Jevons Paradox.

Cue

The meter, the running total read at last against the projection. Every unit leaner than ever, and the sum still to be counted.

Action

Rebounding totted up: The Forecaster, holding the analyst's seat, reads the meter and finds the resource burned has not fallen but risen above where it began.

Stage

The Forecaster returns to Book the Saving and finds it inverted: the fixed demand held in the model came unfixed in the world, so the backfire shows the expected saving not merely eaten but overshot. The per-unit gain is real on every line, and the total at the bottom is larger than before the efficiency, with no waste anywhere to point at.

Tension

The saving is gone, and nothing was wasted. The numbers are honest and the meter is plain: more resource used after the efficiency than before it, though each unit is leaner. Because no glutton and no waster appears, the rise is easy to blame on growth or bad luck, so the one reading that would name it, that the efficiency spent the resource by cheapening it, is the reading the absence of a culprit makes easiest to avoid.

Cue

The cap, where someone puts a ceiling or a price on the resource itself, not on the unit. The lever moved from the efficiency of use to the amount there is to use.

Action

Capping: The Capper, holding the regulator's seat, sets a quota or a price on the total resource, above the efficiency, and holds it.

Stage

The Capper tables Cap the Resource: make the whole deliberately scarce, so a leaner unit becomes less resource used rather than more service bought, and the jevons paradox is answered by pricing the whole so the backfire has no room to form. For once the efficiency saves the total, because the rebound meets a ceiling it cannot push through.

Tension

The one move that works makes the cheap thing dear again. Capping the resource keeps the saving, but only by spending the cheap abundance the efficiency produced, so it feels like taxing a success and lands as a burden on every buyer the lower price had pleased. It holds only while it is held ... or the cap is judged too costly and lifted, the resource goes cheap once more, and the rebound floods straight back in.

Cue

The drawing board, a resource to be made to go further per unit, in good faith to save it. The gain worked out, the saving multiplied from it, everything resting on a fixed count of units.

Action

Improving: The Engineer, holding the efficiency engineer's seat, doubles the efficiency, while The Forecaster at the analyst's seat books the saving that follows if demand holds still.

Stage

The Engineer tables Improve the Efficiency: cut the resource each unit costs, so the efficiency delivers a real per-unit gain. The Forecaster tables Book the Saving, holding demand fixed, so the expected saving is projected clean, and neither of them prices the fact that the leaner unit is also a cheaper service.

Tension

Both are right, and the rightness lays the trap. The efficiency is a genuine saving per unit and the projection is sound arithmetic, so nothing here is a mistake. But the gain aimed at the unit is a price cut on the service, and the projection that isolates the gain does so by assuming away the one thing the gain will move, demand, so the saving is booked exact and false in the same breath.

Cue

The market, where the efficiency has made the service cheaper, not just leaner. A lower price meeting buyers free to do more and builders free to make more.

Action

Rebounding: The User, holding the consumer's seat, travels the now-cheaper mile more often, while The Pioneer at the new entrant's seat finds uses that were never worth the resource before.

Stage

The User tables Use It More: answer the lower price with more of the service, so the cheaper service pulls demand up and the rebound begins to eat the saving. The Pioneer tables Find New Uses, and the new use opens the extensive margin the forecast held fixed, adding demand that never existed to be counted.

Tension

Every extra use is rational, and their sum spends the saving. The User is only answering a cheaper price and the Pioneer is only creating real value, so no one is wasting anything, and both feel thrifty and productive. But the fixed demand of the drawing board comes unfixed here, in old uses and new at once, and the reduction that was promised is quietly consumed by the very cheapness the efficiency produced.

Tenor

Thrifty, green, pleased with the saving. The satisfaction of a resource made to go twice as far: leaner per unit, cleaner per mile, obviously less used overall. The voice of good engineering doing an evident good, spoken by people who really did halve the fuel.

Undertow

Under the thrift, a price quietly falling and a demand quietly rising to meet it. Twice as far per unit is half as dear per service, and half as dear is more wanted, so the very saving becomes the reason to use more, and uses that never paid before begin to pay. Nobody wastes: the driver only answers a cheaper mile, the new use is real value, and the meter climbs anyway.

Nerve

The feeling of doing the responsible thing, each efficiency a genuine saving per unit, the total quietly rising as the cheaper service pulls demand up behind it.

Echo

After the run: a meter reading higher than before the saving, a fleet of new uses that would never have existed at the old price, and an efficiency that spent more of the resource than it spared, one leaner unit at a time.

Projection

Systemic, unsentimental, willing to make a thing dear. Sees that efficiency alone feeds the demand it means to starve, and moves the lever to the whole. Prices or caps the resource itself, so the saving has nowhere to leak.

Action

Sets a cap or a price on the total resource, above the efficiency. Makes the whole deliberately scarce, so a leaner unit becomes less resource used and not more service bought. Lets the efficiency finally save, by holding the ceiling the rebound was pushing through.

Shadow

Its fix spends the cheap abundance the efficiency created. Capping the resource makes dear again the thing the saving made cheap, so it feels like taxing a success, and one repeal lets the rebound flood straight back. Right, resented, and always a lifted cap away from undone.

Tell

"Cap the fuel, not the engine." The one move that keeps the saving, and the one that gives the cheapness back.

Projection

Clever, thrifty, genuinely green. Sets out to save the resource, and does: twice the service for the same fuel. Believes a leaner unit is an obvious, unambiguous good.

Action

Improves the efficiency and books a real per-unit gain. Cuts the resource each unit of service costs, cleanly and honestly. Hands the saving forward as though the total will follow the unit down.

Shadow

Its saving is also a price cut on the thing it saved. Making the service leaner makes it cheaper, and cheaper is wanted more, so the very gain it delivers is the invitation to use more of what it spared. Saves the unit and, without meaning to, unleashes the whole.

Tell

"Now it does the same for half." True per unit, and the reason the half becomes twice.

Projection

Careful, quantitative, credible. Takes the per-unit gain and multiplies it out into a total saved. Believes the arithmetic, because the arithmetic is right.

Action

Books the saving: units of service times resource-per-unit, before and after. Holds demand fixed to isolate the effect of the efficiency. Reports a clean reduction that the whole is expected to deliver.

Shadow

Its fixed demand is the one thing that will not hold. The projection is exact and its assumption is false, because the cheaper service is precisely what moves demand, so the saving it books is spent by the rebound it left out. Right in the model, wrong at the meter.

Tell

"All else being equal, consumption falls." And all else is never equal, because the efficiency itself changes it.

Projection

Enterprising, inventive, alert to opportunity. Sees a service suddenly cheap enough to build on, and builds. Creates real value nobody could afford before.

Action

Opens new uses that were never viable at the old price. Puts the cheaper resource to work in places it could never have gone. Grows the demand not by using more of the same but by inventing more to use.

Shadow

Its new value is new consumption the saving never counted. The projection subtracted from a fixed set of uses, and the Pioneer adds uses to the set, so the resource is spent on things that did not exist to be spent on before. Genuinely creative, and genuinely why the meter climbs past every forecast.

Tell

"At this price, you could even use it for that." And now that is another draw on the resource that was meant to shrink.

Projection

Ordinary, rational, price-aware. Notices the service costs less now, and does more of it, as anyone would. Feels thrifty, because each unit is cheaper than it used to be.

Action

Uses more of the now-cheaper service. Drives the further mile, heats the larger room, runs the leaner thing longer, because the price fell. Spends the saving on more service rather than banking it as less resource.

Shadow

Its thrift per unit is its excess in total. Every extra use is individually cheaper and rational, and their sum is more resource burned than before the efficiency, and the User feels frugal the entire time. Not greedy: simply answering a lower price the way prices are answered.

Tell

"It barely costs anything to run now." Said just before running it twice as much.

Shown

A quota, a carbon price, a hard limit on the total resource, above any single unit. The lever moved from the efficiency of use to the amount there is to use.

Holds

The saving, finally secured. Here the whole is made scarce on purpose, so a leaner unit becomes less resource spent rather than more service bought, and the rebound meets a ceiling it cannot push through.

Offers

The one thing that keeps the gain. A limit on the resource that lets the efficiency save the total, doing at the level of the whole what the unit alone could not.

Withheld

The cheap abundance. The cap makes dear again exactly what the efficiency made cheap, so it feels like taxing a success, and it holds only while it is held, one repeal from letting the rebound flood back.

Shown

Blueprints, a leaner design, a spreadsheet of resource-per-unit before and after. The gain worked out and the saving multiplied from it.

Holds

The per-unit truth, and the fixed-demand assumption beside it. Here the efficiency is real and the projection is clean, both resting on a world where the number of units does not change.

Offers

A credible reduction. A genuine saving per unit, and a total saved that follows straight from it, exactly as intended.

Withheld

The demand curve. The board models the unit and holds the count of units still, so the one thing it does not draw is the rebound the cheaper unit will cause, which is where the saving goes.

Shown

Buyers responding to a lower price, and builders finding new things to build. The cheaper service being used more, and used for more.

Holds

The rebound and the extensive margin together. Here the fixed demand of the drawing board comes unfixed: more of the old use at the lower price, and new uses that the old price forbade, both drawing on the resource.

Offers

Real value and real thrift. Cheaper mobility, cheaper light, cheaper compute, and inventions that could never have paid before, all genuine goods.

Withheld

Any restraint on the total. The market answers price with quantity, so a cheaper service is simply a more-used one, and nothing here holds the whole down while every unit falls.

Shown

A running total of the resource used, and the forecast that said it would fall. The number the whole thing was for, read at last.

Holds

The backfire, in plain figures. Here the per-unit gain and the total consumed sit side by side, and the total has not fallen but risen, though every unit is leaner than ever.

Offers

The honest whole. The one measure that counts what was actually spent, not per unit but in sum, undeceived by how efficient each unit became.

Withheld

A culprit. The meter shows the saving gone and no waste anywhere to blame it on, because the extra use was all rational and all cheap, so it can name the backfire and never a villain.

Place

At the meter, in the running total that was meant to fall and rose. The number the whole intervention was for, read in sum.

Load bearing

Without it the paradox would be merely a saving smaller than hoped, a rebound that ate some of the gain. With it the rebound runs past the gain, so more resource is burned after the efficiency than before it, and the intervention bought to conserve has spent. The Backfire is load bearing because it is the strong form of the paradox, the Khazzoom-Brookes result (Khazzoom; Brookes): not just that efficiency saves less than promised, but that at the level of the whole it can increase the very consumption it was meant to reduce, so the sign of the effect flips.

Apparent

Growth, or bad luck. It looks like something else must have caused the rise: the economy grew, demand was always going to climb, the efficiency surely helped at the margin. That deflection is easy precisely because no waste is visible, so the backfire is read as anything but the efficiency that produced it.

Yearbook

Read by the forecaster at the meter, fed by the rebound and the new use. It is the reckoning: the Backfire is the expected saving inverted, the saving not just spent but overspent, and the plain evidence that the whole was never priced.

Place

Between the unit and the market, where a leaner unit becomes a lower price. In the pass-through from resource saved to money paid.

Load bearing

Without it the efficiency would be a saving and stop there, banked as less resource used. With it the saving becomes a discount, and a discount is not a reduction in use but an invitation to more of it, because a cheaper thing is a more-wanted thing. The Cheaper Service is load bearing because it is the hinge of the whole paradox (Greening et al.): it is the step, invisible in the per-unit framing, where conserving the resource turns into repricing the service, so that everything downstream, the rebound, the new uses, the backfire, follows from a price that quietly fell.

Apparent

Just a better deal. It looks like the happy consumer face of efficiency: the mile is cheaper, the light is cheaper, good news all round. Nothing marks it as the exact mechanism that will undo the saving, because a lower price feels like the reward for thrift, not the cause of excess.

Yearbook

Produced by cheapening, out of the efficiency, and answered by the rebound. It is the pivot: the Cheaper Service is where a saving becomes a signal, the point at which using less per unit is read by the whole market as: use more.

Place

At the drawing board, in the leaner design that does the same for less. The genuine improvement, real and measured, per unit of service.

Load bearing

Without it there is no saving to spend, and no paradox, only ordinary use. With it there is a real per-unit gain, and the whole misfit is that this gain, aimed at the unit, does not stay at the unit: it lowers the cost of the service and so invites more of it. The Efficiency is load bearing because it is the honest good that the paradox turns (Jevons), the improvement that is exactly what it claims per unit and exactly the opposite of what it claims in total, so the trap is set not by waste but by success.

Apparent

An unambiguous win. It looks like pure progress: the same service for half the resource, cleaner, cheaper, greener. Nothing about a genuine efficiency announces that it is also a price cut, which is why the win is trusted to be a saving.

Yearbook

Made by the engineer through improving, and turned by the cheaper service. It is the good the paradox needs: the Efficiency is real, and its reality is precisely what makes the rebound rational, because a truly cheaper service truly is worth using more.

Place

At the drawing board, in the spreadsheet that multiplies the per-unit gain across a fixed number of units. The clean total the efficiency is promised to deliver.

Load bearing

Without it there is no expectation for the rebound to betray, and no reckoning at the meter. With it there is a promised number, exact and false, that the whole intervention is justified by and measured against. The Expected Saving is load bearing because it is the naive projection every efficiency case rests on (Greening et al.): it holds demand fixed to isolate the gain, which is the one thing that guarantees it will be wrong, because the gain itself is what moves demand. It is the saving that was always going to be spent.

Apparent

Sound arithmetic. It looks like exactly the right calculation: units times resource-per-unit, before and after, difference saved. The maths is correct, which is what makes the assumption inside it so easy to miss, since no one doubts a sum that adds up.

Yearbook

Booked by the forecaster, and never met at the meter. It is the promise the paradox breaks: the Expected Saving is what the rebound quietly spends and the backfire finally exposes, a reduction real on the page and gone in the world.

Place

Across the whole run, from the drawing board to the cap. And wherever a resource is used more efficiently and its total use is expected to fall.

Load bearing

Without it the parts are a scatter: an efficiency, a price drop, a rebound, a new use, a meter that rose. With it they are one law: efficiency lowers the price of a service, a cheaper service is more demanded, so a saving booked at the unit is spent, and can be over-spent, at the whole. The Jevons Paradox is load bearing because it is the whole read at once (Jevons; Alcott), and it names the only exit: not a better efficiency but a ceiling, a cap or price on the resource itself, so the gain is kept at the level it is always spent. It is efficiency's own catch: to make a thing go further is to make it cheaper, and to make it cheaper is to make more of it wanted.

Apparent

Progress doing exactly what progress should. It looks like a world getting more efficient everywhere and therefore, surely, using less: leaner engines, brighter bulbs, greener grids. Nothing on the surface is a failure, and that is the whole of it, because the resource is spent not by any waster but by a chain of genuine improvements and rational responses to the prices they cut.

Yearbook

Held whole by nobody: assembled from the efficiency, the cheaper service, and the rebound, and answered only by the capper. It is the misfit named: thrift per unit, left unpriced at the whole, is an invitation to use more, so the saving is kept only by capping the resource the efficiency made cheap.

Place

At the market, where a service cheap enough to build on gets built on. In the applications that could not have paid before, and now pay.

Load bearing

Without it the rebound would be bounded by the uses that already existed, and might stay under the saving. With it the set of uses itself grows: a resource cheap enough opens doors that were shut, so demand rises not only in the old uses but in wholly new ones the projection never counted. The New Use is load bearing because it is the extensive margin (Sorrell), the reason rebound can exceed the gain and tip into backfire, since you cannot bound the new consumption by the old when the cheapness invents demand that did not exist.

Apparent

Innovation, and genuine value. It looks like progress of the best kind: a cheaper resource enabling things nobody could afford before, real goods, real invention. And it is, which is why the new consumption it brings is welcomed rather than counted against the saving.

Yearbook

Opened by the pioneer through rebounding, unpriced by the expected saving. It is the rebound's second engine: the New Use adds to the very set of uses the forecast held fixed, so with the rebound it pushes the total past the saving and into the backfire.

Place

At the market, in every choice to do more of a thing now that it costs less. The further mile, the warmer room, the longer-running leaner machine.

Load bearing

Without it a cheaper service would be used exactly as much as before, and the saving would hold. With it demand answers price: the lower the service costs, the more of it is taken, so the per-unit gain is partly, wholly, or more than wholly returned to consumption. The Rebound is load bearing because it is the effect that spends the saving (Khazzoom; Sorrell), the plain elasticity that turns a leaner unit into more units, measured in study after study and never zero, so that thrift per unit reliably buys use in total.

Apparent

Just people responding to prices. It looks like ordinary, rational economics: a thing got cheaper, so it is used more, exactly as a market should behave. Each extra use is sensible and cheap, so the rebound wears the face of thrift even as it spends the saving.

Yearbook

Driven by the user through rebounding, out of the cheaper service. It is the saving's fate: the Rebound is where the expected saving goes, use by rational use, and with the new use beside it, where the total begins to climb.

Has

The numbers, the model, and the credibility of a clean projection. A per-unit gain to multiply into a total saved. The convention of holding all else equal to isolate the effect.

Orders

Book the saving: service times resource-per-unit, before and after. Report the reduction the efficiency is expected to deliver. Keep demand fixed, so the effect of the efficiency can be seen alone.

Loses

The one variable the whole result turns on. Fixing demand is what makes the model clean and false, because the cheaper service is exactly what moves demand, so the saving it books is spent by the rebound it left out. Exact in the spreadsheet, wrong at the meter.

Drives

Toward a saving that is real on the page, projected on a demand that will not hold still, and undone by the very price change it did not price in.

Has

A service that costs less than it did. The ordinary freedom to use more of a thing when its price falls. A sense of thrift, because each unit is leaner than before.

Orders

Respond to the price: do more of the service now that it is cheaper. Drive the further mile, heat the larger room, run the leaner thing longer. Spend the saving on more service, as a rational buyer does.

Loses

The reduction the saving was supposed to be. Every extra use is cheaper and sensible, and their sum is more resource than before, so the seat is frugal per unit and profligate in total without ever feeling the switch. Banks no resource; buys more service.

Drives

Toward more of the now-cheaper service, each added unit rational and thrifty, their total the rebound that eats the saving whole.

Has

The skill to cut the resource each unit of service costs. A real, measurable per-unit saving to deliver. A brief to conserve, and the belief that a leaner unit conserves.

Orders

Improve the efficiency and prove the per-unit gain. Deliver more service for less resource, cleanly and honestly. Hand the saving forward as a reduction the whole will inherit.

Loses

Control of what the saving does once released. A leaner unit is a cheaper service, and a cheaper service is more demanded, so the gain the seat delivers is the very thing that lifts total use. It owns the unit and none of the whole.

Drives

Toward a leaner unit, sincerely, which is a genuine good and a lower price at once, and a lower price is an invitation the seat never meant to send.

Has

An eye for a service suddenly cheap enough to build on. The freedom to put the resource where it could never afford to go. Real value to create at the new price.

Orders

Open the uses the old price ruled out. Build on the cheaper service and grow the market for it. Turn a saving into a whole new demand, legitimately and well.

Loses

Nothing it can see, because its gains are real. The new uses are genuine value, and they are also consumption the projection never counted, added to a set of uses it assumed was fixed. Grows the whole precisely by inventing more to spend it on.

Drives

Toward new value the old price forbade, which is real and good and also more resource used, so the extensive margin opens exactly as the efficiency was meant to close it.

Has

The power to put a ceiling or a price on the total resource. The lever that acts on the whole, above any single unit. The unpopularity of making a cheap thing dear again.

Orders

Cap or price the resource itself, not the efficiency of its use. Make the whole deliberately scarce, so a leaner unit means less resource, not more service. Hold the ceiling the rebound is pushing against.

Loses

The cheap abundance the efficiency produced. The cap makes dear again the very thing the saving made cheap, so the fix reads as taxing a success, and a single repeal lets the rebound flood back. Keeps the saving only by giving back the cheapness.

Drives

Toward a saving secured at the level of the whole, bought by making the resource scarce on purpose, and never more than one lifted cap from being spent again.

Initiated by

Someone who sees the efficiency feeds the demand it means to starve. The decision to act on the whole, with a quota, a price, or a hard limit on the resource.

Direction

The total resource made scarce or dear on purpose, over and above any efficiency of use. A ceiling placed where the rebound was pushing through.

Lever

Scarcity of the whole, which the unit alone can never supply. Cap the resource and a leaner unit becomes less used rather than more, because there is only so much to use.

Echo

A saving secured at the level it was always spent. The efficiency finally conserving ... held only while the cap is held, and undone the moment it is lifted as too costly.

Initiated by

A unit that now costs less resource to run. The moment a leaner unit becomes, to whoever buys the service, a cheaper one.

Direction

The price of the service falling as its resource cost falls. The mile, the lit hour, the computation, each dearer yesterday and cheaper today.

Lever

The pass-through from resource saved to price paid. What was framed as using less becomes, in the buyer's hand, spending less, and spending less on a thing invites spending on more of it.

Echo

A service quietly repriced downward. The saving turned into a discount, and a discount is the signal every buyer and builder reads as: use more.

Initiated by

A brief to conserve, and the skill to cut the resource each unit costs. An engine, a bulb, a chip made to deliver the same service for less.

Direction

The resource per unit of service falling, cleanly and measurably. More miles per gallon, more lumens per watt, more compute per joule.

Lever

Genuine engineering, aimed squarely at the unit. The gain is real and the intent is thrift, and both are entirely about the single unit of service.

Echo

A leaner unit, and a cheaper service. The saving delivered per unit, and, unbidden, the price of the service cut, which is where the trouble starts.

Initiated by

A cheaper service and a demand free to answer it. The lower price meeting buyers who will do more and builders who will make more.

Direction

Consumption climbing: more of the old use, and new uses that the old price forbade. The saving being spent on service rather than kept as resource, unit by unit.

Lever

Price elasticity, the plain fact that a cheaper thing is a more-used thing. Direct rebound in the existing uses, and the extensive margin opening as fresh uses become viable.

Echo

A demand that has grown to meet the lower price. The projected saving eaten in part or in whole, and, where the rebound runs past the gain, exceeded, so the total climbs.

Direction

Multiply the per-unit gain into a total saved: service times resource-per-unit, before and after. Hold demand fixed to isolate the effect of the efficiency, and report the reduction the whole is expected to deliver.

Orders

(The Forecaster books the saving and holds demand fixed to see the efficiency alone.)

Implementation

(The Drawing Board; the cheapening process the projection leaves out; the expected saving is booked on a demand that will not hold.)

Targets

• [ ] the per-unit gain is multiplied into a total saved
• [ ] demand is held fixed to isolate the effect
• [ ] a clean reduction is reported
• [ ] the one variable the result turns on, demand, is assumed away

Direction

Move the lever from the unit to the whole. Cap or price the resource itself, above the efficiency, so a leaner unit means less resource used and not more service bought. Make the whole deliberately scarce, and hold the ceiling the rebound is pushing against.

Orders

(The Capper sets a cap or a price on the total resource and holds it.)

Implementation

(The Cap; the capping process; the jevons paradox is answered only by pricing the whole, so the backfire has no room to form.)

Targets

• [ ] a cap or price is set on the resource itself
• [ ] the whole is made deliberately scarce, above any unit
• [ ] the efficiency now saves the total, not feeds the demand
• [ ] the saving holds, unless the cap is lifted as too costly

Direction

Build on a service suddenly cheap enough to build on. Open the uses the old price ruled out, put the cheaper resource where it could never afford to go, and create real value at the new price. Turn a saving into a whole new demand.

Orders

(The Pioneer opens uses that were never viable at the old price and are now.)

Implementation

(The Market; the rebounding process; the new use opens the extensive margin the projection assumed was fixed.)

Targets

• [ ] uses the old price forbade become viable
• [ ] the cheaper resource is put to work in new places
• [ ] real value is created, and it is also new consumption
• [ ] the set of uses grows, so the whole grows past every forecast

Direction

Cut the resource each unit of service costs. Deliver more service for less fuel, cleanly and honestly, and hand the per-unit saving forward as a reduction the whole will inherit. A leaner unit is an obvious good.

Orders

(The Engineer doubles the efficiency and books a real per-unit gain.)

Implementation

(The Drawing Board; the improving process; the efficiency is a genuine per-unit saving that is also a cut in the price of the service.)

Targets

• [ ] the resource per unit of service is reduced
• [ ] the per-unit gain is real and measured
• [ ] the saving is handed forward as if the total will follow the unit
• [ ] the service is now cheaper, not just leaner

Direction

Answer the price. The service costs less now, so do more of it: drive the further mile, heat the larger room, run the leaner thing longer. Spend the saving on more service, as any rational buyer does, and feel thrifty per unit while doing it.

Orders

(The User uses more of the now-cheaper service, each added unit rational.)

Implementation

(The Market; the rebounding process; the cheaper service pulls demand up, and the rebound is the sum of the extra use.)

Targets

• [ ] the lower price is noticed and answered
• [ ] more of the service is used, each unit cheaper
• [ ] the saving is spent on service, not banked as resource
• [ ] frugal per unit and profligate in total, without feeling the switch