Recovery by Design

We have a golden opportunity to put design and conservation at the front of the new economy. If there was ever a time when value could be seen as a priority, its now. We need fewer throw away products brought in from exploitation markets, and more high value products with efficiency, durability, and tactile satisfaction. We need products that have minimal impact when made, minimal impact in use, and long life to reduce the impact of the end of the life cycle. This has been all but abandoned in the pursuit of cheap cost products to realize maximum profits from repeat purchase churns from product failure, and low quality to generate high profit. We need to return some of what we have lost in hyper consumerism to create a more robust and solid future.

Time Magazine Gets It – well sort of anyway…

Check this article out in Time. It explains everything I have attempted here – that conservation is our best , cheapest, and most readily available fuel source. I am not alone….

The article made the cover as well

Time Cover Story – December 31, 2008

Here’s a piece of the action:

“This may sound too good to be true, but the U.S. has a renewable-energy resource that is perfectly clean, remarkably cheap, surprisingly abundant and immediately available. It has astounding potential to reduce the carbon emissions that threaten our planet, the dependence on foreign oil that threatens our security and the energy costs that threaten our wallets. Unlike coal and petroleum, it doesn’t pollute; unlike solar and wind, it doesn’t depend on the weather; unlike ethanol, it doesn’t accelerate deforestation or inflate food prices; unlike nuclear plants, it doesn’t raise uncomfortable questions about meltdowns or terrorist attacks or radioactive-waste storage, and it doesn’t take a decade to build. It isn’t what-if like hydrogen, clean coal and tidal power; it’s already proven to be workable, scalable and cost-effective. And we don’t need to import it.”

Now if we could only get the rest of the press to wake up and smell the free fresh air…

So here’s the dig – putting the blame on lighting (cover art), and using that spiral CFL lamp as the icon of energy conservation. This is becoming a little silly, espesially when the article makes a great deal of noise about foreign oil, which has nothing to do with lighting at all (electrical energy is not produced from oil.) The problem with rolling all energy into one big pile, is it leads people to believe thatif they buy an energy efficient car, they are doing their part… while sucking energy of a different type up at home, which taps totally different resources. Conservation is a two-front war. Oil use in transportation, Coal and Nuclear material use at home and in the office. Both are in need of substantial improvement.

But, at least it gets the big picture – we’ll just have to beat them up on details later.

The Core Energy Solution

There is a large untapped reserve of energy at our disposal, if we choose to tap into it. Solving our energy needs is more complex than finding more fuel to burn. Combustion of Oil, Natural Gas, and Clean Coal are just one part of the solution. Solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and ocean tide motion are also viable sources. Nuclear power is tempting, but in fifty years, the problem of waste disposal remains unresolved. These supply-side options are not going anywhere; we have time to develop them properly. In the meantime, we have in our hands a very rich resource, called CONSERVATION.

This chart shows the effect of consumption 20% per year for 4 years (ending at 67% of current use), vs. no change. In 20 years, we will need an additional capacity of 75% – the conservation model, shows only an additional demand of 2%. Obviously, this is smarter, cleaner, and more realistic.

We consume too much energy. We waste energy in cars, homes, factories, and businesses. Waste is lost capacity that is available to us right now. All that is required is a conscious effort to conserve. Cutting energy consumption in half equates to a doubling of existing capacity. To accomplish this gain through construction of power-plants involves trillions of dollar and damages the environment. Conservation costs a fraction of this amount, and protects the environment.

In our homes, incandescent lighting consumes seventy percent more energy to produce the same light as fluorescent and LED lighting.

Trimming fuel use in cars and transportation by twenty-five percent equates to a reduction in demand that is greater than the amount of oil we import from the Middle East, Russia, and South America combined. This means that we are importing oil to cover our wasteful consumption, not to satisfy our real need.

An increase in fuel economy of twenty-five percent is the difference between a car producing 15 mpg and a car producing 19 mpg. This goal is not impossible or unreasonable to achieve.

Conservation is the largest source of new energy available to us today. If we embrace this, we solve near term demand issues. Conservation also optimizes future source additions.

About Conservation First

The population of this planet doubled from 1960to 2000.  That means double the demand on energy, food supplies, fresh water, and governmental control. The population of China and India together are now 50% of the world, eclipsing the USA by a ratio of 7 to 1 (7 Asians for each US citizen.) We as a nation have become piggish in our use of energy, consuming 7 times that of any other developing nation, consuming 23% of the worlds non-renewable energy reserves. We have lost our position as leaders of industry, technology and education. The dollar is losing its power as monetary touch stone. we are seen as fat, ignorant, overly emotional, and violent. Our way of life is slowly losing its luster as an example to the world. Our recent military invasions are observed with concern, not as example. Our allies are distancing themselves from us, leaving us to fight alone in battles we claim as globally important.

What happened? The world got fuller, while we got rich and complacent. We tossed our future into the wishing well of material gain in shiny new trash, went into debt to those exploiting our gluttony to feed their own greed. We have advocated our responsibility to the country in favor of personal gain. We’ve changed from a country of active volunteerism to one of passive check writing, and now of finger pointing and emotional outbursts aimed at no-one.

I am as guilty as anyone in all of this, and accept that. I struggle to find a way to reverse this. The first step is in recognizing the failure, then taking action.

One area I am very committed to is advancing energy conservation in this country. I do not believe that looking for more sources is as viable a solution as simply reducing consumption. If indeed we are using 7 times the energy of other developed nations, it seems simple to realize that we can increase our existing energy resources by 7 times, by simply reducing our consumption to that of our European neighbors. This is far easier to do than increase capacity by the same amount and has the bonus of reducing environmental impact, cutting the impact of energy costs on our lifestyle. Even if all we do is cut use by 50%, the effect is a doubling of the capacity we already have in place! Why this is not the #1 focus of every one of us is a mystery.

As the development of China and India continues – from our handing them the business to finance just that – they will grow to demand there share of energy, and will begin to compete with us directly, raising our costs and reducing availability. We need alternative energy sources we control outright, we need to be very frugal in our use of non-renewable sources (not drill now, wait to drill for as long as we can), and we need to simply conserve. Of all approaches, conservation offers the most immediate, most direct, and most effective source for creating future energy independence.

I can show anyone interested how to cut energy used for lighting in their home by as much as 85%, and in their business by as much as 60%. If this were embraced around the country, in just 50% of homes, the energy released for other uses would be as much as 20% of the current capacity, and that’s just from incorporating lighting energy conservation, with no other changes. If we add conservative operation action to this, and apply this to every aspect of our energy use, from insulating hot water pipes and installing intelligent thermostats to shutting off unnecessary energy consumptive devices when not in use, and reducing unnecessary driving through proper trip planning, reducing our per-capita energy consumption by 50% is far easier than one might think. That is a doubling of our current energy capacity, without spending a single dime on nuclear, clean coal, oil exploration, converting food to fuel, putting up a single wind mill or solar panel. This not only reduces dependence on foreign supplies, it doubles the impact of any new source we put on line! Conservation is simply the single largest and most important first step we can take!

One other area of conservation is our use of military engagement to fight political battles. Not only does this consume massive quantities of energy in action, the infrastructure supporting such activity is equally massive. In fact, over the last 6 years, all gains made from energy conservation efforts have been consumed by the gulf war alone. This needs to be redressed, and our policy of asserting power using energy in this manner rebuilt, or we will never, repeat never, reach any position of energy independence.

On Energy Independance

We are in an energy war of competition with the rest of the world, and need to address this battle now, or face consequences that are not attractive. Drilling is not the solution to today’s supply problems. Building rigs, piping and transportation infrastructure, etc… will take 4-7 years to complete. Further, even if we tap 100% of all domestic sources, we still have a shortfall from demand as we just do not have the oil reserves necessary to feed our current and growing appetite for any length of time. So, yes, get the project started, but don’t assume that there will be any real result, as by the time the supply comes on line, we will have already consumed it. In the short term (next 1-5 years) we must reduce demand significantly. This means higher taxes on gasoline to quell demand (we know that higher gas price are effective and quick) – use that income to rebuild roads and finance alternative energy source deployment (natural gas distribution and hydrogen fuel source infrastructure to eventually replace gasoline for autos, as an example). When we reduce demand substantially, the effectiveness of any drilling into domestic sources will have a far greater total impact on our energy position vs. import demand. The next step is to put in place far more aggressive fuel economy standards, and include SUVs, and commercial vehicles in the standards, putting all new cars at 50mpg, and all others at 35mpg, for example. We also need a national energy code that demands that residences comply. We need to stem waste from incandescent lighting (we can save 10% of the energy every home consumes by simply moving to energy efficient lighting), energy inefficient home designs, air conditioning and heat losses, and water heating, not to mention requiring inclusion of off-grid power in new homes. We also need to put in place more effective mass transportation systems to reduce commuter car traffic, rebuild our freight carrier system to move from trucks to trains. All of this, on top of alternative energy sources for electricity – solar, wind, nuclear, clean coal… This is a lot to do, and it needs to be done inside the next decade. We can accomplish all of this, rebuilding our economy using this as the foundation to export the technology, while truly having an impact on moving this country into a leadership position in energy, in stead of the embarrassing position as wasteful consumer we have become. Focusing on one small item in this fabric of true energy independence as an answer is just another waste of time and energy.