By: Jose Caceres
The recent trends on becoming ‘greener’ are not a fad, but are here to stay. The global community is embracing the desire of becoming greener and the concerns on Climate Change are without a doubt a major catalyst for this transition.
As an example, technological improvements are making more affordable than ever harnessing the potential of the sun for electricity generation in the form of solar photovoltaic systems at the residential scale. In many regions of the world grid-parity has been achieved and the feasibility of producing energy and hence reducing the dependency on the utility grid is growing. It is worth mention that various states of the US report this case. Unless these systems be ‘off-grid’ and backed-up with batteries for full authonomy, they have the requirement of being connected to the grid so they can get the electricity from it when the sun doesn’t shine. A credit obtained for the electricity that is delivered to the grid when the system produces more than the household requires gives this arrangement the potential to have a very low or nil electricity consumption bill, especially balancing it out at the end of the year (obviously, when the size of the system allows this to happen). The potential issue here is, the bigger the size of the system the higher the cost. This latter, representing the main constrain for households to adopt it.
The case of the potential savings on energy can be extrapolated to a great variety of household appliances which aim not only on deliver a better output and functionality but also market on the premise that are energy efficient and thus environmentally friendly. Examples abound; in regions of the world with cold climates for example, the use of natural gas fired-furnaces for heating represent a significant expense in the monthly utility bill. The emergence of leaner and more fuel-efficient furnace systems aims on reducing the energy consumption which at the end of the day represents savings as well as less greenhouse gas emissions. The same applies for every other appliance at home, from home entertainment to kitchen, computers, gardening tools, etc.
The transport sector is not an exception when it comes to energy efficiency, in fact, it represents the main way for reducing energy use consumption whilst at the same time generating less greenhouse gases. If that wouldn’t be good enough, the use of options such as hybrid vehicles or electric ones also mean a substantially reduced expense for fuel!
All the potential savings above described look and sound great, they all allow to become green at the individual and household level and without sacrificing any living standards. In this case we are not talking about using less electricity at home or driving less, we are simply talking about switching to energy efficient options.
It is clear that we all want to spend less in energy without sacrificing the way we conduct our lives (at least not in a dramatic way), but what all of these options that make our life easier have in common? They all cost money! Also, it seems that the more the potential for saving in the long term, the more they represent an up-front cost. This clearly leaves a gap between where we would like to be and where we actually are in terms of our environmental footprint, especially if we were to quantify it in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
The virtue of becoming greener and reducing our footprint by changing our lifestyle and making behavioral changes also exists and it is by far the cheapest way, but it often comes with a cost in the form of a sacrifice. We have to admit that it is not always easy to be green, though it is possible. However, many alternatives also exist that can enable the discovery of ways that cost little and at the same time are rewarding, for example the enjoyment of biking to work (instead of driving).
Anyway, current technological advances are driving prices down of otherwise unaffordable solar pv systems, appliances of all sorts and of fuel-efficient vehicles, including hybrid and electric. The decision to advance to greener alternatives is ultimately based on outweighing the cost-benefit analysis and return on the investment for each case, which differs for each individual or household. Also, the provision of government incentives and promotion of these options could definitely benefit their advancement thus making them both more appealing and affordable. This latter applies well with potential incentives in the form of rebates or in the case of solar pv adoption, the application for example of feed-in-tariffs (in which the household that generates the electricity is able to sell the unused portion of it to the grid).
Regardless of the wide range of environmental concerns that the public might have (varying from effusive green advocates to those who absolutely don’t care), closing the gap between where we are and where we want to be in terms of reducing our environmental footprint boils down to economics and in many cases confronting up-front costs. The choice is on us; do we want to do it? many would answer ‘yes’, but can we do it? perhaps here the answer is ‘no, I can’t because I don’t have the money’ or ‘perhaps I can but what are the options?’… and so on, until achieving an assertive decision.
This article aims on imprinting the idea that achieving sustainability or at least being environmentally proactive doesn’t mean enduring big sacrifices. The hurdle of big up-front expenditures and large investment figures can be rewarded with savings down the road. I just want to conclude saying, if you have the opportunity (the economic means that is) to be greener and moreover without necessarily enduring the process, go for it!
You cannot get through a single day without having an impact on the world around you. What you do makes a difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make. -Jane Goodall
