April 04, 2020 / By mobanmarket
Choosing the most energy-efficient appliances is not as straightforward for consumers as one would expect.Making the right energy-efficient choice
In theory, governments should have an easy time convincing their citizens to be more energy efficient.
According to a European Commission opinion poll, published in July, more than three-quarters of consumers either always, or often, take energy efficiency into account when buying products that use electricity or fuel. In Germany, Europe’s largest economy, the figure is 85%.
Politicians have scored notable successes on the back of this tide of goodwill. The labelling of household appliances to show their energy efficiency (a measure introduced through EU legislation in 1992) has been heralded as an out-and-out success as a means of improving efficiency standards, so much so that the current grading system has been rendered out of date and is being amended (see box). The scheme is also in the process of being extended to cover consumer electronics, such as televisions and computers.
But both consumer organisations and green groups say that consumers still lack all the information they need to make the right choices and can be caught out by misleading claims.
At the same time, policymakers are beginning to discover limits to the kinds of changes that consumers are willing to make voluntarily. Despite the public’s avowed belief in the importance of buying ‘green’, the battle for the soul of the consumer, or at least his or her pocket, does not seem to have been won.
Nowhere is this better demonstrated than in the case of lightbulbs. MEPs and national governments agreed last December to ban incandescent bulbs, because publicity about the economic and environmental benefits of energy-saving bulbs had failed to sway enough of the buying public.
Energy labels have proved one of Europe’s most popular exports. Countries as diverse as Brazil and China, Iran and Israel have all copied the EU’s multi-coloured A-G label for freezers, washing machines and other household goods. The labels vary, but the principle is the same: the top products get a green ‘A’ rating, while the least energy efficient get a red ‘G’ grade. But while the energy label may be admired abroad, discussions over how to revise it are causing a row at home.
In a sense, the label is a victim of it own success. Since being introduced in the mid-1990s, products have made leaps and bounds in energy efficiency. For example, today nearly all fridges get an ‘A’ grade, which has prompted manufacturers to create new A+ and A++ categories. A majority of EU governments would like to copy this approach, as they ponder the revision of the EU energy label framework directive.
Sweden, the current holder of the EU’s rotating presidency, proposes to extend the top of the scale, adding pluses to the A grade, all the way up to A++++, to create four additional categories. But the European Parliament has flatly rejected this proposal. One Green MEP says it “would be as ridiculous as giving a gold medal to every athlete at the Olympics”. Instead MEPs want to revalue the old A-G scale. This would push existing high-performing goods back down the scale. The MEPs contend that this would give manufacturers a strong incentive to make further improvements. But the white-goods industry argues that the plan is unfair and would stop them from recouping the value of previous spending. ]
At the most recent session of negotiations, the two institutions were deadlocked. They meet again next week (17 November) for another go, still hoping that they can reach an agreement before the Copenhagen climate-change conference in December.
Jennifer Rankin
Satu Hassi, a Finnish Green MEP and an expert on energy efficiency, says that “consumers did not switch because of the difference in price”.
Hassi believes that, because electricity bills show overall electricity consumption and not consumption per appliance, the savings that consumers made by buying energy-saving bulbs were less evident than the bulbs’ higher up-front cost, dissuading people from switching away incandescent ones. She “strongly” supports measures to take inefficient goods off shop shelves.
There is a general consensus among environmentalists and consumer groups, however, that consumers would do more voluntarily if they were provided with better information on a product’s energy consumption.
BEUC, the European consumer’s organisation, is lobbying the European Commission to take action against spurious ‘green claims’ made by companies. It argues that companies are able to make broad claims, such as the declaration that a car is the most energy efficient “in its class”, without having to provide sufficient evidence to back up their assertions. The association says that one solution would be for the Commission to provide accompanying guidelines for the implementation of existing EU legislation on unfair commercial practices.
A Commission clampdown is “the only way to put an end to consumers’ confusion and move towards real sustainable consumption patterns”, the association says. The Commission is still considering whether action is necessary.
In some cases, the perceived dearth of good information for consumers has led environmental organisations to take matters into their own hands. WWF, for instance, earlier this year launched a website that ranks competing products according to their energy efficiency. It covers consumer electronics, office equipment and cars, as well as product types not currently subject to the EU’s energy-labelling scheme.
Hassi says that the lack of standardised labelling for many electronic goods is a missed opportunity. “People, at least in my country [Finland], have started to believe that when you buy a new device it is always more energy efficient than the old one,” she says. She notes that, without labelling, people can assume that a new flat-screen television is more energy efficient that a traditional TV, whereas the flat-screen models can actually consume up to six times as much electricity.
Some EU governments have decided that consumers need additional economic incentives to be more energy-efficient. Both Italy and the Netherlands have implemented rebate schemes, linked to the EU energy label, which reward people who buy more efficient products. Similarly, member states have introduced car-scrapping schemes during the financial crisis that gave people an incentive to move to more fuel-efficient vehicles. The Finnish government is considering introducing a reduction to the property tax for people with energy-efficient homes.
Increasingly, it seems, governments feel that, to convince consumers that energy-efficient choices make financial sense, it helps to present them with an up-front saving, an argument that is especially strong in the current economic climate.
Click Here: cheap INTERNATIONAL jersey
Categories: News