IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Green Recovery? Assessing US Economic Stimulus and the Prospects for International Coordination


  • Trevor Houser

    () (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Shashank Mohan

    (Rhodium Group)

  • Robert Heilmayr

    (World Resources Institute)


As the new Congress and President Obama take office, enacting a fiscal stimulus program is at the top of the legislative agenda. Because the size of this program may limit the scope for other legislative priorities and because US consumers' new-found propensity to save makes government spending a more attractive approach for economic recovery, policymakers are hoping to direct government spending in a way that not only generates short-term economic growth and employment but also addresses long-term policy goals. Energy security and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reductions are chief among these goals, and smart government investment in these areas can both create jobs today and lower the future cost of implementing long-term policies such as a cap-and-trade program or carbon tax. Trevor Houser, Shashank Mohan, and Robert Heilmayr consider twelve proposed "green" stimulus programs and examine the economic, environmental, and energy-security costs and benefits of these proposals using the Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System and the Bureau of Economic Analysis's RIMS II multipliers. These proposals fall into three basic categories: energy efficiency investments, such as programs to refit federal buildings and weatherize homes; power generation programs, including extension of the production tax credit for renewable energy and the installation of "smart" meters; and transportation proposals, such as hybrid tax credits, funding for battery research and development, and mass transit expansion. They find that their twelve programs create an average of 30,100 job-years per $1 billion in government spending, comparing favorably with an average of 7000 job-years for every $1 billion in temporary tax cuts or 25,200 job-years per $1 billion in traditional infrastructure investment. These proposals also have a favorable impact on US GHG emissions and reduce US imports of oil and natural gas, but these effects are not significant enough to replace long-term policies in these areas. Rather, these policies can lay the groundwork for long-term policy goals, reducing the cost of implementing such policies down the road while at the same time spurring employment and helping to reverse the continuing economic downturn.

Suggested Citation

  • Trevor Houser & Shashank Mohan & Robert Heilmayr, 2009. "A Green Recovery? Assessing US Economic Stimulus and the Prospects for International Coordination," Policy Briefs PB09-3, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb09-3

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:wsi:jicepx:v:02:y:2011:i:02:n:s1793993311000336 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Carley, Sanya & Lawrence, Sara & Brown, Adrienne & Nourafshan, Andrew & Benami, Elinor, 2011. "Energy-based economic development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 282-295, January.
    3. Anna Alberini, Silvia Banfi, and Celine Ramseier, 2013. "Energy Efficiency Investments in the Home: Swiss Homeowners and Expectations about Future Energy Prices," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    4. Andreas A. Papandreou, 2015. "The Great Recession and the transition to a low-carbon economy," Working papers wpaper88, Financialisation, Economy, Society & Sustainable Development (FESSUD) Project.
    5. Mundaca, Luis & Luth Richter, Jessika, 2015. "Assessing ‘green energy economy’ stimulus packages: Evidence from the U.S. programs targeting renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1174-1186.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb09-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peterson Institute webmaster). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.