Energy Conservation and Rural Alternative Lifestyles

Abstract

Exploration of the energy consumption pattern of a northern California homesteading population reveals a very low level of energy use in this group compared to the general population nationwide, including the latter's poorest segments. Several possible interpretations of this pattern of apparent simplicity are critically compared. Social scientists as well as participants are inclined to offer either functional or historical interpretations of alternative settlements or ways of life, and in doing so tend to neglect the social movement characteristics and the social construction of lifestyles. Some policy implications of this research are noted. In this paper we report on an exploratory effort to measure the energy use of a sample of rural in one northern California county, compare their energy use to a nationwide sample and to another group of frugal energy users, and comment on the possible meaning of these data both for current lifestyle studies and for the development of energy policies. We try to respond in part to the current need for better information on the actual costs and benefits of lowenergy living, and to emphasize as well that varying interpretations of our data are possible. Throughout the paper we refer to the people studied as simplicity (VS) adherents, but we intend the label to be taken in only the most provisional sense because it presumes that which needs to be demonstrated: the existence of a voluntary and simple lifestyle.' Although data exist regarding the consumption of energy by the general U.S. populationlargely as a result of the pioneering study by Newman and Day (1975)-there have been virtually no quantitative studies of individuals who subscribe to frugal living. Most available information comes from anecdotal descriptions of the lives of such rural homesteaders as Ralph Borsodi (1933), Helen and Scott Nearing (1954), and others of more recent times. The only quantitative analysis of energy consumption by low-energy users that we have seen is a study of Amish agriculture by Johnson et al. (1977). Although that study was primarily concerned with energy use in agriculture (dairy production), household energy use of the 17 Amish farmers in the sample was also estimated. The average consumption was extremely low, leading the authors to observe that the conservation achievement of the Amish was greater in their homes than in their farming.