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. Fri . "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 = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • Carbon dioxide (CO/sub 2/) is a product of burning fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal) and fossil fuel burning is the dominant source of global CO/sub 2/ emissions amounting to 5.2 petagrams of carbon per year (PgC) in 1985. The control of CO/sub 2/ emissions would require control of energy production and use. US emissions were 1.25 PgC in 1985. National Energy Policy Plan (NEPP) projections show total US emissions rising 38% by 2010 to 1.7 PgC. The US Department of Energy (DOE) Carbon Dioxide Research Division (CDRD) has sponsored research at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL), Brookhaven National Laboratorymore » (BNL), and at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory to do a preliminary assessment of the technical feasibility and consequences of reducing US CO/sub 2/ emissions from 1985 levels by 10, 25 or 50 percent by either the year 1995 and 2010. In addition, DOE/CDRD sponsored a day-long roundtable attended by nine experts in the field to discuss this issue. Two methods of CO/sub 2/ emissions reduction were considered: energy intensity reductions (conservation), and substitution of natural gas for coal. The study did not address the contribution of other energy supply options or the feasibility of pre- or post-combustion CO/sub 2/ removal. Furthermore, the study made no attempt to explore specific policies that might be employed to achieve technically feasible CO/sub 2/ emissions reductions. This is not a policy document.« less
  • Efficiency of combustion for steam power plants is an essential focus for the electric power industry, as evidenced by the National Energy Strategy which puts great emphasis on improving the efficiency of power generation and use. The prime objective is to reduce emissions: SO{sub 2}, NO{sub x}, CO{sub 2} and particulates, as a consequence of burning less fuel per kW generated. The major driving factor for improved efficiency is likely to be the increased importance to the world of the global warming issue. In fact the U.S. National Energy Strategy of 1991 called for reductions in global warming potential, asmore » measured in billions of tons of CO{sub 2} equivalent, of 10% by the year 2010, and 20% by the year 2030. Achievement of such goals will require reductions from both transportation and energy industries and the U.S. electric power industry has undertaken a voluntary program to return CO{sub 2} emissions to 1990 levels. New generation in the U.S. will emphasize high efficiency options, based for the next 10-20 years largely on combined Rankine and Brayton cycles. Such combined cycles, whether fired by coal or gas, result in significantly higher efficiency. However even an aggressive scenario postulating rapid introduction of coal and gas-based combined cycles, and the retirement of three quarters of existing coal-fired plants by the year 2010 still results in a 16% increase of CO{sub 2} emissions over 1990 levels. An important conclusion is that fossil technology advances alone will likely be insufficient to cap CO{sub 2} emissions at 1990 levels without additional supportive actions.« less
  • China’s industrial sector dominates the country’s total energy consumption and energy efficiency in the industry sector is crucial to help China reach its energy and CO 2 emissions reduction goals. There are many energy efficiency policies in China, but the motivation and willingness of enterprises to improve energy efficiency has weakened. This report first identifies barriers that enterprises face to be self-motivated to implement energy efficiency measures. Then, this report reviews international policies and programs to improve energy efficiency and evaluates how these policies helped to address the identified barriers. Lastly, this report draws conclusions and provides recommendations to Chinamore » in developing policies and programs to motivate enterprises to improve energy efficiency.« less
  • 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