How is this point determined? By consumers! If consumers value frozen ice cream enough, they’ll be willing to pay more for an ice cream truck with a freezer. These higher prices enable the truck owner to buy the higher energy costs associated with running the freezers.

The same is true with light bulbs.

Who pays for an “inefficient” incandescent light bulb? The homeowner who installs the light bulb does in the form of higher energy bills! So how would we know if the better (or at least more consistent) lighting is worth the higher energy usage?

Well, if the consumer chooses an incandescent bulb over an LED bulb, they are confirming they value the services of the incandescent bulb even after accounting for the cost of using more energy.

[I completely agree with this reasoning, although I am far happier with LED bulbs than Jacobsen is. Being a photography hobbyist (fitfully, anyway), I am well aware of the Kelvin issue, but that mainly applies to first-gen LED bulbs and the cheapest options available. Even the latter are far better than ten years ago on warmth. It’s possible to get a range of options in Kelvins from LED bulbs, even at the Home Depot, and some are now individually adjustable. My new ceiling light/fan for the office has a wide range of adjustability, which was necessary for all the podcasting I do. And I have never had an LED light fail on me, which makes them more economically efficient than incandescents for me.

Still, that should be the choice of consumers, not the government. — Ed]