11 States Sue Trump Administration's Energy Department After Weeks of No Movement On Efficiency Standards (go.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: New York, California and nine other states sued the Trump administration Tuesday over its failure to finalize energy-use limits for portable air conditioners and other products. The new standards would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, save businesses and consumers billions of dollars, and conserve enough energy to power more than 19 million households for a year, but the U.S. Department of Energy has not met a requirement to publish them by now, according to attorneys general who filed the lawsuit (PDF) against the DOE in federal court in San Francisco. That means the standards are not legally enforceable. The other states in the lawsuit are: Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Vermont, Washington, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Maryland. The City of New York is also a plaintiff. The energy efficiency standards at issue in the lawsuit also cover walk-in coolers and freezers, air compressors, commercial packaged boilers and uninterruptible power supplies. There is currently no federal energy standard for air compressors, uninterruptible power supplies or portable air conditioners, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit seeks a court order requiring the DOE to publish the new standards as final rules.

Comments

Useless

[_Sharp'r_]

Good. The existing program is useless. Maybe they can do something more useful with the money, time and effort than try and have the Federal government dictate what energy use standards should be.

Re:Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. Why don't the manufactures set their own standards? Even the states suing the federal government have the power to set the standards for any units sold in their state.

These lawsuits are nothing more than politically motivated attack on the current administration. And like all the other politically driven attacks aimed at the current administration they are willing to harm anyone or anything they have to in order to win their political power. If they succeed in getting rid of Trump they best be ready for the political backlash. It's easier to accuse someone of doing wrong than to defend against accusations, and innuendo. Especially since no evidence of a criminal act has been released. If the people braying for Trump's ouster surely they would divulged some evidence in support their accusations. If these people really cared about the country wouldn't they want to get the evidence released as soon as possible so the country could recover as fast as possible?

And there is not a single politician or activist I would want in any position of power in the government. These people crave political power and influence not good government. Politics will never be the same after this sorry episode of politics. And the only endgame in the not so distant second Civil War that is on the way. Remember every state has their own National Guard with the Governor being the commandeer in chief. Some of the National Guard units command enough manpower and equipment to put them in the top 10 strongest militaries in the world. In a civil war you can expect a considerable amount of defections from the federal forces. So yeah we are fucked but at least we won't have to listen to the whiny professional protesters and endless stream of talking heads that revel in their own superiority and galling intellectualism.

Re:Useless

[Pseudonym]

Why don't the manufactures set their own standards?

Yeah, because that's worked so well for the software industry.

Re:Useless

[gravewax]

because efficiency is more expensive. Why make something more efficient when it is more profitable to be able to undercut the competition with less efficient systems. Many people that buy and install those systems are also only caring about their profit margin as they don't intend to be the long term user of the system.

Re:Useless

[ChrisMaple]

This is more a matter of whether the companies making the buying decisions are exercising good judgement. Some brands (like Trane) typically last a lot longer than others, and cost more. Many companies also offer a variety of different efficiencies on similar models, and the more efficient ones cost more. You don't see Trane going out of business because they offer a superior but more expensive product.

Government forcing the purchase of a particular type of product is just usurpation, and the moral philosophy of those promoting such laws is no better than that of the leaders of North Korea.

Wait, they're suing for MORE regulation?

[davide marney]

That's just bone-headed. If you want to manufacture a new energy-efficient whatzit, go right ahead. No one's stopping you.

Re:Wait, they're suing for MORE regulation?

[unixisc]

Not just that, there's nothing stopping these states - NY, CA, IL, et al from introducing their own regulations & banning sales of energy inefficient products in their states. Each state should be allowed to decide for itself how it wants to go. They can easily have regulations that are stricter than what the EPA already has, and then companies can either meet those standards, or miss them and choose to sell outside these states.

Re: Wait, they're suing for MORE regulation?

[ChrisMaple]

Are you deliberately being stupid? Just meet the toughest standard and your products are acceptable everywhere.

Re:Wait, they're suing for MORE regulation?

[jandersen]

That's just bone-headed. If you want to manufacture a new energy-efficient whatzit, go right ahead. No one's stopping you.

In the past, before we had standardised units of measure, the size of a foot, for example, would be different from city to city, and the same for everything else, which meant that there would be constant problems with claims about short measure etc. Both traders and customers wanted to have standardised measures, so they could feel confident that they knew what they were buying. Same now - I don't think this is the government telling manufacturers how to produce their goods, it is about defining a standard scale, so everybody knows how different brands compare. This makes it possible to compete on objective value of the goods rather than perhaps lies.

Re:Good to know

[jfdavis668]

Good plan. I wish I had bought some gas cans before federal regulations ruined those, too.

The Prisoner's Dilemma

[rsilvergun]

and the Tragedy of the Commons would like to respectfully disagree.

Re:Good to know

[baker_tony]

You must be fucked off Obama took all your guns too.

Re:Maybe if the Senate Dems hadn't dragged their f

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious. The GOP controls the Presidency, the House, the Senate, and has a Supreme Court stacked in their favor... Yet all they can do is blame the Democrats. How about using your party's monopoly of government to actually accomplish something, instead of whining all the time?

Re:Cowards

[Atryn]

Wow, that reflects a terrible understanding of Game Theory... Player A and Player B (or in this case Players 1-50) know that if they both act the outcome is better for both of them, but if either of them acts first, they lose and the other wins.

Combine this problem with the dilemma to business of 50 different state standards across countless different product characteristics and the damage that does to economies of scale...

There are good reasons for product standards. The commercial sector tends to address the ones that collectively are good for profits (often via operational efficiencies of standardization, mass production and compatibility). They don't tend to address the ones that are collectively good for purely social reasons, like the environment, product safety, public health, etc. - especially when any subset acting alone lose the market... That's where government plays a good role!

Re:Profit for everyone, why legislate?

[gurps_npc]

Answers to your questions:

1) To prevent Fraud. It's a regulation on what you have to do to say "Energy Efficient". If you don't regulate, than some businesses will reduce power by 1% and say "Buy our 'Green' product." and paint their 1% lower item greeen. The reason to legislate is to stop businesses from lying and claiming things like "No reasonable person would think VitaminWater TM had vitamins in it."

2) To ensure uniformity. Don't want 5 different businesses using made up terms like "Green", "Lite", "Low Power", "Energy GOOD", and what not, forcing the consumer to research what each thing does.

3) Because despite what libertarians think, the government has a better success rate than business. The problem is that governments failures are public and stick around way too long (Afghanistan, Vietnam, Veterans Healthcare - note all three are MILITARY failures),, while the business failures tend to fade away like New Coke, Colgate TV dinners, and the Delorean (all of which died in less than 4 years)

Re:Nonexistent Standards Equals

[Altrag]

Yep. The whole "checks and balances" plan kind of falls flat when Congress is more interested in covering the president's ass than being an independent branch as the constitution intended.