Save money, create jobs: So what's the problem?

Jun
12
2012
If you were told that there’s a way to cut your energy bill, create jobs, pump money back into the economy and help tackle the biggest environmental problem of our time – global warming – you’d probably ask: So what are we ...
photo credit:
If you were told that there’s a way to cut your energy bill, create jobs, pump money back into the economy and help tackle the biggest environmental problem of our time – global warming – you’d probably ask: So what are we waiting for?
 
A new study released yesterday by Environment Northeast looks at the economic impacts of greater investment in energy efficiency in four eastern provinces (Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI). It found that when governments invest in saving businesses and homeowners money on energy costs, it can have big impacts across the economy.
 
There’s the potential to lower energy bills by roughly $2-2.50 for every dollar invested. For these four provinces, that’s $40-60 billion saved over time. A national program for energy efficiency reduced home energy bills by an average of 25%.
 
But the money that you and I save on lower energy bills doesn’t disappear. It gets spent on other things like home renovations, entertainment and travel. Or lowers household debt. The same goes for money that businesses save. This helps the rest of the economy, increasing GDP by an estimated $84 billion or more over time.
 
Investing in reducing energy use also creates jobs. The study found that a moderate energy efficiency program could create 625,000 job-years (one job for one person for one year). Put another way, that’s more than 22,300 jobs per year. A more ambitious program would mean more jobs on top of that. Even studies touted by the oil industry say this far outpaces the jobs this region can expect to get from tar sands expansion.
 
Reducing energy use can also save governments money by avoiding the need to invest in costly new electricity generation, and generates more tax revenue by pumping money into the economy than what’s lost through reduced fossil fuel use.
 
As if that’s not enough, energy efficiency is also the cheapest way to cut carbon pollution. McKinsey, a global consulting firm, estimates that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced at a cost of negative $35 per tonne using technologies that exist today. This means that we save money by tackling global warming.
 
So what’s the problem? Well, we’re not doing it. Some provinces like Nova Scotia have commendable energy efficiency programs. But the federal government has axed its ecoEnergy program, which aimed to save homeowners and businesses money on energy costs. Other provinces, like Ontario, are lagging behind, too.
 
We spend a lot of time debating which type of energy to use: coal vs renewables, nuclear vs hydro, oil vs biofuels. Proponents of polluting fuels like oil, coal and gas believe we’re going to keep needing more and more energy, which justifies the pollution that expanding those fuels will bring. But why? The real debate should be whether we need more or less of all forms of energy, and why governments aren't doing more to save us all money on that energy bill.
 

Comments

We would love to hear from you - leave a comment below, or reply to a previous comment. We have a comments policy
Environmental Defence does not endorse any of the views posted in the comments section. By submitting your comments, you acknowledge that Environmental Defence has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that comments are pre-moderated/reviewed and published according to our submission guidelines. Comments that use discriminatory, partisan or inappropriate language will not be published. Comments that advertise a product or service will not be published.
that you should know about.
leave a comment
Your email will NOT be shown on the website.
Enter your website, blog, Facebook or Twitter URL. It will be linked from the comment.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Jun
29
2012

what IS the problem?


Shaun Loney says:

Hi Gillian,

Great blog! I used to wonder why utilities can get 100% market penetration in installing its traditional infrastructure (like water, natural gas, electricity) but they get such low market penetration with energy efficiency. The answer is they use different tools. Rebates and incentives are expensive and suggest that what they aim to achieve is the exception to the rule. How about using the same tools that utilities use to hook up their infrastructure up and apply that to energy efficiency? The Manitoba government just this month passed a bill that does just this. The first of its kind in North America http://web2.gov.mb.ca/bills/40-1/b024e.php

I work at a non-profit social enterprise, BUILD INc (www.warmupwinnipeg.ca) that is going to take advantage of this legislation by retrofitting entire low income neighbourhoods with workers from disadvantaged communities. Let's tell our elected leaders to offer on-bill financing for retrofits and direct utilities to GO TO the customer with this service. BUILD has written a book on this subject which you can see through our website.

Keep up the good work!

Shaun Loney
BUILD Inc. Winnipeg

reply to this comment