Car blogs

Investing in better energy efficiency and conservation of tried and true sources such as coal and petroleum may not be as sexy of a way to cut greenhouse-gas emissions as solar power, wind power and other "new energy" sources, but it's a lot more effective.


That was the gist of a symposium given Wednesday by John A. "Skip" Laitner, director of  economic and social analysis at the nonprofit group American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; and Robert U. Ayres, emeritus professor of economics and political science and technology management at the European Institute of Business Administration.


Improving energy efficiency by doing things such as recapturing the waste heat that's a byproduct of electricity production, using hydrogen as heat stock and using petroleum waste byproduct to produce thermal power is a lot more of an effective way to address the decades-long declining returns on energy return than investing in renewable sources that now provide just 1 percent of energy consumed in the U.S., Laitner and Ayres said.


"Energy efficiency investments can provide up to one half of the greenhouse-gas emissions reduction most scientists say are needed between now and the year 2050," said Laitner. "The dirty little secret today is that most economic assessments of the current climate change policy either ignore or understate the potential advances of energy efficiency. The cheapest, least-polluting, most economic productive energy is the energy that never gets used."


The good news, according to the speakers, is that there's plenty of room for improvement, because about 87 percent of the energy produced in the U.S. today is essentially wasted. Comparatively, countries such as Japan, Austria and the U.K. waste about 80 percent of their energy because of their greater population density and propensity to conserve more and waste less (for Golden State loyalists, California is actually about as energy-efficient as those countries, according to Ayres).


The implication of the speakers was that federal stimulus money would be better spent on getting utility companies to more efficiently use the energy they're already producing than helping them develop new sources of energy altogether.


"Increasing efficiency by converting primary energy into useful work is the most effective tool that we have to get out of the bind that we're in," said Ayres.


By Danny King, Contributor

Tags: Alternative Fuels, Coal, Emissions, Fuel Economy, Natural Gas, Oil, Solar, Wind, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Coal, Energy, European Institute of Business Administration, Fuel Efficiency, Greenhouse-Gas Emissions, John A. "Skip" Laitner, Oil, Petrole

---

Better Energy Efficiency, Not 'New' Energy, Is Key to Cutting Emissions, Experts Say was originally published by Green Car Advisor. Read the full story by clicking here.