Comments on: Energy Efficiency Could Save Us $168 Billion

By: Scott Grasse

Scott Grasse — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:28:46 +0000

Before anyone gets bent out of shape, remember all you are reading are headlines. I, too, would like to see just how these figures were determined. I get very excited to read how wonderful the world would be to implement these changes but then get down when nothing happens. Energy production and usage is the #1 concern, in my opinion. There will always be people who stand in the way of change. Very seldom do they do so for the right reasons. If you have the power to research, design, build, implement these technologies then do it, and blow right past those who appose you. Don’t waste your time trying to change the minds of the stubborn/ignorant/greedy.

By: Scott Grasse

Scott Grasse — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:28:00 +0000

By: Joseph

Joseph — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:07:36 +0000

Everybody can do their part, too, by cutting back on energy use at home. One handy device for this is The Energy Detective (www.theenergydetective.com) which allows you to monitor your household energy usage in real-time and subsequently conserve. It’s a great tool for those of us who want to save on electricity but aren’t quite ready to make the switch to solar power.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:07:00 +0000

By: Global Patriot

Global Patriot — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:50:39 +0000

The power of sustainability continues to move us in the right direction, but with the current economic crisis at hand the pace is still much slower than hoped for.

Ideally the concrete beneficial results of such projects will inspire corporations and governments to pursue similar initiatives throughout the recovery process.

By: Global Patriot

Global Patriot — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:50:00 +0000

The power of sustainability continues to move us in the right direction, but with the current economic crisis at hand the pace is still much slower than hoped for.

Ideally the concrete beneficial results of such projects will inspire corporations and governments to pursue similar initiatives throughout the recovery process.

By: russ

russ — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:30:36 +0000

I looked at the ACEEE document on their site – gives me a headache trying to sort through the thing.

It would be easier to convert people to conservation if straight forward wording and figures were used. As with any report, I assume certain assumptions were made – which normally justify the writers position.

İ would appreciate something cleaned up, easy to understand and correct.

EnergyStar is better about this type of thing boiling it down to dollars per year for a single item.

By: russ

russ — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:30:00 +0000

I looked at the ACEEE document on their site – gives me a headache trying to sort through the thing.

İ would appreciate something cleaned up, easy to understand and correct.

EnergyStar is better about this type of thing boiling it down to dollars per year for a single item.

By: Mike G.

Mike G. — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:20:01 +0000

This statistic is meaningless without the proper units attached. Sure it could save over $168 billion, but over what period of time? What is the initial startup cost that will need to be invested prior to seeing savings?

Also, do the 220,000 jobs gained by this initiative include the jobs lost by not building those 390 power plants?

This article lacks any concrete evidence.

By: Mike G.

Mike G. — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:20:00 +0000

Also, do the 220,000 jobs gained by this initiative include the jobs lost by not building those 390 power plants?

This article lacks any concrete evidence.