It's dangerous when society is confitioned to think that energy consumption is sinful.

This sort of messaging implies that you should strive to consume less energy disregarding the fact that human uses energy to produce.

It implies that 'homes' are not where you should spend energy, that the only place where energy consumption is slightly less of a taboo is in the employ of large corporations, in 'office' buildings (all the while pretending that factories and manufacturing facilities only exists in some fantasy dreamland.)

Putting a taboo on energy is putting a taboo on production and the productive population.

Saying you should use only as much energy as the average 'efficient' members of the society use is implying that onebshould not priduce and only consume in moderation.

Energy efficiency can only be measured against the value it produces, and values are inherently subjective and personal. Energy consumed by always on air condition systems in an uninhabited multi million dollars estate, using the most energy efficient technology available can only be considered as pure consumption and produced no value to anyone (but the billionaire is paying the bills so atleast those money can go somewhere more productive) But energy consumed by old inefficient technologies in the homes of aspiring young people in developing countries that enables them to study at night and keep their food from spoiling might arguably be more valuable, at least to the person using it.

This seemingly benign messaging is therefore, vile and anti-human flourishing.