Lights Off, Cash Saved: How I Finally Beat My Energy Bill
One of the easiest ways to reduce your energy usage is also one of the most overlooked: Turn off the lights when you leave a room. Every bulb generates heat that makes your air conditioner work overtime. In the summer, that extra strain can cost you more than you think.
Combine this small habit with other smart strategies, like closing blinds during peak sun hours, using ceiling fans effectively and unplugging unused electronics -- and you can make a noticeable dent in your bill without sacrificing comfort. Want to beat the heat and lower your energy costs? Start by flipping the switch.
Why should you turn off the lights?
You've probably been told time and time again the importance of conserving energy, but you might be wondering why it's so important.
First, reducing your energy usage by turning off your lights is an excellent way to reduce your carbon footprint. Electricity generation is one of the biggest sources of carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. By turning off your lights when you aren't using them, you can do your part to reduce carbon emissions and therefore help the environment.
Second, reducing your home's energy usage doesn't just help the environment. It also helps your wallet. Turning off lights when you don't need them can help to reduce your electricity bills. You'll also extend the life of your light bulbs, which will save you money as well.
Pro savings tip
Buying a smart lightbulb can help you conserve energy by setting your lights to go on and off at certain times, so no more falling asleep with all the lights left on overnight. The Wiz tunable white LED smart bulb is CNET's pick for the best white-light smart bulb.
Details $20 at Amazon
How much money can you save?
The amount you can save on your electricity bill by turning off your lights depends on the type of light bulb you use. You can figure your potential savings using the light bulb's wattage.
Let's say you have a light bulb that's 40 watts, meaning in one hour, the bulb will use 0.04 kWh. Then, you can use your electricity price — which you can find on your most recent utility bill — to figure out how much you'll save for that hour. In the case of the 40-watt bulb, if you pay an electricity rate of 10 cents per kWh, your savings by turning that bulb off for one hour would be 0.4 cents.
It's easy to see that number and think it's simply not worth it to turn off your lights more often. After all, what difference does 0.4 cents make? First, remember that estimate is for a 40-watt bulb. If you have higher-wattage light bulbs, the savings will be greater. Next, that estimate uses an energy price of 10 cents per kWh, but in many areas, the price of electricity may be higher than that.
Finally, our estimate looked at the savings of turning off one bulb for one hour. You likely have many light bulbs in your house, and there are far more than just one hour in a month. So when you calculate the savings of turning off all of your light bulbs for many more hours per month, your savings will increase significantly.
When should you turn off the lights?
You can save money by turning off your lights and fans whenever you don't need them. During the spring and summer, it's a good idea to check in on the peak and off-peak energy hours in your area. Many providers use a time-of-use electricity plan where energy costs rise during peak hours, or hours where the grid is facing higher demand, and lower during off-peak hours. These hours change depending on the seasons, so transitioning between seasons is a good time to check on when you're paying the most for energy.
During peak hours, usually during the afternoons in the summer while in the early morning and in the evenings after sunset during winter, it's helpful to be especially diligent in turning off lights and other electronic appliances when you leave a room to cut down on your energy bill. Thankfully, during the spring and summer, daylight saving time is in effect, which means more daylight and less need to have the lights on in your home.
A small change can yield big savings
Turning off the lights and other electric appliances when you aren't using them is one of the most basic steps you can take to reduce your energy usage and save money on your electricity bill. Just remember that even a small change can add up to big energy savings for you and also help reduce your carbon footprint.
More money-saving tips for you
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
18 minutes ago
- CBS News
16 Chicago public schools to receive funding for community partnerships, resources
Sixteen schools across Chicago will be receiving extra funding for family support and education resources as part of the city's Sustainable Community Schools model. A sustainable community school is a school with an emphasis on wraparound services and community partnerships. "Making sure everybody in the community knows what's going on, and not just the people who go to the school," said Ariana Anderson, a sustainable community school student "The difference that SES makes is just like the mental health portion in the classroom," said Alicia Anderson. Ariana and Alicia are sustainable community school students, reporting firsthand the difference they believe the designation made at Fort Dearborn Elementary School, at 9025 S. Throop St. Earlean Briggs is a sustainable community school parent at John B. Drake Elementary School, 2710 S. Dearborn St. She said the parents at the newly designated schools will have the opportunity to be more engaged. "They have the ability to be more involved," Briggs said. "They have the ability for their students to learn how to problem-solve when it comes to conflicts." Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced Monday that the city is adding 16 schools to 20 it first designated as sustainable community schools back in 2018. He made the announcement at one of the 16 schools — George Washington High School on the city's Southeast Side. "It's also personal because I taught in our public schools," said Mayor Johnson. Chicago's 16 new sustainable community schools are: Samuel Davis, the principal at George Washington High School, said he is thrilled that the school is now a sustainable community school. "We're a neighborhood school, so our school is really important to the community," said Davis. Davis said the new designation means new resources for George Washington High School students, with the model centering community voices and work to address needs inside and outside the classroom. "We are able to offer, you know, like after-school matters programs where more kids can attend," said Davis. Of the 16 new community schools, three are considered overcrowded with too many students, while 10 have lower enrollment rates than they should. The designation means addressing both those issues. With the school district in the midst of a full budget crisis — facing a $734 million deficit — The existing 20 sustainable community schools require a $10 million investment. How will the district pay for this? The answer is unclear. But looking ahead at the new school year, and the resources he said students will provide students who need them, Davis said he hopes the sustainable community schools program remains a priority. "It's all about the children. It really is. Our future depends on them," said Davis. "It depends on how we treat them and how we make sure we support them." CPS issued the following statement about the Sustainable Community Schools program: "Chicago Public Schools (CPS) remains firmly committed to creating sustainable school environments, particularly in communities that have long endured economic disinvestment. The Sustainable Community Schools (SCS) model continues to serve as a foundation for equity, collaboration, and student-centered learning across the District. "The SCS model brings together educators, families, community partners, and students to create schools that are not only centers of academic excellence, but also hubs of support and opportunity. By integrating social services, culturally-relevant instruction, and strong family engagement, Sustainable Community Schools are designed to meet the unique needs of every neighborhood they serve."
New York Times
18 minutes ago
- New York Times
Tensions Flare Between Two Federal Agencies Charged With Aviation Safety
The relationship between the National Transportation Safety Board, the government entity that investigates civilian airplane accidents, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the agency responsible for aviation safety, can frequently be contentious, especially after a major national tragedy. Last week, a rift between those two main regulators of aviation safety spilled out into public view. Frustrations — and sometimes tempers — flared in uncommonly raw fashion during the board's marathon of investigative hearings into the deadly midair crash between a military helicopter and a commercial jet near Ronald Reagan National Airport in January. Board members grilled witnesses, including air traffic controllers and F.A.A. managers, over three days and 30 hours of public testimony. Jennifer Homendy, the N.T.S.B. chair, led other board members in accusing the F.A.A. of knowingly stymieing efforts to improve safety at Reagan National Airport and stonewalling parts of the board's investigation into the crash. And Ms. Homendy directly accused the agency of fostering a culture among the air traffic control operation that discouraged employees from raising legitimate safety concerns, including by wielding the threat of retaliation. 'There is and always has been a healthy tension between the two agencies,' said Jeff Guzzetti, a former accident investigator for the F.A.A. and the N.T.S.B. And while the level of public outrage on display during board hearings depends largely on the proclivities of its members, he added, 'in this particular case, it's a shift.' Ms. Homendy and the other board members were careful not to direct their ire toward Sean Duffy, the transportation secretary, or Bryan Bedford, the F.A.A. administrator. Still, the very public airing of grievances raised questions about the working relationship between the two agencies at a critical juncture. The N.T.S.B. makes safety recommendations, but it is up to the F.A.A. to put them into place. The crash at Reagan National Airport, and a series of near misses and tower outages at major airports in the months since, have dampened public confidence in the safety of flying, intensifying the need for cooperation. 'Warning signs were ignored, or just not known or identified or sought, which is quite tragic,' Ms. Homendy told reporters late Wednesday, after the first day of testimony. In a statement, the F.A.A. said officials 'have and will continue to fully support the N.T.S.B.'s investigation,' stressing that the agency had been proactive about addressing concerns and adopting the board's early recommendations. The statement added that 'if there has been any stonewalling, withholding of information or intimidation — those actions will be identified and remedied without hesitation.' The gloves had already begun to come off in the final hours of the hearing on Wednesday. Ms. Homendy lost her patience with F.A.A. managers who claimed they never knew that air traffic officials from Reagan National Airport had urged higher-ups to address the potential risks posed by a helicopter route, known as Route 4, that crossed under the descent path for airplanes landing on a supplementary runway, No. 33. The Army Black Hawk that crashed into the commercial jet on Jan. 29 was flying along Route 4, and at the time of impact, was 78 feet higher than the F.A.A.-mandated ceiling of 200 feet. A number of witnesses testified that the devices pilots relied upon to measure their altitude frequently were off by about 100 feet of helicopters' actual flying height. Air traffic controllers, knowing the risks, sought to make changes as part of a helicopter-focused working group at the airport — but were told by district managers that doing so would be seen as 'too political,' according to the transcript of an interview included in an N.T.S.B. report. 'Every sign was there that there was a safety risk, and the tower was telling you that,' Ms. Homendy told F.A.A. officials. She accused agency managers of routinely dismissing safety concerns raised by employees in the airport's air traffic control tower and of reassigning people who had previously voiced concerns after the accident. She also said they used F.A.A. bureaucracy as an excuse to avoid making needed changes. 'Are you kidding me? Sixty-seven people are dead,' she said, denouncing the F.A.A.'s process for reviewing safety recommendations. 'Fix it. Do better,' she added. By the last day of the hearings, Ms. Homendy was accusing F.A.A. officials outright of trying to stymie the N.T.S.B.'s investigation by withholding documents and data the board had been requesting for months. 'I think you're interfering in the investigation,' she charged, 'because you're basically telling us 'no' every way you can.' Aviation safety experts said it was understandable for tensions to run unusually high after the collision because of the magnitude and rarity of the tragedy — it was the first fatal crash involving a major American airline in over 15 years. But part of the N.T.S.B.'s visible agitation in the hearings could also be strategic, those experts said. The fact that the crash happened just outside the nation's capital — along with the fact that power brokers from the Trump administration and Congress are eager to respond — has created a unique opportunity for the board to influence sweeping changes. 'The intensity has increased partly because of the visibility of this particular catastrophe and the proximity to Washington,' said Alan Diehl, a former aviation safety official with the N.T.S.B. and the F.A.A. 'By doing that, the N.T.S.B. hopes to convince both the F.A.A. and Congress that we need a revolution,' he added, 'in both personnel policies within the F.A.A. as well as the funding policies.' Ms. Homendy, who spent more than 14 years on Capitol Hill before President Trump nominated her to fill one of the Democratic slots on the board, has a keen understanding of Washington dynamics, according to board watchers. She is known for being more public-facing and, at times, being more comfortable adopting an adversarial posture than some of her predecessors. But she was not alone last week in being pointedly critical of the F.A.A. J. Todd Inman, a Republican member of the N.T.S.B, also accused the agency of stonewalling the investigation. The F.A.A. withheld documents about staffing at the control tower for months, he charged, dumping thousands of pages on the board on the Friday before the hearing, only after Ms. Homendy appealed to agency and Transportation Department leaders for help. At another point, Mr. Inman lost his patience with officials' promises to do better. 'We'd like to be treated privately the same way we are publicly,' he said. Mr. Inman also accused the F.A.A. of refusing to share critical data about real-time flight tracking technology, forcing the safety board to spend $50,000 annually to evaluate it 'because the F.A.A. does not consider N.T.S.B. a trusted government partner.' F.A.A. officials in the hot seat frequently defended their agency. Nick Fuller, the F.A.A.'s acting deputy chief operations officer, responded to allegations that the agency had withheld documents and data by arguing that some of the board's requests had been unclear, and that 'in fact, we just gave you the latest and greatest' information. Mr. Fuller also pushed back on accusations from all three presiding board members that after the Jan. 29 accident, the F.A.A. had removed managers at Reagan National's control tower who had previously raised concerns about traffic, staffing or other safety pitfalls. He argued that staffing changes had not been retaliatory, but rather executed in the interest of solving the problem quickly. 'I was given a task to fix the facility risk between helicopters and fixed wing,' Mr. Fuller said, referring to airplanes, 'and it wasn't to work through a collaborative process and allow a few months — it was to get the job done immediately.' On several occasions during the hearings, Ms. Homendy sought assurances that F.A.A. employees who were called as witnesses in the investigation would not be retaliated against for their testimony — a step prompted by reports that some who had critical things to say were being harassed, she told reporters on Thursday after that day's testimony. 'Nobody can take what is clearly a safety issue and get it up through the offices that should be making the decision to ensure safety in the airspace — or somebody's ignoring them,' she told reporters. 'You raise a red flag, and two things happen: You don't get it, you don't get the safety change that you have asked for, or you're transferred out after an accident occurs.' But experts warned against assuming that the acrimony of the hearing would disrupt the two agencies' expert staff members from being able to work together. 'Overall, the process is healthy,' said John Cox, a former airline pilot who runs a safety consulting firm. 'Is there friction? Yes. Is it normal? Yes. Was last week a little more so than normal? Yes,' he added. 'Will that encourage F.A.A. to move more quickly? I hope.'
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Cal Fire crews fighting blaze near St. Helena winery, south of Lake Hennessey
Cal Fire crews were in St. Helena fighting a fire that began near a winery on Monday, Cal Fire LNU said. The fire is near the 90 block of Long Ranch Road, south of Lake Hennessey, and it began around 3:41 p.m. It had burned about 5 acres as of 4:25 p.m.
