232
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Republicans on the House Small Business Committee pressed Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm on Thursday for answers on proposed energy-efficiency standards for ceiling fans.

The proposed standards were first published in the Federal Register in June, and the comment period closed earlier this week. According to the Energy Department, the rule as applied to standard residential ceiling fans would cut fan-related electricity costs by about 40 percent relative to the least efficient fans currently available.

The House panel presented the rules as burdensome to ceiling fan manufacturers, particularly smaller ones.

“This proposed rule would decrease the maximum estimated energy consumption permissible for large diameter and belt driven ceiling fans,” committee Republicans wrote. “This rule would require numerous small business fan manufacturers to redesign their products and may put between 10 and 30 percent of small business ceiling fan manufacturers out of business. It appears that the Department of Energy may not have properly considered small entities during this rulemaking process.”

An Energy Department spokesperson told The Hill this aspect has been mischaracterized, saying in an email that the one-time total conversion cost would be about $107 million for all manufacturers.

“The incremental cost to consumers is $86.6 million annually, while the operating cost savings are $281 million annually — both at a 7 percent discount rate,” the spokesperson said. “The savings are more than triple the incremental costs.”

The spokesperson noted the standards, “which are required by Congress,” would not be in effect for five years and would save Americans “up to $369 million per year, while substantially reducing harmful air pollution — a crucial fact that some have conveniently failed to mention.”

Efficiency standards for home appliances have become culture war flashpoints under the Biden administration. The administration has restored a number of efficiency rules rolled back under the Trump administration, including for shower heads, water heaters and gas furnaces.

The most umbrage, however, has been reserved for efficiency regulations over gas stoves, beginning last year when Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. approved a request for information on hazards associated with the devices, which the CPSC formalized in March. Although Trumka has said there are no plans to ban gas stoves, House Republicans have introduced formal legislation this year to legally prevent such a ban.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] StarServal@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago

They’re contrarians. They don’t stand for anything except the opposite of the Democrats.

[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

That’s the most baffling thing to me when I see so many grown ass adults buying into these cults of personality. Like…what the fuck does your candidate propose to actually do? Just screaming and throwing tantrums like a toddler, and that’s the guy you cast your vote for? I don’t get it

[-] salton@reddthat.com 7 points 1 year ago

Their campaigns are always based on fear and hate of some imagined group or perceived enemy.a lot of these people have also been trained by birth by religious groups to conform to the tribe and to have blind obedience to their leaders.

[-] Lenny@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago

It’s because a lot of them are emotionally immature and not good at critical thinking. It might come off as mean but it’s true, and this is by design. Republicans have been attacking schools decade after decade and this is the consequence (for those innocent people). They do it because if their base gets smarter and starts to question things they will vote them out, they might find less value in religion, etc. and suddenly the conservative world of control that the crave comes crashing down. They’ve made a lot of headway in recent years (extreme push for charter schools that are less accountable to the public, trying to force their religious doctrine into schools, attacking libraries and banning books) so things are just going to get worse for the next generation, especially those born in “red states”.

this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
232 points (96.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2939 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS