Join
Search

Proposal 3: Wind Companies Ready to Create Jobs in Michigan

Bookmark and Share

Dozens of wind energy manufacturers, developers, and suppliers are encouraging Michiganders to vote ‘Yes’ on Proposal 3 as a way to strengthen the state’s renewable energy standard and economy. And that’s just the tip of the job-creating iceberg.

In a letter released last week by the American Wind Energy Association, more than 30 wind energy companies made clear that they see Michigan as a place that is “rich in untapped renewable energy resources that could provide at least enough clean, reliable and affordable electricity” to meet Prop 3′s 25% standard.

Go Blue! Dana Building, U. of Michigan (Source: School of Natural Resources, http://www.flickr.com/photos/snre/6505370447/in/set-72157628402664217)

And those companies see jobs for Michigan in those resources:

If voters like you pass the 25% by 2025 standard, clean energy projects will be built in Michigan and communities will see jobs and economic benefits at every stage of those projects: from the hundreds of in-state construction jobs created to build new wind and solar projects, to new orders at Michigan manufacturing facilities, to the on-site operations jobs, property tax revenues for local governments and lease payments to landowners that will last the lifetime of the project. (emphasis added)

Applying Michigan’s incredible manufacturing capacity and history of innovation to the clean energy sector just makes sense. And, as the yes-on-prop-3 website says, “Michigan’s manufacturing sector is underutilized, with clean energy companies up and running but with plenty of room to grow.”

And the idea of tapping into that power is consistent with what’s been happening across the country. Wind accounted for nearly a third of all new electricity capacity in 2011, and U.S. companies have been earning a larger and larger chunk of wind’s growing market share. According to the Department of Energy’s latest report on the state of the wind technologies market, the Made-in-America piece of U.S. projects is up from 35% in 2005/06 to 67% in 2011.

Domestic content is climbing

“Made in USA” is growing. How about “Made in Michigan”?
(http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-5559e-ppt.pdf)

With its current 10%-by-2015 renewable electricity standard, Michigan is already competing for clean energy jobs. Solar and wind already provide more than 10,000 jobs in Michigan.

Prop 3 offers the opportunity for Michiganders to build on that, big-time, by planning for their state’s long-term clean energy future—something big utilities and politicians haven’t done nearly enough of. Achieving Prop 3’s goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025 could help keep as much as $2 billion of ratepayers hard earned energy dollars from leaving the state to pay for imported coal. That money could then be used to support homegrown renewable energy projects that benefit local communities.

The big picture

The wind industry wants to help with that build-up in the Wolverine state. “Our companies and others are anxious to get new projects up and running in Michigan,” the letter-signing companies say.

Wind companies are clearly not disinterested parties when it comes to policies that would move us away from fossil fuels and toward more clean energy. Nor should they be.

It should be equally clear that you and I and all the good people of Michigan aren’t disinterested parties, either. When dirty coal gets replaced with clean forms of electricity, in Michigan and elsewhere, people win with cleaner air, more money staying in state, and more stable electricity prices. When Michiganders drive their economy forward with investments in local renewable energy, that means jobs, revenues, and economic development in the state. When we say “yes” to taking charge of our electricity future at every opportunity, we all win.

Prop 3 is Michigan’s chance to say “yes” to all of that. Bring in the companies. Bring on the jobs.

Posted in: Energy Tags: , , , , , , , ,

About the author: John Rogers is a senior energy analyst with expertise in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies and policies. He co-manages the Energy and Water in a Warming World Initiative (EW3) at UCS that looks at water demands of energy production in the context of climate change. He holds a master’s degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan and a bachelor's degree from Princeton University. See John's full bio.

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

  • http://www.ucsusa.org/news/experts/john-rogers.html John Rogers

    You’re very welcome, Dennis. Thanks very much for weighing in, and for spreading the word. The opponents, including Consumers Energy and DTE Energy, through CARE for Michigan, certainly have more money to throw into TV ads than the pro-Proposal 3 coalition does.

    If you’d like more on the “yes” side, the Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs website has great videos and other information. Plenty more Facebook fodder.

    And for one analysis of the importance of having solid information for good decision making — or what opponents are doing to obscure good decision making — see my colleague’s spot-on critique of a Prop 3 study by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy and Beacon Hill Institute. As he concludes: “Michigan voters need quality and accurate information in order to make a sound decision about the merits of Proposal 3. Without question, the Mackinac Center’s analysis fails to provide it.”

    Thanks for helping the voters make sound decisions.

    - John

  • Dennis North

    All of the television advertizing about Proposal 3 I’ve seen in Lansing, Michigan, is negative, accusing developers of wanting huge amounts of money “without even having a plan” for using it. I’m spreading this article across Facebook as one small way of counteracting this anonymous campaign against the proposal. Thanks for writing and posting this here, John Rogers.

Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, obscene, rude or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. When commenting, you must use your real name. Valid email addresses are required. (UCS respects your privacy; we will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.)