Energy Choices in a Democratic Society: The Report of the Consumption, Location, and Occupational Patterns Resource Group, Synthesis Panel of the Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems, National Research Council. (1980)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Energy Choices In a Democratic Society sssr • Supporting paper 7 AUTHOR: Nader. Laura rpAia1O4 G3136D2 Fid: 10A. 97 GRAI8104 Apr 80 156p Rept No: ISBN-0-309-03045-5 Rn-81335 Library of Congress catalog card no. 8O i Microfiche copy only. .' future Involving widely ™« Unfe-sty1es. The *»a ^ imagined ° tude, small according to 1nclud1nq patterns. occupations abstract: In a provacat relationship to social Society presents four views varying levels of energy Consumption futurists' intriguing Rescript °ns societies, loosely termed )s beautiful and mln n-um v^nment"8 settlement leisure, dispersion of decision-making power. and plural Ismj vs. homogeneity. These descriptions demonstrate some possible results of alternatives to be considered by scientists, policymakers, and citizens concerned about the direction of our energy policy. Solar energy. Nuclear energy. Quality of life. Social effect, Scenarios Identifiers: 'Energy policy. Energy conservation. Life styles. NTISNASNRC PB81-114852 NTIS Prices: MF A01

Study of Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems SUPPORTING PAPER 7 , * ENERGY CHOICES IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY The Report of the ^Consumption, Location, and Occupational Patterns Resource Group j, Synthesis Panel of the ^Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems National Research Council "I NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Washington, D.C. 1980 NAS.NA APR 2 1 LIBRARY

^International Standard Book Number 0-309-03045-5 /Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 80-81335 '^ Available from: Y ^Office of Publications National Academy of Sciences 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 Printed in the United States of America

To future generations—may they have choice.

FOREWORD The work for this study was carried out between the spring of 1976 and the summer of 1977 as a contribution to the Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems (CONAES) of the National Research Council. The people who worked together on this project to imagine what life would be like under different energy conditions overcame disciplinary boundaries and faced the difficulties of convincing scientists and technologists of possibilities they had not imagined but which members of the general public were already living. The report was revised four times to incorporate reviewers' comments and new information that became available, but the basic message was the same throughout all four ver- sions: energy is a social problem, not a technological one. Since the time of completion of the last version in July 1977, events and information have continued to develop. As additional data have become available, some myths about energy have been dispelled, much to our pleasure, and in fact the conclusions of this study are continuing to be substantiated. It becomes clearer each day that the energy problem is a problem of value—that energy demand is part of the organization of preferences. It is not surprising, therefore, that there is controversy over what is possible. As an anthropologist I can afford to be expansive about the range of possibilities in terms of futures, for after all, anthropology is the study of many human possi- bilities; and the range of variety has been instructive indeed. Human societies are flexible over time. Less adaptable and flexible, however, are the professionals. It became clear as we revised the report that we were trying to explain living habits in a way that could be understood in spite of the mind- sets of scientists of different professions participating in the CONAES study. Economists think that price determines everything. Physicists and chemists believe that progress means technological progress. Engi- neers believe that the language of numbers is somehow more precise than the language of words. While there are exceptions, most believe that what does not fit the mind-set is wrong or incompetent. Although I did try to accommodate to the standards that each professional group set for us, as chairperson of this resource group I was most interested in

writing a report for the American taxpayer that would explain to him or her how the ideals of democracy and individual liberty can be either supported or sabotaged by the use and presence of specific technologies. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Although a number of people contributed to each chapter, a few individu- als were mainly responsible for conceiving and executing each chapter. Laura Nader wrote the foreword and the introductory and final chapters; Robert Olson wrote Chapter 2. Laura Nader and Stephen Beckerman devel- oped the materials for Chapter 3. Paul Craig contributed Chapter 4. Peter Benenson was the principal author of Chapter 5; he was aided by Lee Schipper and David Pilati. Laura Nader, Cathie Jane Witty, and Lee Schipper are primarily responsible for Chapter 6. The brief concluding remarks in Chapter 7 are an anthropological reminder that experts are playing a central role in fashioning the "possible" and the "impossible" in energy planning. Overall responsibility for the editing, organizing, and review was that of the chairperson, who, in the tradition of such Academy studies, performed this task without remuneration from the Academy or, unlike their counterparts in corporations, release time from the University of California. The unsigned preface was written by the Academy staff. We wish to thank the many who also gave of their advice, knowledge, and skill in the process of formulating this document. Robert L. Olson, W. W. Harman, Mary Foster, Clarence Glacken, Nelson Graburn, Steve Beckerman, Otis Dudley Duncan, Lester Lave, Norman Milleron, Elizabeth Colson, and John Holdren, among others, contributed in writing and crit- ical appraisal. In particular, we thank Otis Dudley Duncan, a member of CONAES until he resigned, for his useful advice and for the model he is of a scientist with integrity and sensitivity to the qualitative questions. Belinda Johns contributed her skills and organizational abilities. Grace Buzaljko, Robert Cantwell, and others contributed to the editing process. Many people supported us in collating, looking up references, and the myriad of tasks necessary to such a project: Liz Goldstein, Dorothy Koenig, Kathleen Bradley, Pat Brooks, Lane Hirabayashi, and Cathy Rich. In addition, I personally wish to thank the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. for its support, in 1979-80, during the very final stages of this manuscript. Laura Nader Washington, D.C. March 1980 vi

PREFACE In June, 1975, the National Research Council (NRC) undertook a comprehen- sive study of the nation's prospective energy economy during the period 1985-2010, with special attention to the role of nuclear power among the alternative energy systems. The goal of the study is to assist the Amer- ican people and government in formulating energy policy. The Governing Board of the National Research Council appointed an NRC-wide Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems (CONAES) to conduct the study. CONAES consists of 15 members drawn from diverse dis- ciplines and backgrounds. The committee developed a three-tiered func- tional structure for the study. The first tier is CONAES itself. The ultimate findings, judgments, and conclustions of the study will be embodied in its final report. To provide scientific and engineering data and analyses, a second tier of four panels was formed to examine (1) energy demand and conser- vation, (2) energy supply and delivery systems, (3) risks and impacts of energy supply and use, and (4) syntheses of diverse models of future energy economies, respectively. Each panel, in turn, established a num- ber of resource groups—22 in all—as the third tier, to address in de- tail an array of more particular matters, such as buildings and transpor- tation systems, solar energy, breeder reactors, coal technologies, health and environmental implications, and alternative consumption patterns and economic models. In all, more than 200 informed individuals served on or contributed to the work of the panels and resource groups. The National Research Council customarily publishes only the final reports of its committees—and then only after the report has been re- viewed by a group other than its authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Aca- demy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. However, because such a large volume of information and analyses was assembled for consideration by the committee, and because of the diversity and scope of that information and the accompanying judg- ments, the panel reports and approximately 10 reports by the resource groups are being published as supporting papers. Each of these has been considered by CONAES but has not undergone the critical review pro- cedure normal to the NRC. The report of the Consumption, Location, vii

and Occupational Patterns Resource Group has, however, been subjected to a thorough and expert peer review for accuracy, consistency, and clarity. It must be recognized that some conclusions of the panel and resource group report may be at variance with the conclusions of the CONAES report. The findings reported in these documents are those of their authors and are not necessarily endorsed by CONAES or the National Research Council. This report covers the work of the Consumption, Location and Occupational Patterns Resource Group of the Synthesis Panel, done for the most part in 1977-1978. It is published, with the other supporting papers to enrich the general understanding of the intricate and wide- ranging implications of energy policy in the coming decades and to acquaint the reader with the variety and complexity of the material with which CONAES has had to deal. viii

CONSUMPTION, LOCATION, AND OCCUPATIONAL PATTERNS RESOURCE GROUP LAURA NADER (Chairperson), Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of California at Berkeley PETER BENENSON, Economist, University of California, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory NORMAN BRADBURN, Chairman, Department of Behavioral Sciences, University of Chicago CLARK BULLARD, Research Assistant Professor, Center for Advanced Computation, University of Illinois at Urbana PAUL CRAIG, Department of Applied Science, University of California at Davis DAVID PILATI, Research Assistant Professor, Center for Advanced Computation, University of Illinois at Urbana LEE SCHIPPER, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California at Berkeley CATHIE J. WITTY, Program in Medical Anthropology, University of California, San Francisco ix

SYNTHESIS PANEL LESTER B. LAVE (Chairman), Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution RICHARD E. BALZHISER, Director, Fossil Fuel and Advanced Systems Division, Electric Power Research Institute DAVID COHEN, President, Common Cause CHARLES 0. JONES, Maurice Falk Professor of Politics, Department of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh TJALLING C. KOOPMANS, Alfred Cowles Professor of Economics, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University LAURA NADER, Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of California at Berkeley WILLIAM D. NORDHAUS, John Musser Professor of Economics, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University SAM H. SCHURR, Senior Fellow and Co-Director, Energy and Materials Division, Resources for the Future, Inc. JON M. VEIGEL, Director of Research and Development, Energy Resources, Conservation and Development Commission, State of California DAVID 0. WOOD, Program Director, Energy Economics and Management Division, Energy Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology BRIAN CRISSEY, Staff Officer JAMES E. JUST, Consultant

COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR AND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEMS HARVEY BROOKS (Co-Chairman), Benjamin Peirce Professor of Technology and Public Policy, Aiken Computation Laboratory, Harvard University EDWARD L. GINZTON (Co-Chairman), Chairman of the Board, Varian Associates KENNETH E. BOULDING, Distinguished Professor of Economics, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado ROBERT H. CANNON, JR., Chairman, Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology EDWARD J. GORNOWSKI, Executive Vice President, Exxon Research and Engineering Company JOHN P. HOLDREN, Professor, Energy and Resources Program, University of California at Berkeley HENDRIK S. HOUTHAKKER, Henry Lee Professor of Economics, Department of Economics, Harvard University HENRY I. KOHN, Professor, Radiation Biology, Shields Warren Radiation Laboratory STANLEY J. LEWAND, Vice President, Public Utilities Division, The Chase Manhattan Bank LUDWIG F. LISCHER, Vice President of Engineering, Commonwealth Edison Company JOHN C. NEESS, Professor of Zoology, University of Wisconsin xi

DAVID ROSE, Professor, Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology DAVID SIVE, Attorney at Law, Winer, Neuberger and Sive BERNARD I. SPINRAD, Professor, Nuclear Engineering, Radiation Center, Oregon State University JACK M. HOLLANDER, Study Director JOHN 0. BERGA, Deputy Study Director xii

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 The Futurists 2 Sources of Energy Supply 3 Alternative Societies 5 Ideology, Expertise, and the Public 7 References 9 CONTRAST OF FOUR ALTERNATIVE FUTURES IN TWELVE DIMENSIONS 10 Natural Environment 10 Settlement Patterns 11 Occupations 11 Leisure 13 Personal Possessions 14 Institutional Scale 14 Dispersion of Decision-Making Power 15 Civil Liberties 16 Vulnerability or Stability 17 Pluralist or Homogeneous Societies 18 Equity 19 Professionalism 20 References 22 TO SUPPLY ENERGY: BREEDER REACTORS 23 Energy Sources: The Alternatives 24 The Nuclear-Breeder Path 27 xiii

Capital Intensity 27 Centralization: The Bureaucracy 28 Centralization: Technological Vulnerability and Site Proliferation 29 Legal Effects of Safety Considerations 29 Future Generations 30 International Effects 31 Energy and Social Structure 31 Who Will Watch the Watchers? 32 Breeder Reactors and Solar-Energy Systems: Some Contrasts 32 Summary 34 References 35 TO SUPPLY ENERGY: THE SUN 37 To What Uses Can Solar Energy Be Put? 38 Buildings Sector 39 Industrial Sector 40 Biomass 42 Solar Electricity 43 How Soon Can Solar Technology be Available? 45 How Much Would Solar Systems Cost? 49 Are There Not Geographic Variations in Solar Energy? 53 Can Solar-Energy Systems and Institutions Be Decentralized? 53 The Energy Potential of Solar: Other Views 56 References 65 A HIGH-ENERGY-PRODUCTIVITY SOCIETY: CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCIES 67 Setting of the Problem 68 Energy Savings in Residential Buildings 71 Energy Savings in Transportation 71 An Energy-Consumption Scenario for 2010 73 Mechanisms for Implementing Energy Conservation 84 xiv

Appendix 88 References 100 6 NEW ATTITUDES TOWARD ENERGY AND RESOURCES: A HIGH- TECHNOLOGY, LOW-ENERGY SOCIETY 102 Driving Forces and Adaptive Strategies 105 Advanced Technology and Taste Changes 106 A Shift in Values 108 Private/Residential 113 Commercial 118 Transportation 119 Industry 120 Agriculture 122 Discussion 123 Appendix 125 References 128 7 WHO SHALL DECIDE? 130 References 136

TABLES 1 Energy use, in quads, in buildings sector, accord- ing to Demand and Conservation Panel scenario B 40 2 Process energy use in United States industry in 1975 41 3 Projected U.S. total and process energy use, in quads per year 42 4 1975 process heat use among six leading industrial users 43 5 Projected 2010 primary energy input in quads, from Demand and Conservation Panel scenario B 45 6 Projected 2010 primary energy input in quads, with solar modification 46 7 Start-up and take-off dates for major solar tech- nologies 47 8 Projected growth for solar technologies 47 9 Delivered solar energy costs in the year 2010 49 10 Energy cost assumptions under Demand and Conservation Panel scenario B, in dollars per million Btu 50 11 Capital cost of energy supply and conservation technologies 52 12 Forecasts of solar energy applications in the year 2000, in quads 58 13 Components of gross national product in billions of 1972 dollars per year 68 xv i

14 Personal consumption expenditures, 1945-1970, in percent per year 69 15 1976 energy end use in quads in residential buildings 72 16 Actions to reduce space-cooling requirements in residential units 73 17 Actions to reduce space-heating requirements in residential units 74 18 Energy saving changes in water heating systems 76 19 Energy savings in water heating through use of solar energy 76 20 Automobile use by trip, purpose, length and fuel use 77 21 Potential reduction in miles traveled and gasoline use, compared to 1970 78 22 Projected energy consumption in the United States in 2010, with energy savings 80 23 Summary of energy consumption scenario for the United States in 2010 82 24 Energy conservation policies and their impacts 86 25 Annual growth rates by industry 89 26 Composition of residential units, in millions 89 27 Electricity use as percentage of total energy per sector 91 28 Electricity losses in quads per sector 92 29 International comparisons of vacation times in 1967 109 30 Quality of food: High-quality variants as a proportion of total consumed 110 31 Life expectancy and infant mortality in developed countries 111 32 Energy use in the attitudes-changed scenario 114 xvii