• English Site
• >World
• >Energy and Natural Resources
• >

  Saving the World, One Light Bulb at a Time: Why Conservation Is the World's Best Energy Source

Saving the World, One Light Bulb at a Time Why Conservation Is the World's Best Energy Source

By Alexander Jung

Part 6: Pushing Consumers to Act

Of course, the big power companies have little interest in such decentralized structures. But the time to make that switchover has never been better. Over the next two decades, utility companies will have to replace half of their power producing capacity, providing a unique opportunity. This would be the best chance to switch over to modern gas- and steam-turbine power plants that convert some 60 percent of the energy used into electricity. Or co-generation plants that use heat produced while making power for heating. Such technologies increase energy conversion efficiency to near 85 percent.

In this regard, Germany is currently lagging behind international developments. The country produces only 11 percent of its power by co-generation plants and only a few German cities such as Flensburg and Schwäbisch Hall produce notable portions of their power this way. In the Netherlands it’s almost 40 percent and in Denmark even 50 percent.

German utilities had once planned to double the number of co-generation plants by 2010, but that goal is likely to be missed. German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel has demanded that his cabinet colleague Economy Minister Micheal Glos no longer take the industry by its word when it pledges to meet voluntary targets. Instead, the government should establish clear guidelines for the energy sector.

Lessons from the automobile industry

There's one problem with voluntary commitments from captains of industry: Everyone welcomes them, but no one pushes them. And at the end of they day they’re all just playing for time.

This lesson was learned already during the dispute over limits for auto emissions. In 1998, the German automobile industry promised to cut carbon dioxide emissions on average to 140 grams per kilometer by 2008. That’s roughly the consumption of 5.9 liters of gasoline and 5.3 liters of Diesel per 100 kilometers (39.9 and 44.4 miles per gallon respectively). But Mercedes, Porsche, BMW and Co. are all still quite far from that target, even though it wouldn’t require magic to reach it.

At the Aachen Institute for Automotive Engineering (IKA) scientists are attempting to modify a VW Golf TSI with 170 horsepower by this summer so it uses less than 5 liters of gasoline per 100 kilometers (47 miles per gallon) instead of 7.2 liters. It hasn’t taken much effort to get it down to 5.8 liters already. The scientists have changed the transmission, reduced the weight and minimized the wind resistance. Nothing particularly spectacular. “We want to take it even further,” says engineer Markus Espig. But how can governments encourage such ambition?

A dilemma for the government

The failure of voluntary, industry-wide commitments calls into question how best to improve energy efficiency. Is it enough to offer financial incentives, such as billions in subsidies for renovating buildings, in order to alter behavior? Or should lawmakers instead force changes by legislating new regulations and guidelines?

Thorben Becker of the German environmental group BUND argues the German government could certainly do more. For example, it’s hard to explain why consumers can easily compare energy use for refrigerators and freezers, but that there are no similiar labeling requirements for electric stoves and hot water heaters. Or why the state doesn’t put more pressure on utilities to fit power plants with co-generation facilities. “We need clear legal requirements,” says Becker.

The governments of other countries in some cases certainly do more. Japan has implemented a so-called “Top Runner” program, which sets the most efficient electronic device in a specific product class as the standard to be measured by for three to 12 years. All other competing products that fail to close the gap are labeled as energy wasters and face being banned from sale.

The Netherlands is trying a subtler approach. The country offers direct subsidies to consumers who buy products that are especially energy efficient. There’s €20 to €30 credit for each square meter of thermal insulating glass and €100 for the purchase of an energy thrifty washing machine.

Under Denmark's Electricity Saving Trust, which became law in 1998, each customer must pay a levy of €0.008 cents on each kilowatt-hour used. That in turn finances Danish conservation projects including a campaign to switch from electric heating to district heating -- which often comes from co-generation plants.

Britain also has a non-profit fund known as the Energy Saving Trust to promote the use of sustainable energies and energy conservation.

The Wuppertal Institute has calculated what would be necessary to set up a similar fund in Germany: A levy of 0.06 cent per kilowatt-hour on oil or gas and 0.09 cent on electricity would add up to €1.5 billion annually that could be used to finance conservation efforts. The result would help consumers save 12 percent more energy by 2015, which adds up to €9 billion each year.

But Germany’s top energy saver, Dena director Kohler, offers a different approach. Consumers, according to his philosophy, have to realize on their own how advantageous it is to use energy more efficiently.

That happens, for example, when someone buys a new refrigerator. Recently, the energy agency provided retailers with detailed information about household items so they could help their customers make more informed decisions about their purchases. One adjustable wheel shows just how much they can save each year by purchasing the device with the lowest power usage.

“In the end, that’s the decisive message,” says a confident Kohler.