Menu
This April, Arizona will celebrate the 160th anniversary of the only Civil War skirmish that occurred in Arizona — right there in Picacho Pass. The Union forces lost that particular encounter because of the disobedience of an overeager young lieutenant. They also suffered three fatalities in that fight.
The little bit of publicity I saw about this anniversary only heightened my interest in again climbing the peak. So I set out with a friend to get it done.
Our very first picture was taken at about 7:30 am as we approached Picacho Peak from the south on Interstate 10. At that angle and distance, one might begin to wonder, how the heck do we even begin to think that we can actually make the ascent? And if we look at the seemingly insatiable demands for energy, how might we do anything but dig for more coal or drill for more oil?
Almost directly east of the peak and from less than a mile away, we begin to see new possibilities that did not seem to have been there before. After a bit of parallel processing I began to think about Picacho Peak as a useful metaphor for meeting our energy needs – what we see and what we recognize very much depends on where we are standing at some moment in time, as well as what we see in a different light and a from a different focal point. . . . And if we simply (or not so simply) shift to a different spot and observe a given feature (maybe the energy conundrum) from another angle, from a different elevation, and even in other daylight, we might see entirely new aspects from what we had first imagined.
It turns out that the way up to the peak requires that we actually move to the backside of this very big outcrop of rock. It’s not for the faint of heart, but the way up is both a manageable and satisfying result. In a similar way, if we look at energy not as a problem of inadequate supply, but one that is driven by enormous waste, we can begin to think of different and more cost-effective ways to ease the national concern.
As I’ve written about this before – Energy Productivity Remains Our First Resource – it turns out that we waste more than 80 percent of the energy that we throw at the economic problem. That means there is a much easier way to manage our energy needs. . . . We can dramatically reduce our waste. In the same way that it’s easier to go round to the backside of Picacho Peak rather than attempt a technical climb straight up the front side, it will be cheaper and easier to eliminate the inefficient use of the energy resources we already have at our disposal.
About 90 minutes later, yes, hiking up the backside of the peak, we are finally on top, moving onto a saddle that bridges the actual peak, together with a lesser outcrop that is about 300 yards to the south. The final goal is now easily in sight.
Just as we took a less obvious but much easier way to reach the peak, if we focus on doubling, tripling, or quadrupling our current 14-19 percent level of energy (in)efficiency, it turns out we can more easily satisfy energy demands in ways that actually save us money and create a surprising number of jobs. And in this regard, as a number of colleagues and I released a recent report earlier this year, America 3.0: The Resilient Society that showed how greater energy productivity might generate 15 to 22 million net new while saving all residential and business consumers a net $250 billion per year, or the equivalent of about $1,800 per household annually.
And what, we ask, might be the really big insight from the ascent up Picacho Peak? Instead of thinking about a frontal assault on our energy problems, the U.S. would be better off by taking another and more economical way of tackling the problem. In effect, “thinking big” about energy efficiency and energy productivity.
There is neither a law of physics nor economics that prevents us from quadrupling the productive use of energy and other resources. Rather, it is much more an issue of imagination and our political will to get it done.
– John A. “Skip” Laitner