1 / 42

Global Market Transformation via the Efficient Lighting Initiative (ELI)

Global Market Transformation via the Efficient Lighting Initiative (ELI). Author & Contributors. Kathryn M. Conway Technical Consultant to International Finance Corporation Russell Sturm International Finance Corporation, United States Wayne Abayan and Mary Ann Perlas

efuru
Download Presentation

Global Market Transformation via the Efficient Lighting Initiative (ELI)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Global Market Transformation via the Efficient Lighting Initiative(ELI)

  2. Author & Contributors Kathryn M. Conway Technical Consultant to International Finance Corporation Russell Sturm International Finance Corporation, United States Wayne Abayan and Mary Ann Perlas International Institute for Energy Conservation, Philippines Sommai Phon-Amnuaisuk International Institute for Energy Conservation, Thailand

  3. 1. The Global Effort 2. The “Next Generation” 3. CFL Test Results

  4. Part One:The Global Effort

  5. ELI was… • An initiative to accelerate the market for efficient lighting technologies • Funded by Global Environment Facility • Implemented by International Finance Corporation • Argentina, Peru, Latvia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Philippines & South Africa

  6. ELI is accelerating markets by… • Increasing consumer awareness and demand, • Improving access to capital, • Increasing sales volume and product availability, • Enhancing competition, • Producing downward pressure on prices.

  7. The speed of light!

  8. ELI is institutionalized… • Country partnerships established • Country market capability • Consumer awareness • Financing mechanisms • Retail capacity expanded for efficient products • Educational programs and curricula • Utility incentives developed • Industry and professional associations

  9. ELI Argentina

  10. ELI Peru

  11. ELI Philippines

  12. ELI Czech Republic

  13. ELI South Africa

  14. Part Two:Preparing for ELI’s “Next Generation”

  15. Transitions… • Summer 2002 IFC solicited “ELI Legacy Guardian” international proposals • Evaluated multiple proposals • Continued market evaluation & strategy development through Spring 2003 • IFC engaged China Certification Center for Energy Conservation Products (CECP) to develop a business plan by January 2004.

  16. Why CECP? • CECP has demonstrated ability to execute business model based on manufacturer fees • Access to Chinese lighting industry • Experience with manufacturer process certifications (big impact on quality) • Opportunity to harmonize ELI, China Green Lights and perhaps ENERGY STAR tests

  17. New strategies for ELI… • No longer built on retail/consumer demand • Respond to market demand from bulk purchasers who want to differentiate products and get good quality • Reach out to “big box” retailers, government & utility DSM programs • Require manufacturers to pay small fee

  18. Other ELI Products… • Traffic signals: Light emitting diodes (LEDs) can save 85% of the energy used by incandescent lamps! • Linear fluorescent lamps + electronic ballasts • Outdoor residential CFL luminaires • Indoor residential CFL luminaires • Public area lighting • Others as requested by new participants

  19. Part Three:Results of CFL Performance Tests

  20. ELI products conform to a voluntary energy efficiency and quality specification. • From 2000 to present, ELI has approved the use of the quality mark by 11 manufacturers, for over 120 models of compact fluorescent lamps. • In 2002 ELI launched its random testing program of products marketed in seven developing countries. • The Lighting and Appliance Testing Laboratory, Department of Energy, The Philippines, performs the tests.

  21. To gain approval to use the ELI “green leaf” logo,manufacturers… • Fill out a detailed application form for each model, • Submit performance test data, and • Certify that product is manufactured in a factory operating a quality assurance system in accordance with ISO 9000-2000 or equivalent.

  22. Manufacturers’ test results must be… • Obtained from a nationally accredited laboratory (according to ISO 17025) or an equivalently qualified facility. • Conducted on 10 samples for electrical performance • Conducted on 3 samples for photometric performance. • Submitted within 2 years of testing.

  23. Technical review and approval • Each application is reviewed for completeness and compliance by ELI administrative team and the technical consultant. • If a model is approved for quality mark use it is posted to ELI’s publicly accessible website: www.efficientlighting.net

  24. Summary of ELI CFL Voluntary Specification (July 2002) Efficiency (lumens per watt) • If CFL has either an integral or a separate ballast ·At input power of <15 W: 45 lm/W ·At input power of 15 W and >4000 CCT: 55 lm/W ·At input power of 15 W and <4000 CCT: 60 lm/W • If CFL has a translucent cover ·At input power of  14 W:  40 lm/W ·At input power of 15 to 19 W:  48 lm/W ·At input power of 20 to 24 W:  50 lm/W At input power of  25 W:  55 lm/W • If CFL has a reflector ·At input power of <19 W: 33 lm/W ·At input power of >19 W: 40 lm/W

  25. Also in the ELI specification… • Average rated lifetime: 6000 hours • Lumen Maintenance: 80% of initial output maintained to 2000 hours • Color rendering index (CRI) of 80 or higher

  26. CFL package bearing ELI quality mark must show… • Rated input power (watts) • Light output (lumens) • Average rated lamp life (hours) • Equivalency to general service (incandescent) lamps • Correlated color temperature (CCT) • Minimum starting temperature • One-year “no questions asked” warranty in at least one local language.

  27. RESULTSu u u • Initial, 100-, 1000- and 2000-hour tests conducted for each of 49 models (n=624 units). • 6000-hour results for Round One, 31 models (n=372 models). Input power demand: • Initial reading of the power dissipated by a lamp shall not exceed the rated wattage by more than 5%, per IEC.All models complied with this criterion. • Input power demand remained stable for all models throughout the testing.u

  28. Lamp efficacy (luminous efficacy): Initial light output value / initial input wattage • @ 100 hours: 42 to 65 lm/w. u u • @ 2000 hours: 26 to 56 lm/w. u u • @ 6000 hours: 22 Round One:19 to 51 lm/w. u u • Compared to the efficacy calculated from the 100-hour measured values, there was a marked change in efficacy at 2000 and 6000 hours. u • Efficacy declined by 17% to 56% from 100 to 6000 hours. u u

  29. Initial light output : (rated values vs. measured values) • 1 @ 80% u • 3 @ 89%-91% u • 10 @ +5% u • 13 @ 106% to 110% u • 15 @ 111% to 119% u • 4 @ 120% to 126%u

  30. Lumen maintenance At 2000 hours… • Two-thirds @ >80%. u • 10 (including 4 encapsulated) @ 86%-89%. u • 26 @ 80%-85%. u • 9 @ 70% to 79%. u • 1 encapsulated @ 61%. u For 21 Round One models still operating at 6000 hours: 62% to 82%. uu

  31. Lifetime • 100 hours: 4 units failed • 1000 hours: 9 units failed • 2000 hours: 19 units failed; however, >50% for every model still operating. u • 6000 hours: 22 of the 31 models passed, including all 6 encapsulated. u • 6000 hours: 9 models failed. 5 between 5036 and 5839 hours u;4 between 5000 and 2770 hours. u

  32. Power factor: • At 100 hours, 5 @ 45% to 49%. u • Remainder exceeded 50%. u Lamp start-up time: • All illuminated continuously within 1.5 seconds. U Run-up light output: • Lamp stabilization time of 10 minutes; light output measured at 120 seconds @ 80% of the 10 min. l.o. • Only 3 models failed to meet this requirement. u Correlated color temperature (CCT): • Very close to manufacturers’ claims.u

  33. Labeling and packaging • Minimum starting temperature was not specified in most of the models’ packaging. u • More than half of the models’ packages did not include the standard efficacy and color temperature ratings. u • Some ELI-qualified models lacked the ELI logo.

  34. DISCUSSION • ELI tested as many units and models as resources permitted. • Sample size was not large enough to make broad generalizations about CFLs…but, • Sample was large enough to indicate serious performance problems. • Evidence valuable for follow-up actions with manufacturers, and for anecdotal comparisons with other organizations’ results.

  35. Is “Pass or Fail?” the right question? • Six of the 28 ELI models tested in Round One met all of the ELI requirements. u u • They demonstrate that the specification is within the realm of possibility for mass-marketed products, and that the specification is stringent enough to separate the best performers from the others. u • “Pass or Fail?” is a relevant question.

  36. However… • 22 models failed to meet ELI’s specification. Of these, 11 failed by only one measure. uu • Some were early entries in the program & were granted exceptions on some requirements. u • The qualification period for approved models is only 2 years, so the older entries are being reviewed for renewal according to the current specification. • Here, “pass or fail” is less relevant; More useful are the pass or fail results for each characteristic, because these will shape future revisions of the specification.

  37. Messages to ManufacturersWE CONGRATULATE THOSE WHO PRODUCE BEST PERFORMING CFLS! • ELI will encourage revised labels (for greater accuracy), • May request results from a larger or different sample of units. (Some failed certain measures by only a small amount—perhaps given larger samples these models would “pass”), • Ask for voluntary removal of products that had poor light output, lumen maintenance or life test results, and • Reserve the right to “delist” models that do not fully comply with the ELI specifications.

  38. Of Continuing Concern to Consumers & Advocates • Claims of light output and “equivalency” to incandescent lamps are consistently overstated by manufacturers. u • This concern is substantiated by evidence from other testing programs, too.u • Consumers notice this performance differential; it could become a “market spoiler.” u • ELI successfully negotiates with manufacturers for more accurate labeling. u

  39. Next Generation ELI • Recruit and process product applications through 2005. • Transition to a team including the China Certification Center for Energy Conservation Products (CECP). • Concentrate on market aggregators, such as large retailers and electric utility or government programs, rather than on residential consumers. • Refine the menu of lighting products tested and promoted. • Collaboratively seek global, harmonized test methods.

  40. EFFICIENT LIGHTING INITIATIVEMany thanks to… • ELI team members around the world, • Philippines Department of Energy/LATL • Participating manufacturers, • International Finance Corporation (IFC), & • Global Environmental Facility (GEF).

  41. Thank you for inviting ELI’s Next Generation to BIEL!

More Related