Some Phys-L subscribers might be interested in a recent post "The
Jevons Paradox" [Hake (2009)]. The abstract reads:
******************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to Bartlett's (2004) article "Thoughts on
Long-Term Energy Supplies: Scientists and the Silent Lie," David
Goldstein (2004) wrote: "Enlightened energy efficiency policy can
have much greater effects on the problems addressed in those articles
than any of the solutions or scenarios that the authors presented . .
. .[e.g. stopping population growth as recommended by Bartlett]. . .
.. But to what extent, if any, is Goldstein's claim invalidated by
"Jevons Paradox" (JP): "TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS THAT INCREASES THE
EFFICIENCY WITH WHICH A RESOURCE IS USED, TENDS TO INCREASE (RATHER
THAN DECREASE) THE RATE OF CONSUMPTION OF THAT RESOURCE"?
Jeff Dardozzi (2009), in his Population Press article on "Jevons
Paradox" (JP) states that the comprehensive review "Jevons Paradox:
The Myth of Resource Efficiency Improvements" [Polimeni et al. (2007,
2009)] "clearly supports the proposition that [JP] is present in the
US, Europe, and most other economies and that strategies to increase
energy efficiency in themselves will do little to improve the energy
situation or the ecological crisis."
On the other hand, Steve Sorrell (2007) in his comprehensive report
"The Rebound Effect" (another name for JP) is somewhat less certain
about the influence of JP, writing: "Rebound effects are very
difficult to quantify, and their size and importance under different
circumstances is hotly disputed. Also, rebound effects operate
through a variety of different mechanisms and lack of clarity about
these has led to persistent confusion. In general, rebound effects
have been neglected when assessing the potential impact of energy
efficiency policies. A key conclusion of this report is that rebound
effects are of sufficient importance to merit explicit treatment.
Failure to take account of rebound effects could contribute to
shortfalls in the achievement of energy and climate policy goals."
Neither Dardozzi nor Sorrell consider Bartlett's (2004)
recommendation to stop population growth as a solution to
environmental problems - see e.g., "The Elephant in the Room:
Overpopulation" [Hake (2009)].
******************************************
REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy <http://tinyurl.com/create.php>.]
Hake, R.R. 2009. "The Jevons Paradox," online on the OPEN AERA-L
archives at <http://tinyurl.com/lf57p2>. Post of 28 Aug 2009
19:00:23-0700 to AERA-L,
Net-Gold, and Physoc.