Staff Contributors
Staff Contributors
Adam Browning
Adam Stein
Alan Durning
Andrew Dessler
Andrew Sharpless
Ariane Lotti
Ben Tuxworth
biodiversivist
Brad Johnson
Coby Beck
Edward Mazria
Eric de Place
Erik Hoffner
Frank O'Donnell
Gar Lipow
Glenn Hurowitz
Guest author
Jason D Scorse
Jim Goodman
JMG
John McGrath
John McQuaid
Jon Rynn
Joseph Romm
Josh Dorner
Ken Ward
Kit Stolz
Laura Hess
Lisa J. Bunin
Lou Bendrick
Maywa Montenegro
Melinda Henneberger
Meredith Niles
Michael Hoexter
Michael Moynihan
Miles Grant
Sean Casten
Sharon Astyk
Steph Larsen
Stephanie Paige Ogburn
Summer Rayne Oakes
Thomas Dobbs
Van Jones
Zoe Bradbury


Energy efficiency and economic growth?

But aren't those things mutually exclusive?

Posted by Erik Hoffner (Guest Contributor) at 11:31 AM on 16 Mar 2007

A hopeful Friday note: a significant downloadable report (PDF) from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. It was just brought to my attention, but it's from 2004. Its message bears repeating: energy efficiency/technologies have the potential to dramatically reduce energy use while supporting economic growth.

This European agency estimates that the E.U. could accommodate a 65 percent increase in energy services by 2050, yet simultaneously use two-thirds less energy than today. In the U.S., the estimate is that we could reduce energy demand to one-sixth of our use today through more efficient technologies.

This is important ...

and a message that I try to emphasize with people.

All we need to do is look at all of Amory Lovins work with an open eye and realize that we could greatly strenghten our society while using a fraction of the energy we do today.

And, some major companies get it.  For example, Dupont, according to Chad Holliway, Dupont's Chief Executive Officer

in 1994, Dupont set a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by the year 2000.  They achieved that goal on schedule.  Then Dupont set a goal to reduce its greenhouse emissions by 65 percent by 2010.  They made that goal as well.  In fact, they achieved a 72 percent reduction by 2004, six years ahead of schedule, and avoided costs of over $3 billion by holding Dupont's energy use six percent below 1990 levels.

Yet, too many think that there is a trade-off between the economy and the environment. Willing to trade a dying planet for another 1/10th of percent of GDP growth.

Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart. NOW!!! to Energize America .
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks