Image: Popular Mechanics

Energy Star is the well-known appliance rating system created in the United States in 1992. It has since "inspired" many other similar programs across the globe, including in the European Union, China, Brazil, Iran, and Tunisia. While lauded for its attention to efficiency and environmental conservation, some are accusing the EPA program of being antiquated and discouraging innovation.

It seems that other countries use a categorical rating system. Think of it as a grade: The best get an "A", the good get a "B", and so on down to the products that "fail". Last week Popular Mechanics suggests that this type of rating encourages companies to keep pushing ahead, environmentally speaking. When products get a poor rating, they simply don't sell. Manufacturers are forced to invent better and better products to compete not only with other companies, but their own product lines.

The Energy Star rating, however, is more absolute. The EPA sets a standard, and a product either meets it or it doesn't. Consumers see the sticker, and assume they're buying the best product possible. But that dishawasher could be "barely passing". If a product needs to meet (for example) 60 out of 100 standards to receive Energy Star approval, would you rather have the laptop that meets 62 standards or the one that met 97?

Another point to consider is that the ratings go untested. Energy Star approval is simply based on claims made by the manufacturer, which are never verified in any official capacity. (It should be noted that the EPA's new WaterSense program utilizes independent, third-party licensed certifying to certify that products meet EPA criteria for water efficiency and performance by following testing and certification protocols specific to each product category.)

Read Popular Mechanics' entire article here.