skip to main content

→ Top Stories:
Clean Power plan
Safe Chemicals

Noah Horowitz’s Blog

USA Today poll shows overwhelming support for energy saving light bulbs

Noah Horowitz

Posted February 18, 2011

, , , , ,
Share | | |

This morning, USA Today released the findings of its national poll that shows consumer satisfaction with energy saving light bulbs and their support for the bi-partisan 2007 U.S. law that will bring consumers better and more energy efficient lighting choices.

I have previously written about the massive benefits of the federal energy efficiency standards for light bulbs which include saving Americans more than $10 billion a year in the form of lower electric bills. The results of the USA Today poll demonstrate that consumers know and support the benefits these lighting standards provide: 

  • More than 70% of Americans purchased a LED or compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb in the past few years.  (Note, consumers can now also buy energy savings incandescent light bulbs at leading retailers such as Home Depot and Lowes that use 28% less power and meet the federal standards.)
  •  84% of those who made the switch were satisfied or very satisfied with the new bulb.
  • 63% of all independent voters thought the law enacting the light bulb efficiency standards was a good one.

These results confirm that most consumers have already begun to make the switch to new and improved light bulbs and they like them. 

Hopefully the handful of representatives in Congress who are working so hard to repeal the bi-partisan law and prevent these standards from going into effect will see these compelling findings and decide to call it a day. 

Thank you USA Today for bringing more clarity to this issue.

Share | | |


peter dublinFeb 20 2011 03:36 PM

..and Rasmussen had a poll that said the opposite...
in fairness it depends a lot on how the questions are framed etc

I can understand some of the energy/emission concerns you express in your posts, but I would handle them rather differently....

Re supposed "massive savings"
with light bulb regulations:

1. Why overall energy savings are not there :
with US Dept of Energy references = Under 1% overall energy savings
from energy efficiency regulations on incandescent lights.
You keep including lighting that isn't incandescent etc in your figures

2. Even if the savings were there:

All lights have their advantages, including ordinary incandescents over halogens,
and even if there are electricity savings,
citizens pay for the electricity they use:
There is no energy shortage, including of future low emission electricity,
that justifies a limitation on what citizens can use.
Even if if there was a shortage of the finite
coal/oil/gas sources, then their price rise limits their use anyway -
without legislation.

Moreover: light bulbs don't give out any CO2 gas - power plants might.
If there is an energy supply/emissions problem - deal with the problem!

any need to target light bulbs, TV sets, etc would be better served by taxation:

After all, the energy efficiency regulatory based bans are not because of usage safety - but simply about reducing electricity consumption.
Taxation is more normal to reduce consumption, at least outside the USA.

Bankrupt states like California could gain massively from energy based tax on TV sets etc as well as on cheap bulbs, (2 billion annual US sales)
which could also subsidise CFLs in the shops -
however market based stimulation is in turn better than taxation, as covered in detail on the linked website above.

peter dublinFeb 20 2011 03:40 PM

RE my previous comment:

Essay comparing Regulation, Taxation and Free Market policies on Light Bulbs

Comments are closed for this post.


Switchboard is the staff blog of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the nation’s most effective environmental group. For more about our work, including in-depth policy documents, action alerts and ways you can contribute, visit

Feeds: Noah Horowitz’s blog

Feeds: Stay Plugged In