This week in Doha, Qatar, world leaders are struggling with how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions fast enough, and in amounts great enough, to protect people from the droughts, food shortages, rising sea levels, and severe weather events that climate change is likely to bring.
Leaders are debating a range of solutions including carbon sequestration and policies and practices to help people prepare for the effects of climate change (“adaptation”). In fact, world leaders have been meeting to discuss possible solutions to climate change for 20 years. Yet the cheapest, cleanest, and fastest resource the world has for reducing greenhouse gas emissions remains vastly underused: energy efficiency.
Energy efficiency means better practices and technological innovations that reduce energy consumption while getting the same or better results. Airtight houses that keep people comfortable. Cities with clean, fast public transit, light bulbs that produce the same amount of light for a fraction of the energy—these practices and technologies have been around for decades, yet they still aren’t the norm. (See results of ACEEE International Scorecard where the highest score awarded for any country was just 67 out of 100.) The question that should concern leaders is, Why?
A new analysis by ECOFYS and commissioned by Philips for the United Nations Climate Change Conference estimates that energy efficiency can generate over a third of the emissions reductions we need by 2020. An ACEEE analysis found that in the United States the potential savings are even greater. Meanwhile, vast amounts of energy are wasted through outdated and inefficient practices while the greenhouse gases emitted by fossil fuels used to power these practices continue to billow into the sky.
If the world is going to address climate change in a meaningful way, world leaders must look beyond present policies that cling to old, outdated practices and technologies and instead adopt policies that will shape a future we all want to live in. Energy efficiency will help us get there.
Comments
That's just crazy talk
Save energy and save money? This makes way too much sense. The most cost effective solution, that creates the most jobs? Huh? Can use existing technology and can be deployed right away? That's just crazy talk. Just kidding. It makes no sense to transmit solar, wind and other active renewable power on inefficient and wasteful infrastructure. Energy efficiency must come first.
In Virginia, I'm told by elected leaders that the power companies are not the ones standing in the way of progress on renewable energy. It's just the conservative Republicans in our state assembly, who reflexively shut down any attempt to conserve energy. We actually have very little coal in Virginia but it is highly exaggerated. They convince people we need new coal plants by implying everyone in the region and their children will get a job. And then we get nearly fully automated plants that have very few jobs.
The Republicans are at odds with reality and people give up trying because they think we can't over come the power base of a Republican majority in the state house, coal and power companies. Unfortunately, many of us beat up on the power companies and they end up siding with the coal companies. We need to figure out how to separate them. Possibly stop beating up on them and focus our attention on the conservatives refusing to conserve?
Energy waste
Now you are talking! You probably have not looked at the immense waste of needless outside lighting which is destroying the night sky.
Another huge inefficiency is how badly we have allowed our rail system in North America to deteriorate over the last 40 years. It now takes up to 4 times as long to transport bulk goods by rail as it did 40 years ago.This added transport time is money.Some businesses have resorted to truck transport at double or triple the cost.Bottom line more trucks on the road ,more road maintenance,more dangerous highways and more dead truck drivers.
If we did these kinds of things we would use less fossil fuels ,prices for fuel would come down.As a country we would be more efficient in making goods so we should lead the world not act as a drag on progress.Let's do the right thing for climate change and manufacturing efficiency and let the rest of the world catch up to us!
Reality
The sad thing in all of this is that the need is so obvious it's painful.
Unfortunately energy efficiency is not seen as revolutionary and therefore is just not "attractive", despite supporting the simplest an most obvious of monetisation models - "It will cost you less !"
Our approach, remote scalable diagnosis and triage of opportunity was sneered at by an energy savings body (I leave them nameless) because - everyone must already be doing that as they have the most efficient equipment available !
When I countered that an energy efficient car left running is overnight has 0% efficiency I was accused of selling snake-oil ! - feel free to contact @kWIQly