Bill Overview
Title: BRIGHT Act
Description: This bill expands requirements relating to the procurement and use of energy-efficient lighting in federal buildings. Under current law, public buildings that are constructed or managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) must be equipped with energy-efficient light bulbs and fixtures. Under the bill, buildings must be equipped with the most life-cycle cost effective and energy-efficient lighting systems available, including with respect to sensors, fixture distribution, and other elements. The bill also specifically establishes requirements relating to the procurement of such lighting systems and modifies other requirements accordingly. The bill also requires the GSA to provide information to federal, state, local, and tribal entities about procuring and using such lighting systems in furtherance of governmental efficiency.
Sponsors: Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]
Target Audience
Population: People utilizing or working in government buildings
Estimated Size: 276440000
- The bill primarily impacts federal buildings by requiring them to install energy-efficient lighting.
- The bill aims to set a precedent and provide guidance for state, local, and tribal entities regarding energy-efficient lighting.
- Federal buildings are occupied by federal employees, so their working conditions might improve with better lighting.
- Public users who visit federal buildings will also be impacted by improved lighting design.
- Manufacturers and suppliers of energy-efficient lighting will see increased demand due to the bill.
- The environmental impact is broad due to potential energy savings across federal, state, local, and tribal buildings as they implement the bill's provisions.
Reasoning
- The BRIGHT Act's focus on federal buildings means it primarily affects federal employees working in these buildings and people who visit them. However, the reach of the policy through guidelines could influence local and tribal entities, potentially catalyzing broader energy efficiency efforts that indirectly affect more people.
- Energy cost savings from more efficient lighting can be significant, potentially redirecting funds towards other governmental and community needs over time.
- The policy could help improve working conditions by providing better lighting environments, potentially leading to enhanced productivity and job satisfaction for federal employees.
- As the policy requires life-cycle cost effective solutions, manufacturers and suppliers of energy-efficient technologies may experience increased demand, influencing the market and potentially providing economic benefits.
- The environmental impact, while indirect for individual employees or visitors, includes reduced energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, which could benefit public health on a broad scale.
Simulated Interviews
Federal Employee (Washington D.C.)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about the potential for better lighting at work. Sometimes I get headaches from the current lighting, so improvements could really help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Lighting Supplier (Denver, CO)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If more government agencies buy our bulbs, that could mean more jobs and better growth for my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
State Government Official (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might consider these new standards, but we'll need to see if they're truly cost-effective for our needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Federal Building Visitor (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the new lighting helps. The old lighting here is harsh and uncomfortable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Environmental Advocate (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a positive step. It could drive broader changes that help reduce carbon emissions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Construction Worker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If new projects require these lighting systems, it might mean more work and training for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
University Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Encouraging to see concrete steps being taken by the government to improve energy efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
IT Specialist (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better lighting could make a huge difference, especially with the amount of screen time we have.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Energy Efficiency Consultant (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill could create opportunities for consultants like me to work with various government agencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Non-profit Worker (Boston, MA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal actions often inspire state and local changes, could aid our advocacy efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $10000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- The adoption rate of energy-efficient lighting by non-federal entities such as state, local, and tribal governments impacts overall environmental benefits.
- Rapid advances in lighting technology may lead to additional upgrades or adjustments during the 5-year implementation period.
- Supply chain constraints for energy-efficient lighting components could affect rollout speed and costs.