US energy use drops in 2008

July 20, 2009

Americans used more solar, nuclear, biomass and wind energy in 2008 than they did in 2007, according to the most recent energy flow charts released by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The nation used less coal and petroleum during the same time frame and only slightly increased its natural gas consumption. Geothermal energy use remained the same.

The estimated U.S. use in 2008 equaled 99.2 quadrillion BTUs ("quads"), down from 101.5 quadrillion BTUs in 2007. (A BTU or British Thermal Unit is a unit of measurement for energy, and is equivalent to about 1.055 kilojoules).

in the industrial and transportation sectors declined by 1.17 and 0.9 quads respectively, while commercial and residential use slightly climbed. The drop in transportation and industrial use - which are both heavily dependent on petroleum - can be attributed to a spike in oil prices in summer 2008.

Last year saw a significant increase in with the recent push for the development of more biofuels including ethanol.

"This is a good snapshot of what's going on in the country. Some of the year-to year changes in supply and consumption can be traced to factors such as the economy and energy policy," said A.J. Simon, an LLNL energy systems analyst who develops the energy flow charts using data provided by the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration.

Simon said the increase in wind energy can be attributed to large investments in wind turbine technologies over the last few years as well as better use of the existing turbines.

Nuclear energy also saw a slight increase from 8.41 quads in 2007 up to 8.45 quads in 2008. While no new nuclear power plants came online in 2008, the existing plants had less down time. Over the last 20 years, the downtime for maintenance and refueling at nuclear power plants had been decreasing.

"There's an incentive to operate as much as possible," Simon said. "It's a smart thing to do. You can't earn revenue by selling electricity when you're down."

Many years of experience have allowed nuclear operators to optimize plant reliability on short maintenance cycles.

The chart also shows the amount of energy rejected by the United States. Of the 99.2 quads consumed, only 42.15 ended up as energy services. Energy services are "things that make our lives better," Simon said. "That's the energy that makes your car move and that comes out of your light bulb."

The ratio of energy services to the total amount of energy used is a measure of the country's energy efficiency. The remainder, explained Simon, "is simply rejected. For example, some rejected energy shows up as waste heat from power plants."

"I'm really excited about the renewed push for energy efficiency in this country," he said. "Because once that energy is rejected, it's no longer useful. But more efficient , automobiles and even light bulbs really do reject less energy while providing the same energy services."

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has helped to visualize the Energy Information Administration's U.S. energy data since the early 1970s.

Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Explore further: Next generation nuke plant designs sought

Related Stories

U.S., China sign energy agreement

September 17, 2007

The U.S. Department of Energy has joined with China in agreeing to increase cooperation to heighten energy efficiency in China's industrial sector.

Bush administration cuts energy plans

May 31, 2006

Conservationists are reportedly upset by a Bush administration plan to reduce the budgets of several energy-efficiency research programs.

New standards for Energy Star fridges

August 4, 2007

The U.S. Department of Energy is increasing the energy efficiency criteria required for refrigerators carrying the Energy Star label.

Recommended for you

Microsoft aims at Apple with high-end PCs, 3D software

October 26, 2016

Microsoft launched a new consumer offensive Wednesday, unveiling a high-end computer that challenges the Apple iMac along with an updated Windows operating system that showcases three-dimensional content and "mixed reality."


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

3 / 5 (2) Jul 20, 2009
In fact, nuclear outgrew solar without adding a single new reactor, just from minor uprates.
3 / 5 (2) Jul 21, 2009
i wonder if that's because some 8 percent of americans are no longer driving to work each morning? (unemployment rate increase)
4.3 / 5 (3) Jul 21, 2009
i wonder if that's because some 8 percent of americans are no longer driving to work each morning? (unemployment rate increase)

A very valid point. But let's not forget some of us started pedaling too! (respect bikers on the road please :P)
5 / 5 (3) Jul 21, 2009

A very valid point. But let's not forget some of us started pedaling too! (respect bikers on the road please :P)

Could very well be the increase in efficiency of combustion engines implemented in the 90's as well.

We went from an average 15 mpg vehicle to an average 20 mpg vehicle. That is a giant savings in petroleum and diesel and by course crude oil. Many businesses implemented work from home policies, and unfortunately, many more businesses went out of business.
5 / 5 (1) Jul 21, 2009
The other problem with this article is that, yes our usage went down.

Did our generation do the same?
not rated yet Jul 25, 2009

Soylent, Nuke did not outgrow solar as nuke only went up .5% vs solar probably went up 20%.

Lord jag unemployment didn't go up much until very late in the yr.

Wind was the largest gainer in capacity.

Wait until you see this yrs and the drop you mean will really be their.

The best was the drop in coal
1 / 5 (1) Jul 26, 2009

Soylent, Nuke did not outgrow solar as nuke only went up .5% vs solar probably went up 20%.

.5% of 300 is 1.5

20% of 5 is 1.

The initial count establishes whether his statement is accurate or not. If oil went up 0.01% it would have been the largest spread by count. Anyone have the figures on preexisting nuclear and solar world wide?

As for unemployment you're wrong. Unemployment started in quarter 4 of 07 and the sharp drop in transportation started in quarter 2 of 07. Don't forget the crazy fuel price increase. If anything that's more responsible for change than any sort of renewables drive.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.