Home » Posts tagged 'energy efficiency'

Tag Archives: energy efficiency

Those who choose to heat their home with wood are becoming fewer and fewer. However, with more interested in a self-sustaining lifestyle and going off the grid, those numbers may begin to rise again. If you decided to heat your home with wood, there are simply some types of wood that are better to burn in your home.

There is nothing quite like a roaring fire to stand next to while listening to the crackles and pops on a subzero winter day while there’s a raging snowstorm blowing through. If you live in an area where those days are common in the winter, you probably know the benefits of having a wood burning stove firsthand. The heat is immediate and fills the space quickly as opposed to waiting for propane or electric heat to keep up. It’s also oddly comforting.

When talking about burning wood inside for heat, it is important to first talk about the quality of your wood burning stove. Using wood as the main heat source in your home is not for everyone. It’s actually lifestyle choice. Many summer days will be spent cutting and splitting wood to be used during the winter months and if you choose to buy firewood, the cost may not outweigh the benefits.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Energy Efficiency and Technology Squeeze the Carbon Bubble

June 25, 2018

Energy Efficiency and Technology Squeeze the Carbon Bubble

Homeowner installing programmable thermostat to help weatherize home

The carbon bubble will burst with or without government action, according to a new study. That will hurt people who invest in fossil fuels.

As energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies improve and prices drop, global demand for fossil fuels will decline, “stranding” new fossil fuel ventures — likely before 2035, according to the study in Nature Climate Change, “Macroeconomic impact of stranded fossil fuel assets.”

Researchers from Cambridge University and elsewhere found technological advances will strand fossil fuel assets regardless of “whether or not new climate policies are adopted,” but that “the loss would be amplified if new climate policies to reach the 2°C target of the Paris Agreement are adopted and/or if low-cost producers (some OPEC countries) maintain their level of production (‘sell out’) despite declining demand.”

That could “amount to a discounted global wealth loss of US$1–4 trillion,” and Russia, the U.S., and Canada could see their fossil fuel industries nearly shut down, the report says.

The best way to limit these negative impacts is to divest from fossil fuels and speed up the transition to a diversified, energy-efficient, clean-energy economy. Investing tax dollars to expand fossil fuel development and infrastructure, including pipelines, is irresponsible and incompatible with Canada’s Paris Agreement commitments, putting everyone at economic risk, and leaving us with polluted air, water and land, and increasing climate impacts and healthcare bills.

Lead author Jean-François Mercure told the Guardian, “With more policies from governments, this would happen faster. But without strong [climate] policies, it is already happening. To some degree at least you can’t stop it. But if people stop putting funds now in fossil fuels, they may at least limit their losses.”

Co-author Jorge Viñuales said, “Individual nations cannot avoid the situation by ignoring the Paris agreement or burying their heads in coal and tar sands.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

World can limit global warming to 1.5C by ‘improving energy efficiency’

June 5, 2018

World can limit global warming to 1.5C by ‘improving energy efficiency’

It is possible to limit global warming to 1.5C and achieve many of the sustainable development goals without “negative emissions technologies”, a new study finds.

The research suggests that improving energy efficiency – chiefly by saving on everyday energy use – could play a major role in restricting warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, which is the aspirational target of the Paris Agreement.

Emerging technologies, such as multipurpose smartphones and electric autonomous cars, could be key to improving energy efficiency both in the developed world and the global south, the lead author tells Carbon Brief.

The “landmark” study provides policymakers with tools to implement strategies to rapidly increase energy efficiency, another scientist tells Carbon Brief.

Negative emissions

Under the Paris Agreement, countries agreed that warming should be limited to “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels, with efforts to keep it below 1.5C. Since then, researchers have developed a range of scenarios to explore how this could be achieved.

Until recently, scenarios limiting warming to 1.5C have typically relied on the rapid and widespread deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs).

NETs are a group of methods – many still in development – that would limit global warming by removing CO2 from the air and storing it on land, underground or in the oceans.

In particular, most 1.5C scenarios assume that the world will develop large-scale bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Put simply, BECCS involves burning biomass – such as trees and crops – to generate energy and then capturing the resulting CO2 emissions.

The assumption that BECCS will be needed to reach 1.5C has proved controversialamong some groups. This is because BECCS has yet to be demonstrated at a commercial scale and research suggests that deployment would take up large amounts of land, which could threaten food production and wildlife.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Bedazzled by Energy Efficiency

January 10, 2018

Bedazzled by Energy Efficiency

To focus on energy efficiency is to make present ways of life non-negotiable. However, transforming present ways of life is key to mitigating climate change and decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels.

Energy efficiency policy

Energy efficiency is a cornerstone of policies to reduce carbon emissions and fossil fuel dependence in the industrialised world. For example, the European Union (EU) has set a target of achieving 20% energy savings through improvements in energy efficiency by 2020, and 30% by 2030. Measures to achieve these EU goals include mandatory energy efficiency certificates for buildings, minimum efficiency standards and labelling for a variety of products such as boilers, household appliances, lighting and televisions, and emissions performance standards for cars. [1]

The EU has the world’s most progressive energy efficiency policy, but similar measures are now applied in many other industrialised countries, including China. On a global scale, the International Energy Agency (IEA) asserts that “energy efficiency is the key to ensuring a safe, reliable, affordable and sustainable energy system for the future”. [2] In 2011, the organisation launched its 450 scenario, which aims to limit the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere to 450 parts per million. Improved energy efficiency accounts for 71% of projected carbon reductions in the period to 2020, and 48% in the period to 2035. [2] [3]

What are the results?

Do improvements in energy efficiency actually lead to energy savings? At first sight, the advantages of efficiency seem to be impressive. For example, the energy efficiency of a range of domestic appliances covered by the EU directives has improved significantly over the last 15 years. Between 1998 and 2012, fridges and freezers became 75% more energy efficient, washing machines 63%, laundry dryers 72%, and dishwashers 50%. [4]

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Renewable Energy: Why Emissions and the Economy Don’t Tell the Whole Story

August 13, 2015

Renewable Energy: Why Emissions and the Economy Don’t Tell the Whole Story

Last week, President Obama announced the Clean Power Plan, the United States’ strongest climate policy to date. The plan aims to reduce coal-fired power plant emissions by allowing states to devise their own plans to reach federally-mandated emissions reduction targets. This choose-your-own-adventure policy could send states down very different paths, some worse for the environment and community resilience than others.

A bragging point for the Clean Power Plan is its flexibility; all currently identified low-carbon energy sources can play a role in state plans, including natural gas, nuclear, hydropower and other renewables. But despite the low-carbon nature these energy technologies share, they differ greatly in overall community and environmental benefit. Natural gas is abundantly available today due to controversial fracking technology (most of which occurs near rural communities); hydropower requires dam construction (sometimes on massive scales); and nuclear power comes with the risk of disastrous accidents, issues around extraction and long-term storage problems.

The final Clean Power Plan rule does emphasize renewable energy and energy efficiency over natural gas; a “Clean Energy Incentive Program” provides credits that can be traded later as part of emissions trading systems to states that expand wind, solar and energy efficiency efforts in the two years before state implementation plans take effect. However, shifting from coal to natural gas is one of the three building blocks EPA used in calculating state goals, so states are still permitted to emphasize natural gas in their implementation plans, even if it’s not incentivized. Shifting from one fossil fuel to another is not a sustainable energy future for any state, even if it slightly reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

– See more at: http://www.iatp.org/blog/201508/renewable-energy-why-emissions-and-the-economy-don’t-tell-the-whole-story#sthash.efdtxaKW.dpuf

Recession, Not Fracking, Behind Drop in U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Scientists Conclude

July 22, 2015

Recession, Not Fracking, Behind Drop in U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Scientists Conclude

It’s been a talking point for boosters of the shale gas rush for years: as fracking spread across the country and the supply glut drove prices down, utilities have been shuttering dirty coal plants and burning natural gas instead – meaning that America’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions dropped sharply. Fracking, the argument went, is actually good for the environment because it’s good for the climate.

“The boom in American natural-gas production is doing what international negotiations and legislation couldn’t: reducing U.S. carbon-dioxide pollution,” Bloomberg reported in 2012.

“While other factors, including a sluggish U.S. economy and increasing energy efficiency, have contributed to the decline in carbon emissions from factories, automobiles and power plants, many experts believe the switch from coal to natural gas for electricity generation has been the biggest factor,” said the Wall Street Journal in April 2013.

“In these last years, the natural gas revolution, shall we say, has been a major contributor to reducing carbon emissions,” the Obama administration’s Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said at Columbia University on Aug. 26, 2013, as he described the President’s goals for reducing carbon emissions. “We are about halfway there, and about half of that is because of the substitution of natural gas for coal in the power sector, essentially driven by market forces.”

But, it turns out, correlation is not the same thing as causation. And while the drop in emissions happened at roughly the same time as the fracking rush spread, shale gas had relatively little to do with the drop in carbon emissions, according to a scientific paper published today in the journal Nature Communications.

“Before 2007, rising emissions were primarily driven by economic growth,” ecological economist Dr. Klaus Hubacek and his fellow researchers wrote. “After 2007, decreasing emissions were largely a result of economic recession with changes in fuel mix (for example, substitution of natural gas for coal) playing a comparatively minor role.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Why Energy Efficiency is the Cheapest Form of Energy

July 15, 2015

Why Energy Efficiency is the Cheapest Form of Energy

For a subject that more often than not draws blank stares at dinner parties, energy efficiency has an uncanny ability to provoke controversy among analysts and policy makers alike.

The latest study to dispute its benefits has once again ignited a debate between those who question the value of federal and state subsidies for efficiency programs, which they argue, have questionable returns. Leaving aside the highly technical debate over modeling efficiency – and the more personal friction between engineers and economists – the policy implications are significant.

Energy efficiency is widely considered the most important energy source today, with positive effects ranging from lower energy costs, to boosting the local economy, to improved health outcomes and social wellbeing. Nowhere is this more true than in the state of California.

The controversial paper, published in June, posits that the costs of implementing the U.S. Weatherization Assistance Program outweigh the benefits in terms of efficiency savings. The findings have been disputed by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Illinois Institute of Technology, among others.

More broadly, however, it once again brings into question the value and purpose of energy efficiency programs in the United States. In California, the state that has arguably had the most success with increasing energy efficiency, the debate continues. Since 1975, California’s energy use has essentially plateaued, while consumption per capita in the rest of the United States has almost doubled. It is widely accepted that California’s energy efficiency programs are at least partly responsible.

(Click to enlarge)

Opponents dispute the extent to which the benefits can be attributed to green policies and programs that have spanned everything from fuel efficiency standards, to appliance ratings, to weatherization, to simply better communicating the importance of energy savings to Californians. In a 2008study, Stanford economists found that only 23% of the difference between California’s energy use and the U.S. as a whole was attributable to policy. Still, if this is to be considered the lower end of the range, it remains a significant figure.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

“Green” Policies Don’t Make Economic Sense Even on Their Own Terms

June 2, 2015

“Green” Policies Don’t Make Economic Sense Even on Their Own Terms

When confronting the typical proponents of “green” government policies, the free-market economist must make a strategic decision: Since most of these recommended (and often, actually implemented) State measures make no sense even on their own terms, one course of action is to stipulate the alleged goals and simply point out that the policies do not achieve them.

However, the danger with such concessions “for the sake of argument” is that the interventionists can then say, “So you agree with us that the free market, left to its own devices, will drive humanity over a cliff, and now we’re all just quibbling over the details.” That’s why it’s also important to stress that the underlying fearmongering is baseless, too.

In the present blog post, I’ll move through the spectrum of possible responses. First, Ross McKitrick–who wrote a graduate-level textbook on the economic analysis of environmental policy–has a new study for the Canadian Fraser Institute, critiquing Canadian “green” regulations that make no sense on their own terms.

Specifically, McKitrick shows that if we stipulate for the sake of argument that (say) Canadians are emitting too much carbon dioxide, then the proper policy response would directly target CO2 emissions. So even if you thought this were a worthy objective, it would still be ludicrous (McKitrick argues) to ban 100W incandescent light bulbs–especially in Canada, where most of the electricity is generated through hydro and nuclear.

Similarly, direct mandates on “energy efficiency” in household appliances are also absurd. The government is playing “central planner,” telling Canadians how to achieve reductions in CO2 emissions which any textbook will say is a very costly way to achieve targeted emission reductions. (Naturally, the U.S. federal and state governments have similarly absurd regulations.)

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

How to Keep Warm in a Cool House

March 17, 2015

How to Keep Warm in a Cool House

Heating is a huge source of fossil energy use in cooler climates. In the Netherlands, for instance, heating accounts for 20 to 25% of total primary energy use, despite relatively mild winters. This means heat supply guzzles as much fuel as transportation. [1] According to many, the solution to the high energy use of heating systems is to be found in better strategies for thermal insulation.

A well-insulated building can indeed lower energy use spectacularly, to the point that there’s no need for a heating system: the heat produced by people, electric devices and the sun can ensure thermal comfort. Orientating a building (or a whole city) around the sun is another important design element that can render heating redundant. For new buildings, the design and the orientation are much more important factors for energy efficiency than the choice of the heating system, if that’s needed at all.

When we talk about existing buildings, however, things look very different. There are several methods for insulating older buildings, but their effect on energy use is usually limited in comparison to what a new building can achieve. What’s more, insulating existing buildings can be expensive and some of the easier-to-apply methods can cause problems, such as crack formation, frost damage, mould and rot. [1] And, of course, it’s not easy to re-orientate an existing building toward the sun.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Is China Exporting Its Pollution?

March 16, 2015

Is China Exporting Its Pollution?

China is in the midst of a historic transformation, and the surprising progress the country has made at energy efficiency has raised hopes that the world may get a grip on global greenhouse gas emissions much sooner than expected.

As a result of the progress China is making in cleaning up its industrial sector, global greenhouse gas emissions hit the pause button in 2014, the first time that has happened in four decades (absent a major economic contraction). The International Energy Agency said on March 13 that global greenhouse gas emissions hit 32.3 billion tons in 2014, the same level as the year before.

The shocking revelation that carbon emissions flat lined in 2014 was largely possible because of China’s ability to meet its growth target of 7.5 percent while keeping its greenhouse gas emissions flat.

The Chinese government has targeted pollution reduction as a top priority. It has set a ceiling on its coal consumption at 4.2 billion tons per year by 2020. Only a few short years ago that seemed laughably implausible, but China surprised the world when it reported that it actually saw coal consumption dip in 2014.

Cutting coal consumption fits neatly into the Chinese government’s apparent goal of shifting its economy from export-driven heavy industry, to a consumer economy. In practice, that means forcing the closure of dirty factories.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, not Places

February 14, 2015

Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, not Places

These days, we provide thermal comfort in winter by heating the entire volume of air in a room or building. In earlier times, our forebear’s concept of heating was more localized: heating people, not places.

They used radiant heat sources that warmed only certain parts of a room, creating micro-climates of comfort. These people countered the large temperature differences with insulating furniture, such as hooded chairs and folding screens, and they made use of additional, personal heating sources that warmed specific body parts.

It would make a lot of sense to restore this old way of warming, especially since modern technology has made it so much more practical, safe and efficient.

Most modern heating systems are primarily based on the heating of air. This seems an obvious choice, but there are far worthier alternatives. There are three types of (sensible) heat transfer: convection (the heating of air), conduction (heating through physical contact), and radiation (heating through electromagnetic waves).

The old way of warming was based upon radiation and conduction, which are more energy-efficient than convection. While convection implies the warming of each cubic centimetre of air in a space in order to keep people comfortable, radiation and conduction can directly transfer heat to people, making energy use independent of the size of a room or building.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Climate Spending Falls, Threatening 2-Degree Target – Bloomberg

November 20, 2014

Climate Spending Falls, Threatening 2-Degree Target – Bloomberg.

Spending on carbon-reduction and climate-protection measures by governments and companies fell for a second year, threatening the United Nations’ goal to cap global warming at safe levels, according to a research report.

World expenditures on renewables, energy efficiency and measures that protect against the effects of climate change slid $28 billion, or 8 percent, to about $331 billion in 2013, according to the report published today by the Climate Policy Initiative, a San Francisco-based analysis company.

Governments are trying to devise a new global agreement by the end of next year that would cap the increase in the world’s temperature since the Industrial Revolution to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). To achieve that, annual spending on measures like wind and solar power needs to more than double to $790 billion by 2020, the International Energy Agency says.

“Global investments in a cleaner, more resilient economy are decreasing and the gap between finance needed and actually delivered is growing,” Barbara Buchner, a senior director of Climate Policy Initiative and lead author of the study, said in an e-mailed statement. “Climate finance is a key ingredient to bring the world on a 2-degree Celsius pathway.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: energy efficiency

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Negative emissions

Latest Posts