Some observations on "green collar jobs"

My New York Times this morning had a big feature, made up of several little ones, about how many otherwise educated people already firmly in the workforce are having to go back to school in order to stay relevant and employable.

Embedded in that item was this item here about community college "green collar" jobs programs and a study by the Lawrence Berkeley Lab on the energy efficiency sector in higher education.

Now, what do I think about all this sudden academic interest in the theory and practice of saving energy?

And what does the educated energy professional need to know, especially at the four year college or university level?

I think imitation is the sincerest from of flattery.

Although to be fair, most of these other programs' organizers probably haven't heard of us.

But they are definitely following our lead. We saw this movement coming about ten years ago and moved to where we thought the ball would be.

I also think it takes some thinking to string together the proper programming.

It also takes some insight to see the deeper connections.

It would be easy to miss something important if you lacked the insight or failed to do enough thinking.

For instance, we didn't limit ourselves, or our program, to the energy efficiency sector. We saw that area as intimately connected to the renewable energy area, particularly the distributed forms, solar and wind power.

The inherent nature of the most efficient form of solar heating and cooling, which is passive or architectural solar, meant that solar power knowledge was and always would be directly linked to architecture and green building. So a working knowledge of architecture is also necessary, as well as energy efficiency and renewable energy knowledge.

And this whole enterprise is directed first and foremost by the need to reduce climate emissions and account for their reduction, always in keeping with the most recent climate science knowledge, which, however, is changing constantly. As, frankly, is the available technology in the energy sector, both technology for efficiency and for renewables.

So the truly effective "green collar" expert in the future will have to have a strong and very basic foundation in relatively timeless basic principles such as mechanics, energetics, ecology, math.

While the most important skill will be to account for and manipulate energy and matter flows in systems: household, energy, industrial, and climate systems.

Which systems of accounting, frankly, are the core of a discipline called ecology, although it's primarily physical ecology with an earth science edge that is needed.

A year of physics, a year of biology, a year of chemistry and math through calculus remains the primary basic qualification for a science graduate in any major, and sustainable energy is no different than any other degree in this respect.

If it is different, it's because the field changes, and will continue to change, so quickly that the ability to go back to first principles with any new idea is at an even higher premium than it would be in, say, wildlife biology, where methods and ideas are changing, but not as quickly.

First principles.

On which foundation should then be laid a layer of newer, more shifting knowledge about the current technology and climate science and its math.

The math that is needed is also somewhat timeless, mostly elaborate arithmetic in spreadsheet models, but it also includes some algebra, some trigonometry, a little calculus, and lots of computer modeling.

There's another large area of cognate knowledge that is needed, knowledge about management, about business, about economics.

On that last, these new energy specialists need to be thoroughly versed in the ongoing debate between followers of Keynes and followers of Friedman that plays out in US politics. They should be able to play Keynes against Friedman in their own heads and use either argument with either audience, since even Friedman would see the massive "externality" that is climate change, and so you can, and should argue this anytime you meet a neoliberal conservative.

Just for fun.

But they should also know how differently these issues are seen in mainland Europe, where both Keynes and Friedman can be seen as passé.

They should therefore also be very well aware of the alternatives, the ecological economics critique of our planet's current predicament, as well as the criticism from social democracy. All of which, frankly, is rooted in philosophy and ethics.

Did I mention that you must be able to read, write and otherwise communicate in English very well indeed?

A graduate that has all this science and social science and humanities knowledge will be able to come to their own independent and valid judgments about the desirability of any given course of action or technology implementation, having first run the pros and cons through the filters of physical, ecological, business, economic, social and ethical feasibility, both quantitatively and qualitatively. They will then be able to represent this conclusion in written English with appropriate mathematical reasoning, and argue cogently for it. If they are practical people and have done a little fieldwork, or spent time in the workshop or lab or crawlspace, they will be all the better at actually getting something done, instead of just talking about it.

(There are a lot of good talkers in my business, all of whom would be made more palatable and agreeable by having occasionally stuffed some insulation into a hole or connected a solar panel.)

I also tend to think that the truly independent sustainability thinker will also have a pretty stiff spine of moral decency and courage as well, but I'm not sure I can require this as a condition of graduation.

Developing ownership of all of these areas of knowledge and skill, and fostering all the appropriate dispositions, in one person at one time, is of course a very tall order for a mere baccalaureate program, which is why those working in the energy and climate nexus at higher levels in policy, government and business will need graduate school, mostly just to have enough time to get beyond the introductory level, but also to develop as independent thinkers and people.

A couple of "gap" years here and there in the trenches, especially the military or Americorps or Peace Corps wouldn't hurt either, especially with the dispositional outcomes. In particular, these will need to be people who know the truth when they see it and are not afraid to speak that truth to power.

But there will be lots of positions for baccalaureate graduates who can handle all of the above. A state-level energy program, for instance, should do well if it has a good and energetic posse of young professionals with the background I outline. A business, if it means to do well with ideas in this field, will always need such people. Quite a lot of our students are interested in their own businesses. A non-profit organization working in the climate/energy sector, such as the Natural Resource Council of Maine, would always benefit from new, fresh people that are up-to-date in this field.

I would think that this education would be a good investment, for the right students.

How about for the planet?