Filling the energy efficiency - OECD.org · Greater Market Transparency around the globe •...

Filling the energy efficiency gap through domestic

policies & programmes

Benoit LebotClimate Change Technical Advisor

[email protected]

"Working Together to Respond to Climate Change"Annex I Expert Group Seminar, OECD

6 May 2008

http://hdr.undp.org

2007 2050

Today World AverageSouth

4.2 tCO2eq/Cap

North16.1 tCO2eq/Cap

2050Target50%

Global Emissions

CO2/Cap/year

UNDP HDR Objective for 2050:• In the north, - 80% in emissions•In the south, - 20% in emissions

All sectors and regions have the potential to contribute

Note: estimates do not include non-technical options such as lifestyle changes

8

Efficiency offers most cost-effective abatement: e.g. Vattenfal/McKinsey CO2 abatement cost curve

Source:McKinsey Global Institute 2007 © OECD/IEA, 2008

MID‐RANGE CASE – 2030

IEA WEO 2006: Alternative Policy Scenario: Global Savings in Energy-Related CO2 Emissions

Reference Scenario

26

30

34

38

42

2004 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Gt o

f CO 2


Alternative Policy Scenario

Reference Scenario

26

30

34

38

42

2004 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Gt o

f CO 2


Power sector efficiency & fuel (13%)

Fossil-fuel end-use efficiency

(36%)

Alternative Policy Scenario

Reference Scenario

Increased nuclear (10%)Increased renewables (12%

Electricity end-use efficiency (29%)

26

30

34

38

42

2004 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Gt o

f CO 2

Professeur Kaya (World Summit 1992)

GHG =GHGTOE

TOEX GDPGDP

X POPPOPX

Greenhouse Gas

Emission=

Carbon ContainEnergy x Energy

Intensity x Wealthx Population


GHG =GHGTOE

TOEX GDPGDP

X POPPOPX

½In 2050

= ? x ? x 8/3x 3/2


GHG =GHGTOE

TOEX GDPGDP

X POPPOPX

1/2= x1/4 1/2 x 4by 2050

3%/year 2%/year


GHG =GHGTOE

TOEX GDPGDP

X POPPOPX

1/2= x1/2 1/4 x 4by 2050

2%/year 3%/year

Japan

France

Germany

UK

USA

Zone d'évolution probable dansles pays en développement

Evolution des maxima

China

KoreaBrazil

Evolution of Energy Intensities From 1860 to 2000

Source B.DESSUS – J.M. Martin 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4in toe/1000 $ US

Most Products that Will Use Energy in Buildings in 2020 Have Not Yet Been Made

End Use Energy Consumption in 2020

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

United States China

Ener

gy C

onsu

mpt

ion

(% o

f tot

al)

New stock

Stock pre-2000

33%

90%

5% <1.5 % !

95%

5%

55%Advanced

Gas Turbine

2.6 %

55%Advanced

Gas Turbine

95%

25% 13 %

100%

95%

25% 24 %

How to transform markets?

% ofMarket

Energy Efficiency Scale Less Efficient

MoreEfficient

0

% of Market


MoreEfficient

0

% of Market


MoreEfficient

Supply2007

0

% of Market

Energy Efficiency Scaleor Carbon Contain

MoreCarbon

LessCarbon

CurrentSupply

2007

0

Supply2010

Policy Objective

% of Market


MoreEfficient

0

% of Market


MoreEfficient

0

Market Transformation: A Model

% of Market


MoreEfficient

0

% of Market


MoreEfficient

0

A B C D E F G

Energy

350

More efficient

Less efficient

AB

CDE

FG

A

ManufacturerModel

LogoABC123

Energy consumption kWh/year(Based on standard test results for 24h)

Actual consumption willdepend on how the appliance isused and where it is located

Further information is containedin product brochures

Fresh food volume IFrozen food volume I

20080

40(dB(A)re 1 pW)Noise

Norm EN 153 May 1990Refrigerator Label Directive 94/2/EC

The European

Energy Label

What impact is the impact ofthe European Energy Label?

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

A B C D E F GEnergy label class

Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

More Efficient Less Efficient

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

EU Market 1992


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

EU Market 1996EU Market 1992


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

EU Market 1999EU Market 1996EU Market 1992


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

EU Market 1999EU Market 1996EU Market 1992


EU Market 2003

Transforming the Equipment Market Impact of EU Label on Market of Cold Appliance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

A+ A B C D E F G

EU Market 1992EU Market 2004

Shar

e of

mod

els/

mar

ket

1999: MEPS

© by GfK MS, www.gfkms.com - Italy - SDA-MDA De

10 Ctr.1,5

30,3

26,3

22,2

6,35,37,2

GB D F I E

14,8

24,4

39,4

8,25,57,7

3,1

52

34,5

9,5

21,8

31

23,7

14

2,5

7,1

25,3

11,6

23,1

5

17,3

2

15,7

2

12,2

23,3

14,4

22,2

8,6

17,4

P B NL A S2,1

9,9

16,5

3,8

12,7

54

52,1

20,5

16,1

2,6

6,8

14,1

73,5

64,1

1,7

39,3

37,1

10,61,8

2,2

7,8

6

65,4

16,7

2,5

72,3

Energy Class A+Energy Class AEnergy Class BEnergy Class CEnergy Class DEnergy Class EEnergy Class FOthers

European Freezers Market in 2002

© by GfK MS, www.gfkms.com - Italy - SDA-MDA De

10 Ctr.

39,1

38,6

14,6

6,6

GB D F I E

32,6

40

22,5

4,9

51,7

1,6

41,4

4,2

38,1

41,9

10

10

37

32,1

23,6

7,1

14,3

48,9

23,3

13,5

P B NL A S

14,7

39,7

14

31,6

57,8

26,8

11,52,5

71,1

13,3

8,93,6

3,1

38

43,5

13,4

5

45,9

40

9,44,7

Energy Class AEnergy Class A +Energy Class BEnergy Class COthers

European Refrigerators Market in 2002

Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU clothes-washers

Evaluation of efficiency trends: EU dishwashers

Beyond the Energy label

EuropeanCar Label

In application of EU Directive 99/94/EC, Several Countries(Denmark, NL, BE...) have selected the above format for Car Labelling

G

C

Energy Label also used for Buildings

B

In Austria, UK, Denmark, France….private homes are being labeled

FD

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Perc

enta

ge o

f Mar

ket


5 Steps to Transform a Market

1. Understanding of Market2. Information & Labelling

R&

D

3. Stimulate Research & Dev.4. Set Minimum Perf. Standards5. Market Pull (DSM, CDM, Public Procurement, $ incentives)

A Vision: Let’s Phase out Obsolete Technologies

• Let´s get rid of energy inefficient technologies:– Standby power waste: IEA 1 Watt initiative!– Incandescent & kerosene lighting – Electromagnetic ballast for fluorescent lighting– Inefficient electric motor drive– Inefficient distribution transformers …

• Safety norms as a model for Energy Efficiency norms

• Partnership with key International businesses & Institutions: Marrakech Task Force, UNEP Sustainable Consumption, UNFCCC, IEA, UNDP-GEF

© OECD/IEA - 2007

HFCs, PFCs & N2O reduction

30.6%

Renewables30.2%

CH4 reduction & Cement & Coal

mine/bed19.8%

Fuel switch7.2%

Supply-side EE10.6%

Demand-sideEE, 1.2%

Afforestation & Reforestation

0.2% Transport0.1%

Source: UNEP Risoe, March 2008

CERs to 2012 by CDM project type

Benefits of International Energy Efficiency Policy Co-ordination

• Greater Market Transparency around the globe

• Reduced Costs for Product Testing & Design

• Enhanced Prospects for Trade & Technology Transfer

• Reduced Cost for developing Government & Utility Efficiency Programs

Source : IEA “Cool Appliance” 2003

Benefits of International Energy Efficiency Policy Co-ordination (2)

• Prevent dumping of inefficient technologies in the least developed countries

• Help CDM and Kyoto Flexible Mechanisms deliver energy efficiency

• Labels: Highly Visible Initiative

• Improve compliance

A Practical Road Map for Global Energy Efficiency

1.Develop a common vision:• Let’s phase out obsolete inefficient technology• Get a mandate from International Institutions :

Specific Protocols?2. Organize the proper sequencing of international,

bilateral support:1.GEF or other funding mechanism to co-finance

S&L policies especially in developing countries1.Global Platform2.Regional collaboration3.Help Local, National implementation

2. Carbon Finance to finance market transformationthrough Programme of Activities

Inefficient Products to Museum

All over the World!

Evolution des consommations d’électricité par habitant en Californie

(kWh/per/an)

Impact des programmes de Maîtrise de la Demande d’Electricité en Californie

Public Interest Energy Strategies –CEC #100-03-12F

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

GW

H

Obligations pour les fournisseurs d’énergie à économiser l’électricité coût : ~1% de la facture

Réglementation Thermique

Seuils de Performance

~ 14% de la Consommation de la Californie en 2001

Evolution de la Consommation d’Energie dans 11 pays de l’IEA

AUSDEKFINFRAGERITAJAPNORSWEUKUS

Sans Maîtrise de l’Énergie depuis 1973, la consommation d’énergie en 1998 serait 50% plus forte

Evolution de la Consommation d’Energie dans 11 pays de l’IEA

AUSDEKFINFRAGERITAJAPNORSWEUKUS

Filling the energy efficiency - OECD.org · Greater Market Transparency around the globe •...

Documents

Transcript of Filling the energy efficiency - OECD.org · Greater Market Transparency around the globe •...