STAFF REPORT 

Green Jobs: A Pathway To A Strong Middle Class 

Introduction and Executive Summary 

The White House Task Force on the Middle Class has a simple mandate: to find, highlight, and 

implement solutions to the economic challenges facing the American middle class. With that 

mandate at our backs, it is no accident that we chose to focus on green jobs at our very first 

taskforce meeting in Philadelphia, PA on February 27. 

There are many reasons for our interest in green jobs. The Obama/Biden Administration is 

deeply committed to reforming how we create and consume energy in America. Part of this 

project of reform is the work of many different officials and agencies within the government to 

promote the creation of green jobs. 

Green jobs have the potential to be quality, family-sustaining jobs that also help improve our 

environment. They are largely domestic jobs that can’t be offshored. They tend to pay more 

than other jobs, even controlling for worker characteristics. Moreover, green jobs are an 

outgrowth of a larger movement to reform the way we create and use energy in both this country 

and the rest of the world. They represent a growth sector, and one that offers the dual promise of 

providing good jobs while meeting the environmental challenge to reduce our dependence on 

finite fossil fuels that generate harmful carbon emissions. 

We devote more space to definitions below, but we define green jobs quite broadly as 

employment that is associated with some aspect of environmental improvement. A scientist 

working on advanced renewable energy alternatives to CO2-producing fossil fuels is engaged in 
a green job, as is a laborer weatherizing a home or a lineman--or linewoman--building out the 

smart electric grid. 

This overview paper presents and discusses a few of the most important developments in green 

jobs over the past few years. Specifically, we examine the following questions and areas of 

interest regarding green jobs: 

• What is a green job, and what are the characteristics of those jobs? 

• Green jobs in the recovery package 

• Green jobs in action: a review of ongoing activities in this area 

• Policies to help promote the creation of green jobs 

• Leveraging private capital investment in green jobs 

• Making sure green jobs are good jobs, accessible to all. 

Findings 

Numbers and Characteristics

• Because definitions of green jobs are so broad at this point in time, it is impossible to 

generate a reliable count of how many green jobs there are in America today. We can, 

however, identify jobs in industries and occupations that are likely to be green jobs. 

Characteristics of green jobs: 

• Green jobs are good jobs: they pay more, by 10 to 20 percent, depending on the 

definition, than other jobs. 

• Green jobs are more likely to be union jobs than other jobs. 

• Green jobs are more likely to be held by men, but less likely to be held by minorities or 

urban residents, and addressing this will be a significant challenge. 

• It will take considerable outreach to make the opportunity to work in a green job widely 

available; we present various examples of programs intended to provide pathways to 

green jobs and out of poverty. 
Building the Movement

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) includes various significant investments 

in green technology and jobs. These include: 

• More than $11 billion for investments in a new smart grid, investments that will 

create thousands of miles of new or modernized high-tech transmission lines, while 

training and employing highly-skilled and well-paid lineworkers. 

• $500 million for research and job training projects that prepare workers for careers in 

energy efficiency and renewable energy. 

• $6 billion for a loan guarantee program that will enable green industries to continue 

their rapid growth. 

• $5 billion to the Weatherization Assistance Program that could save homeowners 

$350 per year on their utility bills.

There are a set of factors—policies, programs, and the interaction of key intermediaries, 

including unions, educators, and public officials—that are strongly associated with building a 

green jobs movement in communities, states, and the nation. These factors, described in detail 

below and demonstrated in a number of case studies, are: 

• a public mandate to achieve an energy conservation goal; 

• elected officials invested in meeting the goal; 

• private employers interested in creating green jobs to meet the new labor demands for 

environmentally-sound output; 

• financing sources who want to invest in the new initiatives, often involving federal 

loan guarantees; 

• extensive labor force intermediaries, including community colleges, union 

apprenticeship programs, and pubic/private training programs to serve as a linkage 

between employers and workers. 
What Is A Green Job? 

There is no official or even widely-accepted definition of what constitutes a green job. This is 

not necessarily a disadvantage, as we seek to provide a broad, “lay-of-the-land” survey in this 

report. However, in order to have a coherent discussion about green jobs, we need to identify 

some characteristics that broadly define them. 

The most general trait of green jobs is that they must be jobs that contribute in some way to the 

improvement of environmental quality. We can add to this general characterization by 

examining the far more specific definitions that have been offered by other institutions and 

groups. The United Nations Environmental Programme, for example, expands on our basic 

theme with this much more detailed explanation: 

“We define green jobs as positions in agriculture, manufacturing, construction, installation, and 

maintenance, as well as scientific and technical, administrative, and service-related activities, that 

contribute substantially to preserving or restoring environmental quality. Specifically, but not exclusively, 

this includes jobs that help to protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity; reduce energy, materials, and 

water consumption through high-efficiency and avoidance strategies; de-carbonize the economy; and 

minimize or altogether avoid generation of all forms of waste and pollution. But green jobs, as we argue 

below, also need to be good jobs that meet longstanding demands and goals of the labor movement, i.e., 

adequate wages, safe working conditions, and worker rights, including the right to organize labor unions.” 

(United Nations Environment Programme, Labour and the Environment Unit, “Green Jobs: Towards 

Decent Work in a Sustainable, Low-Carbon World.”) 

Phil Angelides, chair of the Apollo Alliance (see box below), emphasizes this last point on the 

quality of a green job: “It has to pay decent wages and benefits that can support a family. It has 

to be part of a real career path, with upward mobility. And it needs to reduce waste and pollution 

and benefit the environment.”1

Van Jones, founder and president of Green for All, adds yet another dimension, “blue-collar 

employment that has been upgraded to better respect the environment; family-supporting, careertrack, vocational, or trade-level employment in environmentally-friendly fields, such as 

electricians who install solar panels; plumbers who install solar water heaters; farmers engaged 

 

1

 Bryan Walsh, “What is a Green-Collar Job, Exactly?” Time. May 26, 2008: 

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1809506,00.html 
in organic agriculture and some bio-fuel production; and construction workers who build energyefficient green buildings, wind power farms, solar farms and wave energy farms.”2

All of these definitions consistently point to at least three crucial characteristics of green jobs: 

• Green jobs involve some task associated with improving the environment, including 

reducing carbon emissions and creating and/or using energy more efficiently; 

• Green jobs should be good jobs that provide a sustainable family wage, health and 

retirement benefits, and decent working conditions; 

• Green jobs should be available to diverse workers from across the spectrum of race, 

gender, and ethnicity. 

We consider these three characteristics to be essential to green jobs, and throughout this paper 

we will emphasize programs with the potential to create jobs that have all three characteristics. 

THE APOLLO ALLIANCE 

The Apollo Alliance is a coalition of business, environmental, religious, community, and 

labor leaders working toward a clean energy economy that hopes to put millions of 

Americans to work in 21st-century, high-quality, green-collar jobs. The name of the group 

invokes the President Kennedy’s Apollo Program, suggesting that we can create a clean 

energy economy if we devote the same national will and resources to it that we did to putting 

a man on the moon. The alliance promotes investments in energy efficiency, clean power, 

mass transit, next-generation vehicles, and emerging technologies, as well as in education and 

training. The overall goal is reduce carbon emission and oil imports, while spurring domestic 

job growth. The Apollo Alliance has played a key organizing and coordination role in many 

of the examples we provide in the text. 

 

2

 From his book, The Green Collar Economy, by Van Jones, 2008, Harper One. 
Characteristics of Green Jobs Today and the Workers Who Staff Them 

So what do green jobs in America look like? To develop an understanding of the characteristics 

of green jobs and the people who work in them, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) 

performed an analysis of workers in a variety of representative occupations and industries within 

the green sector. This is not an exhaustive analysis of green jobs, because there is no data set 

providing the precise information that would enable such an analysis. For example, our data sets 

enable us to identify persons working on the electric grid and doing home installations. But we 

cannot observe whether those workers are building the “smart grid” versus working on the 

current one, or whether an installation worker is “weatherizing” a home. However, with some 

reasonable assumptions, we can identify the prevalent occupations in highly green industries, 

which have a high likelihood of being true green jobs. 

The CEA’s analysis shows that compared to the average American job, occupations likely to be 

green tend to be better paid, and are more likely to be union jobs. For example, industrial 

machinery mechanics who work in power generation, an emerging green sector, earn about $28 

per hour. Interestingly, mechanics with similar jobs, but who do not work in that power 

generating sector, earn about $6 less per hour, suggesting a sizeable wage premium associated 

with some green jobs. In order to examine the extent of these differences across a set of 

occupations associated with green jobs, the table below shows wages for jobs in power 

generation and turbine manufacturing, two highly green industries, compared to wages for those 

same jobs in all other industries. 
Average wages in 2007 in highly green occupations, all industries compared to highly green 

industries (turbine manufacturing and electric power generating)

Green Occupations Average wage in power 

generation (PG) or 

turbine/engine 

manufacturing (TM) sectors 

Average wage for same 

occupation in all 

industries 

Wage difference for 

highly green 

industry 

(percentage) 

 

Electrical power line installers and 

repairers (PG) 

$27.43 $25.79 6.4% 

Computer control 

programmers/operators (TM) 

$17.06 $17.42 -2.1% 

Control and valve installers and 

repairers (PG) 

$31.09 $23.07 34.8% 

Electrical and electronic engineers 

(PG) 

$40.55 $41.78 -2.9% 

Electrical/electronics repairers (PG) $29.80 $24.97 19.3% 

Electricians (PG) $27.90 $23.99 16.3% 

Engine and other machine assemblers 

(TM) 

$15.49 $16.59 -6.6% 

Engineering technicians (PG) $28.49 $25.17 13.2% 

First-line supervisors/managers of 

mechanics, installers, and repairers 

(PG) 

$34.68 $28.64 21.1% 

First-line supervisors/managers 

production and operating workers 

(TM) 

$28.32 $25.82 9.7% 

Industrial and refractory machinery 

mechanics (PG) 

$27.83 $21.96 26.7% 

Lathe and turning machine tool 

setters/operators (TM) 

$17.33 $16.73 3.6% 

Machinists (TM) $18.81 $18.15 3.6% 

Mechanical engineers (TM) $35.52 $37.48 -5.2% 

Miscellaneous assemblers and 

fabricators (TM) 

$15.00 $13.89 8.0% 

Multiple machine tool 

setters/operators (TM) 

$18.01 $16.11 11.8% 

Power plant operators/ distributors/ 

dispatchers (PG) 

$29.64 $29.10 1.9% 

Welding, soldering, and brazing 

workers (TM) 

$19.19 $16.91 13.5% 

Every occupation in power 

generation or turbine/engine 

manufacturing

$29.91 NA 

 

NA 

All U.S. Occupations $20.30 

Note: CEA calculations from Occupational Employment Statistics data. Wages are reported in 2008 dollars. 

Importantly, these wage differences remain even after controlling for factors that usually explain 

variation in wages. Further analysis by the CEA shows that after controlling for such 
differences, workers in green jobs typically earn better wages than workers in comparable nongreen occupations, with a premium ranging from about 10-20 percent. This advantage is more 

substantial for workers in renewable energy industries, but the wage advantage is present for 

many kinds of green jobs. 

Furthermore, the CEA’s analysis of the characteristics of these green jobs finds higher than 

average shares of union membership (see Appendix Table A1). In 2007, about 12% of the 

overall American workforce was unionized, while green occupations (defined as above, as likely 

occupations within highly-green industries) had much higher unionization rates. For example, 

electricians, who are prevalent in the highly-green power generation sector, had a union rate of 

33%, and the industrial mechanics noted above had union rates of about 20%. 

These results are important because they show that green jobs are disproportionately good jobs. 

After decades in which the middle class has not gotten its fair share of the rewards from 

American growth and prosperity, the green sector of the economy represents a source of highquality, well-paying jobs for the middle class. These green jobs also represent an opportunity for 

workers to organize into unions in high-growth industries, allowing labor and businesses to work 

together to build a green economy. 

However, the CEA’s analysis (see appendix table) also reveals important ways in which we can 

improve the green sector of the economy. Their analysis shows that green jobs are more likely to 

be held by whites, more likely to be held by men, and more likely to be located in suburban and 

rural areas. These results point to the need to expand the opportunity to get a high-quality green 

job to all Americans, including women, minorities, and inner-city residents. We will discuss 

strategies for broadening access to green jobs below, in the section on Green Jobs and Economic 

Mobility. 
Green Jobs and Green Job Training in the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009 

The current recession is causing serious hardships for millions of Americans, but it also presents 

America with an opportunity. In charting our way out of this downturn, we have a chance to not 

only boost our economy, but to also address our pressing energy challenges by putting 

Americans back to work in green industries. We can develop new opportunities for today’s 

American workers and for their children. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R. 

1), signed into law on February 17, represents a recognition of this opportunity, and is a down 

payment on the investments in green industry and infrastructure that are needed to take 

advantage of it. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) establishes crucial 

infrastructure development programs and job training programs that will help green industries 

grow and thrive in America, and supports green investment that will spur demand for the green 

sector of the economy. By making investments now in our energy infrastructure, and ensuring 

that American workers have the skills they need to succeed in these new high-quality green jobs, 

the ARRA takes critical first steps in making America a fertile place for sustained green growth 

and job creation for years to come. 

Key provisions of the ARRA that will help create green jobs and pave the way for future green 

investments include: 

• Building Thousands of Miles of High-Tech Transmission Lines: We know that the 

existing electricity grid today is insufficient and outdated. For example, North Dakota – a 

state with significant wind energy potential – cannot carry that energy to the population 

centers that need the electricity most without a new transmission superhighway. In order 

to bring significant amounts of renewable energy online, we need to invest in tens of 

thousands of miles of new, high voltage national transmission lines. With more than $11 

billion for investments in a new smart grid, the ARRA will jumpstart the modernization 

of electric grid. These investments will create thousands of miles of new or modernized 

high-tech transmission lines. The bill will also deploy 40 million new “smart meters” 

and modernize the power grid itself, allowing smarter, more efficient delivery of power 
that will save energy, lower power bills, and enable future innovation in renewable 

energy and electric vehicles. 

The ARRA does not only invest in the physical infrastructure needed to create a 21st

century Smart Grid, it also invests in the workforce needed to build and maintain this 

system. The $100 million workforce training program included in the ARRA can 

overcome a key obstacle: a projected a shortage of lineworkers as the aging transmission 

workforce enters retirement. Workers who train today will be prepared to construct 

thousands of new miles in the future. These training programs will produce the highlyskilled and well-paid line workers that we need to build a 21st century Smart Grid. 

• Greening the Federal Government: The federal government is the largest energy 

consumer in the world. Investing in energy efficiency upgrades to federal buildings 

around the country will create jobs while substantially reducing American energy usage 

and slashing the government’s energy bill by 25%. The ARRA provides $4.5 billion to 

the General Services Administration to convert federal buildings into high-performance 

green buildings, which generally combine energy efficiency and renewable energy 

production to minimize the energy use of the buildings. In addition, the ARRA provides 

funding for acquiring greener vehicles as part of the federal vehicle fleet.

• Investing in Green Retrofits: Energy efficiency, by many measures, is our fastest, 

cheapest, and cleanest opportunity to address our energy challenges. Improving the 

energy efficiency of everything from our cars and homes to our factories and offices will 

not only help us meet our long-term energy challenges, but also deliver energy savings 

today. Simple improvements like upgrading a home’s furnace, sealing leaky ducts, fixing 

windows and adding insulation can save families up to $350 a year on their energy 

expenses. For many middle class families, these are significant savings. The ARRA will 

boost funding for programs that will enable energy efficiency retrofits for homes and 

businesses around the country, including $5 billion to the Weatherization Assistance 

Program. The bill will provide energy efficiency grants to states, enabling them to 
continue state and local energy efficiency programs with a track record of proven success 

promoting green investments that save energy and create jobs. 

• Establishing a Clean Energy Finance Authority: Encouraging investment and 

developing financing opportunities for new clean energy projects will drive the 

development of the green sector of our economy. In order to draw investment to these 

crucial areas, spurring growth, innovation and job creation, the ARRA creates a new 

Clean Energy Finance Authority (CEFA) to help ensure the availability of financing for 

green investments. At the heart of the CEFA is a $6 billion loan guarantee program that 

will encourage banks to finance green investments with confidence, enabling green 

industries to continue their rapid growth. By helping to remove the obstacles to 

expansion for clean energy companies, the CEFA will unleash the dynamism of the green 

sector of our economy and drive the creation of high-quality green jobs in vibrant, 

growing industries. 

• Launching a Green Job Training Program: Workers have always been the backbone 

of the American economy, and in order to make sure green industries continue to expand, 

we will need to teach our workers the skills they need for high-quality new green jobs. 

The ARRA addresses this need by funding workforce training initiatives, including $500 

million for an Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Worker Training Program that 

will be administered by the Department of Labor. A program was authorized by the 

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, but never funded. In addition, existing 

programs at the Department of Labor could better target their training to emerging green 

industries. Many groups involved in workforce training are already prepared to apply for 

funds and begin training programs. These workforce training programs will ensure a 

plentiful supply of the most important input to the green sector of the economy: 

Americans workers with the skills they need to excel in new green jobs. 

The energy efficiency and renewable energy industries have been remarkably successful over the 

past several years, growing at impressive rates and generating high-quality green jobs across 

America. Without support, the current recession will force green industries to abandon their 
plans for expansion, halting job creation while setting back progress toward American energy 

independence by years. But with the help of the strategically targeted green programs in the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the green sector of our economy will be able, not 

only to weather this recession, but to continue expanding through the current downturn, 

becoming a source of high-quality green jobs when America needs them most. 

Green Jobs in Action: Examples of Local Initiatives to Promote Green Jobs 

Throughout the country, people are working together to improve the environment and create 

green jobs. In many cases, these efforts engage a wide range of stakeholders, from public 

officials, to unions, to advocacy groups representing both environmental and social justice 

concerns. In this section, we highlight some of these initiatives, explain their structure, and 

discuss how they are working. 

Our goal here is not simply to describe best practices. We also intend to identify to the “pieces 

of the green jobs puzzle,” i.e., those factors that help to incubate quality green jobs in a given 

community. Those elements often involve a public mandate (a requirement that some share of 

energy production comes from renewables, for example), collaboration between public and 

private actors to identify and tap relevant opportunities, financing mechanisms, workforce 

interventions to ensure workers have the skills they need, and the involvement of unions and 

community groups to make sure the interests of workers and community members are 

represented. 

Numerous cities, including Los Angeles, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, New York, Portland, and 

many others, have green job programs up-and-running, and their investments are already 

generating significant returns. 

 

The Los Angeles model represents a highly evolved example of the green jobs model, involving 

a diverse set of environmental initiatives and a very large group of stakeholders – from the office 

of Mayor Villaraigosa and the city council, to labor unions and businesses, to educators and 
advocacy groups representing potential green job holders. Most of the “pieces of the puzzle,” 

articulated below, play an active role in the LA case study. In particular, one sees in LA a deep 

commitment to providing less advantaged workers an opportunity to get green jobs. 

Case Study #1: Los Angeles: Extensive Labor Market Intermediaries Train Workers to Fill 

Newly Created Green Jobs

The City of Los Angeles has undertaken or is currently undertaking several initiatives that, 

together, begin to constitute a model for how cities can maximize the benefits of “going green” 

for working families. As is often the case, necessity was the mother of policy innovation. A few 

years ago, the city faced a number of stark challenges including: a state renewable energy 

mandate (a statewide “portfolio standard” requiring 20% renewable energy by 2017) and a state 

cap on greenhouse gas emissions; an impending shortage of skilled construction workers; 

entrenched poverty and joblessness in many low-income neighborhoods; and toxic levels of 

diesel pollution that were imposing huge health costs and blocking the growth of the nation’s 

largest port complex. 

In the past year, Los Angeles has adopted a comprehensive approach to redevelopment which 

will ensure that city-subsidized development projects are built green and serve as vehicles for 

moving low-income residents into middle-class construction careers. The Port of Los Angeles 

has also begun to implement a comprehensive solution to freight-related air pollution that will 

increase efficiency, enhance security, and improve work conditions and living standards for port 

truck drivers. Most important is the fact that these initiatives are being undertaken on a large 

scale: the city’s construction policy is expected to impact 15,000 jobs over five years while the 

Clean Trucks Program (discussed below) could affect as many as 16,000 port truck drivers. 

In 2008, the City of Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) adopted a 

landmark policy designed to protect the environment, safeguard the interests of taxpayers, and 

ensure that city-supported projects create good construction jobs and career pathways for city 

residents. The Construction Careers and Project Stabilization Policy establishes minimum labor 

standards and a process for avoiding labor disruptions by means of a master agreement between 
the CRA and local building trades unions. The policy requires participating contractors and 

unions to make construction job opportunities available to local residents, including individuals 

who face barriers to employment such as a criminal record or a limited education. 

The policy is being implemented alongside a requirement that large subsidized projects meet the 

U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) 

standards. In this way, city leaders have begun to lay the foundations for building a green-collar 

construction workforce in Los Angeles. The UCLA Center for Labor Research and Education 

projects that the policy will make at least 5,000 apprentice-level construction jobs available to 

residents of neighborhoods with high levels of unemployment over the next five years. At least 

1,500 jobs are expected to go to individuals who might otherwise remain homeless, unemployed, 

dependent on welfare programs, or caught up in the criminal justice system. But the most 

important result of the Construction Careers policy will be to leverage public investments in 

economic development to turn short-term jobs into long-term careers in the construction 

industry. 

The Port of Los Angeles, meanwhile, has adopted a landmark “Clean Trucks Program,” which is 

expected to cut pollution from harbor trucks by 80% and pave the way to safe, clean, and 

sustainable growth for the port complex. The program requires motor carriers to replace old, 

polluting trucks with clean trucks, and to replace a workforce of poorly paid independentcontractors with a stable workforce of company drivers. In doing so, the program will not only 

raise labor standards for newly-minted green-collar workers but also allow port expansion to 

continue, creating new green trucking jobs. 

Finally, a diverse group of stakeholders convened by the Apollo Alliance, a national 

interdisciplinary group dedicated to reducing global warming and creating good, green jobs (see 

box), has begun to overhaul the city’s workforce development infrastructure to address the 

challenge posed by the clean technology revolution. This effort has focused on ensuring that 

disparate populations, including traditionally disadvantaged workers, received both access to 

these jobs and the training needed to succeed in them. 
This paragraph, from a case study of the LA case, provides a telling example of the extent to 

which intermediaries have been involved in these efforts: 

“The Green Careers Training Initiative is being designed by the Los Angeles Infrastructure and Sustainable 

Jobs Collaborative, a public-private partnership of key stakeholders led by the Regional Economic 

Development Institute (REDI), an intermediary based at Los Angeles Trade-Technical College (LATTC). 

The collaborative includes SCOPE/LA Apollo; the Mayor’s Office; the LADWP [LA Dept of Water and 

Power]; the Los Angeles Unified School District; California State University Los Angeles (CSULA) College 

of Engineering, Computer Science, and Technology; the IBEW Local 18-LADWP Joint Training Institute; 

the Southern California Gas Company; Metropolitan Water District of Southern California; and the 

Southeast-Crenshaw Worksource (WIA one-stop) Center.”3

As of this writing, these collaborations are successfully training workers and placing them in 

green jobs. Interestingly, beneficiaries of the programs come from quite different walks of life, 

including young, entry-level workers with little experience in the relevant trades, such as 

building or electrical work, as well as older, more experienced workers, already in these fields 

but needing skill upgrades. 

One example of a successful collaborative training program is the Electrical Training Institute of 

Southern California (ETI) a labor-management partnership jointly sponsored by a union—the 

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers—and a business coalition of private contractors. 

The training follows an apprenticeship model, requiring over 1,000 hours and classroom work 

and 8,000 hours of on-the-job-training, making it a very rigorous program. Even graduates of 

this extensive training are eligible for constant upgrades as the technology advances (e.g., a thirty 

hour course of photovoltaics was recently added). Importantly, the costs of training (which is 

free to participants) involve less than 10% public funding with the rest paid for by the unions and 

the contractors through a labor/management partnership agreement. Apprentices earn about $20 

per hour in wages and benefits, which can rise to $50 once they graduate from the program. 

Over 600 candidates, both older and younger workers, have completed this training.4

In San Diego, the IBEW has been training electricians in renewable energy skills for the past 

decade, supplying workers to contractors installing solar panels on a range of buildings. As in 

 

3 See Greener Pathways: Job and Workforce Development in the Clean Energy Economy, by Sarah White and Jason 

Walsh, 2008, Center on Wisconsin Strategy, Workforce Alliance, Apollo Alliance. 4

 Op cit.
the LA case, apprentices work for contractors and receive on-the-job training, while pursuing 

further classroom training at night through a local community college, where they can work 

towards an AA degree. 

Bracken Hendricks, an expert in the green jobs movement, points out that apprentices can double 

their pay from about $14 and hour to almost thirty “before graduating to journeyman inside 

wireman, journeyman sound technician or journeyman residential wireman. A journeyman inside 

wireman, for example, starts at $35.40/hour.” Again, the fees for these programs are paid for by 

labor/management agreements. 

But as always, there is still work to be done. Hendricks points out that the San Diego IBEW 

local is 40-45% Hispanic, but women and African-Americans are underrepresented, a consistent 

theme in this literature. It is here where the work of Van Jones, president and founder of Green 

for All, and his proposal for a Clean Energy Corps (see box) comes into play. These 

organizations have made significant inroads in linking the goals of poverty reduction, green 

production, and the creation of green jobs. 

Green for All describes itself as a national organization dedicated to building an inclusive green 

economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty. The methods and tools of the operation are 

much like those described throughout this study, including public/private partnerships, 

connecting with labor market intermediaries for training, etc. But the organization also 

maintains a deep commitment to ensuring that persons of color and those from disadvantaged 

communities get an opportunity to get green jobs, thereby tapping into a growth sector and a 

potential foothold into the middle class. This goal of ensuring that high-quality green jobs are 

available to people of all backgrounds is discussed in more detail in the section on Green Jobs 

and Economic Mobility below. 
Case Study #2: Washington State: Building A Climate Change Framework with an 

Emphasis on Green Job Creation

In 2007, the Washington State legislature adopted an ambitious set of goals, first set out in an 

executive order by Governor Chris Gregoire, for reducing Washington’s greenhouse gas 

emissions and dramatically increasing the number of green jobs in the state. 

As in LA (and in every other case we encountered) public and private stakeholders quickly 

began to coalesce to meet the legislated goals. NGOs, such as The Washington State Apollo 

Alliance (see box), Climate Solutions, Solid Ground, and The Workforce Alliance, began 

organizing and working with state and union actors, such as the Workforce Training and 

Education Coordinating Board, the Washington State Labor Council, the Washington Workforce 

Association, and the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. 

The participation of this broad set of organizations, many of which have already been involved in 

the creation and administration of other successful workforce development programs in 

Washington, was crucial both in designing the strongest possible program and in building 

political support for the proposal. 

More recent legislation has helped to move the state closer to meeting its green goals for 

reducing carbon emissions while emphasizing the creation of good green jobs: 

• The Employment Security Department (ESD) has been directed to analyze the labor 

market to identify high-demand green industries based on their importance to the 

development of a clean energy economy and their potential to create high-quality green 

jobs. There is to be a particular emphasis on green industries that create jobs in highwage occupations and have career ladders that allow workers to advance to these highwage jobs. 
• The State Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board has been authorized to 

create Green Industry Skill Panels (GISPs), which would bring together business 

representatives from green industries, labor unions representing workers in those 

industries, educational institutions, and more local workforce development organizations. 

These panels would be funded on a competitive basis, and would seek to identify demand 

for high-wage occupations and careers within green industries and develop innovative 

strategies for recruiting and training the workers needed to meet this demand. 

• The legislation would also create a Green-Collar Job Training Fund, which would train 

workers for high-wage occupations in growing green industries and occupations on the 

pathway to these high-quality green jobs. The Fund would be administered in accordance 

with the research conducted by the ESD and the GISPs on high-demand green industries 

and good green jobs. The Fund would distribute competitive grants to organizations or 

group of organizations with proven success implementing workforce training programs. 

These grants would also seek to fund training programs targeted towards adults and youth 

in families below twice the poverty line, dislocated workers, and entry-level workers in 

green industries. 

THE CLEAN ENERGY CORPS 

The Clean Energy Corps (CEC) is a bold proposal by Green For All and its partners to bring 

together Americans across class, generations, background and experience to advance a 

national effort to stop global warming while increasing economic opportunity and promoting 

active citizenship. The CEC would bring together Americans who want to serve in the fight 

against global warming, yet lack organized opportunities to do so, with other Americans who 

seek pathways out of poverty or better employment in the clean energy economy, yet lack the 

necessary skills or connections to employers. Additionally it would connect even more 

American homeowners, businesses, local governments and schools, who want to reduce 

energy costs where they live, work and learn, but lack the financing to do so. The goal is to 

capture the imagination of America, unite constituencies, and motivate millions to act. 
Financing Green Jobs 

The history of energy investment in any large, open economy has involved both public and 

private investment, with the public sector often playing an initial role, leading the way for 

venture private funding. Green energy, and thus green job creation, is no different. Many of the 

firms and industries creating green jobs today present real growth opportunities for private 

investors. According to a study by Roger Bezdek of Management Information Systems, Inc., the 

renewable energy industry (excluding hydropower) grew at over three times the rate of the 

American economy as a whole. Accelerating private investment in these fields has the potential 

to help boost the numbers of green jobs, while also offering clear environmental benefits and 

solid opportunities for profit in the private sector. As a result, one of the important challenges in 

developing a green jobs policy is to leverage the unique capabilities and resources of the private 

sector to maximize the creation of green jobs. 

One powerful mechanism by which the government can encourage the private sector to invest in 

areas that will create green jobs is by providing access to financing. Government assistance in 

securing financing, through programs like the Clean Energy Finance Authority described below, 

is critical to growing industries like renewable energy, which must borrow to fund their rapid 

expansion. In today’s credit markets, where even creditworthy borrowers face real difficulty 

raising capital, such reliable financing is all the more important. This shortage of credit could 

stifle investment in green industries, and as investment declines, so does job creation. 

Using government resources to ensure the availability of financing to companies creating green 

jobs will unleash the dynamism of the green sector of the economy and spur expansion that will 

give a boost to the economy while putting more Americans to work. A number of useful 

strategies have been put forward for working with the private sector to create green jobs; some 

have already been put into practice, other merely proposed. Three of the most successful and 

promising strategies are explored below. 
The Clean Energy Finance Authority 

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, signed into law on February 17, establishes a 

Clean Energy Finance Authority (CEFA), which will coordinate the Federal government’s 

efforts to enhance America’s investment in renewable energy. At the heart of the program is $6 

billion in funding for loan guarantees that are expected to leverage over $75 billion in new 

private capital for renewable energy investments that will create jobs. This program will build 

on existing loan guarantees administered by the Department of Energy and the Department of 

Agriculture that encourage investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and biofuels. 

Major renewable energy investments, like building a new wind farm or constructing a new solar 

plant, cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Government assistance in securing financing helps 

renewable energy firms overcome one of the major obstacles to their continued growth. 

Although financing is an important hurdle in the best of times, this problem is exacerbated by the 

conditions in credit markets today. The unavailability of loans has already caused many clean 

energy companies to scale back their plans for expansion; after a record-setting year in 2008, the 

wind industry may cancel half of its projects in 2009. 

Of course, when major projects like these are scaled back or canceled---when the factories that 

make wind turbines and solar panels to supply major renewable energy projects cut production or 

even shut down—green jobs are lost. This process has already begun, with some of the biggest 

renewable energy companies temporarily closing American factories.

The CEFA’s loan guarantee program is designed to address this problem. The Federal 

government guarantees that banks will recoup their investment if they lend to clean energy 

projects. Because banks can be confident their loans will be repaid, they can confidently expand 

their lending, which gives clean energy companies reliable access to financing for their 

investments in new projects. New wind farms and solar power projects, in turn, provide business 

for wind turbine and solar cell manufacturers. By removing obstacles to getting financing for 

clean energy firms, this loan guarantee program leverages the private sector to drive green job 

creation. 
Existing loan guarantee programs have been very successful, and the Clean Energy Finance 

Authority will continue that success. But no program is perfect, and there are small 

improvements that could be made to these loan guarantee programs to significantly improve their 

uptake and success. Perhaps the most important is simply to reduce the complexity and increase 

the flexibility of the application wherever possible. Uncertainty about criteria for participation 

and details of the application processes can deter potential participants, limiting the effectiveness 

of the program. Existing programs may also deter investment by offering guarantees only to 

certain types of investors, usually banks, or by guaranteeing only part of the loan. Continued 

refinements to loan guarantee programs will help to ensure that every dollar of public money 

committed to the program will leverage the maximum amount of private investment. 

Production Tax Credit (PTC) for Renewable Energy 

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 created a Production Tax Credit (PTC) for the generation of 

renewable energy. The measure allowed an income tax credit of 1.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, 

which has since risen to 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour due to inflation-indexing. The tax credit is 

available to wind, geothermal, and certain other renewable energy generation projects, of which 

wind power is the largest.5

The PTC helps make renewable energy price-competitive with fossil-fuel energy generation, 

which helps create jobs as investment in and generation of wind power and other renewable 

energy creates many more jobs than comparable investments in fossil fuels. According to 

estimates by economist Robert Pollin, green investments generate 2.7 times as many jobs as 

fossil fuel spending. Furthermore, the PTC has been an extremely important driver of 

development in the wind power industry. By making wind power competitive with fossil fuels, 

the PTC encourages further investment in wind power, which in turn improves technology and 

leads to further gains in competitiveness from wind power. 

 

5 The PTC is not available for solar power, but a solar energy investment tax credit is available to businesses and 

individuals who install solar energy systems in their homes and businesses.
However, since its creation, the PTC has usually been extended for no more than a few years at a 

time, and has been allowed to expire three times (in 1999, 2001, and 2003) before it was 

eventually renewed. This erratic treatment has caused the wind power industry to expand in fits 

and starts rather than experience the steady expansion that reliably creates high-quality green 

jobs year after year. In each of the three PTC expirations, the following year saw a sharp dropoff 

in new wind projects. In addition to the direct effects of these expirations, repeatedly allowing 

the PTC to lapse has the additional downside of creating uncertainty about the mid- to long-term 

future of wind power, which further discourages investment. 

The Recovery Act is very helpful in this regard, as it extends the PTC for three years (through 

December 31, 2012) for firms that produce electricity from wind, biomass, geothermal energy, 

gas from the biodegradation or burning of municipal solid waste, and qualified hydroelectric 

production. Perhaps just as importantly, the Recovery Act included important steps to make the 

PTC more effective at encouraging renewable energy production in the midst of a deep 

recession. Firms that owe the government no taxes, because they are not currently turning a 

profit, are not helped by the production tax credit. This is a problem right now, given the present 

downturn. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act addressed this problem through a 

number of mechanisms, including allowing businesses to take more of the credit upfront and 

temporarily converting the credit to a grant. These temporary changes will help to ensure that 

the Production Tax Credit continues to provide an incentive for renewable energy development 

despite the current recession. 

Milwaukee Energy Efficiency (Me2) 

Thus far, this section has focused on the ways in which government can ensure the availability of 

financing for renewable energy investments. However, the green sector of the economy also 

contains many jobs in energy efficiency. Financing investments in energy efficiency presents a 

different set of challenges. Investments in energy efficiency are much less centralized than 

investments in renewable energy, as much of the work in energy efficiency involves retrofitting 

and weatherizing homes and businesses, whereas renewable energy projects are more likely to 

involve the creation of large generation facilities. 
The small-scale, decentralized nature of energy efficiency projects makes it all the more 

important to develop creative strategies for using government resources to support investment. 

This is particularly true in the case of investments in energy efficiency for residential buildings. 

Residents, particularly renters, may be reluctant to invest in energy efficiency measures that 

would create substantial cost savings over several years because the residents are unsure if they 

will occupy the building long enough for the savings to recover the initial cost of the investment. 

Yet solutions to these problems, which have the potential to facilitate significant investments in 

energy efficiency, have been put forward. One promising proposal for financing energy 

efficiency investments is the Milwaukee Energy Efficiency project (Me2), which is being 

developed by the City of Milwaukee and the Center on Wisconsin Strategy (COWS) in 

conjunction with local business, labor, and community leaders. 

The model for Me2 is straightforward. The financing challenge, a typical one in the energy 

sector, is that up-front costs of weatherization or other efficiency improvements lead to larger 

savings down the road. To address this challenge, the Me2 program uses a public/private mix of 

investment capital to pay for weatherization in properties where such work would produce large 

savings. The savings to the consumer are then paid back by only gradually reducing their 

monthly bill. That is, on-bill savings initially represent less than their actual amount, so that 

owners and occupants of buildings can repay the cost of energy efficiency investments through a 

charge on their monthly energy bill.6

 

The program also includes an important provision that attaches the repayments to the property, 

not the individual. If a building is weatherized in the Me2 program, and the occupant moves out 

before the cost of the weatherization is fully repaid, the next occupant would take over the 

repayment obligation. This way, occupants no longer face an incentive not to invest because 

they might not recoup the benefits. They start saving money as soon as the investment is made, 

 

6 That is, suppose the pre-weatherization bill was $200/month and the post-weatherization bill is $150. During the 

repayment period, the consumer pays, say, $180 a month, reaping some benefits from the weatherization and 

returning some to original investors. Once the work is paid off, the full savings redound to the consumer. 
and if they leave before repayment is complete, the subsequent occupant receives the benefits of 

the retrofit and takes over payment. 

The Me2 program provides a mechanism for individuals to easily repay the loans that are needed 

to fund investments in energy efficiency, coordinates with banks and contractors to arrange 

loans, energy auditors, and contractors, and provides part of the upfront cost of improvements. 

By coordinating all the parties involved in energy efficiency projects, ensuring easy repayment, 

and providing part of the up-front cost, the program would be able to leverage the resources of 

private individuals to greatly increase investments in energy efficiency. A similar approach is 

moving forward in various states and cities, including in Michigan under the leadership of 

Governor Jennifer Granholm, in Philadelphia under the leadership of Mayor Michael Nutter, and 

in Oregon through the efforts of state legislators. 

The green sector of the economy is growing rapidly, and continues to present enormous 

opportunities for future growth. Private sector investors are often seeking opportunities to invest 

in precisely the industries that will create high-quality green jobs for working families. As a 

result, one of the most important roles of the government in encouraging the creation of these 

jobs is to remove impediments to private investment in green industries. The public sector and 

the private sector each have strengths and weaknesses, and it is important for the government to 

recognize its own weaknesses and actively seek ways to draw upon the strengths of the private 

sector to advance a green jobs program. By structuring public policy in ways that encourage 

financing of green investments and working to ease the bottlenecks in green investment, the 

government can leverage the unique capabilities of the private sector to spur green job creation. 

Green Jobs and Economic Mobility 

Green jobs can also provide a pathway into the middle class for those who are struggling 

economically. As President Obama noted at the announcement of the Middle Class Task Force 

on January 30, the task force’s work will include developing policy solutions for “people who 

aspire to be in the middle class. We’re not forgetting the poor. They are going to be front and 

center, because they, too, share our American Dream. And we’re going to make sure that they 

can get a piece of that American Dream if they’re willing to work for it.” 
Green jobs are a natural place to begin this effort. The green sector of our economy is still 

developing, and will generate many jobs and career pathways that did not previously exist. At 

this early stage, we have an opportunity to ensure that this sector is open to workers seeking that 

first rung on the ladder to the middle class, particularly younger workers who are just starting out 

and trying to overcome the disadvantages of their childhood. 

The skills young people learn today can help propel them through a lifelong career in the 

growing green sector of the economy. Our country’s future, and the economic security of our 

aging population, depends on younger workers becoming successful and productive citizens. At 

the same time, pathways into good green jobs should also be made available to older workers 

who are struggling to support their families and looking for opportunities to join the middle 

class. 

One way to open doors for these workers is to provide access to training programs where they 

can learn the skills they need to succeed in a green job. To maximize their effectiveness, these 

programs should be targeted on training for jobs in particular sectors of the green economy 

where there is known to be an unmet demand for skilled workers. Green job training programs 

should also provide support services to help disadvantaged workers address various barriers to 

employment. 

Already, some innovative work is underway in this area. Here are just three examples of local 

initiatives that are providing green job training and opportunities for disadvantaged workers. 

• Bronx Environmental Stewardship Training (BEST) Program: Run by Sustainable 

South Bronx, an environmental justice nonprofit, the BEST Program trains local lowincome residents for skilled labor in green industries. Participants, nearly all of whom 

have been on some form of public assistance, go through a 10-week training program for 

jobs involved in green building, urban forestry, and other green industries. The program 

awards certificates for the various competencies in which it provides training, and also 

helps trainees to develop basic job skills. Finally, BEST helps place graduates in local 
green businesses and follows those placed for up to three years. BEST graduates 

continue to be in high demand, in large part because of Sustainable South Bronx’s 

commitment to partnering with business and closely tracking the evolving needs of the 

green labor market. Over 80% of BEST graduates are still employed, and 15% have 

gone to college. After 5 years of success, BEST is now a model for other cities looking 

to give their low income residents a pathway into the new green economy.

• Solar Richmond: Based in California, Solar Richmond combines the aims of 

weatherizing low income homes and providing pathways out of poverty for its lowincome residents, particularly minority youth. The program connects residents with the 

city’s nonprofit low-income assistance and construction training entity to get trained in 

construction techniques. Solar Richmond trainees then get an extra 2-week solar skills 

module. Finally, Solar Richmond partners with local construction and solar installation 

businesses, as well as the nonprofit that does most of Richmond’s low income solar 

installations, to place their participants. While the program is fairly new, 85 percent of 

graduates have been placed with employers. 

• Mile High Youth Corps (MHYC): MHYC connects urban youth aged 16-24 with green 

service activities to teach job and life skills. Crews of 8-10 work together on 

environmental projects around the city of Denver, including energy conservation in lowincome housing, public land and water conservation, and, as part of the federallysupported YouthBuild program, green construction of new affordable housing. The work 

is paid and provides on-the-job training, which is accompanied by Corps-to-Career 

classes that teach job search and job preparedness skills. Corps members also receive 

basic education to make sure that they are ready to succeed post-program. In just one 

year, MHYC members contributed 41,000 hours of community service to Denver’s 

neighborhoods, earned 21 GEDs, and won 50 AmeriCorps educational awards for a total 

of $100,776 towards further education. 

Having a full-time job that pays above the minimum wage represents economic progress in and 

of itself for many program participants. Some previously had no income at all, or very meager 
incomes from public assistance; others were working at minimum wage jobs. But an additional 

goal of green job training initiatives should be to ensure that disadvantaged workers can get on a 

career pathway that leads to greater opportunity and the family-sustaining wages that middleskill green jobs can provide. 

Green job training programs can also be an important tool in breaking down barriers that have 

prevented communities of color from realizing their full economic potential. For example, preapprenticeship programs at community colleges, like the Seattle Vocational Institute’s 

Construction Training Program, can help open up new pathways into green labor apprenticeship 

programs for low-skilled minorities and women. Another strategy, which has been employed 

successfully in Newark, New Jersey, is to require green economic development projects to train 

local low-income residents for the construction jobs that they create. Initiatives like these can 

help ensure that the green building boom creates new opportunities for those seeking pathways 

out of poverty. 

The Administration can jump-start more of these efforts with the funding provided in the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for green job training. The Recovery Act 

provides $750 million for a program of competitive grants for worker training and placement in 

high growth and emerging industry sectors. Of these funds, $500 million is specifically set aside 

for research, labor exchange, and job training projects that prepare workers for careers in energy 

efficiency and renewable energy. 

Secretary of Labor Designee Solis brings particular expertise in this area, as a principal author of 

the Green Jobs Act of 2007. The Labor Department can provide leadership in targeting 

disadvantaged populations and fostering partnerships among employers, state and local 

government, labor unions, and community-based organizations, to ensure that green job training 

programs bring new people into the labor market in the most promising sectors of a local 

economy. Coordinating efforts among federal agencies will also be important, for example, to 

connect the efforts of the Departments of Labor, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development 

with the Corporation for National and Community Service. 
With these partnerships and by employing these new resources, the Administration can fund and 

develop model programs that will train thousands of Americans for the new green jobs of the 

future, while helping to provide them with a pathway into the middle class. 

Conclusion 

Policies to Help Promote the Creation of Green Jobs: The Pieces of the Puzzle Come 

Together in Philadelphia 

A key goal of our overview is to identify the “pieces of the green jobs puzzle”—the policies, 

institutions, stakeholders, and partnerships that are part of a successful green jobs movement in a 

community, be it a city, town, or rural area. 

After reviewing successful models, either up-and-running or more nascent, the architecture for a 

successful green jobs initiative appears to include these components: 

• a public mandate to achieve an energy conservation goal; 

• elected officials invested in meeting the goal; 

• private employers interested in creating green jobs to meet the new labor demands for 

environmentally-sound output; 

• financing sources who want to invest in the new initiatives, often involving federal 

loan guarantees; 

• extensive labor force intermediaries, including community colleges, union 

apprenticeship programs, and public/private training programs serving as a linkage 

between employers and workers and ensure that green jobs are good jobs; 

• partnerships and coordinating mechanisms for all of the above. 

We briefly describe each of these, while some, like financing, have been explained more 

thoroughly above. Following each brief description is an example of this puzzle piece in practice 

in the city of Philadelphia, where Mayor Michael Nutter has been aggressively pressing to 

implement these pieces to build a green jobs movement. 
A public mandate: A majority of states have implemented Renewable Portfolio Standards 

(RPS), which mandate a minimum reliance on renewable sources in the generation of energy 

used in the state. Similarly, many cities and towns have set demanding targets for greenhouse 

gas reduction emitted from their communities and have committed to enhancing green building 

codes, the tree canopy, and regional transit systems to foster sustainable neighborhoods. These 

mandates have multiple motivations: 

• to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change; 

• to reduce the state or locality’s exposure to high and volatile energy prices; 

• to create new jobs for their citizens in the green economy. 

In action: In Philadelphia, an ambitious sustainability framework (“Green Works for 

Philadelphia”) outlines fifteen targets the City is committed to meeting by 2015. The 

City’s plan is integrated with state-level mandates such as Governor Ed Rendell’s 

Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (requiring utilities to source 18% of their power 

from renewables by 2020) and with the state’s new Act 129 (which mandates a 1% by 

2011 and 3% by 2013 reduction in base load electricity consumption). These public 

mandates create incentives and generate resources for green jobs investment. For 

example, Act 129 is expected to generate $85 million of energy savings per year in 

metropolitan Philadelphia service territory to pay for programs to reduce electricity 

consumption, much of which will be devoted to the installation of weatherization in 

residential, commercial, and institutional buildings. 

Elected Officials: Engaged public officials who are dedicated to improving the environment and 

creating good jobs are, of course, an integral piece of the puzzle. Virtually every step in this 

chain, including the one just noted—a mandate to replace fossil fuel consumption with 

renewables—involves support from the public sector. Note, importantly, that especially at the 

local level, such support does not necessarily involve public spending. More often, it involves 

coordination among key players, setting up the right incentives, and identifying and overcoming 

existing barriers. In many cases we observed, one of those barriers was access to green jobs by 

women and persons of color, groups that might otherwise be less likely to get some of these jobs. 
In action: In Philadelphia, Mayor Nutter has challenged Philadelphia to become “the 

greenest city in America.” The challenge is not to become the greenest city government, 

and the Mayor’s challenge is predicated on partnerships beyond government and, indeed, 

beyond the city limits. The Mayor’s Sustainability Advisory Board consists of leaders 

drawn from three sectors: non-profit leaders who educate and advocate for green issues, 

public-sector leaders from suburban counties and state agencies, and private-sector 

leaders from both business and labor. The Mayor’s commitment, including the nation’s 

first big-city cabinet-level Director of Sustainability, ensures that the public mandates 

described above become an organizing principle of policy development and operational 

practice across every aspect of government. 

Private employers: The vast majority of green jobs in America will be created by private 

employers, not by the government. Yes, government at all levels can and should work with 

businesses to create the structure—by creating the monetary and regulatory incentives, by 

addressing the siting issues, and by covering some of the high fixed costs that cannot be 

externalized—within which green jobs can flourish. But at the beginning and the end of the day, 

private employers must be the ones who create green jobs in this country. 

In action: In Philadelphia, this emerging green economy consists of a vast regional array 

of existing and expanding private-sector firms that range from architecture and landscape 

design and building companies, to urban agriculture and food distribution through 

farmer’s markets and co-ops, to small and growing weatherization and solar installation 

companies, to global-scale manufacturing facilities for both wind, solar, and bio-fuel 

technology, and finally to research institutions conducting path-breaking R&D. The 

Building Owners Management Association, the American Society of Heating, 

Refrigeration, and Air-conditioning Engineers, the Regional Labor Council of the AFLCIO, the Delaware Valley Green Building Council, and many other private-sector 

employer and labor associations are actively engaged with the City and Counties on 

implementing a green jobs strategy. The Greater Philadelphia Green Business 

Commitment is creating building owner and tenant checklists that help foster further 

demand for green jobs. 
Financing Sources: Much like private employers must be at the heart of green job creation, 

private investors must play a key role in financing the investments in green technological 

advances that will themselves promote the green jobs movement. As we discuss above, there is a 

relatively new capital marketplace for these investments to flow through, but there is a clear role 

for the federal government here. The history of major regime shifts of energy in this country has 

always involved a combination of public and private investment, and renewable energy, battery 

technology, retrofits, and weatherization will be no different. In the absence of public lending 

incentives, like loan guarantees, it is likely that a sub-optimal level of investment will occur in 

these areas. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act recognizes this reality, devoting 

billions of dollars to such lending initiatives. 

In action: In Philadelphia, the Mayor’s office has proposed the creation of a new public 

authority that can attract and pool a variety of capital sources to support large-scale 

investment, especially in weatherization, building retrofits, and green infrastructure in the 

water and street systems. A public authority can borrow directly from capital markets and 

participate in federal programs including Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds (zero 

interest bonds that provide tax credit to those who hold them7

). The city’s funding 

authority would also provide the mechanism by which these funds could be revolved, 

using part of the energy savings from businesses and households as the repayment 

stream, until the city and region’s entire building stock was brought to optimal energy 

efficiency. 

Extensive labor market intermediaries: For a variety of important reasons, green job initiatives 

throughout the nation have depended on a broad set of intermediaries to help ensure: 

• workers receive the training they need to do these jobs; 

• green jobs are good jobs, with fair pay and benefits; 

• green jobs are available to all who desire and are able to do them, regardless of gender, 

race, age, or ethnicity. 

 

7

 More precisely, the Federal government pays the interest on the bond, though this is done through a tax credit to 

the bond holder. 
These intermediaries have included community organizations, unions, NGOs representing 

workers’ interests, community and four-year colleges, employers, and advocacy organizations, 

including those working for environmental and social justice. 

In Action: The commitment in Philadelphia is to reorient our Workforce Investment 

System around the emerging opportunities on the green economy. One key focus is on 

the community college system. Several of the region’s community colleges are starting 

“Green Jobs Academies,” special programs designed to impart skills related to this type 

of work. The region’s primary low-income weatherization provider, the Energy 

Coordinating Agency, has launched a new training facility that trains building auditors in 

to identify the interventions needed to improve a building’s energy efficiency, while 

forthcoming training classes will prepare the workers needed to complete the audits. 

Whether we’re talking about homeowners replacing their windows and installing solar panels, 

workers moving from old manufacturing to green manufacturing, venture investors looking to do 

well by doing good, unions looking to tap the blue/green nexus, or elected officials putting the 

pieces of the puzzle together, it all amounts to the same thing: building a better, cleaner economy 

with good jobs for all. The Obama/Biden Administration and the Middle-Class Taskforce will 

continue to track these developments, and to look for ever new ways to expand and promote 

green jobs as a pathway into a strong, environmentally sound middle class. 
Appendix: Further CEA analysis of jobs in green occupations in likely green industries. 

Table A1: Characteristics of likely green occupations (percentages except for wages) 

Wage 

(2008 $) 

BA Union 

Member 

Public 

Sector 

Male White Black Hispanic 

Electrical power line 

installers and repairers 

$21.23 14.0% 26.6% 12.1% 98.1% 84.6% 7.3% 12.7% 

Computer control 

programmers/operators 

$17.83 2.4% 19.2% 2.8% 96.3% 96.8% 2.2% 9.6% 

Control and valve 

installers and repairers 

$22.76 12.2% 46.8% 18.0% 95.8% 88.2% 10.0% 13.4% 

Electrical and electronic 

engineers 

$29.00 76.7% 5.5% 10.6% 89.9% 78.7% 5.1% 5.2% 

Electrical/electronics 

repairers * 

$21.46 9.0% 9.2% 24.6% 100.0

% 

100.0% 0.0% 10.5% 

Electricians $21.07 6.3% 33.0% 5.7% 98.5% 90.5% 5.8% 14.6% 

Engine and other 

machine assemblers 

$16.70 2.7% 49.5% 0.0% 83.8% 88.1% 5.1% 14.8% 

Engineering technicians $21.14 15.0% 15.4% 18.0% 80.8% 82.6% 11.2% 10.6% 

First-line 

supervisors/managers 

production and operating 

workers (TM) 

$17.53 15.2% 9.2% 5.7% 80.6% 83.5% 10.8% 12.7% 

First-line 

supervisors/managers of 

mechanics, installers, 

and repairers (PG) 

$20.02 16.0% 11.7% 15.2% 92.7% 87.6% 7.8% 9.2% 

Industrial and refractory 

machinery mechanics 

$19.13 5.5% 19.5% 3.9% 97.2% 87.8% 8.0% 11.4% 

Lathe and turning 

machine tool 

setters/operators 

$14.26 0.0% 23.2% 0.0% 89.8% 87.7% 9.1% 18.4% 

Machinists $16.94 4.8% 16.8% 2.2% 95.1% 86.6% 8.1% 13.2% 

Maintenance and repair 

workers, general 

$16.83 7.9% 13.6% 14.8% 96.7% 85.5% 8.4% 15.3% 

Mechanical engineers $27.22 76.5% 5.9% 5.4% 91.4% 83.5% 3.8% 2.7% 

Miscellaneous 

assemblers and 

fabricators 

$13.79 6.2% 14.2% 1.9% 63.3% 75.8% 17.3% 18.9% 

Multiple machine tool 

setters/operators* 

$19.22 28.5% 31.7% 0.0% 79.2% 79.2% 20.8% 7.4% 

Power plant operators/ 

distributors/ dispatchers 

$24.84 19.2% 34.0% 17.8% 81.9% 88.9% 4.5% 6.5% 

Welding, soldering, and 

brazing workers 

$16.33 2.8% 18.3% 1.3% 95.2% 87.4% 8.5% 20.5% 

U.S. overall average 

(including all 

occupations) 

$14.69 30.4

% 

12.1% 14.1% 53.1% 81.6% 11.8% 13.9% 
Table A1 (cont.) – Characteristics of likely green occupations (percentages except for wages) 

Primary 

earner 

Northeast South Midwest West Central 

city 

Balance 

of MSA 

NonMSA 

Electrical power line 

installers and repairers 

92.7% 6.3% 50.7% 17.0% 26.0% 27.9% 57.3% 14.8% 

Computer control 

programmers/operators 

92.0% 20.1% 32.7% 42.6% 4.6% 10.8% 53.9% 35.3% 

Control and valve 

installers and repairers 

94.3% 13.1% 42.3% 32.7% 12.0% 19.3% 64.8% 15.9% 

Electrical and electronic 

engineers 

93.6% 20.8% 29.2% 20.0% 30.0% 26.1% 65.8% 8.2% 

Electrical/electronics 

repairers * 

61.1% 6.8% 73.5% 2.3% 17.5% 23.0% 58.9% 18.1% 

Electricians 92.6% 16.5% 38.0% 22.2% 23.3% 26.3% 51.9% 21.8% 

Engine and other 

machine assemblers 

99.0% 17.0% 26.0% 45.2% 11.9% 0.0% 62.9% 37.1% 

Engineering technicians 90.2% 13.6% 34.9% 27.2% 24.2% 28.6% 53.4% 18.0% 

First-line 

supervisors/managers 

production and operating 

workers (TM) 

90.1% 16.1% 36.3% 28.8% 18.8% 23.0% 50.2% 26.8% 

First-line 

supervisors/managers of 

mechanics, installers, 

and repairers (PG) 

91.5% 16.8% 36.0% 22.1% 25.1% 20.1% 57.0% 22.9% 

Industrial and refractory 

machinery mechanics 

94.6% 13.2% 42.8% 29.8% 14.3% 21.4% 47.8% 30.8% 

Lathe and turning 

machine tool 

setters/operators 

91.8% 5.0% 29.3% 49.1% 16.6% 11.4% 51.7% 36.9% 

Machinists 90.2% 18.4% 29.6% 32.2% 19.9% 25.0% 49.2% 25.7% 

Maintenance and repair 

workers, general 

90.9% 19.3% 39.6% 22.3% 18.8% 23.2% 53.3% 23.5% 

Mechanical engineers 93.9% 21.0% 21.1% 42.3% 15.7% 26.2% 62.9% 10.9% 

Miscellaneous 

assemblers and 

fabricators 

83.5% 11.3% 32.9% 40.4% 15.4% 29.8% 41.1% 29.2% 

Multiple machine tool 

setters/operators* 

100.0% 0.0% 39.4% 53.2% 7.4% 20.8% 28.5% 50.6% 

Power plant operators/ 

distributors/ dispatchers 

96.5% 14.3% 40.4% 21.2% 24.2% 15.6% 47.1% 37.3% 

Welding, soldering, and 

brazing workers 

92.9% 10.1% 40.5% 29.5% 19.9% 22.2% 43.6% 34.1% 

U.S. overall average 

(including all 

occupations) 

84.3% 18.3% 35.8% 22.8% 23.2% 31.5% 51.2% 17.4% 

Note: Calculations from the Jan. 2007- Oct. 2008 CPS ORGs using ORG sampling weights. Data for all U.S. 

workers are included. Occupations with * have sample sizes that are less than 20 and should be interpreted with 

caution.