Energy Progress as Energy Conservation

With all the Yankee ingenuity in North America and the pressure from the ultimate and inevitable dwindling of fossil fuels, o­ne would expect that enterprising capitalists would have the issue of alternative energy well in hand by now. In fact, all of the research and development in the field of renewable energy appears to lead to the conclusion that the energy consumption we presently enjoy in the U.S. cannot be sustained. We know that we will not reach energy sustainability without energy conservation.

In spite of what some politicians would have us believe, nuclear energy is dangerous. We don’t know where to put the waste. There is the potential for devastation, as seen post Chernobyl. It isn’t a viable consumer energy source because it creates more energy problems than it solves. Hydrogen energy has shown over several decades of research to be problematic in storage, and in fact, production, since the most efficient method of producing Hydrogen is with nuclear energy. Wind energy, at first look, seemed to be almost free energy. However, environmentalists, who have championed it as the answer to our energy prayers since the middle of the last century, are now sadly disappointed to see the effect some wind generators are having o­n wild life populations. It’s use for mass production of direct energy appears to be limited. Water energy is seen as sustainable, but also impacts wildlife and cannot supply all of our energy needs by itself. Solar energy is excellent for local uses. Its not up to the mass production we appreciate from fossil fuels.

Until we redefine energy progress, all modes of alternative energy will seem to fall short. If we see energy progress as how much we have saved rather than how much we have to waste we might begin to be o­n the right track. "A penny saved is a penny earned," wrote Ben Franklin. The modern version should read, "A kilowatt saved is a kilowatt earned."