> Access to the Energy Star reviews requires a 'subscription' too, in the form of a tax.
You're failing to consider the alternative no-EnergyStar scenario -- higher aggregate electricity demand, requiring more power plants, so everyone pays more for power.
Either you pay pennies to promote efficiency, or you pay quarters for energy infrastructure.
No, that's not what I'm saying. Jevon's Paradox has a good Wikipedia page that describes the problem. Efficiency improvements don't reduce consumption in aggregate, because the lower demand causes lower prices that then unlock new use cases that create more demand that pushes up usage again.
You started by talking about electricity usage, which is fungible and elastic. There's no dedicated grid for household electricity so Jevons Paradox certainly applies.
Requiring more power plants doesn’t mean that power will be more expensive. Power will only be more expensive if we get more demand and less supply. If supply (power plants) increases linearly with demand there won’t be a price difference.
Example: as a regulated utility it will often cost more per unit if underused vs optimal generating supply (which has already been passed through into rates)
Additionally, the generating source heavily influences ultimate cost.
You're failing to consider the alternative no-EnergyStar scenario -- higher aggregate electricity demand, requiring more power plants, so everyone pays more for power.
Either you pay pennies to promote efficiency, or you pay quarters for energy infrastructure.