January, 19 2015, 11:30am EDT

Doubts Over Fracking Jobs Claims as New Report Says 24,000 Jobs in Clean Energy for North West
A new report from Friends of the Earth, supported by PCS Union and North West trades councils, shows that industry claims about job creation from fracking are overstated, and that any jobs boom would be short-lived. The report also shows that investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy would create more jobs than more investment in fossil fuels.
The report, titled 'Making a Better Job of It' finds:
LONDON
A new report from Friends of the Earth, supported by PCS Union and North West trades councils, shows that industry claims about job creation from fracking are overstated, and that any jobs boom would be short-lived. The report also shows that investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy would create more jobs than more investment in fossil fuels.
The report, titled 'Making a Better Job of It' finds:
- Overstated jobs claims: the report most often quoted by the industry and its supporters claims that job creation will be over twice as high as that seen in the US, according to peer-reviewed evidence assessing how many jobs are created for a given amount of gas produced1.
- Short-term jobs, long-term risks: jobs figures quoted are peak numbers which tail off rapidly. Cuadrilla claims shale gas production would create 1,700 jobs in Lancashire but this figure is for one year only, and falls to under 200 only three years afterwards2. But local communities would face risks to the local environment and their health for many years. And despite the several years of disruption from Cuadrilla's proposed exploration at Roseacre and Preston New Road, the sites would create only 11 net jobs each.
- Renewable energy and energy efficiency are a better jobs bet: they create over six times as many jobs as gas per unit of power generated or saved, and around three times as many jobs for the same amount invested3.
- Huge potential in the North West: exploiting the region's huge renewable energy potential and saving energy in the region's homes could support another 24,000 jobs4.
Friends of the Earth's North West Campaigner Helen Rimmer said:
"The North West has world-class renewable resources and investment should focus on clean energy technologies such as tidal, solar and offshore wind, and energy efficiency - which tackle climate change and create more jobs than over-hyped fracking.
"Lancashire County Council should reject Cuadrilla's fracking plans and support energy solutions which will create more jobs without risking the county's environment, local economy and communities."
Chris Baugh, Assistant General Secretary of Public and Commercial Services Union said:
"PCS welcome this important report from Friends of the Earth. We were told fracking would be a game changer driving down our energy bills, claims not even Lord Browne, Chair of Cuadrilla believes. Now we're told the dash for gas is about energy security and jobs.
"As this report shows, the arguments do not stack up in the face of the evidence and PCS is clear that investment in climate jobs - helping to reduce carbon emissions - is vital if we are to seriously address interrelated economic, energy and environmental concerns.
"Development of the region's abundant renewable energy sources and energy efficiency programmes will create better and greater employment opportunities than this literal race to the bottom for shale. Trade unions need to play a central role if we are to make a just transition to clean energy sources that protect both the jobs and livelihood of working people and the planet we inhabit."
Dave Savage, Organiser from Preston and South Ribble Trades Union Council, said:
"Fracking is yet another example of environmentally-destructive profiteering by private sector energy companies looking for short-term profits. In contrast, by building in our own country world-leading industries in renewable energy and energy efficiency, we can both make our contribution to preserving the environment for future generations, at the same time as developing sustainable jobs now and for the future."
Ian Gallagher, Secretary of Blackburn and District Trades Union Council, said:
"Blackburn and District Trades Union Council welcomes this timely report. We believe that investment in the areas identified by the Million Climate Jobs Campaign - in renewable energy sources and in insulating and retrofitting existing homes and buildings - is a far more certain way of addressing both climate change and economic growth than drilling for shale gas."
Peter Thorne, Secretary of North East Lancashire Trades Union Council, said:
"North East Lancs TUC notes that 2014 was the warmest year ever and Arctic ice melt is greater every year - the evidence of climate change is irrefutable. We must leave fossil fuels in the ground and develop renewables which can also provide far more jobs. For this reason we are totally opposed to fracking anywhere.
"Barrow in Furness has shown the way for the North West, being a world leading centre for offshore wind turbines. There is no reason why Lancashire can't also become a leading centre for wind, wave and solar technology and create far more and better jobs than fracking ever would."
Clara Paillard Green Representative on Merseyside Trade Union Council said:
"We urgently need to move away from a fossil fuel economy and Merseyside and the North West region has huge potential for clean energy. Fracking is not a risk worth taking for our climate, communities or workers' health."
Stephen Hall President of Association of Greater Manchester Trade Union Councils said:
"The fracking industry has overstated how many jobs it will create, and the North West will get short-term jobs and long-term impacts. Instead of a fracking dead-end we need investment in the clean energy of the future, which could create many thousands of new jobs for workers across Greater Manchester and tackle climate change at the same time."
NOTES
1. The report 'Getting shale gas working' produced by the Institute of Directors, and funded by Cuadrilla, claims that each well pad would create 1,104 jobs at peak, based on peak production of approximately 21 billion cubic feet of gas per year. But a peer-reviewed analysis of job creation from shale gas production in the USA found that 18.5 jobs were created per billion cubic feet of gas production. Based on this, each well pad would create around 400 jobs at peak. Such overstatement reflects the US experience where actual job creation from the Marcellus Shale, one of the largest US shale fields, has been less than one-seventh of that claimed in one industry-funded study.
2. Taken from 'Economic Impact of Shale Gas Exploration and Production in Lancashire and the UK' produced by Regeneris Consulting for Cuadrilla Resources.
3. UKERC finds that:
* renewable energy and energy efficiency create 6.7 times as many jobs as gas power generation per unit of electricity generated or saved
* energy efficiency creates 2.8 times as many jobs as gas power generation for the same investment, and renewable energy creates 3.2 times as many jobs
4. A radical programme of domestic energy efficiency in the North West, focusing initially on low income homes, could lead to an additional 9800 jobs by 2020 and 6700 by 2030 (when the number of homes to be treated is lower than the peak in the early 2020s). Development of just a percentage of the region's solar, onshore wind and offshore wind capacity could support over 14,000 additional jobs, many of them in the North West.
5. Summary report and full report.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
Amazon Won't Display Tariff Costs After Trump Whines to Bezos
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said all companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
Apr 29, 2025
Amazon said Tuesday that it would not display tariff costs next to products on its website after U.S. President Donald Trump called the e-commerce giant's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, to complain about the reported plan.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with Amazon's supposed plan, Punchbowl Newsreported that "the shopping site will display how much of an item's cost is derived from tariffs—right next to the product's total listed price."
Many Amazon products come from China. While U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed Sunday that "there is a path" to a tariff deal with the Chinese government, Trump has recently caused global economic alarm by hitting the country with a 145% tax and imposing a 10% minimum for other nations.
According toCNN, which spoke with two senior White House officials on Tuesday, Trump's call to Bezos "came shortly after one of the senior officials phoned the president to inform him of the story" from Punchbowl.
"Of course he was pissed," one officials said of Trump. "Why should a multibillion-dollar company pass off costs to consumers?"
Asked about how the call with Bezos went, Trump told reporters: "Great. Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly, and he did the right thing, and he's a good guy."
Earlier Tuesday, during a briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called Amazon's reported plan "a hostile and political act," and said that "this is another reason why Americans should buy American."
Leavitt also asked why Amazon didn't have such displays during the Biden administration and held up a printed version of a 2021 Reutersreport about the company's "compliance with the Chinese government edict" to stop allowing customer ratings and reviews in China, allegedly prompted by negative feedback left on a collection President Xi Jinping's speeches and writings.
Asked whether Bezos is "still a Trump supporter," Leavitt said that she "will not speak to" the president's relationship with him.
As CNBCdetailed Tuesday:
Less than two hours after the press briefing, an Amazon spokesperson told CNBC that the company was only ever considering listing tariff charges on some products for Amazon Haul, its budget-focused shopping section.
"The team that runs our ultra low cost Amazon Haul store has considered listing import charges on certain products," the spokesperson said. "This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties."
But in a follow-up statement an hour after that one, the spokesperson clarified that the plan to show tariff surcharges was "never approved" and is "not going to happen."
In response to Bloomberg also reporting on Amazon's claim that tariff displays were never under consideration for the company's main site, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media Tuesday, "Good move."
Before Amazon publicly killed any plans for showing consumers the costs from Trump's import taxes, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor Tuesday that companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
"I urge more companies, particularly national retailers that compete with Amazon, to adopt this practice. If Amazon has the courage to display why prices are going up because of tariffs, so should all of our other national retailers who compete with them. And I am calling on them to do it now," he said.
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) on Tuesday framed the whole incident as an example of how "Trump has created a government by and for the billionaires," declaring: "If anyone ever doubted that Trump, and Musk, and Bezos, and the billionaires are all [on] one team, just look at what happened at Amazon today. Bezos immediately caved and walked back a plan to tell Americans how much Trump's tariffs are costing them."
Casar also claimed Bezos wants "big tax cuts and sweatheart deals," and pointed to Amazon's Prime Video paying $40 million to license a documentary about the life of First Lady Melania Trump. In addition to the film agreement, Bezos has come under fire for Amazon's $1 million donation to the president's inauguration fund.
As the owner of
The Washington Post, Bezos—the world's second-richest person, after Trump adviser Elon Musk—also faced intense criticism for blocking the newspaper's planned endorsement of the president's 2024 Democratic challenger, Kamala Harris, and demanding its opinion page advocate for "personal liberties and free markets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare for All, Says Sanders, Would Show American People 'Government Is Listening to Them'
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts," said one nurse and union leader. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Apr 29, 2025
On Tuesday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Democratic Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Debbie Dingell of Michigan reintroduced the Medicare for All Act, re-upping the legislative quest to enact a single-payer healthcare system even as the bill faces little chance of advancing in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives or Senate.
Hundreds of nurses, healthcare providers, and workers from across the country joined the lawmakers for a press conference focused on the bill's reintroduction in front of the Capitol on Tuesday.
"We have the radical idea of putting healthcare dollars into healthcare, not into profiteering or bureaucracy," said Sanders during the press conference. "A simple healthcare system, which is what we are talking about, substantially reduces administrative costs, but it would also make life a lot easier, not just for patients, but for nurses" and other healthcare providers, he continued.
"So let us stand together," Sanders told the crowd. "Let us do what the American people want and let us transform this country. And when we pass Medicare for All, it's not only about improving healthcare for all our people—it's doing something else. It's telling the American people that, finally, the American government is listening to them."
Under Medicare for All, the government would pay for all healthcare services, including dental, vision, prescription drugs, and other care.
"It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth," said Jayapal in a statement on Tuesday.
In 2020, a study in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet found that a single-payer program like Medicare for All would save Americans more than $450 billion and would likely prevent 68,000 deaths every year. That same year, the Congressional Budget Office found that a single-payer system that resembles Medicare for All would yield some $650 billion in savings in 2030.
Members of National Nurses United (NNU), the nation's largest union of registered nurses, were also at the press conference on Tuesday.
In a statement, the group highlighted that the bill comes at a critical time, given GOP-led threats to programs like Medicaid.
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts and attacks so that we become too demoralized and overwhelmed to move forward," said Bonnie Castillo, registered nurse and executive director of NNU. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Per Sanders' office, the legislation has 104 co-sponsors in the House and 16 in the Senate, which is an increase from the previous Congress.
A poll from Gallup released in 2023 found that 7 in 10 Democrats support a government-run healthcare system. The poll also found that across the political spectrum, 57% of respondents believe the government should ensure all people have healthcare coverage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Advocates Warn GOP Just Unveiled 'Most Dangerous Higher Ed Bill in US History'
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," said the Debt Collective.
Apr 29, 2025
At a markup session held by a U.S. House committee on the Republican Party's recently unveiled higher education reform bill Tuesday, one Democratic lawmaker had a succinct description for the legislation.
"This bill is a dream-killer," said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) of the so-called Student Success and Taxpayer Savings Plan, which was introduced by Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) as part of an effort to find $330 billion in education programs to offset President Donald Trump's tax plan.
Tasked with helping to make $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans possible, Walberg on Monday proposed changes to the Pell Grant program, which has provided financial aid to more than 80 million low-income students since it began in 1972. The bill would allocate more funding to the program but would also reduce the number of students who are eligible for the grants, changing the definition of a "full-time" student to one enrolled in at least 30 semester hours each academic year—up from 12 hours. Students would be cut off from the financial assistance entirely if they are enrolled less than six hours per semester.
David Baime, senior vice president for government relations for the American Association of Community Colleges, suggested the legislation doesn't account for the realities faced by many students who benefit from Pell Grants.
"These students are almost always working a substantial number of hours each week and often have family responsibilities. Pell Grants help them meet the cost of tuition and required fees," Baime toldInside Higher Ed. "We commend the committee for identifying substantial additional resources to help finance Pell, but it should not come at the cost of undermining the ability of low-income working students to enroll at a community college."
The draft bill would also end subsidized loans, which don't accrue interest when a student is still in college and gives borrowers a six-month grace period after graduation, starting in July 2026. More than 30 million borrowers currently have subsidized loans.
The proposal would also reduce the number of student loan repayment options from those offered by the Biden administration to just two, with borrowers given the option for a fixed monthly amount paid over a certain period of time or an income-based plan.
At the markup session on Tuesday, Bonamici pointed to her own experience of paying for college and law school "through a combination of grants and loans and work study and food stamps," and noted that her Republican colleagues on the committee also "graduated from college."
"And more than half of them have gone on to earn advanced degrees," said the congresswoman. "And yet those same individuals who benefited so much from accessing higher education are supporting a bill that will prevent others from doing so."
“In a time when higher ed is being attacked, this bill is another assault,” @RepBonamici calls out committee leaders for wanting to gut financial aid.
“With this bill, they will be taking that opportunity [of higher ed] away from others. This bill is a dream killer.” pic.twitter.com/UjTYvnOEKv
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
Democrats on the committee also spoke out against provisions that would cap loans a student can take out for graduate programs at $100,000; the Grad PLUS program has allowed students to borrow up to the cost of attendance.
The Parent PLUS program, which has been found to provide crucial help to Black families accessing higher education, would also be restricted.
"Black students, brown students, first-generation college students, first-generation Americans, will not have access to college," said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.).
“We cannot take away access to loans, and not replace it with anything else, not make the system better. We know the outcome here—Black, brown, and poor students will not figure it out. Instead, only elite students from the 1% will continue to access education.”@RepSummerLee🙇 pic.twitter.com/oGbRH154Ed
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
As the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) warned last week, eliminating the Grad PLUS program without also lowering the cost of graduate programs would "subject millions of future borrowers to an unregulated and predatory private student loan market, while doing little to reduce overall student debt and the need to borrow."
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for SBPC, told The Hill that the draft bill is "an attack on students and working families with student loan debt."
"We've seen an array of really problematic proposals that are on the table for congressional Republicans," Canchola Bañez said. "Many of these would cause massive spikes for families with monthly student loan payments."
With the proposal, which Republicans hope to pass through reconciliation with a simple majority, the party would be "restructuring higher education for the worse," said the Debt Collective.
"It's the most dangerous higher ed bill in U.S. history," said the student loan borrowers union. "It strips the Department of Education of virtually every authority to cancel student debt. Eliminates every repayment program. Abolishes subsidized loans."
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," the group added. "We have to push back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular