Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(21,875 posts)
14. Some Dilemma: Efficient Appliances Use Less Energy, Produce the Same Level of Service with Less…
Tue Jan 8, 2013, 06:02 PM
Jan 2013
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dgoldstein/some_dilemma_efficient_applian_1.html
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Some Dilemma: Efficient Appliances Use Less Energy, Produce the Same Level of Service with Less Pollution and Provide Consumers with Greater Savings. What's Not to Like?[/font]

Posted December 17, 2010 in Curbing Pollution

[font size=3]In The Efficiency Dilemma, The New Yorker (December 20, 2010), David Owen revives a discredited 19th century article on economics to posit that the increasing efficiency of household products such as refrigerators and air conditioners is responsible for a range of problems, including everything from food waste to America’s culture of excess. Owen argues (apparently seriously) that by allowing consumers to save money that would otherwise go to high and wasted energy bills, efficient appliances have caused Americans to abandon the simple life.

Owen – whose expertise lies in the unrelated field of golfing (I'm not making this up), has unfortunately cobbled together this thesis without the benefit of facts or data. In the real world, efficient appliances (and the laws and policies that make them increasingly efficient) play a major role in reducing household energy usage, slashing energy bills for those consumers who can least afford them, and avoiding the need to build new costly power plants. Sad to say, this article – however well-intentioned, is a great example of misguided pseudo-analysis that is based on rank speculation made worse by gross errors of fact.

The reality is that the increase in efficiency of appliances is a huge success story for all consumers who benefit from the savings these products provide. Refrigerator energy use was growing with a trend that would have resulted in electricity demand of about 175 GW by today; but with efficiency policies that level of power demand was cut to less than 15 GW. The difference, about 160 GW, compares to about 125 GW provided by the entire nuclear power fleet in the United States, or to 400 large coal plants that were expected to be needed but now are not.

Owen, however, blames a host of evils on efficiency, but fails to back up his accusations with facts. Owen starts by conceding that serious energy analysis of rebound effects shows them to be “comparatively trivial.” People who insulate their houses don’t absorb all the savings by sweltering through the winter, and buyers of efficient refrigerators don’t start leaving the door open gratuitously. But after admitting that the serious studies show rebound effects to be small and getting smaller over time, he does nothing to address the finding of the studies but instead starts writing a fairy-tale story of how efficient refrigerators don’t really save energy because somehow efficiency is responsible for the growing size of refrigerators, the increasing extent of refrigeration, and even the growing girth of Americans. The author notes how the size and feature offerings of refrigerators increased rapidly from 1954 until recently, and then, with out-of-the blue imagination, tries to link this to efficiency increases.

…[/font][/font]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

The truth about “Jevons Paradox” OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #1
Are you claiming that this somehow disputes the rebound principle? GliderGuider Jan 2013 #2
The “rebound effect” is real, but its magnitude is exaggerated OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #5
I would invite you to read section 5 of the paper. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #8
Truthfully, telling me that a paper proves (among other things) that the “Jevons Paradox…is real”… OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #10
As I said below, GliderGuider Jan 2013 #11
Whose reasoning is motivated? Mine? Yours? or the author’s? OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #12
Well, I'm not throwing up the impassioned defense, and the author just wrote a paper. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #15
Oh, energy efficiency can’t save civilization by itself OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #16
Mangling Energy Efficiency Economics OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #13
Some Dilemma: Efficient Appliances Use Less Energy, Produce the Same Level of Service with Less… OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #14
Well, just to start.... NoOneMan Jan 2013 #20
You buck the system AldoLeopold Jan 2013 #24
Energy Efficiency is for Real, Energy Rebound a Distraction OKIsItJustMe Jan 2013 #17
I know exactly how the general public will respond to this... Speck Tater Jan 2013 #3
Of course they will. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #4
But on the other hand, what can we expect? Speck Tater Jan 2013 #6
I doubt the general public would be able to understand this even if they wanted too. limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #7
Yes, that's why I posted it here instead of in GD GliderGuider Jan 2013 #9
Prosperity is when everyone has enough to eat, a safe place to sleep... hunter Jan 2013 #18
True that. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #19
I thought prosperity is when everyone within earshot has those things NoOneMan Jan 2013 #21
+1 nt eppur_se_muova Jan 2013 #22
+100 Well said. Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #23
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»No way out? The double-bi...»Reply #14