Why It Is Not A Good Idea
To argue statistics with an engineer. Coyote Blog literally dismantles both an article by Kevin Drum and one from the New York Times at the same time, using the same statistics. Pure entertainment.
On its face, California's numbers are impressive. The CEC's numbers show California to have the lowest per capita electricity use in the nation, using electricity at half the national rate and one quarter the "least efficient" states.
This would be really cool if it were true that a few simple public policy steps could cut per capital energy consumption in half. Unfortunately, though I am willing to posit California is better than average (as any state would be with a mild climate and newer housing), the data doesn't say what Drum and the article are trying to make it say.
The consumption data is from here. You can see that there are three components that matter - residential, commercial, and industrial. Residential and commercial electricity consumption may or may not be fairly apples to apples comparable between states (more in a minute). Industrial consumption, however, will not be comparable, since the mix of industries will change radically state by state. As an extreme example, states with high aluminum production or oil refining or steel making, which are electricity intensive, will have a higher per capita industrial electricity consumption, irrespective of public policy. The graph Drum and the NY Times uses includes industrial consumption, which is a mistake — it is more reflective of industry mix than true energy efficiency.
Take two of the higher states on the list. Wyoming, at the top of the per capita consumption list, has industrial electricity consumption as a whopping 58% of total state consumption. KY, also near the top, has industrial consumption at 50% of total demand. The US average is industrial consumption at 29% of total demand. CA, NY, and NJ, all near the bottom of the list in terms of per capital demand, have industrial use as 20.6%, 15.1%, and 16% respectively. So rather than try to correlate electricity consumption to local energy regulations, it is clear that the per capita consumption numbers by state are a much better indicator of the presence of heavy industry. In other words, the graph Drum shows is actually a better illustration of the success of CA not in necessarily becoming more efficient, but in exporting its pollution to other states. No one in their right mind would even attempt to build a heavy industrial plant in CA in the last 30 years. The graph is driven much more by the growth of industrial electricity use outside CA relative to CA.
Do read it all, it really is a rather good example of how to really read data as opposed to misusing data to advance a political agenda.
Blogosphere, Energy | Gaius Sunday, 17 September , 2006
By Valens, Sunday, 17 September , 2006 @ 1:34 pm
Interesting. What would be more interesting is an analysis of overall energy uses. Surely in those states that use less electricity due to higher prices, they merely shift their consumption elsewhere. I seriously doubt that these states either possess some superior tech that others do not making them more efficient , or that they willing deny themselves the comforts afforded by energy usages out of the goodness of their hearts. Such research could prove very valuable to finding more efficient approaches to energy usage at every level, but not while people use numbers in such a way as the NY Times or Drum.