U.S. President Barack Obama recently issued this challenge: “Let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next 20 years.” Is there really that much waste and is the savings target realistic? Would a similar target prove useful and/or inspirational in Canada?

One of the great challenges with energy conservation and, thus, energy waste is it is really hard to see, unlike garbage or other forms of pollution.

One of the best illustrations of how much energy is used and wasted in Canada can be found by looking at the flows of energy in Canada.

Pollution Probe recently developed an energy flow chart. It shows that the rejected or wasted energy in Canada is slightly more than the energy actually used. While the laws of thermodynamics mean there will always be some waste, there is clearly a huge potential to use energy more efficiently.

President’s Obama’s challenge was based on the findings of a very detailed independent report on energy productivity. Energy 2030: Doubling U.S Energy Productivity by 2030 was produced by a commission of 20 experts from government, industry, energy utility and environmental groups. The report included 20 specific recommendations in three broad areas: unleash investment in energy productivity; modernize regulations/infrastructure; and educate/engage all segments of the population.

The President’s challenge and this report actually focus on increasing energy productivity. This is calculated by dividing the level of economic output (GDP) by the total energy used to achieve it. In 1970, approximately $63 billion of GDP (in 2005 dollars) were produced per quadrillion (one thousand million million) BTU (or quad). By 2011, this had increased 114 per cent to $135 billion/quad due to energy efficiency and conservation. This increase is greater than the amount of energy the U.S. gets from petroleum, natural gas or coal.

While this energy productivity is expected to increase to approximately $200 billion/quad by 2030 under “business as usual” assumptions, the commission concluded it could be doubled to $270 billion/quad if its recommendations were implemented. Thus, the challenge is to double energy productivity by 2030. While certainly not easy, this target is realistic. The report also concluded this increase would result in a $1,000 net benefit to households through reduced energy costs, create more than 1 million new jobs and reduce carbon dioxide by one-third.

Interestingly, the report also included the historical energy productivity of 10 other countries, including Canada. It found energy productivity in Canada increased from approximately $60 US billion/quad in 1980, to $75 US billion/quad in 2008. But it also found Canada had the lowest energy productivity of the 10 other countries’ major economies in the world. Clearly, there is a great deal more Canada could do.

A similar target for Canada would be both useful and inspirational. Due to Canada’s slightly different economy and quite different weather and transportation challenges, the development of a similar target should be founded on a similar detailed independent report.

Peter Love is president of the Energy Services Association of Canada. He is also an adjunct professor at York University’s faculty of environmental studies where he teaches energy policy courses.