Comments on: Your TV should not be a couch potato too

By: Ronald

Ronald — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:20:32 +0000

To bad the graphs didn’t include the 2001-2003 time period in California where the state had a dysfunctional electrical supply pricing system that allowed much of the production to be keep off the market in order to raise supply prices. Residential consumers were able to use in some places 20 percent less electricity.

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:19:47 +0000

Actually it’s a Texas California *divergence*.

California has experienced very large population growth in some of its hottest areas (the Central Valleys, Inland Empire, desert areas east of LA and San Diego). And with that growth in places where aircon is almost a necessity they have managed to hold energy growth flat.

Add in all the computers and other “gadgets” that have appeared in the last few years and are supposedly gobbling up tremendous amounts of energy but haven’t increased average CA usage and one has to ask why are other states putting up with this waste?

It suggests to me that we could conserve our way around building new power plants and start using output from renewables that is coming on line to replace our most expensive and polluting fossil fuel plants.

It would be a net gain all around.

By: Tim Brown

Tim Brown — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:38:40 +0000

The thing that struck me right away about the Texas California convergence was the use of air conditioning. I think that Texas’ oil boom combined with baby boomers wanting to move to a dry warm climate for the winters also increases electricity use.

Given Florida’s hurricane risks and the risk/fact of salinization of Florida’s water supply, I expect that Texas will end up with lots of Canadian Snow birds that divert their travels from Florida.

I appreciate Bob Wallace’s point about congratulating and learning from California’s experiences.

Back to the TV point of the article, I am looking forward to getting a pedal power generator for my laptop…once I get the student debt under control.

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:59:38 +0000

Let’s see, the factors that changed….

CA instituted building standards that reduced overall energy use.

Other states didn’t.

CA gave incentives to utility companies to “sell” conservation. Incentives to junk inefficient appliances and switch to CFLs, among other things, followed.

Other states didn’t.

CA created a support system for installing solar on residences and commercial buildings.

Other states didn’t.

CA engaged in consumer education to promote energy efficiency.

Other states didn’t.

I’m willing to attribute a great deal of the divergence to those factors.

By: red

red — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:18:45 +0000

Without investigating it or reading the underlying articles, I find differences like income, house size, government regulations, and so on to all be credible factors. Your per-capita energy use is likely to be a lot less in a NYC apartment building with 700 sq units than in a Texas suburb. However, when looking at the differences in the graph. California, Texas, and the U.S. average all start at about the same place in 1960, and diverge from there. Some of the factors that have been called out in the comments wouldn’t have changed much in that time, and others would. I’d tend to attribute the divergence to the factors that changed.

By: charlesH

charlesH — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 00:27:55 +0000

I’m sure there are many factors that affect electricity use per customer.

I can think of:

climate
heat source (heat pump vs burning FF)
house hold income (the poor use less of everything)
dwelling size
electricity cost
government effects to encourage conservation (e.g. cfl promotion, building codes)

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:51:35 +0000

I would encourage those that want to speculate on factors affecting electricity usage to start from some data. Roger Chittum posted a good starting point, a breakdown of residential electricity use: http://www.eia.doe.gov/ emeu/ recs/ recs2001/ enduse2001/ enduse2001.html
(Thank you Roger!)

Please remember that the plural of anecdote is not data.

What I find interesting is that many posters just assume that the efforts of California’s regulatory agencies cannot have played a part in the result. It is possible for government to function correctly.

By: William H Calvin

William H Calvin — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:40:37 +0000

One big difference between TX and NY is apartments. In a macMansion, you are losing/gaining heat on all six sides of the cube. In an apartment, you are gaining back roughly equal amounts from your neighbors on as many as five sides.

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:19:41 +0000

charlesH, one can come up with lots of correlations. For example I saw a presentation (no longer on the internet) where the graph had “red states” and “blue states” plotted. However, there is a correlation of red states with southern states, so this does not tell you whether something is cause or effect. I recommend you read the CEC’s presentation, since they do attribute the success in California to various causes.

By: charlesH

charlesH — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:16:05 +0000

JR,

My observation is that we need to find ways to keep energy prices low so that the good people of AK (and the 3rd world) can afford AC.

Energy efficiency certainly is a part of that goal. High efficiency low cost air conditioners would certainly be welcome to the poor of this world.