Conservation and Efficiency - Energy Policy Analysis: A Conceptual Framework - page 176

Figure 10.3 The Energy Conservation and Efficiency Fuel Cycle

Energy audit/
system design

Manufacturing Installation

Waste disposal Decommissioning Operation

some quite simple like duct tape to seal joints in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)
ducts, others quite sophisticated like programmable residential thermostats. In each case, the fuel
cycle starts with some previously utilized technology and attempts to make improvements in en-
ergy efficiency or otherwise reduce energy usage. In new construction, designers must plan more
energy-efficient deviations from previous conventional approaches to energy end-use technolo-
gies. This involves manufacturing processes and eventually the decommissioning of facilities, as
illustrated in Figure 10.3. Manufacturing may involve industrial-scale fabrication of equipment
and energy-conserving materials like insulation, plumbing, and electrical components, depend-
ing on the specific technology utilized. Where housing or other buildings are involved, decom-
missioning may occur after a very long time, potentially fifty or even a hundred years. Disposal
or recycling of waste materials follows manufacturing and construction of the components and
completion of each project.
Environmental costs of energy conservation and efficiency improvements include a wide variety
of conventional land disturbance and land use impacts attending manufacture of goods, possible
hazardous materials disposal, and potential impacts on water and other resources, depending again
on physical characteristics of the technology employed. These costs generally are no greater than
the environmental costs of producing other goods in the U.S. economy and are subject to the same
environmental regulations as other products.
Some have suggested that using energy more efficiently might not be as effective at tackling
climate change as people think, hypothesizing the occurrence of so-called rebound effects, where
efficiency improvements would be offset by behavior changes, such as increasing demands for
cheaper energy, which could potentially slash future carbon and energy savings by half (Jha
2009). It has been suggested that, if the International Energy Agency's (IEA) recommendations
for efficiency measures are followed in full in the next few decades, the total rebound effect—the
proportion of potential energy savings offset by changes in consumer and industry behavior—could
be 31 percent by 2020 and about 52 percent around the world by 2030 (Barker and Dagoumas
2009). Others suggest that for household heating, household cooling, and personal automotive
transport in developed countries, the direct rebound effect is likely to be less than 30 percent and
may be closer to 10 percent for transport. Direct rebound effects are likely to be smaller where
energy forms a relatively small proportion of total costs and has little influence on operating
decisions (Sorrell 2007).
Direct rebound effects might include people who would drive more regularly because their
fuel-efficient cars are cheaper to run. It is suggested that more fuel-efficient cars burning less
gasoline per mile, and costing less to fill up at the pump, encourage extra driving. An indirect