Negawatts vs, Megawatts

There are two ways to reduce emissions and increase energy  security.  The first is to use less energy and the second is to generate it from renewable sources.  The two approaches are not mutually exclusive and both are desirable but they compete for resources.  Around 2006, I became interested in renewable energy, up to that point, I had not thought too much about consumption and at that time electricity was reasonably priced.  Typical grid-tied, rooftop PV installations produce between 1,500 and 2,500 kwh/year.  A good starting point was to try reduce our consumption to the level at which a form of self-sufficiency could be attained. Alongside my interest in renewable energy, is a belief that investments which are good for the environment, should also be good for me.  Added to this is the belief that sound investments are based on fundamentals (e.g. fuel savings) and should not be driven by tax regimes or subsidies, In other words, I'm prepared to buy an item which reduces my emissions, but I want to be rewarded in the form of lower energy bills.  For energy consumption, and therefore emissions to fall, there should be a "virtuous circle" by which I use less energy and I am better off as a result.  This should be possible to achieve, energy is now expensive. Whilst I am fascinated by solar devices and wind turbines, conservation was consistent with my opinions (my favourite coffee mug has the slogan - "everyone's entitled to my opinions").  The graph below shows our household's estimated electricity consumption since 2005: When we started there were some quick wins, incandescent lamps were replaced by CFLs and old computers which were better room heaters than number crunchers were replaced by laptops.  The gas driven domestic hot water system was an economic mess consisting of a gravity feed system with an efficiency of 20% (a charitable estimate).  This took an average to two hours to create a warm bath, therefore anyone needing to be clean used the immersion heater (cheap at night, but expensive during the day).  The water heating was upgraded to a pumped system which also reduced the gas bill and did not leak.  Rough estimates of the breakdown of consumption "before" and "after" are shown below. Since 2007, consumption has drifted down to an average of 6 kwh/day, mainly as a result of taking account of energy efficiency as things like fridge have had to be replaced and just being aware of our energy consumption.  We are not wandering around in Stygian darkness obsessed by energy bill dropping through the letterbox. The law of diminishing returns is beginning to assert itself, we are starting to replace CFL lamps with LED ones which may take us down to 4 kwh/day over the next one or two years.  Our electricity consumption will probably be in the range 1,000 to 1,500 kwh/year, which compares well with the national average of around 3,500 kwh/year (comparing averages is always dangerous). It has to be said that a wind turbine in the back yard would be fun but as I have embarrassed myself on countless occasions by wandering around the garden with a wind speed meter consistently reading 0 m/s and have no desire to annoy my neighbors, this is not going to happen.  The sun does not shine at night and rarely during winter, so rooftop PV does not appeal.  So, I will press on with the LED lights. Sadly, conservation is not sexy.  Acquaintances with rooftop PV who have seen me cycling around with a model wind turbine strapped to my back ask me why my south facing roof is empty and an unscientific survey of the environmental pages of the papers (read on my phone) suggests that greater coverage is given to wind farms than to things lurking in cupboards like boilers, heating controls and meters.  A knowledge of the capabilities of smartphones is a sign of virility whilst being able to read gas and electricity meters is considered boring.  Typically, a mobile phone bill is in the range £15 - £30/month, whilst energy bills often exceed £100/month, so there is an incentive to take an interest. The scale of investment is also an issue, I have the occasional outing to an "eco" fair where a high proportion of the offerings are green boxes with a price tags well over £1,000.  This is not the sort of money that fits well into a typical family budget, yet £10 for an LED light or a few quid extra for a more efficient fridge or washing machine can make a difference over time. Policies which focus on conservation are difficult for politicians, offering subsidies for generation projects gives an incentive to do something.  Telling people not to do something, i.e. use energy is creates a range of reactions ranging from indifference to to charges of infringing of civil liberties:. Its better to make a good case for energy efficient lighting than embarking on legislation which does not win hearts and minds.  Had we not adopted CFL's are electricity bill would now be approaching £100/month. The link between environmental benefits and high cost objects also seems to be well established in (some) political thought processes.  During the 2010 election I was accosted by a canvasser keen to establish the environmental credentials of their chosen candidate, in the interests of fairness, it is probable that I was being a pain at the time, but the patter went along the lines "Of course she can't afford a Hybrid Car". My understanding of hybrid vehicles is that by combining a petrol/diesel engine, motor/generator and a battery you can make a fairly efficient vehicle for £27,000, however, some conventional vehicles, often described as "dull" by reviewers, offer similar performance for much less.  Other options include a small car, no car and a bicycle.  If you live in a remote rural area, you need a car, if you live in a city, a bicycle makes sense economically and environmentally, that also seems to be the view of the current Mayor of London, the man behind the Boris Bike. Next week - Urban Wind