Southern States Are The "Saudi Arabia" Of Energy Efficiency

I was on a fascinating conference call this morning, as the "Energy Efficiency in the South" report came out.  The purpose of this report (and its focus on the south) is because the south has traditionally had much lower energy prices than the rest of the country, and because of that has fallen well behind other regions in instituting energy efficiency programs that can save consumers and taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.  Dr. Marilyn Brown who helped write the report and led the call even noted that the improvements possible in the south made it the "Saudi Arabia of energy efficiency".

Lowell has some thoughts up on this also.

Read the Virginia portion of the report here.

I'll have more in the next few days on how specifically we can all play a part in this.

Comments

[Seriously?]

Let me get this straight -

The south - which has lower energy prices - is losing millions of dollars because they aren't energy efficient?

The north - with HIGHER energy prices are the ones saving millions of dollars?

What you really mean, Ben, is that the south isn't as highly taxed. I know you would love to change that.

Frankly, that's how we like it, thank you very much. Nice try.

[change]

I have admittedly not studied this issue. However from your quote that the “south has traditionally had much lower energy prices than the rest of the country” why would we want to adopt practices of those who have would assumedly have “higher energy prices”?

Is this the same type of Obamalogic groups that promised if we spend 2 trillion dollars we could solve all our problems and keep unemployment under 8%? or The same type group that says we can add tens of millions of people to our healthcare system and we can “save” money without sacrificing quality? or The same type groups that suggest we will be safer if we promise “not” to use certain weapons if we are attacked? or The same type of groups that want to deny us the ability to drill for our own resources (so we must be beholden to others)?

Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical on the surface, I will study the matter further. Until then I suggest that we could lower our costs even further if we drilled off the coast and built a few more nuclear plants; thereby enabling us to use our own resources.

[change]

Seriously,
Sorry to use the same logic as you did, you beat me to the post…

[Not Larry Sabato]

The reason we have had lower energy prices is not because of higher usage- its because of the types of energy we use versus other areas of the country.

The only reason prices are important is that our low prices have traditionally been a disincentive for people to conserve energy- and so there are more opportunities for that here.

[bubba]

Lots of things at work here, lots.

But I have to ask, are the authors of this article suggesting that we dam the few free flowing southern rivers left in the appalachians? should we dam the James at Balcony Falls? Or how about impounding the New through the New River Gorge? Or heck, let's lock up Russell Fork at Breaks Interstate Park, right.

[TomPaine]

Ben: You really need to get more readers who understand basic English and can do simple arithmetic!

All these Libertarians and Teabaggers are reading and math challenged

[Seriously?]

"The reason we have had lower energy prices is not because of higher usage- its because of the types of energy we use versus other areas of the country." - Ben

If we aren't using more energy - what is there to 'conserve'?

Again - this whole debate reverts to taxation and regulation.

And to your second point, yes. We do use other types of energy. Solar, wind, 'renewable' energy are all great. I spent a great deal of time studying them in college and I think they have awesome potential (potential to make energy in such abundance that we don't need to conserve). But it's just not there yet.

Some renewables are ready and have drastically reduced the cost of energy in many states - hydroelectric as an example. A lot of people don't like it because of the consequences to the salmon population. Nevertheless - an example of a renewable that actually works well and reduces co2 emissions (if you're worried about that).

And no, TomPaine, I'm neither. Just your simple, hard working college graduate who pays 40% of his income in taxes.

[Not Larry Sabato]

I didn't say we don't have higher levels of usage. I said THAT is not the reason why the prices are lower.

[Seriously?]

exactly. If we don't have hire levels of usage - why do WE have to conserve vis a vis everywhere else?

I'm challenging the notion that everyone has to conserve for us to be ok as a country.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Oh my god, are you unable to read?

For the third time- WE DO HAVE HIGH LEVELS OF USAGE.

[Seriously?]

hahaha whatever Ben - you used a double negative; which, outside math, doesn't make a positive. ;)

Lower energy costs for less money = a good thing.

Keep workin it!

[change]

Re:
“The reason we have had lower energy prices is not because of higher usage- its because of the types of energy we use versus other areas of the country”

This seems to suggest we are doing something right….

Re: “Ben: You really need to get more readers who understand basic English and can do simple arithmetic!“

TP, you really should try to “think” a little bit before you post a comment.
You possibly could come to the conclusion that you should stfu, thereby making yourself look a bit more intelligent than you usually appear.
Try it and you might actually impress someone besides yourself.

[WT]

This report doesn't even mention the energy reserves in Virginia like the uranium deposit in southside. I've heard that has enough uranium to power Virginia for the next 60 years alone.

[TomPaine]

Change:

I did think a lot about my post and had you, among others, specifically in mind! So STFU yourself, you libertarian moron!

[change]

Young tommy,
If these are “well thought” posts from you, I suffer to wonder what you might pen with a lack of consideration.

And remember my young nescient friend “sticks and stones”

[Steve Vaughan]

TP- I'm not sure why you'd want to paint libertarians with that brush. Change is a moron, but he's no libertarian.