Advanced Search
Fighting the Walmart Mentality of Energy Use
Xcel Energy is selling less of what it makes the most: electricity, according to a recent Star Tribune article. And according to typical business models this should have Xcel Energy executives frantically trying to get consumers to buy more juice. But thanks to state mandates here in Minnesota that “decouple” electricity sales from company profits (reducing a utilities' disincentive to promote energy efficiency), and incentives that encourage utilities to invest in conservation and energy efficiency efforts, all’s well at Xcel.
Still, even though we have rebate programs, LED lighting, more efficient home appliances, conservation marketing campaigns and all the rest, conservation and energy efficiency efforts can sometimes be an uphill battle with some folks. The reason is likely a psychological one.
As an individual consumer, if our utility bill is too high we may react in one of two ways. We can say, “wow I use a lot of electricity!” and make efforts to reduce our usage. Or we might react with “wtf, why do they charge me so much for all this electricity I use!” and harp on utilities for charging too much for electricity.
A recent blog by David Roberts at grist.org points to a quote from New Mexico conservative activist Marita Noon that ties the latter reaction perfectly to struggles in reducing energy use. While discussing President Obama's energy policy Noon says, “The American way, what made CostCo and Walmart a success, is to use more and pay less. That’s the American way.”
As a society, our attitude towards purchasing other goods and services is that we should get more for less. Why wouldn’t this apply to electricity? Seemingly abundant fossil fuels have allowed us to consume as much energy as we want at relatively cheap prices, albeit at staggering environmental, health, and national transportation and defense costs.
To some people, conservation and energy efficiency (combined with clean energy) says the reverse: use less and, because there are higher costs for energy efficient upgrades and electricity from renewable energy sources, pay more. On the surface this is more or less true, but it ignores the fact that energy efficiency can offset and even surpass the upfront costs for upgrades and higher electricity prices. It also captures the externality costs mentioned above.
Fortunately, Minnesota made strong efforts to restructure utilities’ profit models so that the providers of electricity are encouraging us to use less. But if the mentality of “use more, pay less” continues to pervade our culture, we will continue carelessly burning dirty and unhealthy fossil fuels for our energy needs.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Energy Energy Efficiency
3 Comments
May 26, 2012 at 10:32 am
I don’t understand where this “use more pay less” concept comes from here. Having worked in many Wall Marts around the country I am fully aware of the many energy saving strategies they are using. As for large buisnesses like the mining companies, they pay on a different scale based on peak power demand, should they establish a new peak demand their rate goes up considerably. This is tremendouse incentive for them to save energy not carelessly use it. Your “Wall Mart mentality” example holds no water and is mearly another afront against Wall Marts non union stance that has no bearing in fact when it comes to energy use. It’s not that I am a Wall Mart supporter, but at least base your attack on fact not fiction.
May 23, 2012 at 11:39 am
This is a very complex issue that many look at through simplistic glasses. While new battery break throughs are continueing to make solar and small wind turbines more feasable and less costly for home use, they are still more of a rich and upper middle class adventure due to the 20+ year payback on some of these systems. On the larger scale both wind and solar have unsolved problems with how to store the excess energy produced. Only a few examples of pond storage of water have so far started tackeling this issue. Hydrolic accumulators and heat storage in molten metal have yet to become feasable on a large scale. Tapping Ocean currents could allow us a little more flexibility, but our best and most controlable source is Geothermal which can be built as an “on demand system”, meaning we can produce only what we need at a given time.
Bernice Vetsch says:
May 26, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Hello Will. Several years ago, scientists from Columbia University were seeking to develop solar panels that stored energy in the same way as green plants and leaves—chemically. Energy is then available at night or on dark days when needed it. Such panels could make it available at night to homes and businesses as well.
Do you know if this has come to fruition?