This man is at the least economically illiterate and probably innumerate as well:
Going down the renewables and efficiency route will give us more jobs, more power and more security and, in the long term, for less money.
Creating jobs is a cost of such schemes, not a benefit. I think you\’ll find that when people turn up to work to polish the mirrors of your solar power system, they\’ll expect to get paid for doing so. If you\’re going to use any form of accountancy from the realistic side of this universe that cash flowing out to pay them is a cost, no?
So if we employ more people in this scheme, by creating more jobs, then it\’s very difficult to see how this is going to (other things being equal*) cost us less money.
* Yes, of course, there\’s the difference in capital costs, in fuel and so on, but that\’s why we build spreadsheets so that we can test the effects of substituting one for another. And no, as yet we don\’t see that solar is cheaper….something we can prove by simply pointing to the subsidies required to fund solar systems. And please don\’t start on CO2 emissions….solar PV releases some three times nuclear. The "creation" of jobs is to be analysed as a cost of such sschemes, not a benefit.