Global Warming, Clean, Green, Environment, Sustainability and other stereotypes!

• Home
• About “It’s Hot Here”
• Contact Me
• Important Dates and Events
• Organizations
• Tools
• What to do?

EnergyStar: Who is going to certify our certification programs?

Recently EnergyStar was in the news, and obviously not for the right reasons. If you do not know what EnergyStar is, it is a brand built by the Government to help businesses label their products as energy efficient. The website with it’s ostentatious offers to help you improve the energy efficiency of your house among other things.

You can mesmerize yourselves by going here: http://www.energystar.gov/

When the program derails

The “program” seemed to be running just fine, till the GAO was able to push forth an investigation. All hell, so to speak broke loose. Here is some of what came to pass:

1.1. The program did not evaluate if the products being submitted for certification were real or if they were coming from a real company. This is not altogether a new disease for certifying or examining agencies. Back in 2009, I blogged on how an IRB had provided approvals for studies from fake companies with some interesting names. You can read about that here.

1.2. The program approved a product that was purported to be a gasoline powered alarm clock. Of course, there is no reason why a gasoline powered alarm clock is not plausible. However, is it useful? Would you check to see if it exists if someone brought it up, say in a conversation? This begs the question – what exactly is the certification process here?

1.3. Some seemingly legitimate products were rejected. It is not clear if the GAO said what the response was.

1.4. A few products were also withdrawn by the GAO when they never received a response within the investigation period. It is not clear why this happened either.

Pouncing on the wrong problem

It might appear that we should immediately hoist EnergyStart, the DOE and the EPA to the altar and sacrifice them. That of course would make for a great Tea Party.

It would be the wrong thing to do, of course.

The real problem is this – no certification program is appropriate without clear, well established procedures and documentation.

Can we simply pull well documented and outlined procedures out of thin air?

Absolutely not.

The solution

2.1 Do not baptize

That’s right. Do not baptize a defective, albeit first-step solution. This is exactly what the EPA and the Government did with EnergyStar. Once they labeled it to be their solution to the consumers’ quest for energy efficiency, it was pretty much forgotten. Yes, they can claim now that they will work on it, but this should have been laid out clearly in the beginning.

The consumer may be busy, and may not be a fool. You do not have to present yourself as an oversimplified know-it-all to the average person. If the EPA had come clear and mentioned that EnergyStar was  a growing system, this problem with the PR disaster could have been lessened.

2.2 Do not sensationalize, Senator Snowe

Of all the people to go bananas over a Government rating system, I would have never presumed it would be Senator Snowe. Government agencies can do with some of the sensational and sleazy “investigations” run by the GAO at the behest of board legislators.

If she did have doubts about the EnergyStar program, which is what unequivocally motivated her call to the GAO that lead to the investigation.

Well, how about alerting the EPA about her doubts to begin with? Wouldn’t that have avoided this unnecessary embarassment to an agency that is also run with taxpayer money?

Seriously, if this does not stop, someone needs to investigate and see if the GAO is being abused by certain Senators…because the GAO wasn’t pulled out of the Easter Bunny’s tushy – that was also paid for by “taxpayers”.

2.3 Optimize

Optimize the certification program. When you begin, you make some assumptions on the science, the elements examined toward certification, volumes and so on. As time progresses and you start providing this certification, things start to evolve and even devolve based on circumstances or improvements in science and/or other observations.

For example, a lot of companies are now performing life cycle assessment to ascertain and/or minimize the carbon footprint of their products. However, one of the current weaknesses (one of many, mind you) is that LCA does not have a time value associated with the emissions. It is assumed that all the carbon (or other) emissions for the product that will be released in the product’s life cycle is made in one giant step. This of course is not true however.

Scientists postulate that the effect of carbon dioxide released slowly over time (which is the real case) is much worse than assuming that carbon dioxide from the entire product life cycle is released in one big puff. Even as we are aware of this, we do not dance naked on the streets or “investigate” LCA consultants.

With transparency and through the use of standards, LCA turns out to be at the highest echelon of acceptable practices to study the impact of a product on the environment.

2.4 Handle Deeper Issues

It is obvious that the problems with EnergyStar were not from a misunderstanding of science. The problems have more to do with poor procedures and poor or absent leadership. However, eliminating or screaming out loud would not be the solution. It is time the DOE and EPA got their act together and streamlined processes so that the companies that submit applications are scrutinized along with the products.

2.5 Comparative Studies?

Comparative studies are controversial in healthcare, but controversy or not, it would be interesting to create benchmarks for each class or type of energy device and look at how newly submitted products line up. Once again, the Government needs to ensure that the benchmarks are also pliable for replacement and constant reexamination.

Conclusion

When it comes to energy and sustainability certification, the “tax payer” stands to gain a lot from programs that are well defined programs created with a focus on maturity and excellence rather than sleaze and sensationalism. While it is important to investigate and clear agencies, it is also important to provide them with the leadership and support they deserve.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

March 28, 2010  Tags: EnergyStar, EPA/DOE, GAO, Senator Snowe, sensational environmental politics  Posted in: Causes, Government and Sustainability, Renewable Energy Politics

• « Previous post
• Next post »