Oil Sands Employment Likely Much Higher than in Clean Energy Sector

A new report on Canada's green energy sector by an organization entitled Clean Energy Canada is receiving favorable attention in the mainstream and social media circles. A clear illustration of the lack of objective analysis done on this report is evident in Richard Blackwell's article at the Globe and Mail. Closer examination of the report illustrates some apparent concerns, and highlights -- yet again -- the need for a return to real journalism in the public interest, rather than just the propagandistic repeating of press releases by organizations having vested interests in the topics they are reporting on.

As Clean Energy Canada explicitly notes on its website, “Clean Energy Canada is a project of Tides Canada Initiatives Society. Tides Canada is a family of charities dedicated to social and environmental issues across Canada.” We know from prior media reporting on this organization that “Tides Canada, a Vancouver group that runs a grant-making foundation and a charity that backs environmental and social-justice projects, received $10.9-million in foreign funding in 2011 -- amounting to 45% of the group's total revenue, according to an accounting breakdown posted on its website.” This context, especially when much of the funding is from American sources -- is important when you read Clean Energy Canada's latest report. Witness the pro-American clean energy stance taken in these quotes from the Clean Energy Canada report:

“Unlike our American friends, where the clean-energy opportunity is clearly a national priority, our federal government's approach could only be described as indifferent ... We outline where Canada stands relative to our southern neighbour and the rest of the world, where the energy revolution is seeing traction inside our borders, and where it could go next ... Under President Barack Obama, the United States has positioned itself as a global clean-energy power player ... Our energy diplomacy is a study in contrasts: While Canada talks up the high-carbon Keystone XL pipeline proposal in Washington, our American friends emphasize the bilateral Clean Energy Dialogue they pushed Ottawa to create in 2009.”

Given the favorable quoting of both President Barack Obama and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in this report (even including a photograph of Clinton on page 9), one gets the impression the report -- and its parent group -- has a strong political preference for the Democratic Party. There is certainly much room for Canada to formally investigate more fully the operations of the U.S. Democratic Party -- both directly and by way of proxy groups -- in Canadian domestic policy making efforts.

---

Regarding the claim that “under President Barack Obama, the United States has positioned itself as a global clean-energy power player,” World Bank data shows that -- in 2012 -- Canada obtained over 62 of its electricity from renewable energy sources, compared to only 12 percent for the USA. Who is really the “clean-energy power player” between these two nations? There are additional claims made in this report, and repeated in the media, that do not appear to stand up to even basic fact-checking. Take the following statement from Blackwell's piece at the Globe and Mail, using data direct from the Clean Energy Canada report:

“The 23,700 people who work in green energy organizations outnumber the 22,340 whose work relates to the oil sands, the report says.”

The report does indeed say that. In fact, the report unequivocally claims that “total direct oil sands jobs, 2013: 22,340” are outnumbered by “total direct clean energy jobs, 2013: 23,700,” that “clean energy job categories include clean power production and equipment manufacturing, energy efficiency technologies and services (such as smart grids and building envelope technologies), clean transportation, and bioenergy,” and “as a result, by 2013 the clean energy sector -- encompassing manufacturing, energy efficiency, and biofuels -- accounted for more direct Canadian jobs than the oil sands.” Those are interesting claims, since the Province of Alberta's Ministry of Energy website states the following:

“Oil sands related direct employment in Alberta is expected to continue growing from the current level (2014) of 146,000 jobs to a peak of 256,000 jobs in 2024.”

When I last checked, 146,000 is much greater than 22,340 and 23,700. One also might question whether all the jobs claimed to be in the clean energy sector should be classified in this group as “direct” employment. Even more relevant is this factoid from Alberta's energy ministry:

“Oil sands related total Canadian employment (direct, indirect and induced), as a result of construction of new projects and the operation of new and existing projects, is expected to continue growing from the current level (2014) of 514,000 jobs to a peak of 802,000 jobs in 2028.”

So, it not only appears that direct employment in the oil sands is many-fold higher than that in the so-called “clean energy” field, but I suspect that if we compared the indirect and induced employment between the clean energy and oil sands sectors, we would find the clean energy sector comes nowhere close to the 514,000 jobs related to the oil sands. If we then included the salaries related to each field, the oil sands would win this battle hands down.