|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Lifestyle changes can help US cut greenhouse gases6 December, 2007 The United States, if its citizens so wish, can cut the amount of greenhouse gases it emits by 28%, at a modest cost and by using simple technology. According to a report, a large share of the reductions in greenhouse gases could result from steps that would more than pay for themselves in lower energy bills for industries and individual consumers. People, it added, should take those steps out of “good sense regardless of how worried they might be about climate change” but that is “unlikely to happen under present circumstances.” The report was prepared by experts in energy at the consulting firm McKinsey & Company. The United States, the report said, was “brimming with negative cost opportunities.” This means that potential changes such as in the areas of lighting, heating and cooling of buildings which would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels as well as save money. “These types of savings have been around for 20 years,” Jack Stephenson, a director of the study, said “but they still face tremendous barriers.” Why? While the equipment is often paid for by a landlord or a builder and chosen for its low initial cost, the cost of electricity or other fuels to operate the equipment is paid for by a tenant or a buyer of home. Which means that the landlord or builder has no incentive to spend more on buying efficient equipment, even though doing so would save a lot of money in the long run. Another problem that the report cites is that consumers often pay little or no attention to energy use in choosing gadgets. Ken Ostrowski, leader of the report team, said, “What the report calls out is the fact that the potential is so substantial for energy efficiency. Not that we will do it, but the potential is just staggering here in the United States. There is a lot of inertia, and a lot of barriers.” The study found that the United States can do the job with “tested approaches and high-potential emerging technologies,” but doing this “will require strong, coordinated, economy-wide action that begins in the near future.” The report prepared by experts in energy at McKinsey & Company focused on outlining the problem rather than suggesting solutions. However, some possible solutions have been suggested. One is that “rules for utilities could be rewritten so they make as much money in promoting conservation as in selling electricity.” Another solution is to stipulate emissions limits and such other government mandates as well as introducing incentives like tax breaks to promote efficient buildings, cars and appliances. The McKinsey report stressed that “lifestyle changes” by Americans could play a role in improved efficiency, even though they were not a major factor in the potential gains the report cited. “A broad public education program around wasteful energy consumption could be mounted.” On the model of the ‘Keep America Beautiful’ campaign of the 1960s, it could promote reduction in “carbon littering” by increasing people’s awareness of the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
