Energy accounting is a system of regularly measuring, analyzing, and reporting energy consumption. Effective energy consumption measuring can be achieved by using both end-user and primary energy methods (Wolfson 5). However, the end-use method tends to provide a more precise answer, unlike primary energy accounts only for sources of energy (Wolfson 6). On the other hand, the end-use computes energy utilized by end consumers such as households and industrial areas such as processing factories (Wolfson 6). Therefore, I prefer the end-use method as it is the most appropriate for a full account of energy consumption patterns in totality.
The end-use approach allows one to record energy consumption and enables cost calculation. My preference for the end-use method is also due to its ability to measure every unit spent per entity and its price (Pradhan et al. 50). The method makes it possible to compare the various aspects of expenditures and monitors the changes over time. On the other hand, the primary energy technique only accounts for energy from the source. Additionally, I support end-use energy as it provides a basis for energy investments besides measuring the intake trends. This is because it can detect high consumers and prioritize them for retrofits and other required management efforts.
One major reason for energy accounting is to facilitate budgeting. The end-use method of measuring energy facilitates the process as it identifies specific areas of wastage and any billing errors. This enables appropriate and objective-guided solutions to be sought and implemented in the saving scheme. End-use also allows efficiency in using energy accounting systems, including software. Further, end-use energy accounting accumulates all energy used, including gasoline, natural gas, and energy (Pradhan et al. 45). Therefore, a comprehensive report of energy consumption patterns by all utilities and their exact costs can be filed.
Energy intensity is a key indicator of the economic stability of a country. It reflects the amount of energy needed per unit output. The assessment shows that energy intensity in the Us has significantly reduced compared to other nations globally. The level of industrialization in America has majorly contributed to this. However, I do not agree with the statement by the politician that the US should not strive to lower its Energy intensity further. A decline in energy intensity shows that the cost used per activity is reduced. Therefore, I support the idea of the USA improving its sectors and energy consumption per end-use sector.
Reducing the energy intensity implies that the nation is improving its productivity while minimizing expenditure. I prefer the adaption of renewable energy in the United States. These sources include solar, water and geothermal, which are key elements in reducing energy intensity (Pradhan et al. 44). The country will have other beneficial outcomes in these efforts. The country will spare money that could otherwise be used for energy production and expenditure. These resources can be redirected to serve other sectors of the economy, such as the transportation, commercial, and transportation sectors.
Developing a plan for lowering the energy intensity will help us positively impact the climate. In the present universe, where climatic changes have become a top issue, it is paramount that we strive to protect the environment to prevent adverse effects such as global warming (Pradhan et al.47). we should consider lowering the energy intensity to control the emission of harmful products into the environment. Generally, lower energy intensity will increase the nation’s GDP and save resources.
Works Cited
Pradhan, Rudra P., et al. “The Dynamics Between Energy Consumption Patterns, Financial Sector Development and Economic Growth in Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Countries.” Energy, vol. 159, 2018, pp. 42-53.
Wolfson, Richard. Energy, Environment, and Climate. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton, 2018.