Q&A about new energy labels for TVs, refrigerators, dishwashers and washing machines

The European Commission set new energy labels for appliances.

How does energy labelling concern consumers?
Televisions; refrigerators, freezers; dishwashers and washing machines represents on average 30% of the electricity bill paid each month by households. The energy label will allow the consumer in the shop to easily see which are the appliances consuming the least energy.

What are the main differences between the old and the new label?
The new labelling system allows up to three classes (A+ to A+++) to be added on top of class A so as to provide consumers with more differentiation between products. If the majority of the market reaches the upper two classes (A++, A+++), the classification will be reviewed. However, it is expected that classes A+++ are close to the technological limit of possible efficiency improvements.
Another novelty is that the label is language free and will be added in the packaging of each appliance. It will allow retailers to easily attach the label to the appliances at the point of sale and avoid today's situation where appliances are often mislabelled.

How much energy can a household save with the highest energy class on the label?
The actual amount of energy saved depends of course on a concrete product (its size and features). For example, a refrigerator-freezer in class A+++ will consume on average 60% less than a refrigerator-freezer in class A. A dishwasher or a washing machine in class A+++ will consume on average 30% less than a dishwasher or a washing machine in class A.

Will the TV and other equipment be more expensive for consumers?
The label scheme does not increase the prices. Energy efficient products tend to cost more but they save energy. The label gives the consumer the choice which product he prefers.

Does the introduction of these new labels ban some household equipment from the market?
The label does not ban any product from the market but provides information and market transparency to assist consumers to make an informed purchasing decision. It ensures that all products are comparable using the same test methods and classification. The aim of energy labelling is to provide incentives for industry to develop further improved products and innovations beyond the "minimum" mandatory energy efficiency levels.

Why does the energy label for televisions have seven classes from A to G while the energy label on refrigerators, dishwashers and washing machines goes up to class A+++?
The principle is that the energy label starts with the classes A to G when it is introduced for the first time on the market (which is currently the case for televisions). Refrigerators, dishwashers and washing machines have already been displaying the energy label with the A to G classes for more than 10 years. As a result of the technological improvement triggered by the label, around 90% of those products currently reach class A. This is why new classes have been introduced on top of class A to allow consumers to differentiate "better than A" products.

How will the new label be introduced at the point of sale? Is an old class A of household refrigerating appliances, dishwashers and washing machines the same as the new one?
The new label will gradually be introduced at the point of sale, meaning that consumers are likely to see the old and the new label close to each other for several months at the point of sale. However, since an old class A or B appliance is equivalent to a new class A or B, consumers will still be able to compare products at the point of sale on the basis of both energy labels.

When will the Regulations enter into force and when will the label become mandatory?
The entering into force of the Regulations is subject to the right of objection of the European Parliament and Council. If they do not object, the Regulations should enter into force around December 2010 or February 2011. The label will be allowed on a voluntary basis immediately after the entry into force of the Regulation and become mandatory on all appliances placed on the market one year after the entry into force of the Regulations.

What is the difference between energy labels, ecolabels and ecodesign?
Energy labels are adopted by the European Commission on a product by product basis (energy labelling Directive 2010/30/EU). They display ranking of products according to their energy efficiency consumption on an A to G scale, the A class (green) being the most energy efficient appliances and the G class (red) the least. Once the majority of products reaches class A, up to three classes (A+/A++/A+++) are added on top of class A.
Energy labels are mandatory for all appliances placed on the EU market and should always be clearly displayed on each appliance at the point of sale.
Ecolabels are voluntary labels adopted by the European Commission on a product by product (Ecolabel Regulation (EC/66/2010). The Ecolabel, i.e. the flower logo, may be displayed on products and promotional material on a voluntary basis if they respond to a list of the criteria pre-defined in implementing measures of the Commission and guaranteeing that the product is among the most environmentally friendly in his sector.
Ecodesign requirements are adopted by the European Commission on a product by product basis (ecodesign Directive EC/2009/125). They set minimum requirements on the performance of the products so as to improve their environmental impact. Ecodesign requirements are mandatory and must be met by all products to be allowed to be placed on the EU market. They are based on an assessment of the impact of the product on the environment throughout its life-cycle, starting from the production stage, through to production, distribution and disposal.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) network

The CCS network is the first network of CCS demonstration projects.

More information: Commission sets up world's first project network for CO2 Capture and Storage

EU risks missing efficiency goal

A report by the European Climate Foundation (ECF) concludes that EU's 20% energy efficiency goal for 2020 may not be reached. Despite 2008 economic recession and existing efficiency and renewable energy policies Europe will still have to save 208 million tonnes of oil equivalent.

This is more than half of what is needed to achieve the 20% non-binding target, which is equivalent to energy savings of about 394Mtoe. The gap can be bridged almost entirely by strengthening energy efficiency efforts in end-use sectors: residential, services, transport and industry. Further savings can be achieved by improving the energy efficiency of power generation and refineries.

The 2006 EU action plan on energy efficiency will be reviewed soon.

Source: ECEEE - EU risks missing efficiency goal, report warns

More information: Roadmap 2050

China turns climate change into Jobs

Thomas Friedman in The New York Times writes about chinese cleverness in turning climate change into jobs. On the contrary, the US is getting behind: the energy bill needed to scale clean technologies has not been approved and lots of doubts remain about climate change.

So while America’s Republicans turned “climate change” into a four-letter word — J-O-K-E — China’s Communists also turned it into a four-letter word — J-O-B-S.
And because runaway pollution in China means wasted lives, air, water, ecosystems and money — and wasted money means fewer jobs and more political instability — China’s leaders would never go a year (like we will) without energy legislation mandating new ways to do more with less. It’s a three-for-one shot for them. By becoming more energy efficient per unit of G.D.P., China saves money, takes the lead in the next great global industry and earns credit with the world for mitigating climate change.

EU ETS responsible for no more than 0.3% carbon savings from 2008 to 2012

A new report from Sandbag warns that the emissions trading scheme implemente by EU since 2008 can increase CO2 emissions rather than reducing them for most of the coming decades unless the it is revised.

The group's calculations show that the scheme, which covers some 12,000 industrial installations and half of the EU's emissions, will at best achieve some 32 million tonnes of CO2 savings during the 2008-2012 period. This is a small fraction of the annual emissions of 1.9 billion tonnes from these installations, it said, adding that the EU would have been better off by simply imposing a cap on one of Europe's largest polluters over the same period.
Moreover, the report argued that the meagre reductions are unlikely to take place in Europe because there is an ample supply of cheap international offset credits. As a result, European emissions could actually increase by 34% from current levels by 2016.

More information:
'Minuscule' CO2 savings expected from EU scheme

Recession accelerates the decline in EU greenhouse gas emissions

The European Environment Agency estimated that greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union decreased by 6.9% in 2009, compared with 2008. This is due to the recession that affected cement, chemical, iron and steel industries. Consumption of fossil fuels, particularly coal, fell by 5.5 % in 2009 compared to the previous year. At the same time, renewable energy use (excluding biomass) increased significantly, rising by 8.3 %.

Siemens makes its factories greener

According to a press release from Siemens, the company wants to reduce energy and CO2 emissions by 20% by the end of 2011. Siemens will invest circa €100 million until the end of 2012 to make its factories greener. The german company is also worried about its suppliers' performance, stating that in the next two years they are to check their companies' energy and environmental efficienct.

“We want to be the first industrial enterprise in the world with an entirely environmentally friendly supply chain”

It is estimated that the company’s 1,000 most important suppliers alone could reduce their CO2 emissions by 1.5 million tons a year and their energy costs by around €170 million.

Doing More While Using Less Power

An interesting article in the New York Times about energy efficiency and the obstacles to efficiency:

“Policy makers are supportive of energy efficiency in concept, but there’s this whole argument of ‘just leave it to the market,”’ Mr. Nadel said. Politically, too, building a power plant brings visible, vote-winning jobs, so “efficiency is everyone’s second choice,” he said.

But some market incentives are misaligned. “Major energy providers make more money out of kilowatt-hours that they sell rather than the ones that they don’t sell,” Ms. Zoi said.

Decoupling utility profits from the amount of energy sold, as California did in 1983, is a way to fix this problem, and it is a growing trend. Twenty-nine other U.S. states have since followed that lead or are about to do so, according to the Institute for Energy Efficiency.