Exergy, an International Journal 2 (2002) 211213

www.exergyonline.com

Viewpoint article

Should we educate the public about exergy?

Marc A. Rosen, Associate Editor
School of Manufacturing Engineering, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON, Canada, L1H 7L7

Abstract
The author explains his views that the public is often confused when it discusses energy, and needs to be better educated about exergy if
energy issues and problems are to be addressed appropriately.
2002 ditions scientifiques et mdicales Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
It is important for the public to have a basic understanding and appreciation of many technical issues. Such understanding fosters healthy public debate about problems and
possible solutions, and often helps guide how public funds
are spent.
Energy issues are no exception. Yet, I feel that the
publics understanding of energy issues is quite confused. In
large part, I feel that this situation is attributable to the public
having next to no understanding of exergy. I believe that such
an understanding is necessary, and explain my views on this
matter in this article.
Although this article deals with education, it focuses on
the public and does not dwell on the education in exergy of
thermodynamicists and other technical people. I dealt with
the latter topic in another article in this series [1].

2. Does the public understand energy?

The typical lay person is generally comfortable with
hearing about energy. He or she even understands it, or at
least thinks he/she does.
This sense of comfort and understanding exists despite
all of the problems associated with energy. For instance,
as mentioned in previous articles in this series [24],
efficiencies based on energy can often be non-meaningful
or even misleading. Also, losses of energy can be large
in quantity, when they are in fact not that significant

This is the fifth in a series of viewpoint articles by the author on exergy

and related matters.
E-mail address: marc.rosen@uoit.ca (M.A. Rosen).

thermodynamically due to the low quality or usefulness of

the energy that is lost.
Yet, a similar understanding of exergy is almost entirely
non-existent in lay members of the public. This lack of
understanding exists despite the fact that exergy overcomes
many of the deficiencies of energy methods, as described
above.
To make matters worse, often the public is confused
when it refers to energy. To those who deal with exergy,
it often seems that members of the public actually mean
exergy when they say energy. For example, two very well
respected exergy researchers, William Wepfer and Richard
Gaggioli, opened one of their articles by writing [5], Exergy
. . . is synonymous with what the layman calls energy. It is
exergy, not energy, that is the resource of value, and it is
this commodity, that fuels processes, which the layman is
willing to pay for.
I contend that it is essential that the public developor
be helped to developa basic understanding of exergy. The
level of understanding needed by the public about exergy
should at least be comparable to that for energy.
Examples of the problems that are associated with a lack
of knowledge of exergy by the public can help illustrate this
contention. Some follow below.

3. Problems with the publics understanding of energy

and the need for an understanding of exergy
One example of the problems that can develop when the
public does not have a knowledge of exergy, but retains
only a confused understanding of energy, relates to the
energy crisis of the 1970s, when oil scarcities existed due
to reductions in oil production. Most of the energy that was

1164-0235/02/$ see front matter 2002 ditions scientifiques et mdicales Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 1 6 4 - 0 2 3 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 8 4 - 5

212

M.A. Rosen / Exergy, an International Journal 2 (2002) 211213

available to the public before the crisis was available during

it. For instance, huge amounts of solar energy continued
to stream into the earth every day. Lots of waste thermal
energy was continually emitted from facilities and buildings.
The commodity for which there was a crisis, therefore,
appeared to be exergy, not energy. That is, energy forms
capable of delivering a wide range of energy services (like
oil), which have high exergies, were in short supply. Of
course, there were also other issues related to the energy
crisis, particularly the shortage of reasonably inexpensive
and widely available resources. But, the key point here is
that the crisis was about exergy, not energy, yet the public
referred to the situation as an energy crisis.
Another example of the confusion exhibited by the public when they speak of energy is the well-used term energy
conservation. When the public says energy conservation, it
is usually referring to an objective of efforts to solve energy
problems. Yet the term energy conservation is meaningless
in that regard, in that it simply states the first law of thermodynamics (which embodies the principle of the conservation
of energy). Exergy, however, is not conserved and it appears
that what the public is really interested in conserving is exergy, the potential to drive processes and systems that deliver
services or products.
A third example of confusion in the public surrounds the
drive for increased energy efficiency. Energy efficiencies do
not necessarily provide a measure of how nearly a process
approaches ideality, yet that is what the public means when
it says energy efficiency. Exergy efficiencies do provide
measures of approach to ideality, and so it appears that the
public means increased exergy efficiency when it discusses
increased energy efficiency.
A fourth example of public confusion about energy
relates to the oft-pronounced need for energy security.
If it were simply energy for which we desire a secure
supply, there would be no real problem. We have energy
in abundance available in our environment, and even when
we use energy we still have equivalent quantities of energy
left over because our use is really only energy conversion
or transformation. However, we are not concerned about
ensuring secure supplies of energy, but rather of only those
resources that are useful to us, that can be used to provide a
wide range of energy services, that can satisfy all our energyrelated needs and desires. That is, we are concerned with
having secure supplies of exergy, or what might be called
exergy security.
Although the lack of clarity regarding the points raised
in these four examples has been discussed in more detail in
previous articles in this series [24]. I raise them again here
in a different context. The previous discussions focussed on
scientists and engineers and were aimed more at technical
readers. Here, I emphasize that this lack of clarity extends
to the public, where the problems caused are different, but
perhaps just as or more important.

4. Extending the publics need to understand exergy to

the media
By extension of the above arguments, I feel that members
of the mediaincluding the press, television and radio
need to be informed, at least at a basic level, about exergy
and its roles. In a sense, the media are a reflection of the
public. If the media have an appreciation of exergy, they can
help ensure lay members of the public have an understanding
about exergy. Educating via television, in particular, can
be an especially powerful method for increasing public
awareness about exergy.
However, for the press and media to run exergy-related
articles, it requires that the public have a rudimentary
understanding of and interest in exergy matters. Otherwise,
the press and media tend to neglect exergy-related topics
for fear of boring or confusing the public. A first step to
resolving the reluctance of the press to write about exergy
is education.

5. Further extending public understanding of exergy to

government
Similarly, government officials require a rudimentary understanding of exergy to improveor at least complement
their understanding of energy issues. Government, being another type of reflection of the public, will be far less prone to
use exergy methods, even when they can be beneficial, if it
feels that the public does not understand exergy even in the
most simple way and therefore will not appreciate government efforts.
The importance of such government involvement should
not be understated and has been investigated by researchers.
For example, Goran Wall has alluded to the importance of
exergy in relation to democracy in an interesting article that
deals with the dilemmas of modern society [6].

6. Closing comments
Taken together, the above arguments explain why I
believe a need exists to improve public understanding of
exergy. I believe such understanding is essential if we are
to better address the energy issues and problems of today
and tomorrow.

Acknowledgements
Financial support was provided by the Natural Sciences
and Engineering Research Council of Canada and is greatly
appreciated.

M.A. Rosen / Exergy, an International Journal 2 (2002) 211213

References
[1] M.A. Rosen, Thermodynamics education: Is present coverage of exergy
sufficient and appropriate?, Exergy Internat. J. 2 (4) (2002) 207210
(this volume).
[2] M.A. Rosen, Clarifying thermodynamic efficiencies and losses via
exergy, Exergy Internat. J. 2 (2002) 35.
[3] M.A. Rosen, Exergy conservation: An alternative to conserving the
already conserved quantity energy, Exergy Internat. J. 2 (2002) 5961.

213

[4] M.A. Rosen, Energy crisis or exergy crisis?, Exergy Internat. J. 2 (2002)
125127.
[5] R.A. Gaggioli, W.J. Wepfer, Exergy economics, Energy Internat. J. 5
(1980) 823837.
[6] G. Wall, Exergy, ecology and democracyConcepts of a vital society
or a proposal for an exergy tax, in: Proc. International Conference on
Energy Systems and Ecology, Krakow, Poland, July 59, 1993, pp. 111
121.