Energy Star faces scrutiny

Energy Star has to improve oversight on its certification process.

Since it was first introduced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992, the Energy Star standard for energy-efficient consumer products has become perhaps the nation’s most recognizable certification.

The Energy Star label, which is supposed to signify products using 20 percent to 30 percent less energy than required by federal standards, can be found in more than 35 product categories for the home and workplace, and has been expanded to commercial buildings and homes. Americans have purchased more than 1 billion Energy Star-qualified products since the label hit the marketplace.

“Energy star has made its way to the masses,” says Hilary Bromberg, a partner with egg, a Seattle-based marketing agency focused on sustainable brands. In 2009, 75 percent of Americans said they recognized the Energy Star label, according to EPA. “It’s one of these pillars that signifies to people, ‘If I buy this [Energy Star-sanctioned product] I will save money,’” Bromberg says.

But EPA recently came under scrutiny when the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report on the Energy Star program showing that undercover auditors succeeded in earning the Energy Star label for 15 out of 20 bogus products during a nine-month study.

To Elaine Aye, principal with Green Building Services in Portland, this threat to Energy Star’s integrity is indicative of the broader difficulty with self-certifying programs that lack third-party verification. “Whenever you have a self-certification program where manufacturers are providing data, you cross a line,” she says. “It’s part of the market transformation we’re all experiencing. As a professional who relies on looking at different products, I have to rely on third-party systems to guide me. When I know that it is [certified], I’m much more inclined to support or believe the info.”

It’s not the first time EPA has received heat for its implementation of the Energy Star label, and it likely won’t be the last. In August 2007, EPA’s inspector general reported lax management of controls and oversight of the Energy Star (PDF) certification process. In October 2009, Department of Energy’s inspector general found similar problems (PDF). The October 2008 issue of Consumer Reports reviewed the program and found lax qualifying standards, outdated federal testing procedures and reliance on industry self-policing.

In response to the most recent study by the Accountability Office, EPA and DOE issued a statement saying the agencies “are taking aggressive action to promote confidence in the Energy Star brand through both testing and enforcement,” noting the agencies have taken action against 35 manufacturers in the past four months for violating efficiency standards.

While the findings against Energy Star trouble some observers, egg’s Bromberg believes the damage will be minimal. “I don’t think the brand will be degraded,” she says. “People are enormously forgiving of organizations that make mistakes. But I think this will increase the rigor. Behind the scenes, we’ll see a tightening of the rules.”

EPA and DOE say they are developing an expanded testing system that would require all products seeking the Energy Star label to be tested in approved labs and require manufacturers to participate in an ongoing verification testing program that will ensure continued compliance.

Energy Star ‘s 4.0 standard for televisions, which was published in September 2009, became effective May 1, 2010. The standard is a significant jump from the 3.0 standard, dropping the maximum amount of power an Energy Star TV can consume by about 40 percent. And last year California Energy Commission requires manufacturers to meet the new, stricter Energy Star requirement by 2011.