Help Save Consumers Millions and Protect the Environment!
ENERGY STAR has saved Americans $230 billion on utility bills and prevented over 1.7 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases over two decades by promising an "easy choice" for consumers and a commitment to “delivering overall energy savings that are cost-effective to the consumer.”
Now there’s a proposal in Washington that would break this promise by hiding the fact that the proposed requirements for ENERGY STAR windows, doors, and skylights would not be cost-effective for many consumers.
The result? Middle-income consumers will have to fend for themselves when searching for affordable energy-efficient options; this hurts consumers and the environment.
Tell the EPA to save ENERGY STAR – for consumers and for the environment. Sign the petition to send the EPA a clear message that the ENERGY STAR program should keep its commitment to cost-effective energy savings.
For just over 20 years, ENERGY STAR has enjoyed the widespread support of consumers, retailers, and manufacturers, saving $230 billion in energy savings while preventing $1.7 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases from reaching the Earth’s atmosphere. The final draft of the proposed Version 6.0 of the ENERGY STAR criteria for windows, doors, and skylights breaks with the mission of the ENERGY STAR program.
Rather than offering cost-effective energy efficient options for consumers, the proposed new ENERGY STAR standards would increase the cost of efficient products too much. As a result, in most parts of the U.S., it would take consumers many years to recoup their investment and begin seeing real cost savings.
Replacing single pane windows continues to be the “low the hanging fruit” when retrofitting a home for greatest energy efficiency gains. Significant energy savings can be achieved by the replacement of these windows with higher efficiency models. Over the last 15 years, ENERGY STAR windows have become the industry standard for helping consumers like me identify energy efficient products that provide a reasonable return on investment.
If the ENERY STAR program moves to a standard that fails to properly consider cost-effectiveness as criteria, I’m concerned that the result could be significant cost increases, longer payback periods, and a missed opportunity to capture energy savings. I strongly oppose abandoning the ENERGY STAR program’s original mission and guiding principle of cost-effective energy savings, which benefit consumers and the environment.
More than 20,000 citizens have sent over 80,000 messages to the President and their representatives in the U.S. Congress expressing their concern about this misguided proposal. I strongly urge you to maintain the original mission of the ENERGY STAR program, keeping affordable options for energy efficient windows and doors. Please keep the ENERGY STAR promise of an "easy choice" for consumers and make sure that the ENERGY STAR program continues to benefit middle-income consumers by continuing to include affordable energy-efficient windows, doors and skylights within the program.
Thank you for your consideration of my views.