Economic woes remedied by green technology

Representatives from leading renewable technology companies and small businesses appeared before the House Small Business Committee to discuss the role of green technologies in spurring economic growth, particularly for small firms that are developing and using green, renewable practices.

Gregory Wetstone, senior director of government and public affairs for the American Wind Energy Association stated that nearly 35% of the nation’s new electrical capacity in 2007 came from wind energy, and the numbers are growing. Wetstone also said that America provides one of the best opportunities to harness wind energy. In addition, he said that turbine production plants help the economy by relying on nearly 400 sub-suppliers, many of which are small businesses.

Speaking on behalf of the Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contrators Association, Kevin Tindall stated that if only one in 10 homes installed water-efficient fixtures it could save more than 300 billion gallons of water and save nearly $2 billion annually in energy costs. Upgrading to these technologies also creates a strong demand for employees that are knowledgeable about energy-efficient products and necessary education programs.

However, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa) expressed concern over the cost of green technology. Andrea Lucke, vice president of sales and design for Robert Lucke Homes in Ohio stated that the average buyer stays in their home for only 7 years. This is not long enough to make the purchase of green technologies like solar panels feasible for homeowners. Members of the panel urged the committee to increase and continue federal incentive programs for such technology to combat this issue.

Comments

[lisetrise]

It's encouraging to see that even small changes toward green (like water efficient fixtures) can really make a huge difference.

We keep hearing a lot about how "building green" is more expensive, and how the average buyer only stays for 7 years, etc., but I believe this is rather short-sighted thinking. Simply planning an energy efficient home design (see http://www.building-your-green-home.com/energy-efficient-home-design.html)
can save a substantial amount of money and energy expense. Passive solar design and passive cooling features cost next to nothing to implement - just planning. And suppose a family does use active solar panels (and federal incentives are great!) - and they decide to move after year 7? Well, green homes are in great demand now, so someone will be willing to pay a lot more for such a house. And the energy efficiency will be a huge draw!
I see it as a "pay me now or pay me later" situation. What good is it to build the cheapest possible home - with toxic construction materials, and pay increasingly higher and higher energy bills each month? In addition, expect medical bills to pile up....because indoor air quality is connected with numerous health problems.

I believe the demand for green homes will only continue to grow. Thanks for your report on this issue

[Reddy Kilowatt]

Statistics on home ownership have lost relevancy. With the lending crisis and eventual interest rate climb, people will be staying in their homes longer. The housing market crash and subsequent Fed lending institutional demise, has dampened any perceived growth and will do so forwardly. This is the 80's all over again. Additionally, greenies don't consider resale value when investing in alternatives. It is a culture that combats "capitalism at any cost" and their home value is way down the list of their priorities. They enjoy living off the grid as much as possible, it gives them a feeling of victory and is their contribution to the global warming crisis. These folks are not your normal "Joe's" YET!!