For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:52 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
MonteQuest wrote:
What if you eliminate that margin through tax or price controls on the commodity conserved? Won't increases in efficiency and conservation be productive in reducing energy use then? In other words, no financial benefit.
You're proposing an energy efficiency tax? "There will be an extra $5000 tax on this car because it's a hybrid."
I think Pops makes an excellent point. There is only so much oil in the ground. The Jevon's paradox is really moot in terms of consumption rates. We're gonna use it all up as fast as we can pump it. Maybe efficiency, though, will drive prices higher. If a gallon of gas will take you 60 miles, then you can afford to pay more for it than if it only takes you 20 miles.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12009 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:58 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Wouldn't taxing the commodity encourage conservation by making the commodity too expensive to waste? _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6375 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:13 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Ludi wrote:
Wouldn't taxing the commodity encourage conservation by making the commodity too expensive to waste?
As far as things that won’t happen in the US that is the best solution. Tax all fossil fuels to the point that conservation is encouraged and when the inevitable belly in price occurs raise the tax some more; and in the interim all the amazing alternatives are developed sooner rather than later - or another way is found.
The obvious flaw in that macro scenario is that the rascals will be voted out and those laws repealed.
Back to the micro - me and my. _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12009 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Yeah, well, nobody likes taxes.
Could be four good years though! <<<< crazy optimist _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:55 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Ludi wrote:
Could be four good years though!
They were 4 good years. They lasted from '76 to '80. Carter actually tried to solve this problem. Ok maybe even he wasn't foolish enough to propose a huge gasoline tax. He has gone down in the annals of politics as the idealistic, but foolish, Georgia peanut farmer. Probably not far off. American's made a very clear choice at that point in their history. They decided overwhelmingly, that if there was bad news for their future they didn't want to know about it. They want to blame their problems on people with a different skin tone and bomb them. They preffer to drink their Martini's on the promenad while the Titanic sinks than to be bothered by any anoying alarm bells.
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Aaron wrote:
This is why all efforts at conservation & efficiency are actually counterproductive, and lead us even further into the quagmire of Hubbert's Peak.
Ms. Harper is conserving:
Quote:
Harper, the South Hill resident, decided to leave her car for a van pool – much to her own surprise.
"I was really resistant to it," she says. "It was going to be a big hassle."
Prices at the pump changed her mind.
She got on a waiting list for a van pool offered by Pierce Transit. She took a driving course. Now she pays $22 a month to van-pool as opposed to the $180 to $200 a month she paid to commute alone.
Even if the price of gas drops below $2, she says, she's not going back.
Part of her reasoning is that she likes to shed the day's stress by talking with her co-workers during the ride home. Part of it is helping the environment by taking a few more cars off the road.
And there's another reason. A big one. "I have extra money," she says.
So why is conservation counterproductive for her, Aaron? She's saving money and decreasing her exposure to oil prices.
Considering that you believe oil prices will continue to rise due to peak oil, isn't it extremely irresponsible for you to be telling the readers of this site that conservation is counterproductive? Telling people they shouldn't conserve oil is probably the worst advice possible, from the standpoint of peak oil preparation.
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:18 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
I was thinking about it, and Jevon's paradox may not even happen with a shrinking amount of energy. The energy we save will allow us to continue the same standard of living. Since there is less total energy coming in to the system, we can't have more useage unless we save more energy than we're losing every year through depletion. Once we hit peak there will be no more growth, but through conservation and efficiency we may be able to maintain a decent standard of living.
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:22 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Quote:
So why is conservation counterproductive for her, Aaron? She's saving money and decreasing her exposure to oil prices.
Considering that you believe oil prices will continue to rise due to peak oil, isn't it extremely irresponsible for you to be telling the readers of this site that conservation is counterproductive? Telling people they shouldn't conserve oil is probably the worst advice possible, from the standpoint of peak oil preparation.
That's a fair point John, and valid I think, as far as it goes.
I don't question the utility of conservation & efficiency on and individual level per se, but consider it to be a non-sequitur in terms of peak oil.
What's more irresponsible?
Confronting the reality of the situation, or hanging our hopes on hollow promises? _________________ "When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F Roberts.
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:19 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
The paradox still doesn't strike me as a paradox.
It sounds like demand is effectively remaining a constant as a product of efficiency and number of users (either in consumers or activity). Doesn't the introduction of an increase in efficiency merely displace the system from equilibrium? And wouldn't some kind of oscillation occur until the new equilibrium is established?
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:30 pm Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
Revi wrote:
I was thinking about it, and Jevon's paradox may not even happen with a shrinking amount of energy. The energy we save will allow us to continue the same standard of living. Since there is less total energy coming in to the system, we can't have more useage unless we save more energy than we're losing every year through depletion. Once we hit peak there will be no more growth, but through conservation and efficiency we may be able to maintain a decent standard of living.
Ok, say we can match a depletion rate of 2% each year and every year with conservation and efficiency.
No growth, just conservation and efficiency.
First, you run up against the law of diminishing returns. Those gains only go so far.
Second, trust me, a lot of the big efficiency gains have already been utilized from our last energy crisis. The ones left will take design, planning, and implementation over a decade or more.
Third, where will the energy come from for the 3 billion new comers?
That's 250,000 people a day who want food, clothing and shelter and a job.
Fourth, with no grow, the debt cannot be serviced, the money supply deflates, and the economy implodes. That is, unless we try to revisit Weimar Germany 1923. Get your wheel barrow today!
Fifth, no growth equals massive unemployment.
This is a rough generalization based upon your musings as a premise, but I doubt it is far off. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:37 am Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
MonteQuest wrote:
Fourth, with no grow, the debt cannot be serviced, the money supply deflates, and the economy implodes. That is, unless we try to revisit Weimar Germany 1923. Get your wheel barrow today!
I believe that is the plan. _________________ "The world is changed... I feel it in the water... I feel it in the earth... I smell it in the air... Much that once was, is lost..." - Galadriel
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 5:58 am Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
I am sorry if I am a bit slow on the uptake but before I read all the postings about Jevon's Paradox I felt that I should conserve as much enegry as I could. But seeing what has been written it seems that would make things much worse --- so now I should throw my guilt in the bin and burn as much oil as I can
OR is there some limiting factor to the 'Paradox' such as it only applies in a situation where the supply can be expanded? - And, as most of us here know the supply of oil can not be (greatly?) expanded.
SO. I have a duty to burn as much oil as I can afford (to stop others burning even more), or Jevon's Paradox while a lovely head exercise is largely irrelavent to the world we are moving into with a contracting not expanding oil supply (although I am sure Monte can provide numberous examples from the past where the Paradox as applied).
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6375 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 8:59 am Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
MonteQuest wrote:
Second, trust me, a lot of the big efficiency gains have already been utilized from our last energy crisis.
As an example of this, consider all the improvements in energy conservation in home construction. Prior to the 70s very little thought was given to efficient building because energy was so cheap, but after the various embargoes, great technological leaps were made in home energy conservation.
The result 30 years later?
Huge barn-like homes with vast unlivable but conditioned space – think cathedral ceilings, no way to close off unused areas – think Open Floorplans. I imagine the typical home built today is twice as large as those built in the 60s; a perfect example of the Paradox on the macro level.
Also a perfect example of how, on a micro level, an individual can turn the paradox to their advantage by incorporating the advances in technology into a smaller and smarter home design.
Wish I was that smart! BRR! _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:52 am Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
IslandCrow wrote:
I am sorry if I am a bit slow on the uptake but before I read all the postings about Jevon's Paradox I felt that I should conserve as much enegry as I could. But seeing what has been written it seems that would make things much worse --- so now I should throw my guilt in the bin and burn as much oil as I can
Personal ethics (which tell you to conserve) has nothing to do with the Paradox. Let me give you an example:
Let's assume you are a promiscuous person who is also concerned about human trafficking and exploitation. Your sense and personal ethics of yours tell you that you should not go in sex tourism sprees or have illegal "hot" nights. But the JP commands that you do thse things , because others will not follow your example.
It is all a matter of ethical decisions/choices we have to make _________________ "Nuclear power has long been to the Left what embryonic-stem-cell research is to the Right--irredeemably wrong and a signifier of moral weakness."Esquire Magazine,12/05
The genetic code is commaless and so are my posts.
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:58 am Post subject: Re: Jevon's Paradox Explained
EnergySpin wrote:
Personal ethics (which tell you to conserve) has nothing to do with the Paradox. Let me give you an example:
Let's assume you are a promiscuous person who is also concerned about human trafficking and exploitation. Your sense and personal ethics of yours tell you that you should not go in sex tourism sprees or have illegal "hot" nights. But the JP commands that you do thse things , because others will not follow your example.
It is all a matter of ethical decisions/choices we have to make
Unfotunately, this does not apply to the majority of the people. Same thing can be said of people in dealing with conservation. There will always be a few knuckleheads that that won't conserve, but when push comes to shove, the vast majority will and that is what it is all about in terms of conservation.
The same thing could be said of what Pops was saying about the huge homes people are building - this is not the majority of the people in the world so does it really matter? If a family makes over $100,000 USD a year they are amoung the upper 5-10% of the wealth in the world. Assuming these are the only people who can afford these huge houses, then logic would tell you there are not a lot of these huge houses being built in comparision to all of the houses being built.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
but before I read all the postings about Jevon's Paradox I felt that I should conserve as much enegry as I could. But seeing what has been written it seems that would make things much worse --- so now I should throw my guilt in the bin and burn as much oil as I can 
