PS, IME there aren’t many people who are really truly consistent about saving energy in absolute terms, not just relative to the inherent energy intensity of a lifestyle they’ve chosen for other reasons. The general impression I have is that people of sort of frame of mind to care a lot about energy consumption, aside from the direct cost, are often pro-rural living and more often than not pro ‘experiences not things’. But rural tends to mean more driving, a Prius is only a rational choice at US gas prices if you drive the hell out of it. Likewise Economist had a good graphic recently (can’t link, don’t remember the issue) about resorts trying to go green, but it’s a joke when you consider how much aviation fuel is used to get to resorts far from their customers. If experiences means travelling to the four corners of the world, you basically can’t also be an energy saver.
I know there are some people who completely walk the walk of living in tiny spaces and basically never travelling, though they could afford to, by which you can really cut your energy footprint. That’s fine with me they do that, as long as it remains voluntary.