The UK has a long history of using public information ‘films’ or adverts that are used in campaigning. I think the efficiency issue is always tied into economics when it comes to efficiency choices. But i know a lot of people i know are absolutely hopeless at making economic long term judgements, so often they will choose a path that appears cheap initially but turns out to be expensive and environmentally damaging in the long term.

Here in the UK and i think across the EU all ‘white goods’ such as washing machines, cookers etc have an energy rating and most people usually buy at least B rated goods. I think the highest rating now is A++. I assume as things get more efficient than the scale will be altered.

The point i would make is that making goods more efficient is unlikely to reduce emissions without other radical changes, that includes actual reductions in consumption of goods.
eg. 1 TV per home instead of 3 or 4.

Yeah, I read that Friedman article. Denmark is great, but they also have real electricity rates that are 3X average US levels, or so I’ve read. I know promoting energy efficiency is many forms is going to be a major part of the solution to the energy challenge, but have lately been dismayed at the relationship between energy intensity (Btu/GDP) and retail electricity rates. The inter- and intranational correlation is very strong!!!! Where is the best evidence you know of showing a causal relationship between efficiency policies and reduced energy use. If I cannot prove this to myself, then I’m gonna have a hell of a time making the case to others that a carbon tax isn’t the true solution to climate change.

Regarding the sourcing…a 2007 study done by Bruce Hedman suggested 135K mw could come from industrial CHP (small power plants located on site at manufacturing facilities). A Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory study in 2005 found 64K mw that could come from waste heat recovery (recycling heat that’s already being wasted by manufacturers). Combine those numbers and that’s about 200K mw that could come from energy recycling technology (which we think is a conservative estimate). From those studies, you glean the numbers of 40% of the nation’s electricity, 20% of total power, and 20% in GHG reductions.

My question is, where are the international examples of where policies promoting efficiency have had a major impact on per capita energy use? I need to find concrete case studies where it wasn’t just high energy prices, but standards and/or legislation that have had major effects on energy intensity. Or else people will argue that it was expense energy, i.e. Japan and California, that caused energy intensity to be so much lower.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-07/cmu-cmr072908.php

Whose businesses exported manufacturing to China?
Companies like Apple moved manufacturing to China to cut costs and to compete with other businesses that also moved manufacturing to China.

And we demanded that prices remained low or were made lower.

So what does this mean?
The US can make a big difference by consuming less and becoming more efficient. Other countries would struggle to make similar cuts because they already have higher efficiency standards due to higher energy costs.

It is a well known fact in the UK that insulating the home to a higher standard is not only cheap but also has a big impact on a families carbon footprint when compared to spending a lot of money on reneweables.

But the fact is that micro-renewables are an unavoidable next stage for home improvements after cheaper options such as insulation.

Regardless, those numbers you reference are stunning. The 20%/40% statistics are still shocking every time I see them. What studies were those from again?

And to be a little self-interested, have you thought of funding young persons who would advocate for your cause?