Imagine the following scenario. You are shopping for a new refrigerator. You find some models that have the same dimensions as the old refrigerator. One has an ice maker, which may be comfortable. Another has an inner water distributor, which may also be comfortable. A third has an ice maker, and also the familiar Blue Energy Star sign. She has difficulty keeping all the features straight, so I decided to go with the third, knowing that it will save you money on your electricity bills.
Decisions such as hundreds of times are made in the minute-on today, they are estimated, more than a million approved products are sold. These products range from refrigerators (star stickers models about nine percent of those that meet the minimum federal standard) for dryers (here, 20 percent more efficient power stars models) to air conditioners, dishwashers, billiard pumps, commercial water heaters, and list-ups continue. The Energy Star rating, which dates back to 1992, jointly runs by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry of Energy, and was named – through its website – “one of the most successful US government volunteer programs in history.” Energy Star-Again, according to its website-over thirty-three years, reduced the demand for electricity by five trillion kilowatts per hour and cut greenhouse gas emissions with four billion tons.
Last week, reports began to generalize that the Trump administration was planning to cancel the energy star program as part of its reorganization – or, if you prefer, violation – from the Environmental Protection Agency according to the people who attended a briefing on this issue, and a segment that was apparently displayed during the meeting, the administration plans to eliminate the entire office to protect the atmosphere, which works on the energy of management tools along many other programs. The Environmental Protection Agency did not confirm these reports and did not deny these reports. When journalists (including this situation) asked about his plans for the office, he only said that he “provides organizational improvements to the staff of employees who would better benefit the American people and enhance the agency’s basic task better, while operating America’s great return.”
As with many administration’s actions, there are questions about whether eliminating the energy star program will be legal. In the 2005 Energy Policy Law, Congress has directed the heads of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry of Energy to “maintain the integrity of the Energy Star Spice”, which it will be difficult to do if there is no such label. There is also an issue whether legislators will agree to the changes in the program, which started during the era of President George Haran Bush and has wide support from consumers and industry. In April, more than a thousand companies, municipalities, and organizations sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency official, Lee Zeladen, and urged him to “maintain the levels of financing and full employment” of the program. The message noted that the Energy star costs about thirty-two million dollars annually to management, “however American families provide more than $ 40 billion annually on energy bills”-“a huge return on taxpayers’ investment.”
Given that it costs very little, has wide support, which is completely voluntary, why is the administration considering getting rid of the energy star? One of the possibilities is that he does not really know what you do. As Paula Glove, the coalition president to save energy, a non -profit group of both parties, noticed that the program “really corresponds to the president’s priorities on reducing energy costs.” (During the first administration of Donald Trump, there was a talk about the end of the energy star, but the idea was abandoned soon.)
Another possibility is that this is part of the administration’s assault on anything and everything related to curbing greenhouse gas emissions. “This is not an economic policy-it is sabotaging the economy and sabotaging the family budgets to pay the donors with fossil fuel,” said Senator Shieldon Whitch, a democratic of Rod Island and a classification member of the Environmental and Public Works Committee.
The second Trump administration was climate protection, which was not in Rome in Rome. According to the A Tall, which is kept by the Sabin Center in Colombia, the administration has taken more than a hundred steps aimed at limiting or eliminating federal support to reduce emissions and adapt to the climate. This includes an executive order that gives priority to the development of fossil fuels and a memorandum of federal agencies to stop the rental of expansion sites in marine wind energy, both of whom issued by Trump on his first day in his post, and a recent announcement by the Ministry of Interior that it will carry out quick approval procedures for oil and gas projects. A blog post by several colleagues of the Sabine Center, which determines a hundred days of Trump’s days, indicated that “the administration is moving quickly to relax to organize the federal climate in all fields.”
Not satisfied with undermining federal climate programs, the Trump administration has also gone after government and local initiatives. In an executive order issued in early April, the President ordered the Ministry of Justice to try to prevent what he called “exhausting and ideological motives” climate change “or energy policies that threaten US energy dominance. Later that month, the administration filed lawsuits against two states-Vermont and New York-which planned to create a “superior climate” to be funded through fees for fossil fuel companies. It also filed lawsuits against Hawaii and Michigan, which announced plans to prosecute major oil companies over climate damage. The Hawaiian Prosecutor, Ann Lopez, described the lawsuit against her mandate a “direct attack on Hawaii’s rights.”
The White House war against climate initiatives extends to the depths of climate and information science worlds. The administration rejected the researchers who were working in the national climate evaluation, which is the report of the Commissioner of Congress. (Scientists continue to work anyway, under AEGIS of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Association.) The money has been cut off for the Climate Model Program in Princeton, on the pretext that the effort contributes to a phenomenon known as “climate anxiety”. Global temperature records are destroyed. “Climate change will not make him disappear.”. Bradcho indicated that Trump appears to be believed in reality Ministry of TruthHis saying: “Ignorance is strength.”
In the context of all this massacre, Energy Star can be considered as another possible victim. However, it is unusually known and popular, and this, he suggested that Joe Joufman, who served as head of the Air office and radiation at the Environmental Protection Agency during the Joe Biden era, may be the point.
“I think what we see is that they are following the programs because “They are common. They are following programs because People will notice, because they are about to disavow the social contract. “♦
