Is the economical solution the one that, for the most part, minimizes the energy needed to do or build things?

Question

This is the fully-worded Q: Is the economical solution (aka the "green solution") the one that, for the most part, minimizes the amounts of energy needed to do or build things? Can you pls explain your answer.

Answer 1

No.  The economical solution attempts to maximize return on investment.  Sometimes energy can be very cheap.  

Suppose you have purchased land in an Amazon rain forest.  To get a return on your investment, you toss a match on it and burn away the pesty trees so you can plant soybeans and raise a crop.  All the energy in the trees is wasted, and in a few years, the fertility of the formerly-forest-floor is gone too.  You sell the land and move on.  A spread of cement-like "caliche" (left behind) bounces most of the solar energy back into space, and washes most of the rain directly into the nearest river.

Green economics is different from classical economics.  Green may consider the system or planet, and allow a loss for an individual investor if it is a gain for more others.  

Money economics means the guy with the money gets more of it back.  The ecosystem can be trashed if it makes a profit.