The Solar Industry Now Employs Twice As Many People As Coal

A good life is like sailing or surfing - catch the wind or the wave and ride! Most important, be aware - and ready for the shifts. Nothing is static, not the wind, waves - or job market.

So for those inclined - here's an opportunity. This market is opening up and projected to grow.

The Solar Industry Now Employs Twice As Many People As Coal

...The jobs right now are mainly in manual installation, and as more solar becomes more common, there is hope that other jobs will be created to keep up with improving technology

Solar employs slightly more workers than natural gas, over twice as many as coal, over three times that of wind energy, and almost five times the number employed in nuclear energy. Only oil/petroleum has more employment (by 38%) than solar.

Stands to reason because the solar technology is moving quickly.

a reply to: soficrow
Of course it stands to reason cos there aint no more pits open.

a reply to: xuenchen

Or bc fossil fuel mining is much more mechanized and automated.

Automated solar panel installers don't exist yet

The Solar Industry Now Employs Twice As Many People As Coal

And ?

Twice as many people will be put out of work when the weather changes see climate change.

a reply to: neo96

I need to remember this so when a large volcano erupts to short solar companies. thanks.

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: neo96

I need to remember this so when a large volcano erupts to short solar companies. thanks.

Yellowstone erupts blankets the conus with something comparable to a nuclear winter.

Solar panels aren't going to be much good.

There is virtually no different between fossil fuel power, and alternative energy power.

They both need fuel(sun,wind) to work.

Don't have it. They don't.

Thats interesting when you think of the difference in power produced.
Factor in the goverment subsidies as well.
Employment numbers will drop when the installation work disappears.

On a side note,,
Did they include all coal related jobs in their numbers?
Railroads move a bunch of coal and employ a lot of people.

And how much energy are solar panels making compared to coal? I'd imagine its a fraction. Regardless, the better solar infrastructure gets the more it helps - however there are better systems out there already.

How much of the percentage of total energy the nation consumes does Solar contribute?

More nuclear, we got vast desert wastelands to fill with nuke plants, huge tectonic plate subduction zones under the oceans. Build drone subs to fill with waste and drive them to the subduction sites, problem solved, cheap energy for all and the waste gets slowly recycled into the core of the earth over millions of years.

Solar is growing, I am currently working on a 1 megawatt array design for a land fill site. We should be on line by December of 2017. We sale the project, the county gets the revenue, clean power, and the land fill becomes useful again. I call that a win for all.

Coal is dead.
Only old industry or power generators use it.

Trump makes a big deal about it because Hillary said she was going to close the mines..

Of course that angered the miners rightfully. ( she meant we would replace an old energy source with a new one thereby maintaining jobs but anyway no matter.)
Trump knew the miners were angry so he used that and stirred them into a frenzy and played up to them with promises of renewed interest in coal but that's just not happening. All he really managed to do with his executive order was place the rivers and streams around the mine in jeopardy by removing regulations. No worries though that EPA guy will take care of it...oh wait...

Fossil Fuel is dying out. We may always have a need for some, but it's dying.

Think when the Automobile came out and people were still trying to prop up the horse industry. It's the same thing.

People need to wake up and change. Or Change will happen without them. It's called evolution.

Steel making uses coal and is considered a national security resource that has to be protected for time of war. OBummer wanted coal completely wiped out . Wonder why????

originally posted by: mikell
Steel making uses coal and is considered a national security resource that has to be protected for time of war. OBummer wanted coal completely wiped out . Wonder why????

Because it's a dirty, outdated technology.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Amount of fuel used to generate 1 kWh: Coal = 0.00052 short tons or 1.04 pounds. Natural gas = 0.01011 Mcf (an Mcf equals 1,000 cubic feet) Petroleum = 0.00173 barrels (or 0.07 gallons)

or about 8 120watt solar panels to create 1 kWh, the largest avail commonly today.

Those are just to make 1kw of power.

I found this somewhere, you can too with google.

Electricity - consumption: 3.832 trillion kWh (2012 est.)

So multiply 3.832 trillion by 8, and that is how many solar panels the US needs annually and that was back in 2012, more is needed as time goes on.

30,656,000,000,000 or over 30 and a half trillion panels. An average cost of the most efficient 120watt panel is $200.

6,131,200,000,000,000 so it would cost over 6 quadrillion US dollars to buy enough solar panels to supply the US with enough energy in 2012.

The US is only a few trillion in debt now and people are having heart attacks over it. How are we going to come up with 6 quadrillion dollars initial investment on panels alone, not including installation, maintenance, the massive square footage preparation (an astronomical number itself that is unfeasible) to justify Solar energy?

Solar is a pipe dream, coal is real.

Oh and those solar panel numbers, those are only if they are receiving direct sunlight 24 hours a day, which is impossible so multiply 6 quadrillion by 3 for one third of the day of solar, then multiply by 2 to account for bad weather and seasonal conditions. 36 quadrillion spent on solar panels, dream on.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
a reply to: Sillyolme

Amount of fuel used to generate 1 kWh: Coal = 0.00052 short tons or 1.04 pounds. Natural gas = 0.01011 Mcf (an Mcf equals 1,000 cubic feet) Petroleum = 0.00173 barrels (or 0.07 gallons)

or about 8 120watt solar panels to create 1 kWh, the largest avail commonly today.

Those are just to make 1kw of power.

I found this somewhere, you can too with google.

Electricity - consumption: 3.832 trillion kWh (2012 est.)

So multiply 3.832 trillion by 8, and that is how many solar panels the US needs annually and that was back in 2012, more is needed as time goes on.

30,656,000,000,000 or over 30 and a half trillion panels. An average cost of the most efficient 120watt panel is $200.

6,131,200,000,000,000 so it would cost over 6 quadrillion US dollars to buy enough solar panels to supply the US with enough energy in 2012.

The US is only a few trillion in debt now and people are having heart attacks over it. How are we going to come up with 6 quadrillion dollars initial investment on panels alone, not including installation, maintenance, the massive square footage preparation (an astronomical number itself that is unfeasible) to justify Solar energy?

Solar is a pipe dream, coal is real.

Oh and those solar panel numbers, those are only if they are receiving direct sunlight 24 hours a day, which is impossible so multiply 6 quadrillion by 3 for one third of the day of solar, then multiply by 2 to account for bad weather and seasonal conditions. 36 quadrillion spent on solar panels, dream on.

You're missing the bigger picture though.

Sure, just Solar right now...for everything could never happen. But over time ..a million more here ...a million more there. Wind Farms, Battery Packs, Electric Cars, Green Buildings (mainly meaning better insulated and more efficient), Higher MPH Cars, Better public transportation, more bike lanes etc.

Everything plays it's part. The truth is that fossil fuels are dying out and it's time to move forward.

a reply to: amazing

Nope, you are dreaming if you think there will ever be 36 quadrillion dollars worth of solar panels manufactured, installed and maintained.

It is an impossibility, or what is more commonly referred to as a pipe dream.

a reply to: amazing

I'm curious. What's your solution to the social implications in pouring money into not ready for prime time, very expensive power sources?

Fixed income retirees would no longer be able to afford electricity. The working poor would no longer be able to afford it. The inner city poor, a huge number of people could no longer afford electricity. Electricity would out of necessity become a luxury, only affordable to the wealthy if this is forced to artificially move forward too fast.

Shutting down coal is a bit premature and I think that's a point that those who are anti clean coal are ignoring. That and the fact that upgrading existing coal fired power plants to be clean is far cheaper and would lead to affordable power while other technologies are progressing.

Had common sense come into play, elected officials would be proposing helping companies upgrade, making coal use no longer dirty and saving the coal industry, preserving their jobs and making them productive taxpayers. Instead we get emotional knee jerk nonsense for purely partisan reasons. As usual common sense is thrown out the window in favor of coddling radical idea's and those pushing them.

Moving too fast towards solar will no doubt make many people fabulously wealthy and cause a lot of harm to the working poor and those who can least afford it too happen. Perhaps that's the real reason it's being pushed so hard? Follow the money.

Unfortunately the solution is not that simple, according to a PBS Nova Documentary "The Nuclear Option" the world hunger for energy is driving the market towards a new generation of Nuclear plants, they are now being built/tested in China (less regulations) also the new Nuclear plants are designed to avoid the dreaded meltdown that doomed Three mile island, Chernobyl and Fukushima.