Recent economic analysis by leading U.S. academic institutions finds that comprehensive, forward-looking federal climate and energy policy could create up to 25,000 jobs in Arkansas, increase household incomes by $1,230 and grow the state economy by $1.2 billion.[1]

  • Aggressive policy implementation results in greater economic and job growth in Arkansas than moderate or no implementation of climate/energy policy.
  • Even moderate implementation would benefit Arkansas, generating $400 million Gross State Product and $457 per household.
  • States that currently rely most heavily on carbon-based sources of energy nevertheless stand to benefit most from new policies because of untapped energy efficiency potential.
  • Several U.S. government agencies have gotten similar results with their projections.

Energy inefficiency wastes money, while strong standards that increase energy efficiency are a powerful economic driver, putting money back in Arkansas consumer pockets, which we spend on goods and services, generating more jobs and economic growth.

  • Strong energy efficiency standards are projected to save every Arkansas household $870 per year, create as many as 8,100 jobs in Arkansas, save consumers $1,087 million in energy costs, and avoid the need to build 15 new power plants.[2]
  • Arkansas’ commercial, residential and industrial sectors could cut energy use by 19 trillion BTU by 2020 – or about the amount consumed by 366,000 Arkansas households in 2006.[3]
  • Energy efficiency investments generally cost less than half as much as comparable fossil fuel generation capacity and, on a per kilowatt hour basis, are less than half average retail electricity rates, according to Duke University.[4]

Arkansas business leaders know that reducing waste increases the bottom-line and improves competitiveness. Across the U.S., major corporations are saving energy and reducing global warming pollution to save money.

  • The U.S. as a whole uses roughly twice as much energy to produce a dollar of goods as our European and Japanese trading partners.  That puts us at a serious competitive disadvantage.
  • Some major U.S. corporations have already taken action to correct this disadvantage:
        • Weyerhaeuser plans to reduce its greenhouse gases 40% below 2000 levels by 2020 for purely economic reasons: reduced costs and reliance on oil through increased use of biomass.
        • BP has reduced emissions by 10% and saved $650 million.
        • DuPont has reduced emissions by 69% and saved $2 billion.
        • IBM has reduced emissions by 65% and saved $791 million.
        • Alcoa has reduced emissions by 25% and saved $100 million.
        • 3M has reduced emissions by 50% and saved $200 million.

Clean energy jobs and investment could boom in Arkansas.

  • 448 clean energy businesses in Arkansas generated more than 4,597 jobs, as of 2007.[5]
  • Between 2006 and 2008, venture capitalists poured $22.845 million into clean technology businesses in Arkansas.[6]
  • From 1998-2007, clean technology jobs nationwide grew by 9.1%, while total jobs grew by only 3.7%.[7] Despite the financial crisis, experts predict jobs in the clean technology sector will be better protected than U.S. jobs overall.
  • On a national level, clean technology is the fastest-growing sector of venture capital investment. $4.12 billion was invested in clean technology in 2008, up 54% over 2007.[8]

1. Clean Energy and Climate Policy for U.S. Growth and Job Creation: An Economic Assessment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, October 2009.  http://are.berkeley.edu/~dwrh/CERES_Web/Docs/ES_DRHFK091025.pdf

2. http://www.aceee.org/energy/national/W-M%2050%20State/Arkansas.pdf

3. Sharon (Jess) Chandler and Marilyn A. Brown, “State Specific Summaries of the Meta-Review of Efficiency Potential Studies and Their Implications for the South” Working Paper #51, Georgia Tech’s Ivan Allen College of Public Policy, August 2009. http://www.spp.gatech.edu/faculty/workingpapers/wp51.pdf
http://www.seealliance.org/pdf/state_specific_efficiency_potential_implications_for_south.pdf

4. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University, “Transforming Utility and Ratepayer Support for Electrical Energy Efficiency Nationwide,” October 2008. http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/ccpp/ccpp_pdfs/ee%20web.pdf

5. The Clean Energy Economy, 2009. Analysis conducted by Collaborative Economics for the Pew Center on the States.  http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Clean_Economy_Report_Web.pdf

6. Ibid

7. Ibid

8. “Cleantech drives through stormy 2008,” February 2009, PricewaterhouseCoopers. http://www.pwc.com/en_US/us/point-of-view/assets/pwc_pointofview_cleantech_insert.pdf