Understanding the Jevons Paradox

Shiela

Alright Bruce, quick question to get us started. What do a nineteenth-century coal mine and my attempts at daily step goals have in common?

Bruce

Hmm, let me guess. They're both full of untapped potential that somehow gets wasted?

Shiela

Ouch, close... but no cigar—or should I say, no coal. We're talking about the Jevons Paradox today, which might just blow your mind like, well, a steam engine in 1865.

Bruce

Ah, William Stanley Jevons' big observation—that making coal use more efficient actually led to people burning through more of it. Classic irony, huh?

Shiela

Totally. He noticed that during the Industrial Revolution, when those fancy new steam engines used less coal per task, overall coal consumption didn’t drop—it skyrocketed. Efficiency made coal cheaper to use, so industries used it like snow in a Sydney heatwave. Poof, it’s gone!

Bruce

Right. The more we improve the tech, the cheaper it becomes to run things, and boom—demand goes through the roof. Makes you wonder if "efficiency" is just code for "use more now, pay later."

Shiela

Oh, for sure. And it’s not just coal. If you ever needed a modern example... remember when you got your latest smartphone?

Bruce

Oh, you mean the phone I bought to stay "organized" but now use to endlessly scroll through dog videos?

Shiela

Exactly!

Shiela

That’s the Jevons Paradox 2.0 right there. More productivity potential equals... zero productivity because TikTok exists. The same thing happens with stuff like water—better irrigation tech doesn't save water; it often leads to growing thirstier crops or expanding irrigated areas.

Bruce

And that's where the Khazzoom-Brookes postulate comes into play. Efficiency gains in energy tech, for instance, can accelerate economic growth, which just ends up boosting overall consumption. In other words, we're we’re playing a losing game without realizing it.

Shiela

Oh, I’ve lived that game! Like when I downsized my coffee mugs thinking it’d help me drink less. Spoiler alert: just ended up refilling them... over and over. Classic rebound effect, but in caffeine form.

Bruce

So basically, your caffeine habit is an economics lesson. Noted.

Shiela

It really goes to show how people misunderstand efficiency, though. Policymakers can have the best intentions, but if they ignore how efficiency causes demand to rebound, their strategies might totally backfire.

Bruce

That’s where things like green taxes or cap and trade systems come in. Pair those with efficiency improvements, and maybe we can keep consumption in check... at least in theory.

Shiela

It’s like dieting apps, right? They make you super aware of the calories, but then you find a "healthy" snack and end up eating twice as much. Efficiency without the right limits just doesn’t get you the results you hope for.

Bruce

Well, Shiela, as long as we don’t use this newfound knowledge as an excuse to binge through resources... or snacks, I’d call this episode wildly efficient in itself.

Shiela

Agreed! And that’s the paradox of learning—it just makes you wanna learn more. See what I did there?

Bruce

Oh, I saw it. As clear as a clean-burning steam engine.

Shiela

Well, folks, that’s all for today on the Jevons Paradox. Until next time, remember—watch out for those sneaky rebound effects!