It sounds utterly contrary to what we might think: If we use less energy, civilization will actually increase the emissions blamed for global warming.

That's one of the controversial findings of the University of Utah's Tim Garrett, who applied simple physics in an unconventional way to look at worldwide energy use.

His new paper, to be published this week in the journal Climate Science, finds that conserving energy actually spurs economic growth and steps up energy consumption.

"Making civilization more energy efficient simply allows it to grow faster and consume more energy," said Garrett, an associate professor of atmospheric sciences.

"I'm just saying it's not really possible to conserve energy in a meaningful way," he added, "because the current rate of energy consumption is determined by the unchangeable past of economic production."

With its additional claim that an unchanging mathematical value determines the rate of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, Garrett's paper is sure to spur more debate. Some economists panned it, and several journals previously rejected it.

Meanwhile, the conclusions are expected to be welcomed by those who doubt the usefulness of trying to stop climate change. Utah political figures, including U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert and state Rep. Mike Noel, have publicly attacked policy responses to climate change. They say cap-and-trade and other approaches probably will devastate the economy with little benefit to the public.

Rob Davies, who teaches physics and climate at Utah State University, said the study "has the potential to be incredibly important work in the realm of economics and energy," even if it is too early to draw broad conclusions from it about the wisdom of tackling carbon dioxide emissions.

"Tim has opened up a brand new window from which to view the problem, and explored one of its important features -- namely, the role of efficiency," said Davies. "But there are other aspects that remain to be factored in, such as relative costing of carbon- and non-carbon based sources."

With its publication, Garrett's paper will now be subjected to the usual scientific process, including challenges and testing from the perspective of a variety of disciplines.

Garrett said the results have made him reconsider his own views about conservation, although he still rides his bike or takes the bus to work, dries family laundry on a clothes line and uses a push lawn mower.

He does not foresee a rapid switch-over to nuclear power or any other policy moves that would stop the increase in greenhouse gases.

"If it feels good to conserve energy, that is fine," he said. "But there shouldn't be any pretense that it will make a difference."

fahys@sltrib.com