1. Discussion on EU Green Paper on Energy Efficiency Product Policy : Elements for a Discussion Benoit Lebot Climate Change - UNDP-GEF [email_address] E-Conference - 19 October 2005

2. Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992) GHG = GHG TOE TOE X GDP GDP X POP POP X Greenhouse Gas Emission = Carbon Contain Energy x Energy Intensity x Wealth x Population

3. Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992) GHG = GHG TOE TOE X GDP GDP X POP POP X ½ In 2050 = ? x ? x 8/3 x 3/2

4. Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992) by 2050 GHG = GHG TOE TOE X GDP GDP X POP POP X 1/2 = x 1/4 1/2 x 4 3 %/year 2 %/year

5. Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992) GHG = GHG TOE TOE X GDP GDP X POP POP X 1/2 = x 1/2 1/4 x 4 by 2050 2 %/year 3 %/year

6. 5% <1.5 % ! 33% 10%

7. >110 TWh/year <40 TWh/year

8. CO 2

9. Standby Power Waste = 2.5% World Electricity = 1% World CO2 Emission

10. Metered Energy Saved with Efficient Refrigerators & Freezers in 20 Households 884 775 747 615 558 519 439 411 345 325 1020 1101 1105 1175 1279 1740 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 11 Household 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

11. Metered Energy Saved with Efficient Lighting of 20 Households 209 247 104 164 185 187 195 196 197 246 250 283 286 309 383 799 53 62 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/an Source : SAVE/Ecodrôme 98 Average Savings : 244 kWh / (an.house) ADEME - Cabinet O. SIDLER ADEME CEE Energy saved after replacing bulbs Consumption after replacing bulbs

12. Demand outlook - residential appliances – IEA-Europe TWh Projections for 17 European Member Countries Source : IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”

13. Impact of more progressive appliance policies – IEA Europe 17 TWh/year -31% -38% Source : IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”

14. Projected savings by end-use IEA - 17 TWh/yr Projections for 17 IEA European Countries Source : IEA 1997 “Cool Appliance: Policy Strategy for Energy Efficient Homes”

15. How to bring energy efficient end-equipment to the market?

16. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Market Transformation: A Model 0

17. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Market Transformation: A Model 0

18. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Current Supply 2002 Market Transformation: A Model 0

19. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Current Supply 2002 0 Supply 2010 Market Transformation: A Model Policy Objective

20. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient 0 In the EU, 7 Energy Efficiency Categories Market Transformation: A Model

21. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient 0 A B C D E F G In the EU, 7 Energy Efficiency Categories Market Transformation: A Model

22. The European Appliance Energy Label Energy 350 More efficient Less efficient A B C D E F G A Manufacturer Model Logo ABC 123 Energy consumption kWh/year (Based on standard test results for 24h) Actual consumption will depend on how the appliance is used and where it is located Further information is contained in product brochures Fresh food volume I Frozen food volume I 200 80 40 (dB(A)re 1 pW) Noise Norm EN 153 May 1990 Refrigerator Label Directive 94/2/EC

23. Does the label work?

24. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% A B C D E F G Energy label class Share of models/market Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance B E C A D F G More Efficient Less Efficient

25. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% A B C D E F G Energy label class Share of models/market EU Market 1992 Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance B E C A D F G More Efficient Less Efficient

26. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% A B C D E F G Energy label class Share of models/market EU Market 1996 EU Market 1992 Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance B E C A D F G More Efficient Less Efficient

27. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% A B C D E F G Energy label class Share of models/market EU Market 1999 EU Market 1996 EU Market 1992 Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance B E C A D F G More Efficient Less Efficient

28. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% A B C D E F G Energy label class Share of models/market EU Market 1999 EU Market 1996 EU Market 1992 EU Market 2003 Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance B E C A D F G More Efficient Less Efficient

29. Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU clothes-washers

30. Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU dishwashers

31. 4 Main Methods used in the World for setting Energy Efficiency Targets

32. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Current Supply 0 Transforming the Equipment Market Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1

33. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1 Method 1: Statistics Analysis

34. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 1 Method 1: Statistics Analysis Cold appliance 1999

35. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Current Supply Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2

36. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Current Supply 2000 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2 Top Runner

37. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 2008 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Top Runner Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 2 Method 2: Top Runner

38. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 1989 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 MEPS 1990

39. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 1990 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 Method 3: Minimum Life-Cycle Cost MEPS 1990

40. Elements of a life-cycle analysis 500 kWh/yr 500 € E

41. Elements of a life-cycle analysis 500 kWh/yr 500 € 400 kWh/yr 550 € D E Improved Insulation

42. Elements of a life-cycle analysis 500 kWh/yr 500 € 400 kWh/yr 550 € 350 kWh/yr 520 € D E C Improved Insulation Improved Compressor

43. Elements of a life-cycle analysis 500 kWh/yr 500 € 400 kWh/yr 550 € 350 kWh/yr 520 € 280 kWh/yr 570 € 2.5 year payback D E C B Improved Insulation Improved Compressor +

44. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

45. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year B A++ E C A Purchase Price Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

46. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Purchase Price Life-Cycle Cost B A++ E C A Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

47. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Purchase Price Life-Cycle Cost Life-Cycle Cost Analysis B A++ E C A

48. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Minimum Life-Cycle Cost MEPS

49. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Life-Cycle Cost Analysis +5% energy cost -10% energy cost Minimum Life-Cycle Cost

50. Life-Cycle Cost € Energy Savings in kWh/year Life-Cycle Cost Analysis +5% energy cost -10% energy cost

51. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 1990 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 MEPS 1993 Method 3: Minimum Life-Cycle Cost MEPS 1990

52. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 1994 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 MEPS 1993 MEPS 2001 Method 3: Minimum Life-Cycle Cost MEPS 1990

53. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 2001 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 MEPS 1990 MEPS 1993 MEPS 2001 Method 3: Minimum Life-Cycle Cost

54. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Supply 2001 Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 3 MEPS 1990 MEPS 1993 MEPS 2001 Method 3: Minimum Life-Cycle Cost

55. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 4 Current Supply Method 4: World’s Best Practice

56. % of Market Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient More Efficient Transforming the Equipment Market 0 Setting Minimum Energy Performance Standards: 4 US MEPS 2004 Supply 2004 Method 4: World’s Best Practice

57. Beyond the Energy label

58. 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

59. Energy Label also used for Buildings B In Austria, UK, Denmark, France…. private homes are being labeled F D

60. www.display-campaign.org

62. EU Product Policy can enhance other Energy Efficiency Policies

66. Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards in the US $2/Home $150/Home

67. Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards in the US $2/Home $150/Home $600/Home $450/Home

68. EU Product Policy: an Example to Numerous Economies

70. B

75. Inefficient Products to Museum All over the World!