#112 - Efficiency and Expansion

Over the past two centuries we have become remarkably good at improving energy efficiency. Engines have become more powerful and precise. Fuels have become cleaner. Technologies have become smarter. From a distance, this looks like a steady journey of optimisation — one that should naturally lead to lower emissions and a healthier environment.

And yet total energy use continues to rise. So do material extraction and, globally, emissions.

This tension is not new. In 1865 the English economist William Stanley Jevons observed that improvements in the efficiency of coal-fired steam engines did not reduce coal consumption. They increased it. Cheaper and more efficient engines made coal more economically attractive, which expanded its use.

As he wrote:

This observation — later called the Jevons paradox — remains deeply relevant. Efficiency can reduce the cost of using a resource. Lower costs can stimulate higher demand. What appears to be technological progress may therefore expand the system rather than restrain it.

We can see manifestations of this paradox everywhere around us. The car industry offers a visible illustration. The original Mercedes G-Class, introduced in 1979, had a modest 90-horsepower engine (alternative version offered only 72 horsepower). Today, the top models approach 600 horsepower. They are 600 kilograms heavier than the first version, more materially intensive, and consume similar amount of fuel.

From a narrow engineering perspective, modern engines are far more efficient. From a system perspective, however, much of that efficiency has been absorbed by greater performance, weight and comfort. Car industry, particularly German producers, engages in the never ending race of power and size. The cars are getting stronger and bigger, and the promise of sustainable car industry seems to fade away soon after new, more efficient technology is designed.

The question is not whether these cars are technically impressive. They clearly are. The question is what problem they are solving. In most cities all over the world, speed limits make such power largely unusable. On Polish motorways, a 600-horsepower vehicle reaches the 140 km per hour legal limit while still warming up. The surplus capability exists — but cannot be meaningfully exercised within regulation. Its function is more symbolic than practical.

This is not unique to one brand or one country. It reflects broader incentives. Manufacturers compete on margin and differentiation. Consumers respond to signals of status, safety, and identity. Regulation typically sets minimum standards, not upper limits on power or size. Efficiency improvements then become a platform for expansion rather than restraint.

It would be simplistic to argue that efficiency never reduces impact. In some sectors and regions, relative or even absolute decoupling has occurred. But it is rarely sufficient.

When efficiency lowers the effective cost of consumption, the freed capacity is frequently redirected into more consumption — more power, more size, more speed, more convenience.

At the individual level, this dynamic also intersects with psychology. New purchases can elevate our sense of satisfaction, but only briefly. Research on hedonic adaptation suggests that such gains are short-lived. What felt exceptional quickly becomes normal. The baseline resets and we continue the search for the new triggers of happiness.

Seen this way, the sustainability challenge is not only technological. It is structural and cultural. It concerns how societies convert efficiency gains: into reduction, or into expansion.

Cleaner energy sources and more efficient machines are essential. But they do not automatically translate into lower environmental pressure. That depends on whether efficiency dividends are captured — through policy, norms, pricing, or self-restraint — or used through higher throughput.

The deeper question may not be how to make systems more efficient. We have proven we can do that. The question is what we choose to do with the efficiency once we have it.

If every gain becomes an invitation to expand, optimisation alone will not stabilise the system. Imagine Mercedes G-Class using all the efficiency gains but run on 90 horsepower, super efficient engine. Entire efficiency captured in reduction of emissions.

What would it take for efficiency improvements to translate into sufficiency rather than scale?

I publish one short reflection like this each week. If you would like to receive them by email, you can sign up to the newsletter here

References and Notes

1. Smil, V. (2017). Energy and civilization: A history. MIT Press.