Do you think energy efficiency leads to more freedom?

Question

Of all the solutions to climate change, energy efficiency is the most popular solution for the public and business, because it saves money and gives greater freedom. James Watts coal fired steam engine was more efficient that Thomas Newcomens earlier model, and gave reduced cost and greater freedom. So why are the deniers so resistant to change? Are they the The Luddites of this century that protest against the change produced by the technological leaps that we will be making, which they feel threaten their lifestyle. A popular argument with deniers is that we will have less freedom and the goverment will have more control but this has not been the case in the past so why should it be the case now? Is the protest about paying extra tax really logical when the fuel bill is 50% less?

Answer 1

Yes, this is one of the many benefits that come from addressing global warming.  Another huge one is reducing our dependency on foreign oil.

You make a good point that becoming more energy efficient would offset the impact of a carbon tax.  But as soon as conservatives see the world 'tax' their eyes turn red and their brains melt.

Answer 2

yes i think saving would definitely be possible

Answer 3

Do you mean by governmental controls have led to more freedom in the past??? The emission standards for automobiles in the ‘70s meant that all cars now need a confusing variety of vacuum hoses that make it close to impossible for the lay person to work on their own car if they choose and decrease mileage. This means the car must be brought to an expensive mechanic, and has twice as many parts that can break. I cannot chose to throw these hoses away and hope for better mileage because it is against the law.  A power plant is now required to have all types of scrubbers and cleaners for their output.  Yes this is necessary, however, it cost them lots more money without any return in efficiency. They will now be given a restriction with carbon credits and carbon output.  This will cost them money without increasing any efficiency.  The new laws are now applying to the incandescent bulbs.  After 2012 I will not be able to purchase these from a store. Is that freedom?  I tried these in my house and had some blow within a month and I have several fixtures that will not fit these bulbs. but I will not have the freedom to chose the right bulb for my house.  At one month a CFL will be responsible for more than 20 times as much mercury production and cost me over 10 times as much to replace.  If I change fixtures I will be responsible for the power production to make  those new fixtures at extra expense to me with the possibility of no cost recoup; do to those lights burning out so rapidly in my house.  So in this case the laws give me no extra freedom, they only cause me hassle and expense.  Efficiency is great, if I can get a product that will give me what I want and save me some cash in the process, I am happy to purchase it. However, if I am mandated to buy something more efficient that will not give me the results they advertise; that is surely not freedom. I should have the freedom to get the product that suits my needs.

Answer 4

I don't know about freedom but as for energy efficiancy in the home, i reckon a lot of people just can't be bothered to put in the initial effort of changing their lifestyle and things round the home. I think mabey if the government gave people more of a physical incentive to save energy it would help. Most people are too small minded to foresee the benefits outside what effects them directly. Selfish i know, particularly people with kids. After all it's their world we seem so ready to destroy.

Answer 5

its all about who makes the most money and wins

Answer 6

All the points you make are perfectly true, and I'd just like to add one more.  The more energy efficient we become, the less dependent we are on oil from certain nations in the Middle East that don't really like us.   If we didn't need massive armies over there protecting 40% of the world's oil supplies, we could bring all those troops home and save a ton of $$.