Skip to main content

Energy Efficiency and Jobs- As Never Seen Before

By October 13, 2014November 7th, 2021Energy Efficiency, Energy Rant
Jeff Ihnen

Author Jeff Ihnen

More posts by Jeff Ihnen

Join the discussion 2 Comments

  • Nick says:

    Jeff – I think these numbers are contradicting each other. Maybe something is left out, like commodity fuel costs? Less jobs per GWh would imply, especially in mature industries, that something costs less per GWh, because the primary cost of anything is split between two things – labor (even commodities are priced based somewhat on the labor needed to extract them) and the scarcity of the commodity itself. If labor costs alone are compared, less jobs per GWh is actually the goal in order to make the EE cost lower. Further, whatever the assumptions, some measure of the induced and indirect jobs from an activity are likely to be missed or miscalculated. Can’t we just go to the price we had originally? That has it all in there, one way or another, because everyone in the chain isn’t working for free, so the knowledge problem, as it’s called in Austrian Economics is already solved for us. No need to make it more complicated than what’s already been done for us by the market price.

  • Jeff ihnen says:

    Thanks Nick. You are correct – from an economic standpoint, EE is best, at least per ACEEE. My wonder was, how does this work from a jobs and materials perspective? I was thinking (guessing) that EE requires more labor per kWh, but even with more labor per kWh, the material cost savings, including commodity cost savings (EE vs added supply) more than make up for the extra labor costs of EE.

    Therefore, according to these studies, we get the best of both worlds – more jobs, and a lower cost resource.

    Hope this makes sense.