[Graeme]

Three Jokers in the Energy Deck

This is the era of Big Oil. Could the next be the era of Big Efficiency?

A new report by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy suggests the possibility. Re-invented with today’s smart energy technologies, energy efficiency could displace 40 to 60 percent of our total energy needs by the year 2050, according to The Long-Term Energy Efficiency Potential: What the Evidence Suggests.

Sound far-fetched? ACEEE says history backs its assertion. Over the last 40 years we tripled the U.S. economy, “and three-quarters of the energy needed to fuel that growth came from an amazing variety of efficiency advances—not new energy supplies,” said the report. Energy forecasters at the time predicted we would be using far more energy than we do now. The advent of the computer, the Internet, energy savings appliances and other efficiencies saved us a lot of money and a lot of oil. In 1970, our economy required 15,900 British Thermal Units of energy to support $1 of economic activity; by 2010 we needed only 7,300 Btus.


In short, we are thinking small about efficiency, when we should be thinking big.

ACEEE further warns that the deck contains at least three jokers, or unwelcome wild cards, that could threaten our hand if we fail to pursue energy efficiency. These include 1) diminishing supplies of cheap and available energy; 2) a slowing rate of energy productivity; and 3) climate change.

How do we keep the jokers buried? The report says it requires “a different recipe of technology investments” than we are now making.

renewableenergyworld

[Keith_McClary]

Three Jokers in the Energy Deck

Over the last 40 years we tripled the U.S. economy, “and three-quarters of the energy needed to fuel that growth came from an amazing variety of efficiency advances—not new energy supplies,” said the report. Energy forecasters at the time predicted we would be using far more energy than we do now. The advent of the computer, the Internet, energy savings appliances and other efficiencies saved us a lot of money and a lot of oil. In 1970, our economy required 15,900 British Thermal Units of energy to support $1 of economic activity; by 2010 we needed only 7,300 Btus.
renewableenergyworld

"Off-shoring" those energy intensive, stinky smokestack industries also helped, although Americans are still the ultimate users of the energy used to manufacture and ship imports.

[Graeme]

Thanks for your comment. A lot more can still be done within US borders as the 96 page report points out. I read the executive summary and the introduction. The US economy is projected to triple by 2050. Peak oil is mentioned in the introduction. The joker depends on how traditional energy is going to be used during the survey period. Greater efficiency gains occur if there is less emphasis on tradtional energy. I hope others read the report and comment on the contents.

[Keith_McClary]

Thanks for your comment. A lot more can still be done within US borders as the 96 page report points out. I read the executive summary and the introduction.
...
I hope others read the report and comment on the contents.

I also didn't read it.

[knowres]

Well if your 1$ of economic activity is based on moving $0.001 around 100 times in virtual financial constructs, there is no surprise that the ratio of energy consumptio to economic activity dropped..
What is the ratio of the "real economy" (stuff being made, repaired, transported etc) to the virtual economy (trading fnancial instruments in split second transactions over and over again) or service economy (hairdressers, yoga instructors, "personal well being consultants" and the like) ? now and then ?
Do we still see an efficiency gain ? or simply a shift towards the abstraction of economic activity?

[FarQ3]

There's a huge difference between $1 in 1970 and $1 in 2012. I would expect a lot more value for $1 in 1970, therefore a lot more energy expended to obtain that dollar.