Suchergebnisse

Rapid innovation in product design challenges the current methodology for setting standards and labels, especially for electronics, software and networking. Major problems include defining the product, measuring its energy consumption, and choosing the appropriate metric and level for the standard. Most governments have tried to solve these problems by defining ever more specific product subcategories, along with their corresponding test methods and metrics. An alternative approach would treat each energy-using product as something that delivers a basket of functions. Then separate standards would be constructed for the individual functions that can be defined, tested, and evaluated. Case studies of thermostats, displays and network equipment are presented to illustrate the problems with the classical approach for setting standards and indicate the merits and drawbacks of the alternative. The functional approach appears best suited to products whose primary purpose is processing information and that have multiple functions.

Europe and North America would appear to offer excellent opportunities for crossfertilization of energy efficiency policies and programs. But it is important to understand the context and background; otherwise, innovations will be misinterpreted and good ideas dismissed prematurely. Through a survey of the literature, we compiled a list of major points of miscommunication between efficiency experts in the United States and Europe. Examples of the contextual differences that lead Americans to misunderstand the European situation include realizing that Europe has different institutional setting and regulatory power and there is little evaluation of energy efficiency programs. On the other hand, Europeans are mystified why American utilities don't use "green" and "white" certificates. Europeans still think of air conditioning as a luxury and don't understand that Texas would not be inhabited without it. Both groups fail to take into account the differing division of responsibilities for energy efficiency between Brussels and the Member States or between Washington and the states. Finally, the same word can have either subtle or enormous differences in meanings. For example "standards" in Europe refer to test procedures, not regulatory efficiency requirements. Although institutional differences dominate interpretations of energy efficiency policies on both sides of the Atlantic, setting up a Rosetta Stone or primer on energy policy will improve understanding and can be a first step of more effective learning from each other.

Local governments can have a large effect on carbon emissions through land use zoning, building codes, transport infrastructure investments, and support for transportation alternatives. Recognizing this, many cities have developed climate action plans, containing a disparate mix of mostly voluntary greenhouse gas emissions reduction proposals. This paper describes an integrated climate policy instrument for local governments: city carbon budgets. We identify and evaluate options for creating an effective and acceptable institutional structure, allocating emission targets to localities, measuring emissions, providing flexibility and incentives to local governments, and assuring compliance. We also discuss the likely costs of such a policy. Our recommended policy structure is based on the principles of effectiveness, equity, efficiency, administrative ease, and political acceptability.

Local governments can have a large effect on carbon emissions through land use zoning, building codes, transport infrastructure investments, and support for transportation alternatives. Recognizing this, many cities have developed climate action plans, containing a disparate mix of mostly voluntary greenhouse gas emissions reduction proposals. This paper describes an integrated climate policy instrument for local governments: city carbon budgets. We identify and evaluate options for creating an effective and acceptable institutional structure, allocating emission targets to localities, measuring emissions, providing flexibility and incentives to local governments, and assuring compliance. We also discuss the likely costs of such a policy. Our recommended policy structure is based on the principles of effectiveness, equity, efficiency, administrative ease, and political acceptability.

Local governments can have a large effect on carbon emissions through land use zoning, building codes, transport infrastructure investments, and support for transportation alternatives. Recognizing this, many cities have developed climate action plans, containing a disparate mix of mostly voluntary greenhouse gas emissions reduction proposals. This paper describes an integrated climate policy instrument for local governments: city carbon budgets. We identify and evaluate options for creating an effective and acceptable institutional structure, allocating emission targets to localities, measuring emissions, providing flexibility and incentives to local governments, and assuring compliance. We also discuss the likely costs of such a policy. Our recommended policy structure is based on the principles of effectiveness, equity, efficiency, administrative ease, and political acceptability.

Although the government sector represents only 10 to 15 percent of the economy in most countries, carefully targeted public procurement can play a significant role in market transformation through its influence on both buyers and suppliers. Government leadership in energy-efficient purchasing can set an example for other buyers, while creating opportunities for leading manufacturers and distributors to increase their sales and market share by offering energy-efficient products at competitive prices. Under proper circumstances, a highly visible government purchasing policy can have a disproportionately large influence on the market for efficient products. In the United States, President Bush signed an Executive Order in 2001 directing all federal agencies to buy products with low standby power (1 watt or less where possible). This represents a deliberate choice to use government purchasing - rather than regulations or incentives - as a market-based strategy to encourage energy savings. It also builds upon existing efforts to encourage Federal purchase of energy-efficient products (Energy Star products and others in the top 25th percentile of efficiency). This paper summarizes the Federal Energy Management Program s first 18 months of experience in implementing this Executive Order, including analysis of data on standby power, interactions with manufacturers and industry groups, and the relationship between these efforts and other federal programs concerning product labelling, testing, rating, and efficiency standards. After five years of implementing low-standby power purchasing, we estimate energy savings for federal agencies alone at about 230 GWh/year (worth US$14 million), with spillover effects on the broader market that will save all US consumers nearly 4000 GWh/year (US$300 million).

Comparison of nine conservation supply curves for electricity shows that fully implementing a series of energy efficiency measures will result in annual saving of 734 billion kWh (BkWh). This is 45 percent of 1989 U.S. building sector electricity use of 1627 BkWh and represents a $29 billion saving. When translated to units of conserved carbon dioxide (CC CO2), this annual saving is 514 megatonnes, which is 10 percent of the total 1989 U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from all sources. Implementing additional fuel efficiency measures would result in further potential saving of 5·2 quads of fuel (natural gas and oil) per year, or another 300 megatonnes of CO2, at a net savings of $20 billion. Fuel switching (replacing electric resistance heat with on‐site natural gas combustion) would produce annual saving of another 74 megatonnes of CO2 at a net saving of $6·8 billion. Thus, total CO2 saving from these combined efficiency measures are 890 megatonnes at a net saving of $56 billion per year.

Solar thermal water heaters are an old technology used a century ago in California. They are now used extensively, in updated form, in many countries. According to government and industry estimates, well-functioning solar water heaters can theoretically displace 50 to 80 percent of the output of a natural gas-fueled household water heater, depending how hot water usage aligns with production and storage capacities. In so doing, they offer tremendous potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, fuel consumption, and energy bills. Such performance holds promise for California given its climate change and energy efficiency policy goals, since 40 percent of the natural gas used in California households is used to produce hot water. However, absent programs, only a specialty market for solar water heaters has developed. To encourage wider deployment, the California Solar Initiative—Thermal program offers financial incentives for systems qualifying under a carefully crafted set of specifications. The program has had some limited success since its inception in 2010. Within that context, this research assessed the performance and potential future use of natural gas-displacing solar water heaters in single-family homes in California, attending to a wide range of sociotechnical considerations. This project documented high diversity in user satisfaction and perceived system performance, and a qualified decrease in project costs to below $5,000 per installation. Solar water heating is a technology in progress, not universally suitable but instead appealing to varied niches shaped by household sensibilities, abilities, and hot water use levels. Thus, recent evolution provides a counterpoint to the pessimism, even as serious difficulties remain. The suitability of solar water heating for California households is not purely a matter of costeffectiveness within a typical energy efficiency framework, but also of evolving performance, perceptions, and values in light of ongoing and aspirational energy and social transitions ahead.