Conservation and Efficiency

Conservation and efficiency is a necessary part of finding a solution to global warming. I'd delete that first sentence.Conservation is the act of reducing the amount of energy one uses and efficiency describes using less energy to accomplish the same task that one would normally do with more energy. The two are not mutually exclusive principles; conservation will come naturally if energy is used more efficiently. By using less energy we burn fewer fossil fuels and decrease our carbon footprint, helping to mitigate greenhouse gases and solve the problem of global warming.

Energy efficiency truly depends on the effectiveness of the technology. Many advances in technology have been made that mitigate the amount of energy used by buildings, cars, and other appliances. In the transportation sector for the individual hybrid cars are an innovation that improves energy efficiency by combining electric engines and gasoline motors Reread this sentence for clarity. By using unleaded fuel only when it is most efficient for your ride, one is emitting less carbon into the atmosphere. For example, a 2009 Toyota Prius Hybrid only emits 4.0o tons of carbon dioxide a year as opposed to a typical station wagon, like the Saab 9-3 Aero Combi AWI which emits 10.2 tons of carbon dioxide annually. Other features of hybrid cars that improve energy use are: regenerative braking, which converts energy normally wasted during braking into electricity, and an automatic start and shut off, which shuts off the engine when the vehicle comes to a stop. Improving the design of transportation vehicles in general, whether they be non-hybrid cars, trains, or airplanes so that they are lighter and therefore require less energy would also improve fuel economy.

The biggest consumer of energy is the industrial sector, which uses more than twenty eight percent of all energy The most inefficient technology in this sector are motors what kind of motors??, which consume as much as 63% of all industrial energy. There have recently been developments in technology that force premium-efficient motors having additional laminations that reduce energy loss and therefore increase efficiency. Changing low efficiency motors for the top ones in technology today use 18% less energy. . Better technology in pipes that reduces leaks in steam distribution systems through boilers would also contribute greatly by causing less steam to be released, and therefore less energy would be lost every year, improving efficiency and causing fewer greenhouse gases to be emitted.

Commercial buildings also have high energy outputs. Each year more than 100,000 megawatts of electrical power comes from commercial lighting in the day time. Compact Flourescent Light Bulbs use seventy five percent less energy than an incandescent bulb. Therefore, if one were to replace all of the millions of light bulbs in commercial buildings with Compact Flourescent bulbs, only 25,000 mega watts of electricity would be used. Also, improving insulation technology so these buildings are better insulated and improving window technology so less heat energy escapes through the glass will significantly cut the amount of heat needed keep them at a comfortable temperature. These same measures can be taken in the residential sector, improving efficiency in people’s own homes. On an individual scale investing in technologies that improve efficiency and working to conserve energy will save a person money. For example, buying a Toyota Prius that gets 46 miles per gallon only costs a $1.58 to drive twenty five miles and has an annual fuel cost of 947 percent (assuming 2.91 gas price, 15000 miles of driving annuall, 45% of which is on the highway). Driving the previously mentioned Saab station wagon, which only gets an average of 18 miles per gallon, would cost you 4.04 to drive twenty five miles and $2427 dollars annually. Although an investment in a hybrid car would cost money at first, the returns on it are more than the investment and one’s financial situation is improved. On a larger scale the cost to the U.S. economy for oil every year is close to $200 billion every year (you say every year twice). By being more efficient in our energy use, less of our budget will need to be allocated to the purchase of fossil fuels. These actions will boost the economy and allow our government to invest elsewhere (you might not want to say our in reference to the US, because not all of your readers are going to be American.. Energy efficient standards for new buildings in the U.S.A. since preliminary measures have been taken have already generated at least $200billion in net energy savings. The creation and installation of new technological innovations in all of the sectors would create employment for people, which would continue to boost the economy. The savings in energy bills individuals would get would allow them to spend more on other things, further increasing productivity in the economy. These economic benefits are a positive byproduct of the mitigation to greenhouses gases.

These economic economical benefits are reasons for politicians to take the side of Conservation and Efficiency reread sentence for clarity. At this time of economic deficit anything to aid the economy would be beneficial. If the United States of America uses less oil, it will need to purchase less oil, reducing its dependence on foreign countries however there are reasons not to as well. reread that sentence, too. There is opposition to this that could sway political candidates against this global warming solution. Big oil conglomerates that fund political candidates would not benefit financially from fewer fuel purchases, and the politicians would not benefit financially if they lose some of their biggest sponsors.

Taking the steps to conserve energy and use it more efficiently would have an impact on our society. Lifestyles would be altered (two very general statements). The laid-back attitude many have towards conserving energy would need to change. Sacrifices of small luxuries, such as discontinuing large SUV’s, wearing a sweater instead of setting the thermostat higher during the winter, and less air conditioning in the summer would have to be made. People would have to forgo individual comforts like having their own car to drive to work every day and use public transportation or carpool.

If governments wish to implement energy conservation they may raise the price energy. For those who are able to invest in energy efficient models of appliances large savings could be reaped and the standard of living would not change, if anything for many it could actually improve as the total cost of energy people would need to pay would actually decrease. A lot of stress may be placed on lower income households for they will not be able to afford the se new technologies and therefore will not save money, possibly decreasing the standard of living. If programs were implemented ensure everyone had access to efficient technologies then lower-income households would benefit.

The effects of conservation and technology will be felt in different ways depending on where one lives. In an urban area it will be much easier to forsake the use of an individual car and use public transportation, for example. However in a city most initiatives will be about a broader picture, rather than about actions an individual takes. Insulation is a good example of this; in a rural setting building insulation is the individual owner’s responsibility; however living in a high rise apartment in the city makes it difficult for the individual to insulate their building. Building efficiency in cities will have to be mandated on a larger level.

The sacrifices people make promote conservation and efficiency on an individual level, but these policies can be carried to local, state, and federal levels as well. Cities can mandate things, like Tuscan Arizona that recently passed a mandate saying landscapers must harvest their own rain water. The federal government can also make mandates to weed out energy inefficient appliances, such as mandating all cars are under specific weight requirements, and forbidding imports of inefficient machinery. They can also allocate money to researching and developing buildings and commercial applications for these technologies.

There are some risks that people may associate with conservation and efficiency. Take for example the California Energy Crisis from 2000 to 2001 where there was not sufficient energy for the entire state. Many people are worried this will happen if there are conservation mandates and major power plants are shut down; however this was not what happened with California, which was caused by the fact that California’s energy reserves were low because these power companies had gone bankrupt. Had California taken efforts earlier to use energy more efficiently there actually would not have been a crisis. People continue to misunderstand what’s going on, however, and believe that if the government takes massive steps to conserve energy, a similar disaster will occur.

Conserving energy by using it more efficiently will directly mitigate greenhouse gases. This solution is one of the easiest for us to begin doing and if employed alongside the other solutions will be help the world end global warming.

NOTES: Try checking out what other people have done with the organization of their sites. You might benefit from having a few clearly defined sections with labels instead of a long essay piece. Most Wikipedia sites are in this segmented form rather than essay form. Some examples of sections you could have are: Background, Methods, Costs, Risks, and Conclusion. Also, you might want to look for a few more examples that don't just focus on cars. Your stuff on the industrial sector was really interesting, perhaps look more into that?