Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Energy Efficiency Standards and
Labelling
Gene McGlynnSenior Expert, Energy Efficiency
Energy Charter Secretariat [email protected]
Implementing Energy Efficiency Policies: National and International OpportunitiesSofia, Bulgaria
29 October 2008
2
Energy Charter Review of EES&L Analysis by Klinckenberg Consultants Background to PEEREA WG discussion
Identify approaches used in ECS countries
Assess effectiveness of approaches
Focus on non-EU Economies in transition
Suggest areas for cooperative work
3
Case for Energy Efficiency Standards and Labels
EE S&L:1. Help the market recognise energy performance
2. Provide consumers with tool to select products with lower running cost
3. Provide manufacturers with tool to differentiate products
4. Lead to huge net economic gains (if done properly)
5. Lead to important energy and CO2 savings
4
Role of EE S&L in Product Policy
5
Benefits of EE S&L
1. Very large energy savings, estimated $4.8 billion for Australia, $ 100 billion for USA by 2020
2. Extremely effective mechanism for saving energy and reducing GHG emissions
3. Relatively easy to implement and manage
4. Create level playing field for manufacturers
5. Can be internationally harmonised
6. Results are comparatively assured
6
EES&L for AutomobilesDifferences in labelling approaches• Urban, highway or both• Fuel efficiency or CO2• Test cycles• Include costs?• Stars, ranges?
Issues for regulators• Voluntary to mandatory (Japan, EU)• Used vehicles (New Zealand)• Dynamic (eg Top-runner) or static• Problems from class boundaries• Heavy Vehicles (Japan)
7
International Cooperation Can Help
EU, APEC, US all developing international standards• APEC-ESIS database promotes transparency and trade• Energy Star a global brand
Communities of Practice promote consistency• Common test procedures• Common performance banding• CFLs, STBs, Motors
Other potential• Verification results• Testing laboratories
8
Summary Overview: EE S&L in ECS countries
EU AUS JapanEU
Cand.Balkan
Russia / Arm.
Other CIS
Household appliances
Sm, SvLm, Lv
SmLm, Lv
SvLv
SmLm
-SvLv
-
Lighting SmLm, Lv
SmLv
SvLv
SmLm
- Lv -
CE / ICT SvLv
LvSvLv
- -SvLv
-
HVAC SmLm, Lv
SmLm, Lv
SvLv
- -SvLv
-
Motors SvLv
Sm - - - - -
Cars SvLv
Lm SmLm
- - - -
S = standard, L = label, m = mandatory, v = voluntary
9
Indicative: Projected Annual Benefits in CIS Countries
Annual savings
Energy Money Annual savings
Energy Money
Armenia 250 GWh $ 25 M Mongolia 160 GWh $ 16 M
Azerbaijan 1100 GWh $ 110 M Russian Federation
33,000 GWh
$ 3,300 M
Belarus 1,700 GWh $ 170 M Tajikistan 880 GWh $ 88 M
Georgia 370 GWh $ 37 M Turkmenistan
380 GWh $ 38 M
Kazakhstan 2,200 GWh $ 220 M Ukraine 7,400 GWh $ 740 M
Kyrgyzstan 560 GWh $ 56 M Uzbekistan 2,400 GWh $ 240 M
Moldova 300 GWh $ 30 MNotes: (1)Approximately 6% of all electricity can be saved with EE S&L programmes(2)Further savings possible from heating equipment, vehicles, possibly buildings
10
Key Lessons Learnt in Economies in Transition1. Regulations only deliver when these are properly
mandated and well implemented
2. Access to testing laboratories is essential
3. Leading market parties ask for well-implemented EE S&L
4. Manufacturers can benefit from introducing EE S&L
5. Energy efficiency standards and labels deliver
6. Appropriate mix of standards and labels is needed
11
Possible Framework for Implementing EE S&L
1. Creating awareness of national policy decision makers
2. Enhancing capacities of local experts
3. Developing regional EE S&L strategy
