The Juice Saver is a good law - hell, a great one. But why make it applicable only to renters?  This will have the effect of raising rent (as landlords shell out more to buy more fuel efficient appliances and pass the cost on to renters).  Meanwhile, renters are more likely than homeowners to live in apartments, which due to their design are more fuel efficient than detached houses.  Renters were already being efficient than homeowners prior to this law.  The city is trying to squeeze water out of Gibralter while there's a giant sponge just down the street.

As for Easy Being Green: I can think of only two "Green" buildings in Manhattan off the top of my head: 4 Times Square (PDF!) and my favorite, 1400 Fifth Avenue.  Actually, here's a website with a lot more green buildings: GreenHomeNYC.

I think the issue is that energy efficient appliances cost more upfront (and paid for by the landlord) while the return on this investment is enjoyed by the renter, who pays the electric bill. This disconnect in investment and return is solved by regulation. It might cost the renter slightly more per month - we are talking about a couple of hundred dollar difference perhaps for a useful life of 15-30 years. That works out to less than a dollar a month, but the electrical savings could be in the $5/month range.

For homeowners, the need for regulation is less necessary, although very tempting, we just need to convince them to do something in their economic interest! But unfortunately people always reach for the lowest prices item on the self and who cares about the running costs - that's for another day!