4.5 Article

What is wrong with energy efficiency?

期刊

BUILDING RESEARCH AND INFORMATION
卷 46, 期 7, 页码 779-789

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09613218.2017.1361746

关键词

buildings; energy demand; energy efficiency; low-carbon society; policy measures; rebound effect; social practices; social theory

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) as part of the Research Councils UK (RCUK) Energy Programme [EP/K011723/1]
  2. EDF as part of the R&D ECLEER Programme
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K011723/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. EPSRC [EP/K011723/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

At first sight the purpose of energy efficiency is plain: it is to reduce the amount of energy used and the carbon emissions associated with the design and operation of things like buildings, domestic appliances, and heating and cooling technologies, or with the organization of bureaucratic, business or industrial processes. National and international responses to climate change are dominated by policies that promote energy efficiency and by people who take this to be a self-evidently important thing to do. Established criticisms, including those which focus on problems of rebound, draw attention to the unintended consequences of such strategies, but rarely challenge the conceptual foundations of efficiency' as a topic in its own right. This paper uses Bruno Latour's We Have Never Been Modern (1993) notion of purification and Ian Hodder's Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships Between Humans and Things (2012) ideas about entanglement to develop a more fundamental critique and to argue that, far from being a solution, efficiency, as currently constituted, undermines that which it is expected to achieve. It is concluded that if carbon emissions are to be reduced on any significant scale, then it is essential to consider the meanings and levels of service and the types of consumption and demand that efficiency policies support and perpetuate.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据