• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • California's Energy Policy Not Responsible for Reduced Consumption

    A study out of Stanford analyzes factors that lead to California’s lower per-capita electricity consumption. Proponents of regulation and cap and trade often point to the “success” California has had reducing per-capita electricity consumption (Note the reduction is relative to per-capita consumption in the rest of the U.S.).

    The study finds that the vast majority of the difference in electricity use is explained by factors other than policy. For instance, the mild weather and California’s relatively higher use of natural gas for space heating, led to a 15.8% reduction in per-capita residential electricity use. Differences in household size (more people per household=lower per-capita use) and its higher urban/rural ratio (urban households live in smaller dwellings that use less energy) reduce per-capita residential electricity consumption another 21.4%.

    California’s different mix of industrial users, by itself, accounts for a 38% drop in per-capita industrial electricity use. Less commercial floor space per capita reduces per-capita commercial electricity consumption by 27%.

    When it is all added up, the authors conclude that California’s policies account for no more than 23% of the difference in per-capita electricity consumption. Since they haven even looked at the direct impact of California’s 50% higher electricity prices, that 23% could be grossly overestimating even this reduced policy impact.

    In short, more than 75% of the touted benefits of California’s costly energy policies are actually attributable to factors other than the policies. The basket-case economy that California has woven for itself is further confirmation that the effectiveness of its energy policies is overblown.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to California's Energy Policy Not Responsible for Reduced Consumption

    1. Leon, Durango, CO says:

      David, thanks for the umpteenth illustration of how Statistics are used to lie and influence representative government. I got a job at nine bucks per hour and I suppose that is the same thing as my old job at $25. Sure, the unemployment rate is a useful measure, but look at the dagger note. We quit counting the people who "don't want a job" then we quit counting the people "who have given up looking for a job."

      It is my contention that Statistics has supplanted analysis and ruined everything. The whole point of their energy policy is to ruin the American energy industry AND NOTHING ELSE.

    2. Nicolai Alatzas says:

      Who is getting ruined? Is it the people that are gaining energy independence or the Oil Companies that are becoming Energy Companies? Just take a look at Shell

      What are you so scared of?

    3. GG says:

      Run the numbers for yourself and see how cap and trade will effect your household:

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.