Promoting Efficiency, Not Alternative Fuels
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 05.29.07
After our rant about the drive to subsidize coal to liquid technology at whatever cost to the environment, we started writing about another article in the New York Times discussing how energy efficiency was better than alternative fuels. We always say that Conservation is the Best Energy Source and others agree- the Germans are going after terawatts; in Vermont the utilities fund it and in New York Governor Spitzer is commited to reducing electrical demand by 15%. “Efficiency is the steak,” said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club. “Renewables are the sizzle.”
But it took Dave Roberts at Grist to note the juxtaposition of the two articles and say "Those of you with strong stomachs will want to marvel at the contrast between two New York Times stories out today. Marvel ... and tear your fracking hair out" and conclude:
There's your civics lesson from today's NYT, kids:
* Energy efficiency: a financial boon and a cheap, fast way to reduce carbon emissions. But: no big industry lobby. Thus: ignored by the feds.
* CTL: a financial boondoggle with few energy security benefits that will aggravate climate change. But: big industry lobby. Thus: plied with billions in taxpayer subsidies.
Looking for something to chat about with your Congressional representative? This seems like a good place to start. ::New York Times and David Roberts in ::Grist
Couldn't agree more. While we are at it, any chance of convincing the press to use the term "eco-friendly" for news that really deserves it? Most of the time it is used to describe less harmful alternatives rather than truly eco-positive or eco-neutral solutions. It might seem a small thing, but having eco-friendly used to describe hybrid cars for example (still eco-negative, just not as negative as the standard SUV) makes it harder to differentiate between truly innovative or sensible approaches. Talk about tearing one's hair out, I'm positively hair-negative right now!
Energy efficiency is in itself a form of alternative energy production. No one lobbys for it in Washington, yet it should be promoted.
If our congress wanted to, they could place limits on vehicle size and power by higher mpg requirments, pass laws to gradually do away with the use of incandescent lights and even pass laws insuring the installation of devices to cut off power when TV sets are turned off.
There is really much to be done in this area but it is without glory. It just needs clear thinking, hard working congressmen who are willing to act for the benefit of their country.
It's not that I don't agree with what's in the article; it's that conservation and efficiency mean different things. Don't call it conservation because it's isn't, it's increasing efficiency. This confusion between conservation and increasing efficiency hurts the environmentalist argument. When you conserve, it's assumed that you are using less. However, efficiency assumes that you are trying to do more with less. I would submit the following as an example of this: http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/efficiency.html
efficiency is just a delay. when the population grows and third worlds industrialize. we will be facing the same harsh reality.
we can never be polution free, so we have to knock out the things we can, like cars and power stations.
ofcourse efficiency is good, and i think its a requirement to becoming netural. more efficiency the less $ needed to change fuels. and ppl will learn how valuable it is.
if we drive for all and miss, hopefully we will be ok.
if we drive for some, and miss. we will be stuffed.
al gore summed it up good. theres no one fix, we have to do them all.
Gerald is correct - Efficiency is to do with technology, Conservation is to do with human behaviour.
You could make a car 100% more efficent, but if the human drives it 100% more then the conservation is 0%.
Hmm, I don't think i'll be needing to heat my house these next few months. It's terribly ineficient, the heat from outside just spills through the walls. (plus our siding is black, which is cool, but not literally in the summertime)
And we don't have air conditioning. So.... We'll just go to the mall or jump in a pool.