55 W


hen environmentalist and energy efficiency advo- cate Amory Lovins coined the term “nega-watt,” he


neatly encapsulated a more structured approach to measuring and controlling emissions and energy conservation. Simply put, a nega-watt is a megawatt


of power avoided or saved from use on the grid. It is a term that has currency for indi- viduals, businesses, and governments. Business, though, has been slower to


grasp the concept, partly because energy expenditure has in the past been a pro- portionately low element in its total over- head. With the days of cheap energy over, many companies have seen their bills more than double in the past three years. Corporate attitudes are changing. The ROI for energy ef f iciency is


staggering for individuals, businesses, and governments. Consider that a 2009 report on energy efficiency from the con- sulting firm McKinsey found that the U.S. could save $1.2 trillion through 2020, by investing $520 billion in energy efficien- cy improvements such as sealing win- dows and replacing older household ap- pliances with newer models that use far less energy. That half-trillion investment would cut the United States’ 2020 energy use by 23 percent, slashing greenhouse gas emissions in parallel. According to McKinsey, homes account for about 35 percent of the possible gains in end-use efficiency, the industrial sector accounts for 40 percent, and the commercial sec- tor for 25 percent. The bottom line: This is a golden opportunity for businesses, individuals, and governments. “Energy efficiency is not just low-hanging fruit; it is fruit that is lying on the ground,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu in 2009.


EFFICIENCY PAYS OFF


In the past, energy supply companies also tended to give little thought to their customers’ energy efficiency. After all, they are paid by the megawatt, not nega- watt. But the high cost of fuel, tightness of supply, the need to avoid grid outag- es, and in some regions restrictions on greenhouse gases, have all combined to mean suppliers are now also interested


in the practice. Energy suppliers are increasingly providing their customers with advice and technology to help them cut emissions. Energy efficiency advice can also be obtained from government agencies, specialist energy or environ- ment consultancies, facilities manage- ment companies, and even insurers. The first step is usually to undertake


an energy use audit, showing where en- ergy is used and where savings can be made. Audits can take as little as half a day for smaller companies and cost relatively little. Suppliers or government agencies sometimes offer them for free. Some of the measures energy audi-


tors recommend are the kind that any manager could predict: turning off lights and computers when workers go home, un- plugging mobile phone chargers when not in use, turning down the thermostat or air conditioning. These are simple behavioral changes that require little effort beyond re- minding people to keep doing them. Others may be less obvious but still


very cheap: for instance, one tire factory was told to have its windows washed. The accumulated grime greatly reduced the amount of natural light reaching the facto- ry floor so that extra lighting was needed. Once the windows were clean, some artifi- cial lights could be switched off. There are other examples of how do-


ing something simple can make a signif- icant difference. Another company reset its heating and ventilation set points and is expected to make an annual savings of $6,400 and about 55,700 pounds of car- bon dioxide as a result. Major investment can also bring big


dividends. The replacement of outdated and inefficient air conditioning systems can pay for themselves in a couple of years, while at the same time improving working conditions for employees. Lovins believes these “blatantly ob-


vious” monetary incentives for increas- ing energy efficiency should move the Western world toward a more energy fru- gal future. The green energy advocate is co-founder of the sustainability research organization Rocky Mountain Institute, which works with upwards of 10 of the world’s top 50 brand names, such as Wal-Mart. Many of those companies now have business strategies so radical that


you might well assume that Greenpeace activists had written them. Speaking in December, Lovins said:


“We are often given a multiple-choice test. We must choose between climate change, oil wars, or nuclear holocaust. We are never given the choice of ‘none of the above,’ when all these problems go away if we use energy in a money-saving way.”


BUSINESS LEADS THE WAY


Certain companies, driven by opportu- nities for increased profit, have shown that cutting back CO2


emissions is pos-


sible, Lovins said. IBM and STMicroelec- tronics were able to cut their emissions by six percent while looking for ways to reduce costs. Similarly, when the Dow Chemical Company invested in ef f i- ciency rather than buying more fuel, it ended up with a $3.3bn profit.


efficiency is not just low-hanging fruit; it is fruit that is lying on the


“ ground. The compelling stories of companies


like Dow have inspired many others, and help give rise to a new term: climate pros- perity. The vision is that if businesses and governments work together to place sus- tainability at the heart of their economic de- velopment strategies, we can successfully mitigate climate change and simultaneously inject new life into our economy. PE


”


MALCOLM MAITLAND is a freelance writer and commentator on environmental issues.


RESOURCES


U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy division: eere.energy.gov


American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE): aceee.org


Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE): dsireusa.org


Climate Prosperity Project, Inc: climateprosperityproject.org


Local Action Moves the World • www.icleiusa.org Energy


PLANET EARTH \\ ENERGY CONSERVATION


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68