energy labels & standards
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Discussion on EU Green Paper on Energy Efficiency
Product Policy:
Elements for a Discussion
Benoit Lebot
Climate Change - [email protected]
E-Conference - 19 October 2005
Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992)
GHG =GHGTOE
TOEX
GDPGDP
X POPPOP
X
Greenhouse Gas
Emission=
Carbon ContainEnergy x Energy
Intensity xWealthx Population
Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992)
GHG =GHGTOE
TOEX
GDPGDP
X POPPOP
X
½In 2050
= ? x ? x 8/3x 3/2
Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992)
GHG =GHGTOE
TOEX
GDPGDP
X POPPOP
X
1/2= x1/4 1/2 x 4by 2050
3%/year 2%/year
Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992)
GHG =GHGTOE
TOEX
GDPGDP
X POPPOP
X
1/2= x1/2 1/4 x 4by 2050
2%/year 3%/year
33%
10%
5% <1.5 % !
>110 TWh/year <40 TWh/year
CO2
Standby Power Waste = 2.5% World Electricity
= 1% World CO2 Emission
884775 747
615 558 519439 411
345 325
10
20
11
01
11
05
11
75
12
79
17
40
242 234 213
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
7 17 10 2 6 18 20 12 16 3 14 15 13 8 9 5 27 4 11Household ID
kWh/an
Source : SAVE/Ecodrôme 98
Average annual Savings: 723 kWh/an/house
ADEME - Cabinet O. SIDLER
Energy saved after replacing Fridges & Freezers
Consumption after replacing Fridges & Freezers
Metered Energy Saved with Efficient Refrigerators & Freezers in 20 Households
Metered Energy Saved with Efficient Lighting of 20 Households
209
247
104164185
187195196197246
250
283
286
309
383
799
5362
71
101
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2 18 10 20 5 16 15 8 14 9 19 4 11 17 6 7 12 27 13 3
Household ID
kWh/anEnergy saved after replacing bulbs
Consumption after replacing bulbs
Source : SAVE/Ecodrôme 98
Average Savings : 244 kWh / (an.house)
ADEME - Cabinet O. SIDLER
ADEME CEE
Demand outlook - residential appliances – IEA-Europe
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Other
Circulation pumps
PCs
Standby
Television
Dishwashing
Clothes-drying
Clothes-washing
Refrigeration
Lighting
Cooking
Water heating
Space cooling
Space heating
TWh
Projections for 17 European Member Countries
Source: IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”
Impact of more progressive appliance policies – IEA Europe 17
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
NoPolicies
Currentpolicies
LLCCfrom 2005
TWh/year
-31% -38%
Source: IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”
Projected savings by end-use IEA - 17
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Other uses
Circulation pumps
PCs
Standby
Television
Dishwashing
Clothes-drying
Clothes-washing
Refrigeration
Lighting
Cooking
Water heating
Space cooling
Space heating
TWh/yr
Projections for 17 IEA European
Countries
Source: IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”
How to bring energy efficient end-equipment
to the market?
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Market Transformation: A Model
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Market Transformation: A Model
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
CurrentSupply
2002
Market Transformation: A Model
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
CurrentSupply
2002
0
Supply2010
Policy Objective
Market Transformation: A Model
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
0
In the EU, 7 Energy Efficiency Categories
Market Transformation: A Model
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
0
A B C D E F G
In the EU, 7 Energy Efficiency Categories
Market Transformation: A Model
Energy
350
More efficient
Less efficient
AB
CDE
FG
A
ManufacturerModel
LogoABC123
Energy consumption kWh/year(Based on standard test results for 24h)
Actual consumption willdepend on how the appliance isused and where it is located
Further information is contained
in product brochures
Fresh food volume IFrozen food volume I
20080
40(dB(A)re 1 pW)Noise
Norm EN 153 May 1990Refrigerator Label Directive 94/2/EC
The European Appliance Energy
Label
Does the label work?
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
A B C D E F GEnergy label class
Sh
are
of
mo
del
s/m
ark
et
More Efficient Less Efficient
Transforming the Equipment MarketImpact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance
B ECA D F G
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
A B C D E F GEnergy label class
Sh
are
of
mo
del
s/m
ark
et
EU Market 1992
More Efficient Less Efficient
Transforming the Equipment MarketImpact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance
B ECA D F G
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
A B C D E F GEnergy label class
Sh
are
of
mo
del
s/m
ark
et EU Market 1996
EU Market 1992
More Efficient Less Efficient
Transforming the Equipment MarketImpact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance
B ECA D F G
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
A B C D E F GEnergy label class
Sh
are
of
mo
del
s/m
ark
et
EU Market 1999
EU Market 1996
EU Market 1992
More Efficient Less Efficient
Transforming the Equipment MarketImpact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance
B ECA D F G
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
A B C D E F GEnergy label class
Sh
are
of
mo
del
s/m
ark
et
EU Market 1999
EU Market 1996
EU Market 1992
More Efficient Less Efficient
EU Market 2003
Transforming the Equipment MarketImpact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance
B ECA D F G
Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU clothes-washers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
A B C D E F G NA
Mar
ket
Sh
are
April 2003
1996
Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU dishwashers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
A B C D E F G NA
Mar
ket
Sh
are
April 2003
1994
4 Main Methods used in the World for setting Energy
Efficiency Targets
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
CurrentSupply
0
Transforming the Equipment MarketSetting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1
Method 1:Statistics Analysis
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1
Method 1:Statistics Analysis
Cold appliance 1999
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
CurrentSupply
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
CurrentSupply
2000
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
To
p R
un
ner
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply2008
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
To
p R
un
ner
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2
Method 2:Top Runner
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply1989
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
ME
PS
199
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply1990
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
Method 3:Minimum
Life-Cycle Cost
ME
PS
199
0
Elements of a life-cycle analysis
500 kWh/yr500 €
E
500 kWh/yr500 €
400 kWh/yr550 €D
E
Improved
Insulation
Elements of a life-cycle analysis
500 kWh/yr500 €
400 kWh/yr550 €
350 kWh/yr520 €
D
E
C
Improved
Insulation
ImprovedCompressor
Elements of a life-cycle analysis
500 kWh/yr500 €
400 kWh/yr550 €
350 kWh/yr520 €
280 kWh/yr570 €
2.5 year payback
D
E
C
B
Improved
Insulation
ImprovedCompressor
+
Elements of a life-cycle analysis
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
B
A++
E CA
Purchase Price
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
Purchase Price
Life-Cycle Cost
B
A++
E CA
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
B
A++E
CA
Purchase Price
Life-Cycle Cost
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
Minimum Life-Cycle Cost
ME
PS
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
+5% energy cost
-10% energy costMinimum Life-Cycle Cost
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lif
e-C
ycle
Co
st €
Energy Savings in kWh/year
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
+5% energy cost
-10% energy cost
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply1990
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
ME
PS
199
3Method 3:Minimum
Life-Cycle Cost
ME
PS
199
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply1994
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
ME
PS
199
3
ME
PS
200
1
Method 3:Minimum
Life-Cycle Cost
ME
PS
199
0
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply2001
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
ME
PS
199
0
ME
PS
199
3
ME
PS
200
1
Method 3:Minimum
Life-Cycle Cost
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Supply2001
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3
ME
PS
199
0
ME
PS
199
3
ME
PS
200
1
Method 3:Minimum
Life-Cycle Cost
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 4
CurrentSupply
Method 4:World’s
Best Practice
% of Market
Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient
MoreEfficient
Transforming the Equipment Market
0
Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 4
US
ME
PS
200
4
Supply2004
Method 4:World’s
Best Practice
Beyond the Energy label
European Car Label
In application of EU Directive 99/94/EC, Several Countries (Denmark, NL, BE...) have selected the above format for Car Labelling
G
C
Energy Label also used for Buildings
B
In Austria, UK, Denmark, France…. private homes are being labeled
FD
www.display-campaign.org
Expanding EU Labels to Other Human Activities
• Building Materials : Windows, Insulation, Boilers, Pumps,
• Renewable Energy System: Photovoltaics, Solar Panels, Biomass System
• Food products: Fresh Food, Meat, Cooking Preparation
• Leisure: Air-Travel
EU Product Policy can enhance other Energy
Efficiency Policies
EU Energy Efficiency Standards & Labels
• Bring transparency to the market
• Help stakeholders work on energy efficiency
• Enhance market forces to address energy efficiency – for instance in commercial materials, advertisement
• Facilitate market based mechanisms: White Certificate, Energy Service Directive,…
Questions for Green Paper
EU Product Policy require sustainable resources:
• To collect data, understand the current situation, set baseline;
• To analyze, to consult stakeholders, to run test facility
• To monitor impact and update policy
• In the USA, $1M/year/end-use an average study last 3 years
• What are the resources available in Europe?
Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards in the US
• Over the last 15 years, US DOE spent $200 Millions on appliance programmes
• That is $2 /US Household
Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards in the US
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
US DOE EE Investment Energy Savings Net Savings
$2/Home
$150/Home
Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards in the US
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
US DOE EE Investment Energy Savings Net Savings
$2/Home
$150/Home
$600/Home
$450/Home
EU Product Policy: an Example to Numerous
Economies
B
Benefits of International Policy Co-ordination
• Greater Market Transparency
• Reduced Costs for Product Testing & Design
• Enhanced Prospects for Trade & Technology Transfer
• Reduced Cost for developing Government & Utility Efficiency Programs
Reasons for a Global Product Strategy
• CDM may address large GHG emitters, not the end-use sector
• S&L: a structure to Energy Efficiency efforts
• Most appliances evolved in International Market: S&L can easily be duplicated
• S&L can start on appliances, then expand to cover other sectors (buildings & vehicles)
Proposed Vision for an EU Product Policy
• Let´s get rid of obsolete technologies:– Incandescent and kerosene lighting – Electromagnetic ballast for fluorescent lighting– Standby power waste– Inefficient electric motor drive, air conditionners
appliances, …
• Safety norms as a model for Energy Efficiency norms• Partner with key International businesses• Work towards an International declaration for G8,
CSD, UNFCCC… set a Global Strategy
Inefficient Products to Museum
All over the World!