Most Americans overlook efficiency as the most effective means of reducing energy consumption.
At the same time, poor public perception of the amount of energy needed by appliances and certain activities may be preventing consumers from making more informed choices when it comes to energy-saving behavior, a new survey suggests.
The gaps in knowledge versus reality suggest there is a significant opportunity for education to help consumers make better decisions to save energy. For example, Americans are more likely to say using less energy, such as shutting off lights, is the quickest path to energy conservation, without considering the potential savings from using more energy efficient equipment and behaviors, such as switching to compact fluorescent lightbulbs.
"Relative to experts' recommendations, participants were overly focused on curtailment rather than efficiency, possibly because improvements almost always involve research, effort, and out-of-pocket costs (e.g., buying a new energy-efficient appliance)," the report said, "whereas curtailment may be easier to imagine and incorporate into one's daily behaviors without any upfront costs."
Respondents were asked about the single most effective thing they could do to conserve energy. Fifty-five percent named curtailing energy use, such as driving less, as the most effective method, while just 11.7 percent chose efficiency.
They were also asked to estimate the amount of energy used by nine devices and energy saved by six household activities. Researchers found many misconceptions, such as the belief that using a clothesline to dry clothing saves more energy than changing the washer's settings; the opposite is true. Participants also thought a central air conditioner used 1.3 times as much energy as a room air conditioner, when is actually uses 3.5 times as much. Participants estimated that trucks consume as much energy as trains and ships, when they actually use 10 times as much energy per ton-mile.
They accurately estimated that moving goods by airplane is the most energy-intensive shipping method, and using virgin aluminum or glass to make cans or bottles takes more energy than using recycled materials.
Interestingly, participants who went out of their way to act in ways that were more environmentally friendly guessed less accurately.
"Unexpectedly, participants who engaged more in energy-conserving behaviors had less accurate perceptions of energy use and savings, possibly reflecting unrealistic optimism about the effectiveness of their personal energy-saving strategies compared with alternative ones," the report said. "Alternatively, people may focus primarily on the behaviors they have already adopted, leading to inaccuracies in judging how much energy other behaviors use or save."
The survey covered 505 people in the U.S. The article, "Public perceptions of energy consumption and savings," was authored by Shahzeen Z. Attaria, Michael L. DeKayb, Cliff I. Davidsonc, and Wändi Bruine de Bruin from Columbia University, Ohios State University, and Carnegie Mellon University, respectively. The article appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Image CC licensed by Flickr user jeffwilcox.
Ecocentrism, In general
Ecocentrism,
In general waiting for your appliance to die and doing some investigation of best replacement is a good plan to minimize cost, but not minimizing energy use.
Most large appliances, cars, etc get recycled so many of the resources are recovered.
For example, if the water heater starts leaking, people often take what the plumber has rather than going for the most energy efficient model. If your furnace is dead in February and its 4 degrees outside it is hard to wait 3 days for the 98% efficient gas furnace. Planning ahead is important.
I disagree on the light bulbs. If you are waiting for an incandescent bulb that is on for more than 4 hours per day, a CFL will probably save you money. A 75 watt bulb on 5 hours at 10c/kWh cost 1.13c/month. An equivalent CFL uses about 19Watts, and cost about 29c/month. Using the incandescent loses (costs) about 84c more per month. Your saving your electric from the minute you replace the bulb, you've paid off the CFL in 2-3 months.
So, my advice is: If you have CFL in a drawer, you've spent the money. Take out the working incandescent bulb from fixtures that are on more than 1-2 hours per day and put in the CFL. Save the incandescent bulbs to use in closets or other places they are on for minutes at a time. Turn off the lights when you leave the room. Look for stuff that is plugged in and warm even when you're not using it. This helped my cut my electricity bill by 40% between Dec 09 and Jan 10.
The same argument can apply to coal fired power plants. These are mostly old (pre 1960) mostly less than 35% efficient. Should we keep spewing mercury and soot and acid rain because the plant still works? Or should the plant be replaced with something that pollutes less? A new coal plant might make it to 40% efficient with better pollution control. A good new combined cycle gas plant can hit 60% efficient.
If you have high air conditioning bills CFL also help. Notice that incandescent bulbs are really hot (waste heat), while CFL are only warm. Your AC unit has to work harder to pump the waste heat out.
As Scotty said, fixing the biggest energy wasters first saves the most. If you drive 100 miles a month, your car might not be a high priority. If you drive 100 miles per day, mpg is an important consideration.
The author makes it seem as
The author makes it seem as though it is more "green" to toss out all your old lightbulbs and appliances as well as trade in your old car for a brand new one in order to buy new energy efficient devices. But the truth is that the raw materials are the real concern so new appliances and vehicles should not be bought until the old ones die. The technocentric point of view of this author reflects the new mindset that technology will save the world. If one actually wants to help slow the process of killing the earth, then using less of everything is the best way. Make things last and do not purchase unnecessary things like a new lightbulb when the old one is still shining. Also, driving less is an enormously efficient way to save energy. No driving=no emissions. How does that not make sense? Are you encouraging more driving as long as you are driving a hybrid? If so, that is entirely awful advice. Too many consumers are lulled into a false sense of bettering the planet because they drive a hybrid or recycle their bottles so they end up using more because they believe efficiency is better than curtailing.
The real answer is that you
The real answer is that you need a combination of efficient devices and efficient practices. WHEN my incandescent bulbs go out THEN I replace them with CFLs. WHEN my old computer needed replacement THEN I included power supply efficiency and CPU/GPU wattage in my new shopping criteria.
Turning off your PC for the night is good. Having a PC that draws fewer watts than my ceiling lights is also good. Combining both is best.
When the efficiency difference is negligible then there's no rush to replace something. Now that LEDs are viable my plan is to move my current CFLs into sockets that currently have incandescents (since there will be great improvement there, and they should be burning out in a month or two) and put the LEDs into the sockets that see the most use.
Or look at it this way: people need to drive. Let's say they already drive the fastest routes they need as infrequently as possible. Someone with an older, less efficient car would end up wasting more on that once-a-year trip to grandma's than someone with a newer, more efficient car. Curtailing can only accomplish so much and requires constant active attention. Combining it with efficiency allows for the occasional exception to have less impact, as well as taking care of inconsiderate slobs who don't really want to do anything about it anyways.
OK this makes a lot of sense
OK this makes a lot of sense dude.
www.total-privacy.cz.tc
Will there be a "Do this, not
Will there be a "Do this, not that" style article as a follow up to this one?
How does changing the setting
How does changing the setting on a washer save more energy than using a clothesline, which costs basically zero energy (food to compensate for the act of hanging up clothes?)... that's retarded.
I believe the point is that
I believe the point is that forgoing the "extra rinse" or always choosing the largest load size and longest run cycle uses a dryer load(or more) of energy more than using the proper wash setting.
If the clothes washer setting
If the clothes washer setting is changed from hot wash / hot rinse to cold/cold and using the correct size you'll save energy. Heating water if very energy intensive. You can save a bunch by using a detergent made for cold water and avoiding cold water.
Similarly, dishwashers require very hot water to clean the dishes. They get water from the hot water pipe (but this might be cold at first) and heat the water electrically to about 140F. Typically, the kitchen sink is next to the dishwasher. Running the dishwasher just after washing pots means the water going into the dishwasher is hotter so less electricity is needed to heat the water.
i too question that finding,
i too question that finding, drying clothes on a clothesline costs nothing, as it is using the sun and wind to dry the clothes.what is the criteria for that study? i wonder? if it is a straight comparison, than i suppose the energy from the sun and wind may be more than that used by changing the setting of the washer... but since the sun's energy and the wind are natures' energy output it does not cost us anything to use it. I think it is findings like this which says drying clothes by changing the washer setting is more efficient than drying clothes on a clothesline, that makes people suspect all these so called efficiency savings. that is why people prefer to just switch off.
Not surprising.
Not surprising. Understanding that energy efficient appliances are more effective than curtailment is equivalent to people understanding that putting down a bigger downpayment on a home saves money by reducing total interest payments over the lifetime of a loan, or buying a car is cheaper than leasing, etc. Lack of basic financial fundamentals is the root cause. Education needs to begin in the classroom if we are to make any significant headway quickly.