John Kerry told The Hill and Politico ‘Oh, this isn’t an environment bill.’ That’s spectacular,” said Horner. “The Global Warming Bill is no longer about global warming. Look, it’s designed exactly like the other bills. It’s a Cap and Trade energy rationing / tax scheme. It looks, smells, operates, is written, uses the same language as the global warming bills. It’s now that they just realize the issue never was the issue. They are just using what they thought would sell.”

In Wisconsin, The so-called ‘Clean Energy Jobs Act,’  originated as recommendations from the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force.

“Well now they realize it’s not selling, so they’re changing the title,” said Horner. “It’s exactly what they did in Wisconsin; I know it’s now called the Clean Jobs Bill, yeah, that’s it, it’s about jobs.  No it isn’t it’s about power.”

Coming soon: Horner deconstructs the arguments in favor of sweeping legislation aimed at combating global warming and predicts what could happen in Washington over the next few weeks.

Share

The State Senate met and adjourned early Thursday afternoon before the State Assembly even began to tackle the bulk of their calendar. This move effectively killed the global warming bill as well as efforts to change the election law and establish several regional transit authorities.

“The Legislature did what was best for families and employers by not voting on the global warming bill,” said James Buchen, Vice President of Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. “The bill would have increased utility bills, energy taxes, and hampered job creation without making an impact on global warming.”

The Senate’s action left Assembly Democrats visibly, and quite publicly, upset with their Senate colleagues.

Democrat Helen Kelda Roys (D-Madison) displayed her anger in a post on her Twitter feed. “Wow…I guess Senators get too tired to work more than a 2-hour workday.Tough life for them,” she wrote to her followers on the social media site.

After taking up some initial pro-forma matters in the morning The Assembly remained off the floor until around 5 pm Thursday, took a nearly four hour break beginning at 10:30 pm, and did not conclude their work until after 4 am Friday.

Assembly Republican Leader Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon) called the entire session a failure and said the Democrats embarrassed themselves with how they ran the legislature and what they accomplished the last two years.

“With unemployment still ravaging the Wisconsin economy, Assembly Democrats ended the legislative session without meaningful action on jobs” said Fitzgerald. “The session started with $5 billion in tax increases and continued with an agenda popular only in Madison.”

The Assembly was able to pass a few measures onto the Governor for his signature, including a bill to give sweeping new powers to the Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction to intervene in some failing schools, a proposal to regulate payday lenders and a bill which legalizes farm-to-consumer sales of untreated, raw milk.

Black and other supporters of the global warming bill said they hope to convince Governor Doyle to call the legislators back for a Special Session to deal, specifically, with that bill. However, Capitol observers believe such an option appeared unlikely given the public outcry in opposition to the legislation.

Share

Blame it on a combination of the lack of sleep as a result of monitoring late-night legislative sessions and a healthy cynicism from two decades of working around the Capitol in Madison, but that sentence made complete sense to me as I wrote it this morning.

What’s of primary concern to our readers/viewers/followers/friends/fans today?

1. The Global Warming Bill
2. The Elections Fraud Facilitation Act
3. The Madison Educational Bureaucracy Empowerment Plan
4. The establishment of non-elected Regional Taxing Authorities for transit

As of this writing, all four of these proposals are on life support. But they are not dead yet.

As my colleague Brett Healy pointed out in his instant classic on the Silly Season, anything can happen in the waning days (and especially hours) of a legislative session.  Most of the action takes place behind the scenes and it will be weeks, if ever, before the citizenry of Wisconsin know exactly what deals were cut and why they were made.

The horse trading, deal making, ego stroking and amendment drafting could be fierce today.

Supporters of each of those aforementioned bills will be pursuing every plausible and many improbable avenues to get their ideas passed by both houses today. While it is possible that all four proposals could stall and die today, it’s also possible that all four could be in the mix with other pieces of legislation (like the wage lien bill) and that Democratic leaders could strike a massive deal behind the scenes at any point in the next few hours.

So, it’s a scary thought but entirely possible that all four proposals could pass in both houses, in rapid succession, over the course of less than an hour. The majority party has extraordinary parliamentary powers to limit debate, and we’ve seen these powers abused on more than one occasion.

At the same time, the Senate could whip through just their publicized calendar and adjourn by 1pm, before the Assembly ever gets to the floor today. The only certainty in Silly Season is uncertainty.

Today, the last day of the regular legislative session, has dawned. We’ll continue to track the zombies here and on our Twitter feed and Facebook page. If something happens today, we’

ll let you know.

The center-right coalition, the fiscal sanity caucus and others who are hoping to limit the damage coming out of Madison must forget about the victory celebration until the final gun sounds. The defensive coordinator must remain vigilant and shouldn’t get the Gatorade shower when the undead are on the field and there is time left on the clock.

Oh, and did I mention that even then, it may not be over? There is a limited floor period scheduled for May wherein bills that have passed one house may still be considered, with a little maneuvering*.

Taxpayers need a break, and I clearly need some sleep. Hopefully we can catch a little of both today.

Until it’s over, though, we’ll stay awake. You stay tuned.

By Brian Fraley
A MacIver Institute Perspective

*Clarification about May:

Under Senate Joint Resolution 1, the session schedule for the 2009-10 biennial session period, there are two floor periods in May. The first floor period, from May 4 to May 6, is a limited-business floor period.  Under SJR 1 and the joint rules, only the following items are eligible for action: revisor’s correction or revisor’

 s revision bills, reconciliation bills to correct mutually inconsistent acts of the session, proposals recalled because they cannot be properly enrolled, state employee contracts, and legislative citations. 

The second floor period, from May 25 to May 26, is a veto review floor period.  Under SJR 1 and the joint rules, only the following items are eligible for action: gubernatorial vetoes or partial vetoes, pending nominations requiring Senate confirmation, revisor’s correction or revisor’

s revision bills, reconciliation bills to correct mutually inconsistent acts of the session, proposals recalled because they cannot be properly enrolled, state employee contracts, and resolutions and joint resolutions introduced by either committee on organization.

But, and this is a big caveat, the Legislature always has the authority to extend a floor period, call itself into extraordinary session, or otherwise amend SJR 1 such as expanding the jurisdiction of a particular floor period (e.g., creating a list of bills which may be considered or allowing bills which have passed one house to be considered).  Moreover, the Governor could always call a special session. If we’ve learned anything it’s that in Madison, anyting (bad) is possible.

Share

See this video report for more details:

Share

MNS [Madison, Wisc…] The Public Service Commission’s analysis of a controversial environmental bill was based on a “serious methodological error, that distorts the actual cost impact of the bill” according to the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC).

MMAC sent a letter to Senator Jeff Plale, co-Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Clean Energy Jobs, in which they outline their concerns.

“As you can see, the results, using PSC’s own study numbers, indicate that the CEJA Sub proposal would increase electric rates between 6.4% and 12.5% above the status quo, depending on the assumption made for CO2 regulation costs,” MMAC warned. “This would be an improvement from the original proposed bill, in which rates would increase between 7.8% and 20.8%, but it would still be a significant increase above the status quo.” 

MMAC’s revelation comes on the heels of continuing criticism that the Public Service Commission has become advocates for the legislation, rather than impartial, nonpartisan regulators.

“We are extremely concerned that these increased rate costs would have a dampening effect on the economy as electricity would cost more for everyone.  Those concerns are heightened further in light of  the current challenging economic climate,” said Steve Baas, MMAC’s director of Government Affairs in the letter to Plale.

The legislation, dubbed the ‘Clean Energy Jobs Act’ by its supporters, is scheduled for a vote in the State Assembly later Tuesday.

Attempts to reach Senator Plale for comment this morning were unsuccessful.

See the letter, here.

Share

Share