Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Jevons Paradox Thread Pt. 2

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.
Post a reply

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby joewp » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 01:17:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'A')ctually, you spell it wrong too. It's Jevons' Paradox.

Uh, no, it's the Jevons Paradox, exactly how I expressed it. How surprising, yet another Jevons devotee who hasn't read the literature but still uses the hypothesis to justify his lack of conservation. Yawn.


Actually, it could be done either way. Jevons is the guy who came up with it and it's his paradox, hence Jevons' Paradox. And your ad hominem attacks do nothing to help your cause and everything to show how you make an ass of yourself by assuming. I have 8kw of solar on my roof, drive less than 3 miles per day(if at all) and have my thermostat set at 64 in winter and 80 in summer. I do this not in hope that it will make a difference, but to accustom my family for when we will have to do with less.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')And you don't honestly think energy-efficient appliances are the cause of increased electricity use, do you? This is such a simple-minded explanation it boggles the brain. Sorry if I come off as arrogant (OK, not that sorry), but give me a fucking break.


All I know is that fridges in the 60s were smallish affairs that made a lot of noise and used a lot of electricity. May I introduce you to the Northland 42" side by side:
Image

Very efficient, that's why it can be so much bigger, and ends up using more electricity than the old models. Another example is houses. They're so much better insulated now, and furnaces are so much more efficient. That's why the US has gone from 1500 sq ft houses to this:
Image

But of course, your entire premise that Jevons was wrong falls apart when energy use climbs every year, efficiencies or none, now doesn't it? Jevons' paradox is based on human nature, your dispute of it is based on illusory "studies" that no one has seen except the "top of your head".
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 02:57:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pablo2079', 'A')nother reason to conserve is to save money.


For you, but not for everyone.

How do we insure that "savings" doesn't get spent on more energy consumption?

Savings cannot be spent.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 03:02:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'T')he guy can't even spell Jevons. Why should I listen to anything he says about something he can't even spell? I stopped reading after the title.


The inevitable ad hominem attack from Loki.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 03:05:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'T')he author wants programs without the rebound. Given Jevons Paradox for the life of me I can't think of any. Can you?


Sure. Raise the price as efficiency increases to avoid the rebound.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 03:10:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', ' ')The Jevons Paradox is a hypothesis


No, it is an observation of reality. It is called Jevons' Paradox because it ran counter to Jevons' intuition.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 03:20:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'T')ake whatever people here say about Jevons with a BIG grain of salt. As I pointed out earlier, most people (including both Monte and Aaron) can't even spell the man's name. How much confidence do you have that they will be able to rigorously evaluate his hypothesis and its modern equivalents?


Is this only debate tactic you have, ad hominem attacks?

Jevons is spelled Jevons. Both Aaron and I spell it that way.

A common error with words that end is "s" is the punctuation that shows possession.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')o form the possessive of a plural noun ending in "s," simply place an apostrophe after the "s."


The Apostrophe

Thus, it is Jevons' Paradox, not Jevons Paradox.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 03:25:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'A')nd you don't honestly think energy-efficient appliances are the cause of increased electricity use, do you?


As a builder, I can guaranntee you that they are. Bigger refrigerators and more of them. More efficient lighting, more lights.

More efficient heating/cooling = bigger houses.

It is discussed from the get-go.

edit: kudos for Joewp for holding your feet to fire as well, I see.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MD » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 05:23:38

Not to nitpick, but I generally don't refer to misplaced punctuation as spelling error. [/np]

Let's just settle on the compound form and end the confusion:

"Jevons-Paradox"
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby Newsseeker » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 10:00:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'T')he author wants programs without the rebound. Given Jevons Paradox for the life of me I can't think of any. Can you?


Sure. Raise the price as efficiency increases to avoid the rebound.


I don't think that it is realistic to anticipate some mechanism interfering with supply and demand so as to avoid the rebound. FDR tried fixing prices and it failed thanks in part to Henry Ford. Remember when the US gov tried fixing gas prices? Not good. It would be political suicide to run on a ticket increasing prices so as to avoid the rebound no matter how much sense it makes.
Newsseeker
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu 12 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby Aaron » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 10:08:59

Absent a single world government which exercises dracionian control over every aspect of human society, efficiency & conservation energy savings always result in greater energy consumption.

1984 anyone?
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 11:23:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'T')he author wants programs without the rebound. Given Jevons Paradox for the life of me I can't think of any. Can you?


Sure. Raise the price as efficiency increases to avoid the rebound.


I don't think that it is realistic to anticipate some mechanism interfering with supply and demand so as to avoid the rebound. FDR tried fixing prices and it failed thanks in part to Henry Ford. Remember when the US gov tried fixing gas prices? Not good. It would be political suicide to run on a ticket increasing prices so as to avoid the rebound no matter how much sense it makes.


Most likely... until reality clearly shows otherwise.

This is why energy spent on conservation and efficiency gains is a fool's errand to mitigate peakoil in an infinite growth, free market system.

Our efforts are best directed elsewhere.

It's a Catch-22 of our own making.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby shortonoil » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 15:07:12

MonteQuest said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his is why energy spent on conservation and efficiency gains is a fool's errand to mitigate peakoil in an infinite growth, free market system.

Our efforts are best directed elsewhere.


In an infinite growth system, yes it is a fool errand. But, what energy spent on conservation and efficiency gains can do is slow the decline of our standard of living as we fall off the back side of Hubbert’s curve. This could have considerable advantages, as it would keep the society healthier, while we develop alternatives in energy and life styles.

Herein lies the question, are we as a society so nihilistic, that once informed, would we destroy any chance for the future to accommodate ourselves in the present. If the answer is “yes”, we shouldn’t be wasting our time and effort. If “no”, conservation is the way we have to go.

Anyone got an opinion?
User avatar
shortonoil
False ETP Prophet
False ETP Prophet
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: VA USA
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 15:31:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '[')b]MonteQuest said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his is why energy spent on conservation and efficiency gains is a fool's errand to mitigate peakoil in an infinite growth, free market system.

Our efforts are best directed elsewhere.


In an infinite growth system, yes it is a fool errand. But, what energy spent on conservation and efficiency gains can do is slow the decline of our standard of living as we fall off the back side of Hubbert’s curve.


How does increasing the consumption of a declining resource slow the decline in the SOL?

Conservation and efficiency gains are short-lived due to Jevons' Paradox/Rebound Effect.

Conservation increases unemployment as economic activity declines.

Have you not read the several threads on this?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 15:34:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', ' ')Herein lies the question, are we as a society so nihilistic, that once informed, would we destroy any chance for the future to accommodate ourselves in the present. If the answer is “yes”, we shouldn’t be wasting our time and effort. If “no”, conservation is the way we have to go.

Anyone got an opinion?


Conservation is the way to go if, and only if, we can curtail the increase in consumption as the price drops, counter the unemployment issue...and we can curb and start to reduce the existing population long-term.

Conservation may be reduced to an individual effort for their own self interest.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby shortonoil » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 16:11:22

MonteQuest said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow does increasing the consumption of a declining resource slow the decline in the
SOL?

Conservation and efficiency gains are short-lived due to Jevons' Paradox/Rebound Effect.

Conservation increases unemployment as economic activity declines.

Have you not read the several threads on this?


Have I read them, yes, and you are making an assumption that may not hold; there will not be any increased use of resources as a result of conservation, because they won’t be there to use. It appears to me that energy decline will occur faster than conversation or efficiency increases can compensate for those loses. As a result we will be going through an era, at least for a few decades, of a declining standard of living. Conservation can take some of the sting out of that, but it won’t be able to alleviate it totally.

The benefit will be that this process may keep the society healthier, more cohesive and grant some time to it as it makes the needed transition to a sustainable society.
User avatar
shortonoil
False ETP Prophet
False ETP Prophet
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: VA USA
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby MonteQuest » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 16:20:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', ' ')Have I read them, yes, and you are making an assumption that may not hold; there will not be any increased use of resources as a result of conservation, because they won’t be there to use.


No, you did not read them as that was covered ad naseum.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t appears to me that energy decline will occur faster than conversation or efficiency increases can compensate for those loses. As a result we will be going through an era, at least for a few decades, of a declining standard of living. Conservation can take some of the sting out of that, but it won’t be able to alleviate it totally.


If conservation is able to take some of the sting out, then it will be able to increase available supply, which will lower the price relative to what it might have been, thus increasing consumption back up the the current supply limit.

The new supply comes from the conservation and efficiency efforts.

If those efforts cannot increase available supply, then yes, Jevons' is over and so is conservation/efficiency efforts to mitigate declining resources.

And if efficiency/conservation efforts can keep up with decline and the increased consumption curtailed, then you still have the rapid rise in unemployment as the economy contracts.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby shortonoil » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 17:12:27

MonteQuest said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f conservation is able to take some of the sting out, then it will be able to increase available supply, which will lower the price relative to what it might have been, thus increasing consumption back up the the current supply limit.


This is again a regurgitation of the economist flat earth view; that money creates energy. This is flat wrong; energy creates money. If a society has X Btu available to it, and only X, then no matter what the price, you still only have X Btu to expend. Because people save money doesn’t mean there will be energy to buy, the price becomes completely irrelevant if the supply is not there. In actuality, in time, the price goes up until they don’t have the money to buy it. This summer you are probably going to get a first hand example of this.

This is how conversation can work: lets say it requires 1000 Btu to fry an egg (one burnt egg!). You don’t have the money to buy 1000 Btu, so you put a lid on the fry pan and now it only takes 500 Btu. You can buy 500, so you have a fried egg. Conservation did not increase the available supply, it merely utilized what you had more efficiently. Now if that was the last 500 Btu on the planet, no amount of money is going to get you one more fried egg, even though you saved 400 Btu worth of funds in putting the lid on the egg.

Trying to explain conservation or energy use in terms of money, in a decline energy situation, will produce nothing but fallacious arguments. Money is a construct of someone’s imagination, Btu are real.
User avatar
shortonoil
False ETP Prophet
False ETP Prophet
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: VA USA
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby grink1tt3n » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 18:08:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '
')This is how conversation can work: lets say it requires 1000 Btu to fry an egg (one burnt egg!). You don’t have the money to buy 1000 Btu, so you put a lid on the fry pan and now it only takes 500 Btu. You can buy 500, so you have a fried egg. Conservation did not increase the available supply, it merely utilized what you had more efficiently. Now if that was the last 500 Btu on the planet, no amount of money is going to get you one more fried egg, even though you saved 400 Btu worth of funds in putting the lid on the egg.


But if there is now another 500 Btu left to fry another egg, then your friend can and will fry his, and you'll be at the same place you were when it cost 1000 Btu to fry an egg.
User avatar
grink1tt3n
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat 28 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Southern California
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby joewp » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 18:36:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '
')Herein lies the question, are we as a society so nihilistic, that once informed, would we destroy any chance for the future to accommodate ourselves in the present. If the answer is “yes”, we shouldn’t be wasting our time and effort. If “no”, conservation is the way we have to go.

Anyone got an opinion?


The answer is an emphatic "Yes". See this story:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Yahoo News', '
')Americans see climate threat, but reluctant to conserve: poll
NEW YORK (AFP) - A strong majority of people in the United States see global warming as an imminent danger but not all are ready to make big sacrifices to slow climate change, according to a new poll Friday.
...
But only 38 percent said they supported a higher tax on gasoline to discourage energy consumption and to fight global warming.

That figure dropped to only 20 percent if the tax increase was two dollars a gallon (3.8 liters), which would effectively increase the current gas price by more than 40 percent.


It's fine when somebody else has to do it, but don't hurt the cushy lifestyle we've become accustomed to!
Joe P. joeparente.com
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
User avatar
joewp
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Keeping dry in South Florida
Top

Re: Efficiency Policy, Jevon’s Paradox, and the “Shadow” Reb

Postby Ludi » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 19:20:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('grink1tt3n', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', 'N')ow if that was the last 500 Btu on the planet, no amount of money is going to get you one more fried egg, even though you saved 400 Btu worth of funds in putting the lid on the egg.


But if there is now another 500 Btu left to fry another egg, then your friend can and will fry his, and you'll be at the same place you were when it cost 1000 Btu to fry an egg.



Maybe I'm confused, but, I thought we had only 500 Btu with which to fry the egg, therefore there is no 500 Btu left over. But neither is there "conservation" as nothing was conserved, the 500 Btu was used to fry the egg. I don't know how we can call use "conservation." You don't conserve something by using it, unless there is something left over, something "conserved." Only if you use LESS than 500 Btu to fry your egg, and therefore have something left over, can you claim to have "conserved" it seems to me. Perhaps we are not using the same definition of "conservation."
Ludi
 
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests



cron