I have to agree with the Tea Party; the US government should not choose the light bulbs I use in my home.  And fortunately, it does not.

Yet that’s the spin being pushed by those who want to roll back federal lighting performance standards. An odd mythology is developing around the standards.

Opponents claim that the standards amount to government picking and choosing winners and forcing them upon us. More specifically, they say that the feds have banned the incandescent light bulb, which has been around since Thomas Edison’s time.

This is not true; the incandescent light bulb is not being banned; the standards are agnostic about technology type as long as they perform as required. The 2007 law is meant to act as a market mechanism that encourages innovation. With a benchmark to work towards, scientists, engineers and product designers are working to displace older, inefficient devices.  Already several different kind of light bulbs have made their way into the marketplace, including a new and better incandescent.

We have efficiency standards not only for light bulbs, but also for refrigerators, water heaters, air conditioners, microwaves and other appliances. They are nothing new.  Those who see them as government intrusion may be surprised to find that the first US appliance standards were set under Ronald Reagan.

Still one might ask, do we really need appliance standards? Are they worth the bother? That’s a $300 billion question – the amount the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy estimates the US will save on electricity costs by 2030 through existing appliance and lighting standards. 

Here are other important points about appliance standards made by Steven Nadel, ACEEE’s executive director, in a testimony on March 10 before the US Senate’s Energy and Natural Resource Committee. Nadel urged that Congress reject S. 395, the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act (BULB), which would repeal lighting standards set in 2007 under the Bush administration.

  • Appliance standards generated 340,000 net jobs in the U.S. in 2010.
  • The majority of the standards are based on consensus agreements between manufacturers and energy efficiency advocates.
  • Four types of bulbs already meet the standards, although the standards do not take effect until 2012. Two are incandescent bulbs.
  • The 2007 lighting standards, alone, are expected to reduce annual electricity use by 72 billion kWh by 2020, enough to serve the annual electricity needs of 6.6 million average households and avoid construction of about 30 power plants.
  • ACEEE forecasts that the lighting standards will reduce consumer energy bills by more than $7 billion by 2020, or about $50 per American household annually.
  • A recent USA Today survey of 1,016 adults found that despite misinformation circulated about a light bulb ban, 61% of Americans favor the 2007 lighting standards, while 31% say they are  bad.

This blog is open source & copyright free with attribution to www.realenergywriters.com

Views: 70

Comment

You need to be a member of Home Energy Pros to add comments!

Join Home Energy Pros

Comment by Elizabeth Guinn on March 30, 2011 at 6:20am
Enjoy your blog immensely.  Great article.

Home Energy Pros

Home Energy Pros was founded by the developers of Home Energy Saver Pro (sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy,) and brought to you in partnership with Home Energy magazine.

Latest Activity

Sean Lintow Sr replied to Bud Poll's discussion Inconsistant Local Authotity
"There are actually plenty of them out there like the manufacturers themselves, SPFA, BSC,…"
2 hours ago
Profile IconEthan Bukowiec and Andy Li joined Home Energy Pros
8 hours ago
Bob Blanchette replied to w d's discussion Managing Solar Energy
"Look into passive solar heating. The south windows have enough overhang that the windows are shaded…"
21 hours ago
Steve Waclo commented on Kaplan Clean Tech's blog post The Difference Between Home Inspection and Energy Auditing [Infographic]
"Excellent graphic summary but I don't agree Home Inspectors also check energy use. I believe…"
yesterday
Steve Waclo replied to Linda Wigington's discussion Low-cost electricity monitoring: Accuracy & Applications in the group 1000 Home Challenge
""The problem with plug in energy testers is they miss most of a typical homes energy use. 240v…"
yesterday
w d posted a discussion

Managing Solar Energy

What's the state of the art on managing solar energy (esp. at the home)?There's surely no…See More
yesterday
Bud Poll posted a discussion

Inconsistant Local Authotity

It becomes frustrating to give people modern advice and then have to backtrack and tell them to do…See More
yesterday
Morgan Hunter replied to Isaiah Borel's discussion Blown Cellulose VS Blown Fiberglass in the Attic
"Up here In Canada Fibreglass wins hands down for heat loss! Check back 5, 10 & 20 years later…"
yesterday

© 2014   Created by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service