Will banning high-powered kettles and hairdryers help climate change efforts?
|
Version 0 of 1. 6.02pm BST18:02 My verdict The verdict today comes in two parts. First, the inane tabloid debate about Briton’s right to own high-powered vacuums and hairdryers was entirely misleading. The EU directive was portrayed as the whim of a Brussels bureaucrat, rather than the product of careful discussion with industry and experts over almost a decade. The focus on maximum power limits ignored the fact that the EU assesses all items for the effective ways to reduce energy consumption. Maximum power ratings will only be used where it is appropriate and can be imposed without impacting performance. Second, the answer to today’s question is both yes and no. As I have just said, the debate is about more than just high power. Banning high-powered kettles will likely have no effect on emissions. But mandating hairdryers that give good drying to energy performance would be a significant move. If the potential energy savings on these product groups could be realised across another dozen or even 20 groups, the savings could be relatively large. But more importantly, design demands from Europe could kickstart research and development in other parts of the world. China is Europe’s biggest supplier of appliances. If its manufacturers are forced to meet design requirements from Europe, it can only encourage China’s domestic lawmakers to implement similar restrictions. Extropolated globally, the savings from energy efficient appliances start looking very impressive. I wonder. If this was a British government initiative would conservatives complain that we shouldn’t get too far in front of our European partners (as they did when Chancellor George Osbourne suggested the UK should ease its carbon budgets last year). This is not a question of sovereignty or some notion of the British way of life. Since when does this nation define itself by the strength of its vacuums? This is a question of whether the law works. It does. 5.16pm BST17:16 An independent assessment of the EU approach by consultants Ecofys says directive has the potential to make energy savings of between 400 and 460 TWh annually by 2020. But it says there is room for improvement and the costs involved in monitoring the scheme could be reduced. It says the focus on individual product groups might be a weak way of approaching efficiency. It uses the example of “product systems” such as whole buildings. Mandating the energy use of whole buildings means that building managers take on some of the responsibility and cost of monitoring the appliances used. 5.02pm BST17:02 Your comments I think some people don't understand the difference between power output and efficiency. What i'd like to see is better measures of use:A kettle should be rated by how long it takes to boil both 2 and 8 cups of water.A scale of suction should be developed for vacuum cleaners. Then it will be quite clear that more power doesn't actually make for a better end use and it will be easier to make informed choices... Let's leave the EU and decide for ourselves what kind of domestic appliances we use instead of being dictated to by meddlesome bureaucrats. Time is running out to buy the most powerful vacuum cleaners on the market... http://t.co/HAMS3dhjd3 #home #cleaning Benny Peiser, of the climate sceptic Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: “There is no example in history when any product technology has become more energy efficient and this has led to a decrease in energy usage, in fact the opposite happens.” He said money saved from reducing electricity bills would end up being spent on other appliances and emissions would simply be shifted sideways. I looked into buying a replacement kettle recently. I was surprised by how many watts some of the kettles used, and the eco ranges tended to be the highestHowever, the rational was that it takes the same amount of energy to bring a set amount of water to the boil, so the difference between appliances is how much time it takes to get thereThe important issue, for kettles, is to have them small enough so that you do not over fill themI have not bought a new kettle yet as I want one that collects its own condensation. these exist but seem to be in the early stages of development.Another recent buy was an induction hob.I spent along time pondering this and in the end decided it was the way forward. I wanted top quality so I managed to get a second hand Miele of ebay. Unfortunately the back ring is not working any more. Now when it is to hot to light the wood burner to cook I have one induction hob ringI have made a rocket stove, this is extremely efficient, just using twigs The rules intend to reduce EU electricity consumption by 19 terrawatt hours by 2020 and to inspire designers to build more energy efficient, yet still effective, devices. In 2013, OECD Europe electricity production was 3,429 TWh. IEA Monthly Electricity Statistics 19 TWh is about 0.5% of that. The contribution to emissions abatement (if 19 TWh is actually saved) is hardly worth having. The worst part of this mini-austerity stuff is that it is a distraction from the real job of decarbonizing the energy sector. 4.51pm BST16:51 The key to energy saving design is not just to focus on maximum power limits, as in the great vacuum cleaner furore of 2014. But to look at all the design elements that effect efficiency. This makes the fear campaign in the tabloid press about low powered hairdryers look a little silly, because the EU is considering a holistic design approach. For some devices it will be necessary to account for performance. As well as the controversial limit to power consumption on vacuums which was introduced this week, the EU also mandated a minimum dust pick up. It is proposed that hairdryers are measured on a power consumption to drying rate ratio. Engineer and reader Dave Beakhust says the biggest power savings for kettles are made in increasing the durability of the materials, so the savings happen at the factory. “The energy demand during use for the normal everyday jug kettle was not an issue of concern, and there was little opportunity for energy saving by reducing this, beyond shortening the time it takes for the auto shut off to operate. They did however consider that the very high early failure rate of common jug kettles was a cause for concern, as the embodied energy - that is the energy used to make and transport it was a significant part of the whole life energy use. “It is my hunch that no reduction of power draw by ordinary kettles will be forthcoming, as the longer it takes to heat up, the longer heat is being lost to the environment, so the less efficiently the energy is used.” 4.24pm BST16:24 Potential energy savings from toasters, kettles and hairdryers Whether maximum energy quotas on smaller appliances will save meaningful amounts of carbon is still being assessed. The EU’s preparatory study, prepared by Deloitte, on these items is long and tough to summarise but I’ll have a look at the initial findings for a few key product groups. Toasters It was estimated that a single toaster uses 40 kWh per year. Across Europe there are close to 200 million toasters. Their total power consumption is more than 7 TWh. This is more than a quarter of the annual production of power (24 TWh) at Drax coal power station in England, the second largest coal station in Europe. The report estimates that the energy use of toasters could be cut in half. For toasters indeed, according to the Blue Angel, the most efficient devices consume about 50% less energy that the most inefficient ones. Oeko-Institut also explains that a new “Ecoslot” function allows toasters to activate only one toast slot (out of two or four), which is again up to 50% less energy consumption. There are also toasters available which close up during toasting and therefore save time and energy. This would equate to an annual saving of 3.7 TWh/year in 2020. Kettles Unsurprisingly perhaps, there are a similar number of kettles in the EU as there are toasters. According to one study by the UK Energy Saving Trust, average annual kettle electricity consumption is 167 kWh. But this can vary considerably and there is therefore room for improvement, says the EU report. The energy consumption of a kettle depends on: If best practice designs become mandatory, the study estimates an EU-wide saving of between 4.8 and 8.3 TWh/year by 2020. Hairdryers The number of hairdryers in the EU is estimated at 15o million, each using 70 kWh per year. This is an EU-wide usage of 10.5 TWh each year. Hair dryers offer a potential energy efficiency improvement of around 30%. This equates to a saving of 3.3 TWh/year in 2020. In total, improving toasters, hairdryers and kettles could save the EU up to 15.3 TWh/year in 2020. This is more than half the output of the Drax power station. It will also save consumers the running costs of these thirsty devices. Updated at 4.28pm BST 3.23pm BST15:23 Sir James Dyson maker of Dyson vacuums told the Western Daily Press that he supported the EU cap on vacuum motors. “It’s a myth that bigger is better. Dyson has never made a vacuum cleaner of more than 1,400 watts because it is intelligent engineering that leads to high cleaning performance, not energy-thirsty motors. The motor cap is a sensible part of the upcoming regulation from Europe, as it can drive investment in efficient technology.” Updated at 3.23pm BST 3.07pm BST15:07 British consumer watchdog encouraged rush on energy sucking vacuums Media reports of a rush on high-powered vacuums this week may well have been exacerbated by this blog from Which?. “Buy now if you’re looking for a powerful vacuum cleaner, as new rules about to come into force will soon restrict the motor sizes available,” says the government’s consumer watchdog. “Many of our Best Buy models have motor sizes that exceed this - so if you’re in the market for a powerful vacuum, you should act quickly before all of the models currently available sell out.” The Committee for Climate Change’s Ute Collier notes “the German consumer body Stiftung Warentest has found that among the 20 best-rated products on the German market, only one would be banned by the new rules”. Which? told me this morning that they do not focus on the energy efficiency of products, merely assessing their performance. Decc polling suggests that 80% of Britons care about energy saving in their homes. So why are Which? not factoring this area of consumer interest into their product assessments? And why are they actively encouraging people to go out and buy products that will cost more to run and emit more carbon? Updated at 3.33pm BST 2.15pm BST14:15 Eurosceptics argue that the EU rules are extraordinarily harsh. But are they? Regulations governing appliances are almost ubiquitous in the developed world. A 2013 report by the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), a Brussels-based NGO, found that energy efficiency measures were active in over 70 countries, including all the world’s major economies, 80% of the world’s population and an even larger percentage of its GDP. Major programs are active in the US, EU, China, Australia and Japan. Share of energy consumption subject to minimum standards, 2010. Light: Thermal, Dark: Electric Source @CoolproductsEU pic.twitter.com/PN4lv5DwDe In the US, it is estimated that annual carbon savings from efficiency measures will reach 275 million tonnes by 2020 and by 2030 the cumulative savings will be 7 billion tonnes. The EEB estimated that the EU’s Ecodesign Directive had the potential to: “Produce net annual cost benefits of €90 billion and savings in annual CO2 emissions of 400 MT, equivalent to the expected benefit from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).” There seems to be little doubt that regulating large appliances is an effective way to reduce emissions. But the argument today is whether placing restrictions on smaller appliances can actually have an effect on carbon emissions. I have published a list of some of the countries that operate these programs and the appliances they regulate. It seems that the EU’s programme is moving into unexplored territory by introducing vacuums and considering even smaller devices. Most other programmes focus on the large gains that can be made from fridges, dishwashers etc. Updated at 3.08pm BST 1.15pm BST13:15 It is perhaps important to clear up that kettles are not necessarily going to be controlled by the EU. The union is currently looking at a list of 30 product groups it is considering for controls, this includes kettles, hairdryers etc. It has commissioned studies on the various savings that might be achieved without lowering the performance of the device. It intends to reduce this group of 30 down to 20. 12.59pm BST12:59 The UK Department for Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is waiting for the EU’s own research on small devices such as kettles, treadmills and toasters to be completed before commenting on the effectiveness of the proposed measures. However it is understood the department is generally supportive of energy restrictions on appliances if they will reduce emissions without limiting performance. A report by Decc in July found the introduction of efficiency controls on large appliances, such as fridges, freezers, TVs and washing machines, had significantly reduced running costs and emissions with no apparent drop in quality. Drop in household appliance energy consumption due to EU rules. Source: Decc https://t.co/bpaVvcUZqU pic.twitter.com/hiTKjSmSPE Energy minister Ed Davey said at the time: “Making everyday appliances more energy efficient has helped to keep more money in the pockets of consumers – without people having to do a thing. “Newer, less power-hungry appliances are coming out all the time thanks to better product standards and improving technology – which means running costs are going to keep falling, saving people even more money.” 12.35pm BST12:35 Ute Collier, an analyst at the UK government’s Committee on Climate Change who wrote this helpful blog on energy efficient vacuums, says the comment of Benny Peiser in the Daily Express were “just total rubbish”. Peiser had challenged the idea that banning high-powered appliances will actually have any effect on emissions. “He’s talking about the rebound effect,” she says. The UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) describes these examples of the rebound effect: But Collier says there has been “lots of academic work” debunking the idea that energy efficiency measures have no effect on energy consumption and therefore emissions. An International Energy Agency report in 2012 concluded: “Many economists and engineers have studied the rebound effect both empirically and theoretically and the vast majority has concluded that it does exist but is not strong enough to outweigh the energy and financial savings resulting from energy efficiency.” She says the EU directives governing large appliances have been in place for some time and they have proved that the measures can reduce energy consumption. “On the major appliances,” she says, “I don’t see how anyone can refute that [the EU directive has worked. If you now go into John Lewis and pick the best fridge-freezer you will save a third of the electricity compared to the average fridge-freezer in people’s homes.” She says some of the coverage in the tabloid press about the way the directive was formulated had been deeply misleading. “If you read some of the commentators in the press, you would think it was done by bureaucrats who didn’t have a clue. But that’s not the case, there’s experts involved, there’s engineers involved.” Collier says the process of deciding how to limit each device’s energy consumption was based on an exhaustive consultation that took into account the need to be able to generate substantive energy savings without compromising performance. “With vacuums there is clear evidence that there is a lot you can do,” she says. 11.57am BST11:57 Estimates of power savings from energy efficient appliance measures. Source: @CoolproductsEU pic.twitter.com/yNj1ME3FQg Although this commenter from John Vidal’s blog seems to think 200 coal stations is an exaggeration. Last year, electronic gadgets alone were estimated to use around 600TWh of electricity – equivalent to the output of 200 medium-size coal-fired power plants. 11.29am BST11:29 Early twitter reaction Banning electrical appliances isn't going to get public on board with reduced energy use, just makes out 'climate action' is EU interfering. “EU ban on electrical appliances is an 'astonishing assault on our British way of life’” FFS. Inefficient appliances = national identity? @guardianeco @KarlMathiesen its a fantastic tiny step in the right direction. It will drive innovation & design with no impact on users What is the EU's problem with appliances? Hair dyers hoovers and now toasters?!! When will it end? Letting all 28 EU members states come up with their own rules for electric appliances would drive manufacturers nuts. Updated at 11.32am BST 10.35am BST10:35 On Tuesday, my colleague John Vidal made the case in favour of the ban. The reality is that this is a tabloid-induced summer storm that has little to do with cleaners and everything to do with political vacuums – and the right of the right to be as thick as it likes. The idea behind the – albeit Orwellian-sounding –Ecodesign for Energy-Using Products and Energy Labelling directives is to make the world’s designers come up with machines that need less power, make less noise and cost less to run. Which sound pretty reasonable ambitions as long as the new machines continue to do their jobs efficiently. All vacuum-cleaner makers, including Sir James Dyson, as well as most fridge, washing machine and telly makers, have known about this directive for years and have quite easily adapted their models. Just a few Brits, it seems, demand the right to ignore labels showing how much money they can save and to carry on using obsolete, super-powered machines. 10.25am BST10:25 Welcome to the eco audit The EU’s ban on high-powered appliances has attracted predictably vociferous criticism from Eurosceptics, who have bemoaned “yet another assault on the British way of life” from the bureaucrats in Brussels. The EU’s Ecodesign for Energy-Using Products and Energy Labelling directives aims to set limits on the wattage of household appliances. Small appliances use a vast amount of electricity worldwide. The rules intend to reduce EU electricity consumption by 19 terrawatt hours by 2020 and to inspire designers to build more energy efficient, yet still effective, devices. But alongside the hyperbole about sovereignty, opponents of the ban have also called into question its effectiveness in lowering carbon emissions. The Daily Express today ran a front page story in which Euro and climate sceptics combined to attack the rationale behind the legislation. Alan Murad, from Get Britain Out, said: “The Luddites who dreamt [these rules] up only reveal their economic illiteracy, as most high-wattage devices are often more energy efficient than what they’ll be replaced with.” Benny Peiser, of the climate sceptic Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: “There is no example in history when any product technology has become more energy efficient and this has led to a decrease in energy usage, in fact the opposite happens.” He said money saved from reducing electricity bills would end up being spent on other appliances and emissions would simply be shifted sideways. Politically motivated as these arguments may be, they do deserve an examination. Today, with your input, I’ll be looking at whether energy efficient appliances are indeed effective in reducing consumption. Join in the discussion by contributing in the comments below, tweet me or email me. If you are quoting figures or studies, please provide a link to the original source. Follow me on @karlmathiesen for updates throughout the day and later I will return with my own verdict. |