|
My narrative is different, I think most conservation you have to think actively about isn't going to do all that much.
Some of it may even be a well-intentioned mistake, exchanging one poison for another. You can change out all your light bulbs only to find that their mercury content will poison your fish, or whatever -- while running an inefficient furnace for another 3 years burns through more energy than all those bulbs put together.
A much greater savings could be have if we'd enact a BTU tax or something like that, because that would encourage uniform changes across the economy. More people would do the math and learn that they could buy that furnace earlier and save more money. What would be really innovative would be to exchange our income tax with a BTU tax. What say you to terrible inflation for a while, in return for no IRS? I'd take that deal.
But in the long run, the biggest gains will still be in continued innovation in all forms of energy usage. Make all furnaces, transport, and appliances more efficient, that's the biggest form of conservation of them all.
|