Yancy Cody
Physical Science
November 21, 2008
Energy Conservation
Article one: (Ebsco Host) Fahey, Jonathan “Cash for Conservation” Forbes, Vol. 182, Issue 11, (November 24, 2008)
Article two: http://www.physorg.com/news72963583.html “Developing Alternatives to Fossil Fuels” Review of Forbes article “Cash for Conservation”
Written by Jonathan Fahey
With the rising cost of oil today and the inefficiency of electric power, it is clear that America needs to conserve energy. However, less energy used by the public means less money made by utility companies so it is not likely that those companies would try to persuade the public to use less energy. Nor is it likely that the public will conserve energy on their own, due to the fact that Americans in general place a fairly high priority on personal comfort. In an effort to resolve this problem without building new power plants CEO of Duke Energy, Jim Rogers, has come up with a plan.
According to Rogers, energy that is saved should be considered a natural resource just like coal, natural gas, water, etc. He believes that utilities should be paid on the energy that is saved as well as the energy that is used. If this plan is set forth the utility companies would be rewarded monetarily for reducing energy consumption. The idea is that the overall cost would be less to reward the utility companies for complying rather than spend money fighting with them.
Public Service Electric & Gas of New Jersey has a plan to spend $47 million to put towards energy audits on hospitals, warehouses, and other big energy users to help them find ways to preserve energy. They also plan to go door to door into residential areas to do these audits. These costs would be considered a capital expense and therefore the company would receive a %10 return on this investment.
Rogers plan would involve installing equipment to monitor and regulate energy used businesses and homes. Duke energy would in turn receive 85%-90% of what the...