California is introducing legislation that will force manufacturers of plasma TVs to improve their energy efficiency by 33% by 2011 and by 49% by 2013. No new TVs will be allowed to be sold in California that do not meet these new standards. Is energy efficiency the answer though or does it actually increase our energy use?

Plasma TVs use 4 times more energy than older big box TVs. With the number of TVs per household increasing, TVs are now consuming 10% of a household’s total electricity. It is estimated that the legislation in California will help people annually save between $18 to $30 per TV.

One would think that the more energy efficient we become the less energy we would use, but this is actually incorrect. Evidence is increasing that improving energy efficiency actually leads to the use of more energy. Yes, you heard that right. Economists call this the rebound effect of energy efficiency. The rebound effect was initially proposed by William S. Jevons in 1865 when he observed that as we became more efficient excavating coal, the cheaper coal became. The result was that the world consumed even more coal. Even though over the past generation we have become twice as efficient, we use over 40% more energy.

For example, when TVs use less energy people buy more of them and turn them on for longer periods of time. Another example of the energy rebound effect is we buy more cars and drive them longer. Our cars are actually 40% more fuel efficient than they were in 1975. The result is not using up less oil, but more. Currently in the US there are 130 million more drivers than there were in 1970. The average car is being driven 12,000 miles per year now compared to 9,500 miles in 1970. It has been found that people who buy hybrids actually end up driving their cars more and further distances too.

Another example of the rebound effect is flying. With energy efficiency improvements in planes, the amount of oil used per mile has decreased by more than 40% since 1975. Flying became cheaper, so more people travelled by air. The result is that overall, air travel now uses 150% more fuel.

The same occurs in housing, where 20% of our energy use occurs. Our houses have more efficient appliances and furnaces in them than ever before. The problem is we just buy more appliances and larger houses. With houses increasing from 1,000 square feet in 1950 to nearly 2,500 square feet today, we use more energy to heat and light up our homes.

The final problem with energy efficiency is that we often use the money we save from energy savings and spend it on other things that use up even more energy. Money we save on our florescent lights we use to buy a plasma TV. Money that we save from driving a smaller vehicle we use to go on a trip to Mexico or Thailand.

So what is the solution? Do we not want to become more energy efficient? Should we consume with glee? No. Energy efficiency on its own is clearly not the solution. We need to combine it with legislation to decrease the overall amount of energy consumed.

The fairest way of doing this is making both consumers and manufacturers equally responsible. With this, manufacturers need to be forced to become more efficient like they are in California, who also have energy efficiency targets on refrigerators, air conditioners, and lighting among other appliances. The result of this in California is that electricity consumption per capita has not increased in 30 years. This is a good start, but it is like tar sand intensity targets, the overall emissions keep on increasing though.

The second part of the solution is charging consumers for the price of carbon through a carbon tax. Placing a price on carbon that is high enough to influence consumers decision making is the way to go. Otherwise, contrary to popular belief, energy efficiency just leads to the use of more energy and more emissions.

Sources:

Why Your World Is About To Get A Whole Lot Smaller: Oil And The End Of Globalization by Jeff Rubin (2009).

The End of Energy Obesity: Breaking today’s energy addiction for a prosperous and secure tomorrow by Peter Tertzakian and Keith Hollihan (2009).