4_SobrieteEnergetique_partage
π Economics
Degrowth: is this the end of GDP?

Reducing emissions : how to be more energy “sufficient”

On February 1st, 2022 |
4min reading time
Julie Mayer
Julie Mayer
Lecturer at Université de Rennes
Mathias Guerineau
Mathias Guérineau
lecturer in management science at Université de Nantes
Key takeaways
  • Energy sufficiency is defined as a way of organising ourselves to better meet energy needs by limiting what we consume - consuming less to do more.
  • It is now recognised by law as a factor in reducing overall energy consumption to achieve carbon neutrality, by switching to renewable energy.
  • Contrary to preconceived ideas, many initiatives promote sufficiency as a project that creates value in terms of reducing pollution, preserving nature, making financial savings and strengthening social ties.
  • When we talk about sufficiency, some people hear "restriction" or "de-growth", which can lead to opposition. But this is not entirely true. In a way, some see it as "intelligent deconsumption".
  • Considering that doing "less" or "just enough" has benefits may imply moving towards new ways of organising or thinking.

What is energy sufficiency and what does it promise ?

Ener­gy suf­fi­cien­cy goes beyond ener­gy effi­cien­cy. It is defi­ned as a way of orga­ni­sing our­selves to bet­ter meet our ener­gy needs by limi­ting what we consume. In other words, it is about consu­ming less to do more. First­ly, from an eco­lo­gi­cal point of view, redu­cing our ove­rall ener­gy consump­tion is obli­ga­to­ry if we are to achieve car­bon neu­tra­li­ty. Par­ti­cu­lar­ly if we want to switch to rene­wable ener­gies, as put for­ward in the various sce­na­rios pro­po­sed by RTE1, ADEME2 and Nega­watt3. Depen­ding on the sce­na­rio, ener­gy consump­tion will need to be 23–55% lower in 2050 than it was in 2015. It the­re­fore seems unli­ke­ly that we will stay on track with the ener­gy tran­si­tion without fac­to­ring in “suf­fi­cien­cy”.

But suf­fi­cien­cy also holds other pro­mises because glo­bal war­ming is just one of the cri­ti­cal glo­bal issues we are cur­rent­ly facing. Add to that the col­lapse of bio­di­ver­si­ty, the deple­tion of cer­tain rare mate­rials, and so on. Each of these pro­blems raises the ques­tion : where is the limit to what we can pro­duce and consume to pre­serve and live in har­mo­ny with Earth’s natu­ral sys­tem ? On top of that, the ener­gy tran­si­tion and the “green revo­lu­tion” also col­lide with social inequa­li­ties : a stu­dy shows that by 20304, the car­bon foot­print of the richest 1% and 10% of the world’s popu­la­tion will be 30 and 9 times res­pec­ti­ve­ly that which is com­pa­tible with limi­ting glo­bal war­ming to 1.5°C. Rethin­king consump­tion pat­terns of the weal­thiest popu­la­tions is the­re­fore neces­sa­ry for a fai­rer tran­si­tion. Not to men­tion that a reduc­tion in social inequa­li­ties is also one of the sus­tai­nable deve­lop­ment objec­tives set by the UN. 

Last­ly, it has been obser­ved that ener­gy suf­fi­cien­cy often creates value : such as less pol­lu­tion, pre­ser­va­tion of nature, finan­cial savings, and streng­the­ning of social ties. 

How is energy sufficiency achieved in tangible terms ? 

We have shown that there are three types of ener­gy suf­fi­cien­cy5, at dif­ferent scales of action. Among is “moni­to­red” suf­fi­cien­cy, which cor­res­ponds to an incre­men­tal opti­mi­sa­tion of indi­vi­dual ener­gy use by imple­men­ting eco-ges­tures or moni­to­ring consump­tion, for example. Next comes “sym­bio­tic” suf­fi­cien­cy, defi­ned by ins­tal­ling a har­mo­nious rela­tion­ship and syner­gy with nature. Expe­ri­ments on this are ongoing in eco-ham­lets or “low techs” where sim­pler, clo­ser-to-nature and more col­lec­tive life­styles are being explo­red. Final­ly, “mana­ged” suf­fi­cien­cy is more about rear­ran­ging infra­struc­tures to reduce ener­gy requi­re­ments mecha­ni­cal­ly : archi­tec­ture of homes or urban plan­ning can thus be rethought out to encou­rage sha­ring of ser­vices, or to pro­pose a more appro­priate sizing of pro­duc­tion equip­ment and trans­port net­works. These are three very dif­ferent ways of achie­ving suf­fi­cien­cy, but in prac­tice they are often complementary.

In concrete terms, we can start to ques­tion our consump­tion : “do I real­ly need it?” or “can we do it dif­fe­rent­ly?” For example, by lowe­ring reso­lu­tion of videos vie­wed online or unplug­ging elec­tri­cal appliances when not in use are small actions which, without chan­ging our com­fort, can have a signi­fi­cant impact when aggre­ga­ted across the popu­la­tion. Ano­ther example is the “Ate­lier des ter­ri­toires” in the city of Caen (France), which has been expe­ri­men­ting for seve­ral years with the deve­lop­ment of a ter­ri­to­rial pro­ject invol­ving inha­bi­tants and citi­zens. It has led to the tes­ting of pro­po­sals for com­mu­nal urban ser­vices such as sha­red gardens.

Moreo­ver, let’s not for­get the role of com­pa­nies. Social and soli­da­ri­ty players and coope­ra­tives are deve­lo­ping eco­no­mic models that com­bine limi­ted pro­fi­ta­bi­li­ty and value crea­tion. The “Licoornes” net­work, which includes the ener­gy com­pa­ny Ener­coop, the tele­phone ope­ra­tor Tele­coop, Label Emmaüs and NEF, is an inter­es­ting example of busi­ness model that incor­po­rates suf­fi­cien­cy. For example, Tele­coop offers a sub­scrip­tion that is char­ged to the user accor­ding to actual mobile data consump­tion, encou­ra­ging consu­mers to mode­rate their digi­tal use. 

We are also seeing the emer­gence of ini­tia­tives led by engi­nee­ring col­lec­tives to debate or expe­riment with low-ener­gy solu­tions. In the “Enga­ged Engi­neers” or “For an eco­lo­gi­cal awa­ke­ning” col­lec­tives, suf­fi­cien­cy has a strong reso­nance. The Low­Te­chLab and the Tran­si­tion Cam­pus are also ini­tia­tives where new ways of com­bi­ning the tech­ni­cal and tech­no­lo­gi­cal exper­tise of engi­neers are being expe­ri­men­ted with, while at the same time rein­ven­ting pro­jects for “bet­ter living” in a more har­mo­nious rela­tion­ship with nature. 

Why does energy sufficiency, as a concept, face so much opposition ?

I think it’s impor­tant to point out that oppo­si­tion to ener­gy suf­fi­cien­cy is most often in the form of pas­sive resis­tance, i.e. it is rare­ly taken into consi­de­ra­tion. In road­maps of public poli­cies, and some­times in those of com­pa­nies, suf­fi­cien­cy is men­tio­ned but imple­men­ta­tion methods remain vague. Suf­fi­cien­cy is often confu­sed with ener­gy effi­cien­cy, which refers more to impro­ving the per­for­mance of tech­no­lo­gies, such as the ther­mal insu­la­tion of buil­dings. But effi­cien­cy mea­sures alone poten­tial­ly lead to a “rebound effect”: the ener­gy gains made pos­sible by effi­cient tech­no­lo­gies are off­set by an increase in usage. The gamble on tech­no­lo­gy alone is the­re­fore very uncertain.

Even if more and more public, pri­vate and citi­zen players are taking on suf­fi­cien­cy, the term is still not being consi­de­red enough in the eco­lo­gi­cal tran­si­tion, because of nega­tive conno­ta­tions. When we talk about suf­fi­cien­cy, some people hear “res­tric­tion” or “decline”. It is true that suf­fi­cien­cy requires us to think in terms of limi­ted growth. But we are tal­king about “intel­li­gent de-consump­tion” which can create eco­no­mic, social, and envi­ron­men­tal value for ter­ri­to­ries.  Howe­ver, for some, this is still dif­fi­cult to hear and understand. 

Final­ly, suf­fi­cien­cy can lead to resis­tance if it is only defi­ned by indi­vi­dual beha­viour : injunc­tions that are often contra­dic­to­ry, bet­ween consu­ming less to pre­serve the envi­ron­ment and consu­ming more to boost the eco­no­my, or even guilt-indu­cing, can slow down indi­vi­dual efforts. The yel­low jackets move­ment in France, or the phe­no­me­non of eco-anxie­ty, are an expres­sion of this. Suf­fi­cien­cy is a way of orga­ni­sing our­selves col­lec­ti­ve­ly. It is the pur­pose of our research, which explores, through case stu­dies, how other modes of orga­ni­sa­tion are pos­sible. But moving towards these modes of orga­ni­sa­tion some­times requires a para­digm shift, par­ti­cu­lar­ly in peo­ple’s mind­sets : we are not used to valuing the fact of doing ‘less’ or doing ‘just enough’. And for suf­fi­cien­cy to be sca­led up, other rever­sals need to be consi­de­red : for example, what eco­no­mic models and public poli­cies should be used for suf­fi­cien­cy ? We still have a lot to build !

Interview by Pablo Andres
1 https://​www​.rte​-france​.com/​a​n​a​l​y​s​e​s​-​t​e​n​d​a​n​c​e​s​-​e​t​-​p​r​o​s​p​e​c​t​i​v​e​s​/​b​i​l​a​n​-​p​r​e​v​i​s​i​o​n​n​e​l​-​2​0​5​0​-​f​u​t​u​r​s​-​e​n​e​r​g​e​t​iques
2https://​tran​si​tions2050​.ademe​.fr
3https://​nega​watt​.org/en
4https://​www​.oxfam​.org/​e​n​/​p​r​e​s​s​-​r​e​l​e​a​s​e​s​/​c​a​r​b​o​n​-​e​m​i​s​s​i​o​n​s​-​r​i​c​h​e​s​t​-​1​-​s​e​t​-​b​e​-​3​0​-​t​i​m​e​s​-​1​5​d​e​g​c​-​l​i​m​i​t​-2030
5https://​uncloud​.univ​-nantes​.fr/​i​n​d​e​x​.​p​h​p​/​s​/​d​e​r​j​9​T​5​8​A​a​ebP53

Support accurate information rooted in the scientific method.

Donate