Introduction
Energy consumption has been a significant topic of debate in the last decade. On the one hand, the economic and societal context highlights the positive connotations, such as increased quality of life and positive financial growth. On the other hand, the environmental and ecological perspectives emphasize the importance of mindfulness regarding resources and pollution. The current paper examines the paradigm by arguing for measuring unused energy and for addressing high consumption despite the low intensity in the United States.
Measuring Energy Consumption
There are two primary ways to measure energy consumption. One can assess end-use or primary energy, which contrasts with the nature of the examination. On the one hand, end-use implies determining consumption by sector. On the other hand, the second method aligns with the overall availability of resources. Thus, the used versus potential energy is analyzed based on the selected methodology. The end-use model can be more appropriate for multiple reasons.
First and foremost, it is critical to determine consumption by the industries or segments that generate it. Currently, it is distributed among residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors (Wolfson 31). Determining the areas that drive higher resource use can indicate the need for reforms and policies to minimize it.
Such a granular approach also allows for the economic benefits of power usage to be maintained. Needless to say, expenditure benefits individuals in such areas as satisfaction and life quality (Wolfson 31). However, it depends on the sector and the level of use, as once it exceeds a certain point, the effect does not remain sustained. By examining each domain separately, implementations can be employed without affecting the well-being of the general population.
US Energy Intensity
It is indeed the case that the US energy intensity is lower than that of other countries. Even though the intensity of other nations has not transformed since the 90s, America has reduced it (Wolfson 30). This may be perceived as a sign that no further changes or improvements are needed. However, it may result from technological advancements.
Nonetheless, as there are opportunities to further address the topic, it is critical to integrate them. In addition, energy consumption is still high despite the low intensity. As a result, it is vital to adopt measures to reduce said measurement. Specific solutions involve maximizing the use of renewable energy, such as solar and wind power.
Similarly, adding more intensity-reduction policies through new technologies can yield economic and environmental benefits. It is vital to acknowledge the benefits of the steps the US has already taken. Nonetheless, an even higher level of productivity and efficiency can be achieved by adopting new and improved approaches to mitigate the adverse effects of high power intensity.
Conclusion
It is vital to ensure that consumption and intensity are under control due to the adverse consequences that can arise if said metrics are not regulated. Concerning measuring expenditure, the end-use methodology appears to have more positive connotations due to the possibilities associated with the model, such as targeted interventions. Additionally, despite the progress that has already been made in the field of lowering intensity, additional policies and implementations can maximize the positive results that have already been achieved.
Works Cited
Wolfson, Richard. Energy, Environment, and Climate. 3rd ed., W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2017.