Another example (and study) of how increased efficiency results in increased consumption. i.e. Jevons Paradox.
… a 2006 study done for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found that Energy Star homes in Phoenix, Arizona use 12 percent more energy than homes without an Energy Star label. The Energy Star houses actually use 16 percent less energy per square to heat and cool, but on average they are larger than non-Energy Star houses. In other words, people consumed their savings from energy efficiency by buying bigger houses. …
A new report, The Rebound Dilemma, for the Institute for Energy Research (IER) by California State University, Fullerton economist Robert Michaels analyzes the implications of depending on energy efficiency improvements to reduce carbon dioxide emissions as a way to mitigate future climate change. …
The results of the studies vary considerably, but eyeballing the reported results the rebound appears to hover around 30 percent. … The upshot is that energy efficiency mandates advocated by environmental activists with the aim of mitigating future man-made global warming will likely fall far short of their goals.
Article here. Previous PT post here.
Or only people who could afford big new homes elected to go Energy Star? This tends to show how trendy some so-called green initiatives are.
Or maybe energy-star appliances are more likely to be in newly built homes than older homes that already had old utilities, and newer homes are more likely to be bigger monster homes than an old 50’s bungalow with an old washer-dryer. It may have little to do with the energy-efficient appliances and more to do with the long-standing push for bigger homes in the suburbs.
Tessa,
I believe that an Energy-Star label can be applied to new home construction that meets certain standards so the article is not just about the appliances but the whole house.