energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation
DESCRIPTION
In Brazil energy efficiency standards for cold appliances was established in 2007.A specified single set of MEPS (Minimum Energy Performance Standards) forrefrigerators, freezers and freezer refrigerators was implemented withoutevaluation of its impacts and estimation of potential electricity savings. This paperpresents a methodology for assessing the impacts of the Brazilian MEPS for coldappliances. It uses a bottom-up approach to estimate residential end-useconsumption and to evaluate the energy saving potential for refrigerators. Thehousehold electricity consumption is projected by modeling appliance ownershipusing an econometric approach based on recent household survey data. A cost benefit analysis for more stringent standards is presented from the perspective ofsociety and electricity customers. The results showed that even considering thecurrent market conditions (high discount rate for financing new efficientequipment) some MEPS options are advantageous for customers. The analysisalso demonstrates significant cost-effective saving potential from the societyperspective that could reach 21 TWh throughout the period of 2010-2030 – about25% of current residential consumption.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology
for impact evaluation
*Conrado Augustus de Melo
**Gilberto de Martino Jannuzzi
* Núcleo Interdisciplinar de Planejamento Energético NIPE, University of
Campinas
** Faculty of Mechanical Engeneering, University of Campinas - UNICAMP
Rua Mendeleyev, 200 Campinas - CEP:13083-860 – São Paulo
Email: [email protected] Tel: 55 61 98151877
Email: [email protected] Tel: 55 19 3289-3125
Abstract
In Brazil energy efficiency standards for cold appliances was established in 2007.
A specified single set of MEPS (Minimum Energy Performance Standards) for
refrigerators, freezers and freezer refrigerators was implemented without
evaluation of its impacts and estimation of potential electricity savings. This paper
presents a methodology for assessing the impacts of the Brazilian MEPS for cold
appliances. It uses a bottom-up approach to estimate residential end-use
consumption and to evaluate the energy saving potential for refrigerators. The
household electricity consumption is projected by modeling appliance ownership
using an econometric approach based on recent household survey data. A cost-
![Page 2: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
benefit analysis for more stringent standards is presented from the perspective of
society and electricity customers. The results showed that even considering the
current market conditions (high discount rate for financing new efficient
equipment) some MEPS options are advantageous for customers. The analysis
also demonstrates significant cost-effective saving potential from the society
perspective that could reach 21 TWh throughout the period of 2010-2030 – about
25% of current residential consumption.
Keywords: Energy efficiency, refrigerators, impacts evaluation.
1. Introduction
Minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) are mechanisms of public
policy that prohibits the commercialization of products which do not comply with
specific limits of energy consumption. MEPS have been implemented in many
countries (Harrington & Damnics, 2004) and are an effective mechanism to
promote energy savings and market transformation (Rosenquist et al, 2006;
Schiellerup, 2002).
The international experience shows that the adoption of these energy standards
requires the implementation of some steps such as technology assessment, market
assessment, price-efficiency relationship, life-cycle costs and also a prospective
evaluation of impacts is required. As an example, McMahon (2004) compares the
establishment of MEPS in the USA and Australia. This comparative analysis
shows the existence of similar steps in the processes adopted and an evident
concern with impacts of the adoption of the standards under the perspective of the
consumers (the life cycle costs), of the society (national benefits and costs), and
![Page 3: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
also considering the views of trader associations and manufacturers (industry,
competition and commercial issues).
In Brazil energy efficiency standards policy formally begins with the ‘‘Energy
Efficient Act’’ enacted in 2001 (Brazil, 2001). The specified set of MEPS for
refrigerators, freezers and fridge freezers and air conditioning devices was
adopted only 6 years after the Law (MME, 2007). Criteria to specify the first
MEPS for residential refrigerators were based on the experience of the Brazilian
Labeling Program (PBE). Through the PBE, Brazilian manufacturers, CEPEL1
and INMETRO2 decided to eliminate the last label classes on a voluntary basis.
The standard prohibits manufacturers and importers from placing F and G rated
appliances on the Brazilian market. Table 1 shows the equations used for
estimating the MEPS for the existing refrigerator models in the country.
Table 1 – MEPS of ordinance 362/2007
Equations for maximum consumption levels (MCL - kWh/month) Categories
R141B Cyclopentane Refrigerator MCL= 0.0422 × AV + 23.3227 NMC = 0.0416 × AV + 22.9786 Combined
refrigerator/freezer MCL = 0.1118 × AV + 20.8413 NMC = 0.1101 × AV + 20.5338
Combined refrigerator/freezer
frost free MCL = 0.1292 × AV + 9.1322 NMC = 0.1258 × AV + 8.8936
Vertical freezers MCL = 0.0257 × AV + 47.8582 NMC = 0.0254 × AV + 47.1521 Vertical freezers
frost free MCL = 0.0217× AV + 71.6286 NMC = 0.0214× AV + 70.5718
Horizontal freezers MCL = 0.0925× AV + 15.9759 NMC = 0.0911× AV + 15.7402 Source: MME, 2007. Note: R141B and Cyclopentane are refrigerants. AV is adjusted volume.
Nevertheless, estimates of energy savings potential by adopting the proposed the
standards adopted were not made. The Brazilian Ministry of Mines and Energy
justified that there was not enough information about replacements of old
appliances by new equipments (MME, 2006a and MME, 2006b). The lack of this
![Page 4: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
type of analysis makes a precise assessment of energy efficiency potential
impracticable in the context of national energy planning. The estimates of energy
saving potential through MEPS could assist in the identification of cost-effective
opportunities to reduce the requirements for power sector expansion. The National
Energy Plan 2030 (MME & EPE, 2007) does not consider specifically the
potential impacts of energy efficiency mechanisms in the behavior of the
projected electricity demand.
The main goal of this paper is to present a model for impact evaluation of MEPS
in Brazil for the case of home cold appliances. The model is conceived to examine
the economic and energy impacts considering the consumer and society’s
perspective.
2. Refrigeration energy projections: methodology
The proposed methodology combines a bottom up approach based on detailed
engineering appliance data with a stock forecast model which considers the
growth rate of appliance ownership in the residential sector and sales. The
ownership of basic appliances, such as refrigerators, is dynamic and depends
mainly on household income level and the appliance prices. The model utilizes
population forecasts in combination with an econometric parameterization to
estimate the national ownership rate for each year in the forecast. In the horizon of
this study, occurring in the year 2030, the estimated total population of Brazil's
237 million inhabitants while in the year 2005 this value was about 180 million.
The projected scenarios follow the basic assumptions adopted by National Plan of
Energy 2030 (MME & EPE, 2007). The potentials of energy conservation are
![Page 5: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
estimated from the differences between the projections of two scenarios: 1) the
BASE Scenario, which reflects the continuity of the current refrigerators energy
consumption, called “BASE Scenario” and; 2) “MEPS Scenarios”, where more
stringent MEPS options are applied. In both scenarios we have considered the
national average tariff of Brazilian the residential sector at US$123.04/MWh
(Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency - ANEEL, 2006).
2.1 Data Sources
Three main data bases are used in the present research:
1) For the historical series of GDP/per capita (Gross Domestic
Product/population) and index of appliances prices (IPA-OG) IPEADATA was
used. Available in http://www.ipeadata.gov.br/
2) In the case of the historical series of equipment rate of ownership, as well as,
the number of residences and projection of the population were used the data from
IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, 2005). Available in:
http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br
3) The detailed description of the stock appliances in the household sector was
based on the survey done by ELETROBRAS (2005).
2.2 Refrigerator energy consumption and MEPS options
Refrigerators have undergone significant reductions in electricity consumption
over the last two decades in Brazil. A 27% decrease in electricity consumption
was observed in models with volumes between 250-300 liters (most popular
models) since 1990. (MME & EPE, 2007). Table 2 provides detailed assumptions
![Page 6: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
for the models used in this paper. The data used to estimate baseline energy
consumption for the equivalent refrigerators was collected from a national survey
(ELETROBRAS, 2005). Information from a total of 49 refrigerator models from 8
different manufactures was used to establish the three equivalent models adopted
by the authors (Table 2).
Table 2 – MEPS assumed for equivalent models.
Equivalent Model Market share
(Brazil)
BASE consumption (kWh/year)
Energy Efficiency Design Options Assumed (V=volume;
C= consumption)
One-door 201-300 (Liters) Procel Label C
32,59% 326 Refrigerator Europe, 2“Star”1
V=204 liters, C=335 kWh/year
1 door 301-400 (Liters) Procel Label A
25,46% 483 Refrigerator, Brazil, 1“Star”2
V=320 liters, C=360 kWh/year
Combined “Frost Free” 301- 400 (Liters) Procel Label A
14,18% 580 Refrigerator, Europe, 4“Star”1 V=355 liters, C=591 kWh/year
1 Source: CLASP (2006).
2 Source: Queiroz et al. (2005)
In order to calculate the potential for energy efficiency improvement from MEPS
for each equivalent model presented in Table 2, the authors used literature data
from Queiroz et al (2005) and CLASP (2006), whose design and class
configuration is similar to the equivalent model. These proxy data, although not
accurate, provides a solid basis for the projection of prices and efficiency savings
at the household and national level (CLASP, 2006).
Tables 3, 4 and 5 present the engineering data used in the estimates for each
equivalent model. The engineering data considers up to seven combinations of
efficiency improvement options in order to increase energy efficiency. Design
options combinations are cumulative: each subsequent option includes all
measures of the previous combination and an additional one. For instance, for the
![Page 7: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
equivalent model 1-door 200-300 liters presented in Table 3, the efficiency can be
improved up to 107%, which is equivalent to a 51% reduction in electricity
consumption and to a corresponding price increase of 16%.
Table 3 – Engineering Parameters for equivalent model – 1 door 200 – 300 liters
Design Number Design Option Efficiency
Improvement Purchase
Price (US$)
Electricity Consumption
(kWh/year) 0 Baseline 0% 417 326
1 Baseline + increased door insulation (+15mm) 12% 421 291
2 1 + decreased door leakage 14% 421 286
3 2 + optimized compressor 30% 433 251
4 3 + increased cabinet insulation (+15mm) 64% 450 199
5 4 + increased door insulation (+15mm) 75% 454 186
6 5 + increased cabinet insulation (+15mm) 102% 475 161
7 6 + double evap. Heat cap. 107% 483 157 1 2,4 R$/US$ as for 2005 (Bacen, 2006).
Source: based on CLASP (2006)
Table 4 – Engineering Parameters for equivalent model – 1 door 301 - 400 liters
Design Number
Design Option Efficiency
Improvement Purchase
Price (US$)1
Electricity Consumption (kWh/year)
0 Baseline 0% 583 483
1 Baseline + more efficient
compressor 21%
636 399
2 1 + increase of door insulating
thermal thickness 1.27 cm 25%
648 386
3 2 + increase of wall insulating
thermal thickness 1.27 cm 39%
706 347
4 3 + increase of wall insulating
thermal thickness 2.54 cm 41%
723 343
5 4 + increase of wall insulating
thermal thickness 2.54 cm 51%
764 320
1 2,4 R$/US$ as for 2005 (Bacen, 2006).
Source: Queiroz (2003).
Table 5 – Engineering Parameters for equivalent model – 2 doors 301 - 400 liters Frost Free
Design Number Design Option Efficiency
Improvement Purchase
Price (US$)1
Electricity Consumption
(kWh/year) 0 Base 0% 750 580
1 Base + improved compressor 14% 758 509
2 1 + increase of door insulating (35/ 65 mm)
19% 765
487
![Page 8: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
3 2 + increase of door insulating (50/80) mm 23% 773 472
4 3 + decreased door leakage 24% 773 468
5 4 + increased cabinet insulation (45/65mm) 38% 795 420
6 5 + increased cabinet insulation (60/80mm) 48% 810 392
7 6 + doubled cond. Surface 71% 848 339 1 2,4 R$/US$ as for 2005 (Bacen, 2006).
Source: based on CLASP (2006)
The main factor affecting the life-cycle cost of each design option is the degree to
which the first cost increases with the improved efficiency. The relation between
the product efficiency and its cost is based on the cost incurred to manufacturers
to implement a particular energy-saving design. The model assumes retail price
scales, in percentage terms, as the manufacturer’s incremental costs. This
assumption allows the estimate of retail prices by using a price estimate of current
baseline models in combination with fractional price increases (CLASP, 2006).
2.3 Stock forecast
A forecast of the total number of products operating in Brazil in each year, and the
rate at which old, inefficient products are replaced with new, efficient ones must
be made in order to determine the national-level impacts of MEPS. The general
form of the econometric parameterization of product rate of ownership is given by
Equation 1.
βαPYkS ××= (1)
where S, is the appliance rate of ownership in the household sector. Y is the
income (GDP), P is the appliance prices, and k is a constant. The parameters α and
β represents the impacts of the income and price respectively on equipment
ownership.
![Page 9: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
A least squares fit to the data for each appliance was performed and the results
are given in Table 6 and showed in figure 1. The strong correlation between
ownership with income and appliance prices is evident. The results are relatively
well modeled indicating the resolving power of the other variables, income (proxy
is GDP/per capita) and index of appliances prices.
Table 6 – Model Parameters for cold Appliances ownership
Parameters Refrigerator α 0,05666 β -0,00791 R2 0,95034
0,89
0,89
0,90
0,90
0,91
0,91
0,92
0,92
0,93
0,93
0,94
0,94
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Rat
e o
f O
wn
ers
hip
Data
Model
Figure 1 – Refrigerator rate of ownership: model and actual data
2.4 Refrigerators sales model
The sales model determines the fraction of appliances that will be affected by
efficiency programs at any point in the forecast. The determination of
economically-driven appliance ownership rates allows for the calculation of the
total stock of appliances and product sales. Sales are driven by the increase in
![Page 10: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
households owning appliances, or by the replacement of retired appliances. In
Brazil there is a combined effect of economic growth and increase of number of
household, which the “first purchase” component is a considerable driver of sales.
Sales due to increased ownership are given by Equation 2.
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )1-×1--×= ySyNRySyNRyPC (2)
where PC stands for first purchase, NR(y) is the number of households in each
year, S(y) is the function presented in the equation 1.
In addition to first purchases, the model describes the replacement of an appliance
in terms of an annual retirement probability that varies as a function of the
appliance age. It is given by Equation 3.
( )
−−
+
=Did
VuIde
e
IdP
1
1 (3)
where P(Id) is the probability of retirement at a given appliance age (Id), Vu is the
average lifetime of the product, and where Did is the mean deviation of
replacement ages, assumed to be two years. In this way, the appliances
replacement in each year is given by Equation 4.
( ) ( ) ( )∑=
×−=30
1
,1Id
e IdPIdystockySub (4)
where Sub(y) is the number of equipment replaced in year y. Stock(y-1, Id) is the
number of products of vintage Id remaining in each year. Id equal 30 is the
![Page 11: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
maximum age of refrigerators in the stock in each year. At last, the total sales (TS)
for the each year are given by Equation 5.
)()()( yPCySubyTS += (5)
2.5 Customers point of view
This perspective is a critical factor in the decision for which MEPS is appropriate
minimum efficiency level. Then for each household is provided an estimate of the
financial impacts of minimum efficiency standards at the unit level through Life
Cycle Cost (LCC) methodology. There are two main components in this analysis
which are the equipment cost and the operation costs. The method is given by
Equation 6.
( )∑+
+=n
R
OCEqLCC
1 (6)
where Eq is equipment cost (retail price), n is the year since purchase and OC is
the annual operating cost. Operating cost is summed over each year of the lifetime
of the appliance. Operating cost is calculated as follows in the equation (7):
TariffEnCOC ×= (7)
where EnC [kWh/year] is Energy consumption and Tariff is the price of electricity
[US$/kWh].
![Page 12: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
2.6 Societal point of view
Under the societal perspective the method consists in calculating the total energy
savings resulted from the difference in energy consumption between the BASE
and the MEPS scenarios. In the BASE case, all products are assumed to be
operating at the current efficiency baseline characterized by the current appliances
stock. In the MEPS case, those products, purchased after the MEPS
implementation, are assumed to operate at the efficiency determined by specific
MEPS options. In this method MEPS affects only new products, not those already
installed before the implementation year. In the first implementing year of
standards, therefore, savings are small, since the standard only has an effect on the
products purchased in that year. As time goes on, more and more of the product
stock is impacted by standards. The total energy saving is given by Equation 8.
( ) ( ) ( )BASE MEPSES y CE y CE y= - (8)
where ES is the total energy saving, CE is the energy consumption in each
scenario given by Equation 9:
( ) ( ) ( )∑=
×=30
1
,Id
ypCeIdystockyCE (9)
where Ce is determined according to the year of purchase (yp). The Ce differs
between the BASE and the MEPS scenarios for year after the MEPS option
implementation.
![Page 13: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
The benefits for society are accounted as the total economic savings occurred
from electricity savings. Equation 10 illustrates the model of accounting of the
benefits (BS).
( ) ( ) TariffyESyBS ×= (10)
On the other hand the national costs in year (y) are the sum of equipment costs
equal to the retail price times the total number of sales in each scenario. Equation
11 illustrates the model of accounting of the costs (CS).
( ) ( ))(×)(-)(×)(=)( yEqyTSyEqyTSyCS BASEBASEMEPSMEPS (11)
where TS is the total units sold and Eq is the equipment price.
The Net Present Value of the MEPS option is then defined as the sum over a
particular forecast period of the net national savings in each year, multiplied by
the appropriate national policy discount rate as given for Equation 12.
( ) ( )( )( )
( )∑
+×−= −
yn
yy
ryCSyBSVPL
0
1
1 (12)
where r is the discounting rate considered 8%3 in the simulations.
3. Model Results and Impacts
![Page 14: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
The energy saving potential and the economic evaluation front to the perspective
of the consumers and the society are described as follow. These results pursue the
premises of economic growth of the B1 scenarios (rate of 4.1% per year)
presented in the National Energy Plan (2030) (EPE & MME, 2007).
3.1 Maximum energy saving potential
The aggregation of all energy efficiency design options for each equivalent model
represents the maximum energy saving potential, i.e the highest level of energy
saving is achieved through the most stringent MEPS for refrigerators. The
electricity demand projections for each equivalent model studied are presented in
Table 7. The savings are the difference between the projected scenarios.
Electricity savings increase steeply after the year of program implementation
(2010) as more and more efficient refrigerators are brought into the stock due to
the replacement of old appliances. While in the base case the total consumption
still rises from 21.38 TWh in 2010 to 26,74 TWh in 2025, in the MEPS scenario
the consumption reduces from 20,96 TWh to 15.52 TWh in 2025. By this year,
when the stock will be completely replaced by efficient products, MEPS will have
reduced refrigerator consumption by about 42% compared to the base case4. This
corresponds to about 10% of the current (2007) total residential electricity
consumption.
Table 7 – Results: Consumption and savings potential. Brazil 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Models Consumption (TWh/year)
201-300 7,3 8,19 8,28 9,13 9,85
301-400 8,44 9,47 9,58 10,56 11,39
BASE
301-400 FF 5,64 6,33 6,4 7,05 7,61
![Page 15: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Total 21,38 23,99 24,26 26,74 28,85
Models Consumption (TWh/year)
201-300 7,12 6,85 5,23 4,42 4,74
301-400 8,31 8,45 7,26 6,98 7,51
301-400 FF 5,53 5,5 4,5 4,12 4,44
MEPS
Total 20,96 20,8 16,99 15,52 16,69
Models Energy Saving (TWh/year)
201-300 0,18 1,34 3,05 4,71 5,11
301-400 0,13 1,02 2,32 3,58 3,88
301-400 FF 0,11 0,83 1,9 2,93 3,17
Total 0,42 3,19 7,27 11,22 12,16
Saving Potential
% 1,96% 13,30% 29,97% 41,96% 42,15%
3.2 Customer perspective
The life cycle cost analysis gives a trade-off between maximum efficiency and
incremental cost associated with the improvements. The Brazilian retail market
practices a high discount rate 63,6%5 and this reflects directly in the viability
analysis. However, even in these conditions we found options that are still cost-
effective for two equivalent models. While the technical innovations increasing
the retail price the appliance energy consumption (kWh/year) decreases as long as
more innovations are incorporated in the refrigerator. In the case of 1 door (301 –
400 liters) no design options proved to be economically viable, due high costs of
technical innovations when compared to another options. Figure 2 shows the
results obtained from life cycle cost analysis performed. Table 8 summarizes the
results of analysis for each equivalent model. The total cumulative electricity
saving during the period analyzed (2010-2030) is 7 TWh under the customer
perspective.
![Page 16: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
100 200 300 400 500 600
kWh/year
US$
1 door 301 -400 l iters
1 door 200 - 300 l iters
Frost free 300 - 400 l iters
Figure 2 – Life cycle cost analysis.
Table 8 - Cost-effectively efficiency improvement and energy saving potential
Model equivalent (liters)
Cost effective technical innovations
Energy efficiency improvement
Cumulative Energy saving (2010-2030)
1 door (201-300) Increase of door insulating (15mm) + decreased door
leakage 14% 4,9 TWh
1 door (301-400) - - -
Combined “Frost Free” (301-400)
improved compressor + increase of door insulating (35/65 mm)
19% 2,1TWh
3.3 Societal Perspective
The societal perspective is here considered as the projection of the total national
expenses taking into account the costs of energy efficiency improvements and the
benefits from the energy savings. This exercise indicates the existence of a bigger
role that more stringent MEPS could play. The net present value for each design
option is given by Table 9. For instance, under the customer perspective for the
![Page 17: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
case of the equivalent model 1 door 201-300 liters, the improvement in energy
efficiency is cost-effective up to “design option 2”. On the other hand, under the
societal perspective all design options considered for this case resulted in positive
net present values (NPV). Even the most expensive option has a positive net
present value, which is US$ 183 million throughout the period of 2010 the 2030.
Considering only the cost-effective options presented in Table 6 (option 7 dor the
1-door 200 - 300 liters model, option 2 for the combined frost-free 301 - 400 liters
model) the total energy savings are 20,9 TWh, corresponding to US$ 264 million.
Table 9 – Net Value Present (NPV) in 2010 for each design option
1 door (201-300 liters)
(US$ million) 1 door (301-400 liters)
(US$ million) Combined “Frost Free”
(301-400 liters) (US$ million)
Design option
PVB PVC NPV PVB PVC NPV PVB PVC NPV
1 719 -238 481 1.338 -2.522 -1.184 623 -505 117
2 845 -285 560 1.535 -3.083 -1.547 830 -749 81
3 1.551 -724 827 2.170 -5.881 -3.711 960 -992 -33
4 2.626 -1.661 965 2.283 -6.720 -4.438 1.016 -1.100 -84
5 2.885 -1.899 985 2.648 -8.678 -6.029 1.423 -2.022 -598
6 3.386 -2.814 571 1.690 -2.943 -1.253
7 3.479 -3.295 183 2.165 -4.861 -2.696 Note: NPV is the Net Present Value, PVC is the Present Value of Costs and PVB is the Present Value of Benefits.
4 Conclusions
The methodology presented based on econometric approach and engineering data
for refrigerator ownership and performance provides a practical instrument for
impact evaluation of the minimum energy performance standards for Brazilian
refrigerators. In the Brazilian current policy context it can be a useful tool for
![Page 18: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
energy planning, since we have not yet evaluated the effects of adopted MEPS
into the future energy projections.
The simulations prove that there is a substantial economic savings to consumers
and society as a whole. The actual societal benefits should in fact be greater if
socio-economic externalities of the saved electricity were included.
In conclusion, we believe that the analysis presented gives an estimate to date of
the level of refrigerator efficiency savings that could be used for police makers in
the process of MEPS enforcement that still in its initial control stage in Brazil. We
also present here a method to estimate future savings due to implementation of
MEPS.
Acknowledgements
The author Conrado Augustus de Melo would like thanks to CNPq (National
Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development) the opportunity to realize
studies for the PhD at the Energy Planning Program of FEM/UNICAMP.
References
Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency - ANEEL, 2006. Average Tariffs by Consumption Class
by Regions and Brazil (R$/MWh). Available at: <http://www.aneel.gov.br/>. Access in 2007,
March.
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics –IBGE, (2005). Projeção da População por Sexo e
Idade para o Período de 1980 -2050 - Revisão 2004 -Metodologia e Resultados
![Page 19: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Brazil. Law 10.295, of 2001, October—‘‘Energy Efficiency Law’’. D.O.U., Brasília, DF, 2001,
Oct. Available at: <http://www.mme.gov.br> Access in 2007, Apr.
CLASP, (2006). Methodology Description for the Policy Analysis Modeling System. Available at:
http://www.clasponline.org/files/PAMSMethodology.pdf Access in May 24, 2008.
Harrington, L. & Damnics, M., (2004). Energy labeling and standards programs throughout the
world, The National Appliance and Equipment Energy Efficiency Committee, Australia.
Available at:
http://www.energyrating.gov.au/library/pubs/200404internatlabelreview.pdf [Acess Junho 30,
2008].
McMahon, J. E., (2004). Comparison of Australian and US Cost-Benefit Approaches to MEPS.
Report presented to the National Appliance and Equipment Energy Efficiency Committee
(NAEEEC), Sydney, Australia, March 25-26, 2004
MME - Ministry of Mines and Energy, 2006a. Nota técnica 21/2006 - DDE. Índices mínimos de
eficiência energética para condicionadores de ar.
MME - Ministry of Mines and Energy, 2006b. Nota técnica 20/2006 - DDE. Índices mínimos de
eficiência energética para refrigeradores e congeladores.
MME - Ministry of Mines and Energy, 2007. Portaria Interministerial no 362, de 24 de dezembro
de 2007. Establish MEPS for refrigerators and freezers. Brasília—DF, 2007.
MME & EPE, (2007). National Energy Plan 2030. Available at:
http://www.epe.gov.br/Lists/Estudos/Estudos.aspx Access in 2008, August.
ELETROBRAS, (2005). Survey of appliances and consumer habits.
Available at http://www.eletrobras.com/pci/main.asp Access in 2008, May.
![Page 20: Energy efficiency standards for refrigerators in Brazil: a methodology for impact evaluation](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022082605/55720612497959fc0b8b85fb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Queiroz, G. et al (2003). A life-cicle cost analysis (LCCA) for setting energy-efficiency standards
in Brazil: The case of residential refrigerators. IEI- International Energy Initiative.
Available at: http://www.iei-la.org/documents/RelIEI2-56-01-03.pdf Access in 2008, May.
Rosenquist, G. et al. (2006) Energy efficiency standards for equipment : Additional opportunities
in the residential and commercial sectors. Energy Policy. vol. 34, no17, pp. 3257-3267
Schiellerup, P. (2002) An Examination of the effectiveness of the EU minimum standard on cold
appliances: the British case. Published in Energy Policy Volume 30. No 4. March 2002. 327-332.
1 Electric Power Research Center - http://www.cepel.br.
2 INMETRO - Institute of the Ministry of Science and Technology, which is responsible for the labeling program.
3 The “minimum discounting rate applied in the evaluation of the expansion alternatives” (MME & EPE, 2007).
4 We should remember that equipment with volume lesser that 200 liters and greater that 400 liters are not considered in this analysis.
5 (Institute for Retail Development, 2007). Credit, Interest and Default.
Available at: http://www.idv.org.br/conjuntura-cji-texto.aspx?IdTextoCJI=243 Access in 2008, September.