Opposition to Myths About Energy

Opposition to Conservative Reasoning
and Economic Theory

by Scotland Willis

A recent article in a the Atlanta Journal- Constitution(Feb 11, 2012), highlighted "myths about saving energy."  Unfortunately this line of thinking only reinforces the ignorance that much of the world perceives regarding its interpretation of the of the United States and its sense of arrogance.  

While this may seem like a extreme position to take, look at the numbers before I go into explaining why poor reasoning regarding whether or not behaving more consciously about individual usage, is the greatest harm.

The United States uses collectively, 3.7 billion Megawatt Hours/ year (mWh/ year) as per 2009 numbers*. In 2010, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 11,496 kWh, an average of 958 kilowatt hours (kWh) per month. Tennessee had the highest annual consumption at 16,716 kWh and Maine the lowest at 6,252 kWh.

An example of energy usage available via pdf produced by National Grid: Ten 100-watt lamps, when on for one hour, consume 1 kilo-watt-hour (kWh).  A 60 watt bulb running for 4 hours equals about a pound of coal.

Returning to the dispute; one should not be opposed to people understanding the individual economic impact of wasting energy; it is critical however, to be acutely cognizant of the greater collective impact.  One could easily argue that if I lived alone on this earth and randomly threw my waste everywhere and anywhere in my wake, it would have marginal impact in comparison to what the environment could in its decomposition process, but multiply that times 260 million people and we have a real problem.  Economic theory suggest that we hold constant explanatory variables other than the one under consideration, i.e., accept that considering the micro economics of individuals having too small an impact to matter, is irrelevant; this paradigm can no longer hold true.  The value of externalities and the increased rate at which we are decimating the environment is too significant a factor to be dismissed.  Such elements are too intertwined to not consider extrapolating the observations to create a more meaningful understanding of our individual responsibility- even if it seems as minute as $3.00.  If we could get 260 million people to donate $3.00 each day (which could serve as an example of how much energy we waste, thought the number is much higher), what affect would that have on poverty (2.847e+11); you'll want to add some zeros on for that "11"?

We need to be constantly conscious of our individual actions as we risk losing the opportunity to shift the behavior of everyone around us.  This discussion was prompted not only by the article, but by a heated discussion between my father and myself.  For him he argued that I could not quantify the significance of leaving a refrigerator door open for 10 seconds versus 3 seconds- which completely misses the point.  The point is if we collectively close our refrigerator door sooner, we (260,000,000 people) will have the kind of meaningful impact that would not only protect the environment a bit more, but also shift the perception that gluttony is a way of life in the United States.  A simple look at our rate of obesity and the trend therein, should reflect another serious indicator that our behavior needs to shift.    




*Energy Information Administration (EIA)