It is widely believed that the demand for electricity, if unchecked, will continue to grow at a rapid exponential rate until well into the next century.1 Whether such growth is necessary or desirable is controversial. One can easily identify the benefits likely to be obtained from reduced growth: It would retard the spread of power-plant sites, smokestacks, cooling towers, transmission wires, poles, transformers, etc., which degrade the beauty of the environment and reduce the amount of land available for residential development, parks, wildlife preserves, etc. It would necessarily reduce the growth of air and water pollution due to electricity production and would limit the risk of nuclear accident. Finally, it would provide extra time during which to develop alternative means of producing and using energy with less adverse impact on man and his environment. Aside from the sacrifice of potential electric services, the necessary costs of decelerated electricity-demand growth are not as easy to identify. Substantial restructuring of the sectoral activity of the economy, including relative depression of industries whose outputs are complementary with electricity (e.g., electric machines and appliances) and of electricityintensive industries (e.g., aluminum) and relative expansion of industries whose outputs are substitutes for electricity (e.g., the fossil-fuel sectors) or whose outputs are complementary with electricity substitutes (e.g., nonelectric machines and appliances), is likely to result if significant reductions in electricity-demand growth occur. Restructuring could result in several kinds of costs. The growth rate of aggregate nonelectric output per capita could decline. The mix of goods and services sold in the restructured economy could result in less overall consumer enjoyment than the mix sold prior to restructuring. (For example, would consumers be happier with smaller electric appli-
Read full abstract
Jul 12, 1982
Kent P Anderson 