This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
What Electricity Consumption Tells Us About The State Of The US Economy - An Update
Submitted by Erico Matias Tavares via Sinclar & Co (co-authored with DegreeDays.net),
A year ago we wrote about how electricity consumption could provide clues to the performance of the US economy, which generated a lot of interest and comments.
A relationship between the two variables makes sense, but needs to be framed in the proper context. Genuine economic (and population) growth should translate into more electricity consumption, as we have more activity and transactions taking place throughout the economy.
However, factors such as energy efficiency and the weather can muddle this relationship:
- An increase in efficiency means that the same output can be obtained with less inputs. Therefore, a small-ish reduction in electricity consumption versus a prior period may not necessarily be indicative of a sluggish economy over that time. And we know that this efficiency has been on the rise in recent years (just look at the power rating of your new appliances).
- Likewise, a warmer winter versus the prior year may also cause a drop in electricity consumption, simply due to home heaters not being used as hard, not necessarily because the economy is doing badly.
So can we adjust electricity consumption to take these factors into consideration and get a better measure of its relationship with economic growth?
We developed an indicator to do just that together with DegreeDays.net, an energy systems data company. We provide a brief technical explanation of our proposed methodology below (for a much better overview please visit this supporting article). Bear with us, the analysis is quite interesting!
To account for weather variations, we regressed the weekly electricity consumption data against US-population-weighted heating degree days (“HDD”) and cooling degree days (“CDD”) that we calculated for matching weekly periods:
- Degree days are a specialist type of data derived from detailed temperature readings and used for analysis of heating and cooling energy consumption. This is exactly what we need to normalize the effects of changes in the weather on electricity consumption.
- Energy required to heat a building over a period is proportional to the HDD over that period; energy required to cool a building over a period is proportional to the CDD over that period. Calculating this is pretty straightforward for one building in a specific location.
- But in order to account for the millions of different buildings and variations in weather patterns across the country we calculated population-weighted HDD and CDD using census per city and weather data (again, this is much better explained in that article).
Accounting for energy efficiency is a bit trickier. We did not find any recent data (and which is updated regularly) that could measure this effect. So we decided to run those regressions over much shorter time frames. The rationale being that longer periods could lead to an apples and oranges comparison since the installed power demand base changed. For instance, a new refrigerator consumes much less electricity than a decade ago.
So at the start of each calendar year we ran the regression over the prior 12 months. We then estimated electrical consumption using the regression coefficients and the updated population-weighted HDD and CDD variables, compared it to the actual electricity consumption each week and voilà, we came up with an adjusted indicator based on the percentage differential between the two.
If actual electricity consumption is higher than the one predicted by our regression, which as we have seen should be adjusted for weather changes and some efficiencies, this is a sign that the economy should be doing well. If it is considerably lower then the economy may not be doing so great (or everyone is buying those new refrigerators).
OK! Let’s look at the actual results.
First, some context. Here’s the actual electricity consumption in the US without any adjustments since 1995:
Weekly US Electricity Consumption (MM kw hrs): Jan 95 - Present
Source: EEI.
As we pointed out last year, this is not exactly a picture of economic dynamism. Since then electricity consumption across the US has pretty much remained in the doldrums:
- The red line shows the weekly historical peak, reached all the way back in the summer of 2006. Notice how far we have been from it in recent years, despite all the GDP and population growth that has occurred since then.
- The black line, which is the smoothed consumption data over time (the longer-term trend if you prefer), has recently turned negative.
It is curious to note that financial commentators regularly gauge China’s economic performance by looking at its electricity consumption, but this is not done for the US. Perhaps there is something there that does not fit with the prevailing narrative. Sure, China remains a manufacturing economy while the US is largely a services economy; but as far as we know restaurants, insurance companies, hospitals and IT service providers still use electricity.
In fact, growth in data has been so significant – requiring ever more power-hungry data centers – that IT now consumes some 10% of world electricity production. All the iPhones, clouds, tablets, chats, likes and whatever else have materially increased our demand for electricity, both on the front- and the back-end. So it is surprising that electricity consumption statistics haven’t been a bit perkier in the US, given all the IT development there.
And here’s the evolution of annual electrical generation in the world’s leading economies/blocks since 2006:
Annual Electrical Generation Index (‘06=100): ’06-‘14
Source: BP World Energy Review.
The US (dotted line) has pretty much underperformed everyone in the group in terms of growth (except in 2014 when OECD ex-US, Canada dropped below it). Even Canada, its northern neighbor, has done better. What does this tell you about the US “decoupling and leading global growth"? That Americans must have much more efficient refrigerators and data centers than everyone else? Or maybe there is more to this story.
With that in mind, let’s finally put our “energy indicator” to use. We aggregated weekly data into quarters because as you can imagine we are dealing with quite a noisy data series. Here are the results, compared to year-on-year (“y-o-y”) Real GDP growth (red line):
Quarterly Real GDP y-o-y Growth and the Energy Indicator: 1Q’01 – 1Q’15
Source: EEI, BEA, degreedays.net.
The graph brings out some interesting points:
- Overall, the percentage differential between actual and predicted (by our methodology) electricity consumption reflects the ebbs and flows of the GDP cycle.
- At time the energy indicator precedes GDP turns, although it may take some quarters for this to become evident (again, we are dealing with noisy, unsmoothed data, unlike quarterly GDP which has a host of seasonal adjustments). Notice the jump in 3Q’02, before GDP growth recovered in earnest. And in the run up to the Great Recession in 2008, we had the biggest drop in the indicator in the series while official GDP statistics were still showing economic growth.
- An advantage of our methodology is that we can update the indicator on a weekly basis, and so at the end of each quarter we can have a sense of how the economy performed almost in real-time. The last (red) bar is the accumulated reading to date for 2Q’15, which being positive suggests also a positive y-o-y Real GDP growth in 2Q.
- However, a divergence has formed since early 2013: the trend in the energy indicator is going down, while y-o-y GDP growth seems to be moving higher (notice the two arrows).
OK, so what accounts for that divergence? We can’t say for sure, but back in 2013 the Bureau of Economic Analysis “modernized” its GDP accounting methodology, to include things like R&D, copyrights and pension deficits. As a result total GDP increased by 3%. Presumably the series was updated as far back as 1929 but we can certainly debate whether such variables reflect actual transactions and human activity, which is what our indicator picks up.
Other countries have been even more creative in GDP accounting revisions, adding estimates for illegal activities such as prostitution and drug consumption. Ah, but we already have these covered, as presumably they also consume electricity (even if under very dim lights).
You can take your pick as to which measure you would like to focus on to gauge real economic performance.
But just looking at electricity consumption, adjusted or otherwise, things are definitely looking very sluggish in the US economy right now.
»
- 64220 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Lightbulb ban, you're welcome.
-You're ever loving Government.
Must be all those solar panels Obama made.
Using less electricity. Utility companies (gubmint regulated) are going to have to drastically increase rates to keep up their high pay and pensions...
Are my kids finally turning the lights off when they leave a room?
Make sure HFTs always get priority energy supply.
GPD "growth" is entirely due to Fed-induced inflation.
If you were to chart the COST of electricity usage, instead of actual KW-Hrs used, over the same period, what a different chart that would be.
It's because we all went out and purchased a Tesla home battery
You guys have electricity 24/7?! Braggards!
It's all the electric cars saving on electricity, silly boys!
Out here in the Great People's Republic of Rainbow Colored Unicorn Skittles, we now have PG&E declaring select days as Save the Unicorns (or something) where between the hours of 2 and 7 pm you're supposed to curtail your electricity consumption.
It's called Soft Rationing.
Mom's basement doesn't need much A/C.
Well heck, it’s not like we need a lot electricity for aluminum and for all the guard rails, on the highways and the high tension wires that do not conduct commerce anymore because it all has been happening in Germany and China.
Two words . . .
Distributed generation
Yup. Most new construction has some form of cogeneration.
The rest are idiots.
"What Electricity Comnsumption Tells Us about...The US Economy"
This article tells us nothing (dick), just like Wall Street wants.
It tells us nothing about the breakout of Consumer v. Industrial, the actual "cost" of generation, the cost of nuclear power plant retirement, Smart Meter overcharging, and not a goddam thing about subsides and tarifs.
As well, we should all ask why, if the US is so "efficient" does eslectricty cost more in the US per KW than in China (where its cheap and ubiquitous)?
More useless propaganda.
Sadly, you're correct, as most utilities in conjunction with their state regulatory authorities have implemented rules which adjust rates to maintain regulated returns on equity in the face of declining usage, either because of personal conservation or weather.
Almost amusingly, California Water Resources (CWT) stock price has been ridiculously stable during the worst drought in state history.
We are truly sources of economic energy for big business, to be drained over time. Welcome to the matrix.
That leaves only one option, get off the grid. Leave one little light on the grid but take the rest of the house off of it, same for water.
There's a .gov scam for well water, too! Not only is it soon-to-be EPA controlled, but in some municipalities (including Long Island NY), the town charges an outrageous $500 annual 'well-water testing fee'. You know, to make sure it's safe. And try to tell them the only use for the well is irrigation.
"Leave one little light on the grid but take the rest of the house off of it, same for water."
Good plan. Except for... that monthly "bill maintenance charge" of $12.78. To go up to $378.37 as more people cut back. The only way is to be completely off.
Correction: the only way is to tear the leeches off.
Some ways are more elegant and subtle than others. You don't take on more powerful adversaries with might. You out-think them.
Less energy usage due to the arrival of the Ice Age leading to less AC use.
due to the 1%'ers, in the 77024 zipcode (courtesy of excessive FED induced leverage, speculation and stock buybacks)....there is a race to see how many 10,000+ square foot homes can be built. This is not an exageration and you can google earth it....with some homes topping 20,000. These are homes with utility bills doubling the average annual household income of most Americans. So, as the rest of the economy gets squashed.....the 1%'er line up to soak up the excesses.
I was having beers with some coworkers and we discussed winning the lottery. One who I relate to more said he would go off grid. The other who is a bit of a playboy said he wanted more grid.
Want more grid
Just look up in the sky, there is so much grid (chemtrail grid!) that it looks like a pot-holder woven by you when in second grade.
Actually, AC is cheaper than heating. Because AC is not a closed system, it is about 300-400% efficient, whereas heating can only ever be 100% efficient at most, because heating is mostly a closed system, unless you have an HRV unit perhaps.
Or you can just wear thicker/more clothing like the North Koreans.
Are you nuts? Havent you been following the jetset warmers. Its clearly getting warmer! Decaprio wouldnt lie, he's smart.
Right after this cold front gets here tomorrow. No shit. Cold front in july.
Kidding, you win.
Directions for broken swirly Mercury laden bulbs:
Break 1: Open all windows, air out 20 minutes or more, secure broken pieces into multi-layered bags, dispose at toxic waste dump.
Break 3 or more: call Hazmat.
So special.
Link for the downvoter: http://www2.epa.gov/cfl/cleaning-broken-cfl, also see Google.
Drop broken pieces in Washington D.C.'s water supply.
Standard Disclaimer: What difference does Korsakoff's dementia makes?
"What difference does Korsakoff's dementia makes? "
Monkeys would be cheaper than the jokers we have in DC. They sit in the seats pushing buttons you could provide them bananas while the lobbyist are in the back rooms re-writing the bills.
You can actually still buy incandescent light bulbs at Frys for some reason. I guess they classify it as some kind of "electronics part"
They keep delaying the ban much like all the proposed cost savings in medicaid. I think the use of incandescent bulbs is now insignificent and a ban would do more harm than good.
The funny thing is I had some globe incandescent lights in my bathroom "Hollywood lights" when we bought our house. They burned a lot of juice and warmed up the room.
I tried buying CFLs to reduce the cost. But they kept burning out. Then I would replace with the old bulb I had left.
Now, I just still have the old bulbs in there. Been over 12 years.
pods
CFLs suck in frequent on/off situations and may have an issue with high humidity in a bathroom.
I actually put a 100w incandescent bulb into my pump house in the winter to keep pipes from freezing. They're useful.
I can get by with a lot lower in mine: It's small pump house, I think it's like 32 ft sq; rebuilt it and insulated it pretty good.
I use incandescents for brooders/brooding as well. Those city folk are going to get real hungry if my incandescents go away...
BTW - In the heating season incandescents don't waste heat- that head (as El Vaq notes for pump houses, and I for brooding) is useful to um, heat things, even spaces where humans occupy! Now, in the cooling season they're wasting, but then again one doesn't tend to use lights as much, so, really, any waste likely isn't all that much. For those that live more toward the equator your choice is a bit more difficult.
BTW2 - I recall comparing light output and energy consumption between CFLs and LEDs and saw that the CFLs were actually more energy efficient. Don't know what the latest is. I wonder what sort of hidden consequence is lurking with LEDs...
No real drawbacks to LED, other than the cost. It's a pretty straightforward production process, just requires a wee bit of electronics.
LEDS are made with kittens.
I love kittens.
Kitten etouffee. Not bad when you get the roux right...
;-D
LEDs have 1 great benefit. They do not attract mosquitoes because they emit no UV light.
If you change anything, change the lights on your deck. Those were the first I changed, then I realized the mosquitoes were gone and looked it up. No UV light.
CFL emite UV light and the white coating glows from the UV light, that is how they work. Bug magnets.
Incandescents emit TONS of light we don't see, heat in the infra red and UV that buggies love.
I work with LEDs. They are the future. You can isolate individual spectrum to your liking and they will be 4x more efficient in the next 8 years.Theres some really cool things coming out. Buy them online and put them together..its cheaper than paying 5x the cost at Home depot for a package.
RIPS
++. My brother does that in his pump house. It's hard to beat such cheap heaters! And as a bonus, they come with an on/off indicator light built in! :)
Can you get 100W bulbs? Aren't only 60W and lower available?
Yes. No.
You want power? I give you power!
http://www.grainger.com/product/GE-LIGHTING-Incandescent-Floodlight-1G94...
I have a box of 100s, how many would you like to purchase?
Ban light bulbs and subsidize plug in cars. Brilliant. LED bulbs do save considerable energy although they can stick the ban. The battery cars aren't happening. It may be that SCOTUScare/Robertscare is draining pocketbooks across the country and people are adjusting spending in other areas. Personally, there are too many variables to worry about electricity consumption.
"LED bulbs do save considerable energy"
But, is that really true? What's the total embedded energy in LEDs vs. incandescents as divided by average life expectancy? (and somewhere one has to factor in end-price; I'm thinking that true costs for LEDs aren't necessarily being realized owing to subsidies and such)
I've replaced certain lights with LEDs like motion lights that CFL would suck at and Incandescent would burn out with the constant on/off. So far, they've saved me replacing burnouts many times over, so I'm good there. I've put LEDs in places where incandescent heat would be an issue or constant running makes the efficiency of cost/lumen worth while. I still use incandescent where heat isn't a problem or the heat is a plus. It all boils down to the consumer's choice for the consumer's needs.
Where's the double seasonal adjustments?
Notice there haven't been as many rolling blackouts in California since pre-financial crisis? Less use and hence less producting is the way we're going.
There is a power plant in the coastal california city I live in that only gets turned on for about 1-2 days a year, simply to excercise the system to keep it functional. Outside of those days, it sits there in "mothballs"
"Less use and hence less producting is the way we're going."
Yup!
Economies of scale in reverse... (eventually reduced scale is going to force prices up as margins get hammered [more])
So consumption is flat but our rates just keep going up higher & higher. Why is that? Oh, it must be that deflation they talk about.
Some people will have access to the consumable calories that are required to maintain their current standard of living, most will not...
same as it ever was...
Now I'm hungry. Thanks.
Inflation. (Don't call it a comeback.)
See my post above (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-26/what-us-electricity-consumption...).
Obama wanted carbon credits.
By eliminating manufacturing/technology jobs in the US and shipping them off to China and India he's shifted the pollution to the other side of the earth.
Where the pollution won't bother anyone ever again. And neither will anyone be bothered to get up every morning to go to work.
When you're in government that's what's called a "win win".
Clearly, off-shoring was taking place LONG before folks' favorite punching bag stepped into the limelight. I'll concede the argument that this scenario has only continued to hasten since the current puppet has sat on the throne; however, consider that a lot of stuff is just pure shit that wouldn't survive in the future anyway (who the fuck is going to be able to afford it? without being able to create excess product [and dump abroad- refer to the statement by the Rockefeller types on how this had been the model for a long time]); stop to think that some of it might be selling high (to foreigners) and then buying back low (from foreigners): just watch it unfold- http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/news?tagID=1487
Shit this was happy with heaving industry in the NE since the late 50s/early 60s.
It's hot? Yes, air-conditioning ban...
one to make you laugh
http://www.westernjournalism.com/one-governor-just-sent-a-letter-to-obama-and-threatened-him-with-this-if-he-doesnt-back-off/
one to make you cry
Smart Meters Fire, Living Hell and Bureaucratic Messes
I use low energy consumption devices. I have my higher power toys when I want to play: but for zhedge and work, I don't need some 1.21 jiggawat computer eating up power.
being mindful is all it really takes. Polishing the brass on the titanic, yeah, but atleast I'm feeling better about myself on the way down.
It's really about realizing one's ability to change as needed (for oneself).
Nature looks to conserve energy, that's pretty clear. Humans are OF nature; why we think that we are immune to the notion of conservation of energy is quite telling of our hubris-prone minds.
One thing that likely escaped the authors is that of the impacts demographics plays in this (or did I miss that as I hastily skimmed their article?) I'm not exactly sure which way it would go here, but I'm pretty certain that there is likely a meaningful impact to be considered.
Good enough reason to bring FED personnel in on charges of treason.
A lot of elderly people on fixed income would take pleasure on being in the firing squad.
Agenda 21 crisis failure -2000. Socialist telling the world is going to end if you don't marry a tree -1000.
/lol
What do you think happens when your economy closes 60,000 factories in less than two decades?
But all those carbon credits and clean air the liberals have created.
Jobs and manufacturing is old school. Tanning salons, tatto parlors, title loans and pawn shops comprise the new US economy.
When you're a net energy importer, you can't afford to keep the factories, unless you make quality products other are willing to buy.
US problem - energy imports and overpriced exports. First problem can't be fixed, unless you discover huge new reserves of energy. The second can't be fixed unless you deregulate to lower costs associated with bureaucracy and lower the standard of living to lower input costs.
The factories are gone for a reason and they're not coming back for the same reason.
Inadequate expectations.
Shhhh...don't tell the linear fucks anything...it's wasted....uh...energy.
But...+1,000
I've cut my usage by 33% by just unplugging appliances that aren't used daily. I've also cut my AC usage off while I'm not home. The temps in my area have increased 2 degrees hotter than L/Y. Yes, I am suffering more than last year, but I figure why not get a head start on the suffering that's going to come anyways.
Who would of thought Wallstreet HFT agroithm darkpools create less carbon based energy.
Weed is legal. People have begun to use the sun as opposed to grow lights.
So, for the eco-totalitarians the following question remains unanswered. Assuming they continue to believe their oft repeated end-of-the-world scenario that massive areas of the world (not just a few tiny islands) very soon will be underwater - in no uncertain terms, The End of The World as We Know It (no minor claim) - should the West, with its flat to lower carbon emissions, go to war with China to prevent its increasing emissions that will lead to 'the end of the world as we know it?'
Nobody stated that the entire world will be underwater, only that premature melting of mountain snow would cause floods and crop failures in regions like the Indus Valley and Gangetic Plain, where a billion people live. Or that rises in temperature would lead to increased incidence of hurricanes and typhoons.
Much of China's carbon consumption is caused by the manufacture of goods for export to Western countries, and the infrastructure that enables it (although domestic demand is a large and growing part of the economy). China ought to lower its emissions massively by investing heavily in wind, solar, hydropower, and nuclear power, and they have done so - unlike in the United States where there is little government-driven investment in any infrastructure at all.
Nuclear and hydro-power are the only forms of clean energy that can immediately replace fossil fuel power, but self-proclaimed "environmentalists" have railed against them. It is those "eco-totalitarians" you should be against, not those who can see the realities on the ground.
Nuclear power and clean energy in the same sentence, wow, are you clueless! You can find a clue on Bing or Google by typing in "Chernobyl" and "Fukushima". For extra credit clues, guess what "dosimeter" is!!
But with all the global warming we must be firing up our air conditioners more often. No? Are all those poor people in our southern states just going without, or are they all footing the bill for top of the line and more efficient air conditioners? My guess is neither. The truth is our electricity use follows the increase in the number of computers in our homes peaking in 2005 and then dropping as more people begin using smart phones & tablets more while new computers are ever more efficient.
The west has deindustrailaized.
West has become nations of bastard children.
Good data/science used to support the hypothesis. Definitely looks like a consumption slow down, especially considering the increase in juice for I.T..
Isn't the use/conversion to LED bulbs mandatory? I've bought 2 10 packs of 800 Lumen LEDs from HomeDepot when they were on sale. Not cheap, but I like the 57 watt reduction and claimed long lifetime.
Perhaps a talented analyst might find a GDP increase while Electricity use declines. Think about 60 watt to 3 watt in 90 million houses over the next 3-5 years? Assume 10 bulbs at 3 to 5 hours a day?
Would love to see a comparison chart between electricity and gasoline consumption, as the efficiency argument is used for both.
Ha! Thanks for that! I'm exempt from any analysis as I use DIESEL! (well, no diesel chainsaws, but...)
The efficiency side may not be showing up here. At least in SoCal there has been a huge increase in home solar, and that tends not to show up on anyone's charts, could be as much as 10% of residential. And we've had CFLs for ten years and now LED bulbs are becoming affordable, could be another 10% of both residential and commercial - even the streetlights are going LED. My desktop PC uses less power today than ten years ago, SSDs are thrifty to run, not to mention LED monitors. Large businesses put up solar cells over parking lots or on rooftops, shaving a percent or two off their totals.
Plug-in hybrids like Tesla push the other way, but there aren't many of those out there. Yet.
Um... and all that savings is wiped out due to the increases in energy to pump (for water) deeper!
"Plug-in hybrids like Tesla push the other way, but there aren't many of those out there. Yet."
Teslas are hybrids? Didn't know that! Thanks for the "education!"
While electric motors are more efficient than traditional combustion engines, there's still the little detail of where that electricity comes from: as we're so good at doing, tricking ourselves into believing what ever Madison Ave tells us, there's the trail of "externalities" streaming behind us.
How much is a Tesla? Do you see folks' debt levels dropping faster than the Tesla's prices? How about folks' wages increasing? Always the same "trick," the promise of a brighter future: to be had by the ruling elite only!
Sorry, Tesla non-hybrids - although any electric car is a hybrid as long as most of our electric power is fossil generated.
But this is my point, these authors can't seem to find the increase in total power usage, so I suspect their numbers.
we use more of something as it gets more efficient. Look at cars mpg/miles driven. Computers are another great example, the more efficient the more we consume. Food, we've gotten very efficient at producing and consume more.
please share an example where this doesn't hold tue.
Jevons Paradox
CFL lighting is great if you have an affinity for the 'Woolworth' look. Keeps the drunks out too...
so the lights keep drunks out, hmmm, how long has this drunks problem been goin' on?
Well Thankfully the grow lights haven't changed. Can still get MH and HPS 1000w bulbs at the usual places.
Industry is what consumes megawatts. Steel production, mining, manufacturing, etc. are the big users. My entire customer base are power generating steam plants (nuclear & fossil-fueled). Plants that were once base-load (meaning they operated continuously) have been relegated to cycling on-and-off or been moth-balled altogether. And, with the advent of the current coal-hating Administration, the largest coal plants (and biggets producers of megawatts) are being slowly choked off.
Based on the diminishing investment in the power generating market for equipment and qualified personnel over the past ten years, I KNOW the economy sucks. Now, add the reality that your average-aged chemist and instrument techs are in their 50's & 60's with little new talent coming aboard, and you have the makings of a Third World grid in the not-to-distant future.
Go long candles.
Demographics. You can pretend like things are some sort of conspiracy or you can understand that perpetual growth on a finite planet isn't possible, something that any REAL "educated" person, especially one that's educated in math and physics, should understand. It's the old reoccurring theme of ZH folks totally getting the concept as pertains to "Them who promote the Ponzi scheme of creating endless amounts of fiat 'money'," but when the same math is shown as being in effect with our very existence, well, it gets tagged as being put forth by some leper/socialist/fascist/fucking-whatever-frothy-labeling-non-thinkers-can-think-of-spewing.
But... we like to whine and blame everyone and everything except that every one of us is contributing to the rope-making process that is to become our own nooses.
The "Third World" was coined to help exploit others. Those "countries" were removed farther from sustainability, all in the name of greed/salvation (white man's burden)...
Isn't the use/conversion to LED bulbs mandatory? I've bought 2 10 packs of 800 Lumen LEDs from HomeDepot when they were on sale. Not cheap, but I like the 57 watt reduction and claimed long lifetime.
Perhaps a talented analyst might find a GDP increase while Electricity use declines. Think about 60 watt to 3 watt in 90 million houses over the next 3-5 years? Assume 10 bulbs at 3 to 5 hours a day?
i tend to think of A/C as being predominately electric, with heaters using a number of fuels, heating oil, gas, wood. we have had some record heat in the US, and electric use should reflect this, also let's assume job bbq is laid off, he goes home and turns the A/C to 80 and sweats it out. then Joe goes back to work, in that big office building which is expensive to cool down, what with those servers and computers. joes carbon footprint gets a lot bigger when joe is back at work. back of the napkin your chart may be even more foreshadowing than you think.
I work for one of the big power companies.
Big issues: the relationship between
Heh, they noticed my plasma tv died...
I changed out my air conditioner units in 2010 for more efficient ones and I have replaced almost all the bulbs in my house with LEDs. Siginficantly reduced my electric bill as result , year around. Probably a lot of that going on and so I would take issue with the premise of the article.
more doom porn. these charts just point out the incredible efficiency of usa energy use and the advanced economy that is able to create gdp without energy input.....and china is so backwards they don't use alt energy or leds and they haven't mastered the technique for creating gdp from a vacuum.
those charts are bullshit. total electric consumption goes up every year in the usa.
Perpetual growth, as driven by bank money, is no longer a viable state of affairs. There is no more "returning to growth" for a country with a GDP per capita as large as the United States. Slowly but steadily, we will max out our resources and only incremental improvements to output will be possible, as in Japan. The best thing we can do is to make the transition as painless as possible. End the debt-money system (which is harmful to most people even in times of "growth"), move to sovereign money or mutual credit, and give control over large enterprises to workers. Then invest in a space program that will allow for a continuation of human expansion without draining the resources of Earth.
We have retiired to what many consider a "third world country". Since we installed our PV system our monthly utility bill is about $2.50 USD per month. The power company is very encouraging/supportive. Ok - it will probably take us 6 years to recoup our investment, but we can't consume all the power we are creating (we are running a credit kwh balance). I just checked on our old power company's website from the States for PV system support. The message - "Applications are no longer being accepted. All reservations have been issued."
no no no no, it's the weather stoopid!
My energy footprint is pretty small. I save everywhere I can. Just last night I removed the battery from my samsung 5, ripped back the stickeyback label and removed the transmitter and aeriel hidden there. Somebody probably going to be pissed but hey I won't have to recharge as much now. 4,5 and 6 all have that sneeky little bugger in there.
Doing my part hanging clothes out to dry today.
Ain't nothing going on but the utilities!
The drop in energy use is due to moar conshienchus Amerikkkans. They are righteously conserving ennergeee. And wisely spending more of there munnee on Gucci Bags, and other things I kant even pronounce.
Your just a skwerl trying to get a nut.
Growing, robust economies require cheap, plentiful power. While efficiency and solar production can account for some changes (we must consider the electrical and power consumption required to produce the related products), the lack of growth in power consumption points to the fact that we are peak growth as a nation. Not good, anyway you cut it.
this electrical usage story is several years late:::
see this article by Lundeen who has been tracking the flatlining kW scene for some time now.
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424053111903964304577420183154...
Lundeen started documenting kW production when he found an analyst had predicted the fall of the Soviet Union by researching kW production vs. what the Kremlin claimed for economic growth. Now, is the USA doing the same drill?
Isn't this all flawed unless you back out the weather? It's been a hot summer so far, so lots of AC, but a bunch of unemployed people sitting on their backsides checking facebook and watching tv are not exactly the engine of economic growth.
It puts a bad taste in the mouth (more smoke&mirrors instead of clarity) when the 2nd graph lumps Brazil, Indoa, and Russia together.
There is nothing in the analysis that takes into account the ever-rising cost of electricity. About the time of the financial collapse, Pennsylvania removed the price controls on electric companies. We were told this would be good for consumers and, of course, just the opposite has happened. In addition, the use of electric heaters can double a monthly bill. I know folks who used to have electric baseboard heating, because it once was the cheapest fuel, who now have switched to portable propane heaters and heat just one room at a time.
My staff and family finally realized that the thermostat isn't an acellerator...