Economists: Green energy not a panacea

WASHINGTON, Dec. 5 (UPI) -- Funding alternative energy wouldn't provide the best bang for the buck in a U.S. economic stimulus package, some economists said.

Peter Orszag, President-elect Barack Obama's chief budget adviser, wrote in January that some investments in alternative energy were "totally impractical" and others "could end up making the economic situation worse," USA Today reported Friday.

Orszag wrote his comments in January while serving as head of the Congressional Budget Office, the newspaper reported.

Economist Vincent Reinhart of the American Enterprise Institute has also said stimulus money would be better invested elsewhere.

Funding for research adds few jobs and is, essentially, "a transfer (of funds) to Ph.D. students," Reinhart said.

Obama has said he would create jobs in part by funneling money toward wind farms, solar panel projects and fuel-efficient cars.

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the next economic stimulus bill could include up to $100 billion devoted to alternative-energy projects.

In the short-term, however, "the very best things to do" for the economy would be to increase unemployment benefits and food stamps, Robert Pollin at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, told USA Today.