skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Prospective Evaluation of the Energy and CO 2 Emissions Impact of China’s 2010 – 2013 Efficiency Standards for Products

Abstract

Since China introduced its first mandatory minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for eight major household products in 1989, its MEPS program has expanded significantly to cover nearly 60 residential, industrial and commercial products. In June of 2012, the pace of standards development for new and revised standards was further accelerated with the launch of the national “100 Energy Efficiency Standards.” Initiatives. An unprecedented 21 MEPS were adopted by China from 2012 to 2013, compared to only 7 MEPS adopted from 2010 to 2011. The Chinese MEPS program now covers 15 products in the residential sector, 15 types of commercial and office equipment, 14 types of industrial equipment and 13 lighting products, making it one of the most comprehensive MEPS program in the world. This study provides an updated prospective evaluation of the potential energy and CO 2 impact of 23 of the 28 MEPS adopted by China from 2010 to 2013. This study updates a previous analysis (Zhou et al. 2011) by quantifying the additional potential energy and CO 2 reductions from the newest standards that have been adopted since 2010. The most recent actual and projected sales, usage, and efficiency data were collected for 14 product categories covered undermore » 23 MEPS adopted between 2010 and 2013. Three scenarios are then used to quantify the energy and CO 2 reduction potential of the one-time implementation of these 23 MEPS, including a baseline counterfactual scenario, the actual MEPS scenario and a best available technologies efficiency scenario. The setting of the baseline efficiency is crucial to determining the savings potential of the new and revised MEPS and international best available technology efficiency levels, as it reflects the market average in the absence of MEPS. For this study, the average baseline is based on either the reported 2010 market-average efficiency if sales-weighted efficiency data is available for new product MEPS and selected products with revised MEPS, or the minimum efficiency requirement of the previous MEPS for products with revised MEPS from 2010 to 2013 that do not have sales-weighted efficiency data. Using sales-weighted efficiency data for the baseline help capture market transformation that has already occurred prior to the implementation of the MEPS, and can better differentiate the savings that are attributable to MEPS. The efficiency levels of best available technologies are taken from recent reviews of international commercially available best available technologies.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [1];  [2]
  1. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States). Energy Technologies Area. China Energy Group
  2. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States). International Energy Studies Group
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE; Energy Foundation China
OSTI Identifier:
1345198
Report Number(s):
LBNL-1005921
ir:1005921
DOE Contract Number:
AC02-05CH11231
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY

Citation Formats

Khanna, Nina, Zhou, Nan, Fridley, David, and McNeil, Michael. Prospective Evaluation of the Energy and CO2 Emissions Impact of China’s 2010 – 2013 Efficiency Standards for Products. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.2172/1345198.
Khanna, Nina, Zhou, Nan, Fridley, David, & McNeil, Michael. Prospective Evaluation of the Energy and CO2 Emissions Impact of China’s 2010 – 2013 Efficiency Standards for Products. United States. doi:10.2172/1345198.
Khanna, Nina, Zhou, Nan, Fridley, David, and McNeil, Michael. 2016. "Prospective Evaluation of the Energy and CO2 Emissions Impact of China’s 2010 – 2013 Efficiency Standards for Products". United States. doi:10.2172/1345198. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1345198.
@article{osti_1345198,
title = {Prospective Evaluation of the Energy and CO2 Emissions Impact of China’s 2010 – 2013 Efficiency Standards for Products},
author = {Khanna, Nina and Zhou, Nan and Fridley, David and McNeil, Michael},
abstractNote = {Since China introduced its first mandatory minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for eight major household products in 1989, its MEPS program has expanded significantly to cover nearly 60 residential, industrial and commercial products. In June of 2012, the pace of standards development for new and revised standards was further accelerated with the launch of the national “100 Energy Efficiency Standards.” Initiatives. An unprecedented 21 MEPS were adopted by China from 2012 to 2013, compared to only 7 MEPS adopted from 2010 to 2011. The Chinese MEPS program now covers 15 products in the residential sector, 15 types of commercial and office equipment, 14 types of industrial equipment and 13 lighting products, making it one of the most comprehensive MEPS program in the world. This study provides an updated prospective evaluation of the potential energy and CO2 impact of 23 of the 28 MEPS adopted by China from 2010 to 2013. This study updates a previous analysis (Zhou et al. 2011) by quantifying the additional potential energy and CO2 reductions from the newest standards that have been adopted since 2010. The most recent actual and projected sales, usage, and efficiency data were collected for 14 product categories covered under 23 MEPS adopted between 2010 and 2013. Three scenarios are then used to quantify the energy and CO2 reduction potential of the one-time implementation of these 23 MEPS, including a baseline counterfactual scenario, the actual MEPS scenario and a best available technologies efficiency scenario. The setting of the baseline efficiency is crucial to determining the savings potential of the new and revised MEPS and international best available technology efficiency levels, as it reflects the market average in the absence of MEPS. For this study, the average baseline is based on either the reported 2010 market-average efficiency if sales-weighted efficiency data is available for new product MEPS and selected products with revised MEPS, or the minimum efficiency requirement of the previous MEPS for products with revised MEPS from 2010 to 2013 that do not have sales-weighted efficiency data. Using sales-weighted efficiency data for the baseline help capture market transformation that has already occurred prior to the implementation of the MEPS, and can better differentiate the savings that are attributable to MEPS. The efficiency levels of best available technologies are taken from recent reviews of international commercially available best available technologies.},
doi = {10.2172/1345198},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 7
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (P.L. 94-163), as amended by the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-12) and by the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of 1988 (P.L. 100-357), and by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-486), provides energy conservation standards for 12 of the 13 types of consumer products` covered by the Act, and authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe amended or new energy standards for each type (or class) of covered product. The assessment of the proposed standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers presented in this document is designed to evaluatemore » their economic impacts according to the criteria in the Act. It includes an engineering analysis of the cost and performance of design options to improve the efficiency of the products; forecasts of the number and average efficiency of products sold, the amount of energy the products will consume, and their prices and operating expenses; a determination of change in investment, revenues, and costs to manufacturers of the products; a calculation of the costs and benefits to consumers, electric utilities, and the nation as a whole; and an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed standards.« less
  • An analysis of the energy conservation and life cycle cost benefits of boost heaters for dishwashers is presented to provide technical information to assist in determining whether to modify the dishwasher test procedure to include boost heaters. Two manufacturers are offering dishwashers which have an inlet water temperature requirement of 120/sup 0/F. Cleaning performance in these appliances is maintained with an electric coil in the sump of the dishwasher, which boosts the incoming water to its final temperature. Both manufacturers have petitioned DOE for exemption from efficiency standards, since current DOE test procedures give no credit for water heater energymore » savings. The evaluation shows boost heaters to be energy conserving for all conditions. The life cycle cost analysis indicates boost heaters are cost effective in all cases for homes with electric water heaters, and in most cases for homes having gas water heaters. Additionally the proposed standards for dishwashers will lower water consumption in 1985 model dishwashers such that boost heaters will become cost effective in all cases.« less
  • The purpose of this study is to asses the desirability of implementing minimum energy efficiency standards for clothes dryers, according to the NECPA requirements, based on the cost effectiveness of the technologically feasible design improvements. Section 2 contains consumer use patterns, typical energy consumption of clothes dryers in the United States, and a discussion of the candidate technical design improvements. The selected design changes and their impact on energy savings, the increased capital cost to the consumer, and the corresponding decreased cost in operation of dryers are discussed in Section 3. The increased cost for compliance by a manufacturer formore » testing and labeling, according to the NECPA requirements, per unit dryer manufactured, is estimated in Section 4. Section 5 presents the cost benefit analysis for implementing energy efficiency improvement design changes and the minimum efficiency standards. The desirability of implementing minimum energy efficiency is discussed in Section 6, followed by the conclusions and recommendations of the study, which appear in Section 7.« less
  • This study estimated energy, environmental and consumer economic impacts of U.S. federal residential energy efficiency standards that became effective in the 1988-2001 period or will take effect by the end of 2007. These standards have been the subject of in-depth analyses conducted as part of DOE's standards rulemaking process. This study drew on those analyses, but updated certain data and developed a common framework and assumptions for all of the products in order to estimate realized impacts and to update projected impacts. We estimate that the considered standards will reduce residential primary energy consumption and CO{sub 2} emissions in 2020more » by 8% compared to the levels expected without any standards. They will save a cumulative total of 34 quads by 2020, and 54 quads by 2030. The estimated cumulative net present value of consumer benefit amounts to $93 billion by 2020, and grows to $125 billion by 2030. The overall benefit/cost ratio of cumulative consumer impacts is 2.45 to 1. While the results of this study are subject to a fair degree of uncertainty, we believe that the general conclusions--DOE's energy efficiency standards save significant quantities of energy (and associated carbon emissions) and reduce consumers' net costs--are robust.« less
  • Iron and steel manufacturing is energy intensive in China and in the world. China is the world largest steel producer accounting for around half of the world steel production. In this study, we use a bottom-up energy consumption model to analyze four steel-production and energy-efficiency scenarios and evaluate the potential for energy savings from energy-efficient technologies in China’s iron and steel industry between 2010 and 2050. The results show that China’s steel production will rise and peak in the year 2020 at 860 million tons (Mt) per year for the base-case scenario and 680 Mt for the advanced energy-efficiency scenario.more » From 2020 on, production will gradually decrease to about 510 Mt and 400 Mt in 2050, for the base-case and advanced scenarios, respectively. Energy intensity will decrease from 21.2 gigajoules per ton (G/t) in 2010 to 12.2 GJ/t and 9.9 GJ/t in 2050 for the base-case and advanced scenarios, respectively. In the near term, decreases in iron and steel industry energy intensity will come from adoption of energy-efficient technologies. In the long term, a shift in the production structure of China’s iron and steel industry, reducing the share of blast furnace/basic oxygen furnace production and increasing the share of electric-arc furnace production while reducing the use of pig iron as a feedstock to electric-arc furnaces will continue to reduce the sector’s energy consumption. We discuss barriers to achieving these energy-efficiency gains and make policy recommendations to support improved energy efficiency and a shift in the nature of iron and steel production in China.« less