Energy Efficiency Standards and Labelling Gene McGlynn Senior Expert, Energy Efficiency Energy Charter Secretariat Implementing Energy Efficiency Policies: National and International Opportunities Sofia, 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 CO 2 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 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 Automobiles Differences 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 EUAUSJapan EU Cand. Balkan Russia / Arm. Other CIS Household appliances Sm, Sv Lm, Lv Sm Lm, Lv Sv Lv Sm Lm - Sv Lv - Lighting Sm Lm, Lv Sm Lv Sv Lv Sm Lm -Lv- CE / ICT Sv Lv Sv Lv -- Sv Lv - HVAC Sm Lm, Lv Sm Lm, Lv Sv Lv -- Sv Lv - Motors Sv Lv Sm----- Cars Sv Lv LmSm Lm ---- S = standard, L = label, m = mandatory, v = voluntary

9 Indicative: Projected Annual Benefits in CIS Countries Annual savings EnergyMoneyAnnual savings EnergyMoney Armenia250 GWh$ 25 MMongolia160 GWh$ 16 M Azerbaijan1100 GWh$ 110 MRussian Federation 33,000 GWh $ 3,300 M Belarus1,700 GWh$ 170 MTajikistan880 GWh$ 88 M Georgia370 GWh$ 37 MTurkmenistan380 GWh$ 38 M Kazakhstan2,200 GWh$ 220 MUkraine7,400 GWh$ 740 M Kyrgyzstan560 GWh$ 56 MUzbekistan2,400 GWh$ 240 M Moldova300 GWh$ 30 M Notes: (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 Transition 1. 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

12 Thank You! Energy Charter Secretariat