Page4 RAIN February/March 1982 ENERGY Our Energy: Regaining Control, by Marc H. Ross and Robert H. Williams, 1980, 354 pp., $16.95 from: McGraw-Hill 1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 The title of this book seems to offer the American people control of "our energy." But it may not really be the book we've been waiting for. Our Energy will not help us gain control, it will only reinforce the control already held by government and large-scale industry. Since the Arab oil embargo of 1973, which marked the end of an era of superabundance, Americans have faced a crisis: we must learn to live with less energy instead of using more and more each year. Some of us believe that this crisis offers us an opportunity to restructure our political, economic and social systems. Others, such as Marc Ross and Robert Williams, view energy scarcity as simply a technical challenge for the existing system to meet. Ross and Williams have a scheme to break the pattern of runaway energy growth, using "saved energy as the major resource." Like the Energy Project team at Harvard Business School, Ross and Williams show that by conserving energy we can reduce or eliminate our need for imported oil and new power plants. They point out areas where energy savings are readily available in homes and buildings, transportation, industrial processes, and neighborhood power networks, and they suggest public policy strategies to encourage conservation, primarily by bringing energy prices up to marginal energy costs. A tax on energy would enhance the effect of decontrol on the energy market, they claim, and would stimulate conservation. They fortify their argument with well- documented descriptive and graphic examples. The technical information is useful and easy to understand, and their knowledge of energy-conserving technology is apparent in all of their well-thought-out explanations. But as physicists, Ross and Williams are fascinated with technically innovative gadgets which save energy. Because of this fascination, they tend to ignore simpler solutions to energy problems. They believe that energy needs "can be examined from a technical viewpoint," and so ignore any other perspective. As a result, their suggestions rely on highly technical devices that are likely to be both mysterious and expensive to the average consumer. They propose, for example, a government or industry-sponsored program in which trained professionals with pressurizers, infrared cameras, and calculators analyze energy leaks in houses; any homeowner can do the same thing with a window fan, a roll of tape, a cigarette, and a free instruction pamphlet from Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories (Technical Information Department, Lawrence Berkeley Labs, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720). Ross and Williams conclude their work by "Reinventing America," designing a future that will maintain the lifestyle of the seventies but will use less energy to do so. Reinvented America keeps economic growth as its primary goal, though this growth is powered by saving energy instead of producing it. Their proposal offers no change from the economic inequality of pre-scarcity times. The poor will remain poor in Reinvented America because "effective policies to attack energy problems cannot also be expected to solve age-old distribution problems." In fact, their economic proposal would make matters worse; their energy-saving programs would be paid for in large part by low-income people. Utility loan programs, available mainly to relatively wealthy homeowners but paid for by all classes of ratepayers, benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. And Ross and William's proposed energy tax would hit the poor hardest, both because they spend the largest fraction of their income on energy essentials and because they are the people who can least afford to purchase energy saving devices. Although Ross and Williams assume that people will consume less energy if it costs more, economists studying the phenomenon are not so sure. Many think the effect of energy price on demand varies considerably from one group of energy users to another. The poor, in particular, may be less able to respond to price signals than other groups. Ross and Williams' whole analysis is based on straight "freemarket" economics, but energy behavior may not fall neatly along those principles. Sociology and psychology I may describe energy use patterns as well as or better than economics. For instance, even a rational consumer well aware of the high energy cost of a luxury car may choose the psychplogical and social benefits of prestige instead of the economic benefits of fuel-efficiency. All three disciplines, and in fact many others, must be brought to bear on the issues that surround American energy use. Ross and Williams fail to see the full extent of the problem they consider. American energy, American politics, and American culture are inextricably entangled. We cannot solve our energy problems without considering the social behavior which reinforces them; nor can we make our political system truly effective until everyone's energy needs are met. A "technical viewpoint" is not nearly broad enough. The crisis goes beyond thermodynamics, and it doesn't match up. with neo-classical economic models. What we need, and what Ross and Williams do not provide, is a completely new, interdisciplinary approach to an utterly new situation. —Laura Arnow Laura is a freelance writer and former staffer for Not Man Apart. BUILDING Low-Cost Green Lumber Construction, by Leigh Seddon, 1981,161 pp., $8.95, from: Garden Way Publishing Charlotte, VT 05445 Owner-builders who want to save money by using roughsawn, green, native wood from local sawmills will find this book invaluable. This is a comprehensive guide, with'chapters on selecting and buying the wood, stacking and drying it, construction techniques, and building systems. Instructions for a solar kiln are included in case you want to save money by buying green but don't want to take on the challenge of building green. Seddon explicitly lists disadvantages of building green, as well as uses not suited to green wood (such as window frames). Interviews with people who have built their own green wood houses give other perspectives on building green—costs, comments, mistakes, and praise. —Tanya Kucak
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz