"In the competition for hearts and minds, improving the efficiency with which we use energy faces an uphill challenge; images of heat exchangers, solid state lighting, infrared scanning technologies, more and better roof insulation, double and triple glazing, air sealing systems, or even smart meters do not get the pulse racing" [Convery, 2011, 189].

Why do energy savings measures “not get the pulse racing”? In Convery’s view, they cannot compete with “the glow” of energy supply projects or the local economic benefits of new power plants. Yet, we also know that energy supply projects regularly take years or decades to conclude at significant financial, political, and environmental cost. Conversely, energy savings measures often pass under the radar and are frequently, though not always implemented relatively quickly and easily as the proverbial low hanging fruit. In this paper, we suggest that the binary view of high attention = high impact versus low attention = low impact is neither accurate nor helpful. To speed things up and nuance the discussion, we highlight the relevance of capitalizing on low attention but high impact approaches. First, we develop a conceptual framework that brings into relation energy savings impact and attention (aspects such as participation by different actors, a measure’s material footprint; and political consequences) and how the two evolve over time. Second, we offer examples from Geneva and Switzerland, aiming to populate the framework-derived matrix, analyze movements across cells in the matrix during a project’s life, and identify complementarities between different quadrants of the matrix, for example between programs of the Service Industriels de Genève and the Swiss Confederation. Finally, we address “scope conditions” under which higher hanging fruit can be reached (because they attract less attention) and conclude with recommendations for planning and implementing energy efficiency and sufficiency measures.