Next Generation Energy is managed and written entirely by Seed editors and expert guest bloggers. Read more about them One thing seems certain in every scenario of our energy future: our demand for energy is growing, and if we continue to fuel that demand with coal and oil, the effect on the planet will be disastrous and irreversible. Every day there is new evidence that greenhouse gases are wreaking havoc on our ecosystems, destroying the delicate balance of elements that has allowed Earth to sustain life for billions of years.
Clean and renewable energy could, as we've seen, eventually meet worldwide demand with minimal environmental impact, but as we've also seen, we're not there yet. Though some technologies have widespread political support, and some may even be far enough along in development to compete with fossil fuels in the energy market, it will take a massive rearrangement of our infrastructure to make a transition on even a national level.
In the meantime, we must fight the energy problem on its other front: by tackling our overwhelming consumption. Conservation of energy—and other resources—was one of the first movements put forward in the "green" revolution, but the message seems to be lost on most individuals, let alone businesses and other large organizations whose practices would have a greater impact.
So, how do we encourage widespread energy conservation? What are the most effective ways to save energy, and are they easy to implement? What technologies should we adopt, and which should we give up? Is reducing our demand for energy more critical, at this point, than trying to fill it with alternative sources?
Environment
Comments
Friedman in "Hot, Flat and Crowded" talks about creating incentives for energy companies to encourage efficiency. CA has been doing this very successfully and per capita energy usage has gone down where in the rest of the country it has gone up.
How about having utilities pay for energy audits for consumers?
As for individuals, I use CFLs in lights that are on alot, saving me 75% of the energy for those items. I have switched off 100 watts of vampire loads of equipment I rarely use. Altering driving habits and inflating my tires properly has increased my MPG by about 10% in my normal commuting.
Posted by: darth | October 1, 2008 8:21 PM
Well, the single biggest domestic energy sink is space heating / cooling (as appropriate for the latitude and season). Unfortunately, it's hard to address - you can only get so far by retro-fitting existing structures. Going forward, I think the best thing we could do would be to insist on extremely high building standards - ideally at the level of the German PassivHaus standard.
Personally, I don't think CFLs make much difference. Maybe my usage pattern is atypical, but lighting is such a small component of my total energy use that it's completely impossible to pick out the day I switched all my lights to CFLs by looking at my energy consumption plots - it's buried in the noise. Replacing my fridge made a difference, and stopping leaving my PC on 24/7 made a big difference.
However, a lot of things are less clear-cut. For example, I'm a home brewer. Do the externalised energy savings (transportation, bottle lifecycle, etc) exceed the internalised energy costs (boiling 25L of wort for 60-90mins)? I believe they do (quite significantly, I hope), but it's very difficult to quantify, and only side of the equation shows up clearly in my domestic economy.
Posted by: Dunc | October 2, 2008 8:22 AM
Sure HVAC, fridge, laundry and hot water are the biggest energy users. They are also more expensive to replace/upgrade than sticking CFLs in at a few dollars each. I have all of these items on my list to upgrade, and also perhaps windows and insulation upgrades. These are big $ items so the decision is also based on how much can I afford now, how long is the payback, does the system need to be replaced anyway? For instance, my house is 16 yrs old. The furnace and HW heater and windows are the same age. All will need to be replaced within the next 5 years. That should help my efficiency. I have heard that putting in a 95% plus gas furnace may require significant construction upgrades in the venting which would add even more cost and longer payback time. Is that worth it vs. the 85% one?
Upgrading my vehicle to will save alot of $, but the cost is so high it will have to wait until replacement time anyway, which is years away.
Agree about the PC, my kid leaves his PC on alot and for some reason it won't hibernate even when i set it to do that.
Posted by: darth | October 2, 2008 11:14 AM
It's not going to help make a case for global warming amongst those sitting on the fence when we indulge in hyperbole as you have here, Erin.
You open yourself up to attacks when you write, as you did in the second sentence of your first paragraph: "Every day there is new evidence that greenhouse gases are wreaking havoc on our ecosystems, destroying the delicate balance of elements that has allowed Earth to sustain life for billions of years."
I have no argument with the first clause, but the fact is that Earth's 'delicate' balance has bounced around like a yo-yo over its 4.5 billion year history.
The current climate situation (or at least current until the Industrial Revolution began!) was only in place for some 10,000 years subsequent to the last big glaciation.
Prior to that we had other glaciations and atmospheric gas changes which make today's look modest by comparison.
If you'd said "10,000 years" instead of "billions of years", you'd be a lot more accurate and still be making a solid case. 10,000 years is an immense amount of time by any human standard.
Posted by: Ian | October 30, 2008 10:59 AM
thank you
Posted by: seslichat | January 22, 2009 11:53 AM