
We're About To Lose One of the Best Things the Government Ever Built
One of America's most effective public-private partnerships is under threat. Not from foreign adversaries, but from proposed budget cuts that would eliminate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star program.
At first glance, Energy Star might seem like just a government label slapped on refrigerators or laptops. But behind that small, bright blue star, recognized by 90 percent of American households, is the nation's most trusted and impactful energy efficiency program. According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, eliminating Energy Star would create chaos for consumers and businesses alike, replacing a consistent, science-based standard with a confusing tangle of inconsistent, often pay-to-play private certifications.
Close-up of Energy Star logo.
Close-up of Energy Star logo.
Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images
Energy Star is more than a label. It's infrastructure. As of 2024, the EPA reports that the program saves American families an average of $450 per year on energy bills. It keeps mission-critical facilities—like hospitals, schools, and data centers—running efficiently and reliably. And it's a foundational tool for grid stability, helping utilities and building operators cut demand and emissions without sacrificing performance. By reducing overall energy consumption and improving the resilience of critical infrastructure, Energy Star also strengthens national security. Lower energy demand makes the grid less vulnerable to disruptions—whether from cyberattacks, natural disasters, or supply shortages—while energy-efficient buildings are better equipped to maintain operations during emergencies. In an era of growing threats to our energy infrastructure, programs like Energy Star are essential for safeguarding both our economy and our national security.
In an age of soaring energy demand, aging infrastructure, and rising utility costs, Americans need more tools to improve efficiency, not fewer. Gutting Energy Star would pull the rug out from under efforts to modernize our buildings, decarbonize our economy, and keep costs manageable for families and businesses alike.
I've spent over 30 years helping health systems, schools, and commercial real estate owners achieve Energy Star certification and realize measurable savings and resilience. In the early 1990s, I worked with the EPA to help design and scale the very tools that underpin the program's commercial building platform. Today, through my work with RE Tech Advisors and Legence, we've helped more than 25,000 buildings—totaling 5 billion square feet—track and improve performance using Energy Star tools.
This work has real, tangible impact. Take our recent partnership with Avanath Capital Management, a national affordable housing provider. Since 2021, Avanath has used Energy Star tools to analyze utility usage and create best-practice operating standards that ensure greater efficiencies and economies of scale. More than a quarter of its properties are now Energy Star certified, and they were recognized as an Energy Star Partner of the Year in 2024. These improvements helped the company reduce energy and water use by 10 percent—years ahead of schedule—freeing up capital for property repairs while keeping rents affordable for residents.
At Harvard Law School, our team developed a decarbonization roadmap across 22 buildings and 1.2 million square feet. Energy Star tools were critical to ensuring compliance with local building performance standards and benchmarking ordinances. But beyond compliance, the plan is delivering lower emissions, cleaner air, and improved energy performance.
This is why federal agencies, per the U.S. General Services Administration, require the office space they lease to meet Energy Star certification standards. It's not about politics. It's about performance. Energy Star-certified buildings use, on average, 35 percent less energy than non-certified ones. If the program disappears, those gains evaporate—and utilities, taxpayers, and the planet all pay the price.
Despite decades of bipartisan support, Energy Star now faces the chopping block. Yet no private organization has the impartiality, scientific rigor, or nationwide trust to replace it. The federal government has the data, lab research, and technical expertise needed to run Energy Star effectively and transparently. Eliminating it would be a reckless mistake—and a costly one.
Congress and the administration must recognize Energy Star for what it is: critical national infrastructure that has saved billions of dollars, reduced pollution, and strengthened our energy system for more than 30 years. It's a rare government success story—one where the public and private sectors work together to solve complex challenges and deliver real results.
If we want to stay globally competitive, reduce grid strain, and keep energy costs down for households and businesses, we can't afford to lose Energy Star. Contact your representatives. Tell them to protect a program that works—for all of us.
Deb Cloutier, CRE, is the chief sustainability officer at Legence, president and founder of RE Tech Advisors, and a senior advisor at Blackstone. With over 30 years of experience in commercial real estate and environmental sustainability, she has played a pivotal role in shaping national programs such as EPA's Energy Star and the Department of Energy's Better Buildings Initiative.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
28 minutes ago
- CNBC
Palantir CEO Karp says AI is dangerous and 'either we win or China will win'
Palantir CEO Alex Karp said the artificial intelligence arms race between the U.S. and China will culminate in one country coming out on top. "My general bias on AI is it is dangerous," Karp told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" on Thursday. "There are positive and negative consequences, and either we win or China will win." Karp has been a vocal advocate for U.S AI dominance. He told CNBC in January that the country needs to "run harder, run faster" in an "all-country effort" to develop more advanced AI models. In a recent letter to shareholders, he also touted Palantir's commitment to equipping and enhancing U.S. defense interests. The billionaire tech CEO said Thursday that the U.S. currently has a leg up in the AI race and Palantir is leading the way in making companies more secure and efficient with its tools. "There is no economy in the world with this kind of corporate leadership which is willing to pivot, which understands technologies, which is willing to look at new things, but also has deep domain expertise," he said. "Our allies in the West, in Europe, are going to have to learn from us." Shares of the Denver-based data analytics and AI software firm outperformed in 2024 and have continued their ascent in 2025 as investors bet on their software and work with key government contractors and agencies. The stock is up 74% this year, but investors have to shell out on a higher earnings multiple than its tech peers. "You don't like the price, exit," Karp said on Thursday in response. Karp also asserted that the company is "not surveilling Americans" in response to recent New York Times report that Palantir is helping the Trump administration gather data on Americans.


Axios
30 minutes ago
- Axios
Democrats more likely than Republicans to boycott brands, new survey
Why it matters: These murky expectations highlight the complicated environment businesses are currently operating in. What they're saying: "Businesses need to understand how their brand aligns to current issues and the values that matter to their customer base," says Mallory Newall, vice president at Ipsos. "Brands cannot please everyone, and wading into the political fray does not come without risk. It needs to be done in a strategic way. However, there are potential upsides if companies have a clear understanding of who they're talking to and who their customers are. Those who act inauthentically will lose ground in this environment," she added. State of play: There's a disconnect in what consumers say and what they do. 53% of Americans say they are less likely to buy from a company that takes a stance they don't agree with, but only 30% actually do. Between the lines: A company's political or social stances influence Democrats more than Republicans, per the survey. Democrats are more likely to boycott (40%) than Republicans (24%), but they are also 2x more likely to go out of their way to support a brand that aligns with their values. Target is the latest American corporation to grapple with these boycotts, following its retreat from diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Of note: Boycotting is a luxury afforded to those with disposable income, per the survey. Households with incomes of $100k and above are 50% more likely to stop buying from a company they disagree with than those households making $50k and below. What to watch: 67% of Democrats say they are closely tracking how companies respond to pending Supreme Court decisions, compared to 52% of Republicans. There is more appetite across party lines for business commentary on economic issues — like inflation and trade policies — than other policy issues. The bottom line: "The data suggest that Democratic consumers are much more likely to actually follow through on the threat to withhold or reduce spending when they disagree with brands during this era of complete GOP control," says Matt House, managing partner at CLYDE.


Axios
30 minutes ago
- Axios
Exclusive: Dems press Trump admin. for response to China-backed cyberattacks
A group of Democratic lawmakers are pressing the Trump administration to clarify who is leading the government's efforts to eradicate China-backed hackers from U.S. critical infrastructure and telecom networks. Why it matters: Roughly 1,000 people have already left the nation's top cyber agency this year through voluntary buyouts and other workforce cuts. Those cuts could create dangerous weaknesses in the nation's cyber defenses, the lawmakers argue in a letter exclusively shared with Axios. Zoom in: Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) sent a letter today to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard demanding more clarity on who is leading the response against two major China-backed cyberattacks uncovered during the Biden administration. Democratic Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, Kathy Castor, Ro Khanna, Haley Stevens, Shontel Brown and Jill Tokuda joined Torres as signatories. The lawmakers are also requesting Noem and Gabbard provide an update on any ongoing investigations into both the Volt Typhoon attacks on U.S. critical infrastructure and the Salt Typhoon campaign to surveil high-profile individuals' cell phones. The group is also asking for an update on how proposed budget cuts and the recent workforce reductions at CISA will impact those investigations. What they're saying: "This is not a partisan issue. It is a matter of grave consequence for the security of America both at home and abroad," the lawmakers write. "We owe it to the American people to protect them from the specter of a cyber 9/11 at the hands of our most formidable foreign adversary." Threat level: For years, top American officials have been warning about increasing cyber threats from China. China-backed Volt Typhoon has been prepositioning in critical infrastructure — such as water utilities, power plants and railways — for at least five years, according to congressional testimony. Salt Typhoon, another Chinese government-backed group, was caught hacking into several high-profile politicians' phones last year, including President Trump's. "Somewhere, Xi Jinping is smiling at America's insistence on degrading its own cyber capabilities," the lawmakers write.