Effectiveness of promoting energy efficiency in Thailand -- the case of air conditioners

This paper aims to identify the magnitude of energy efficiency improvement, which has been promoted through energy efficiency labeling and the Minimum Energy Performance Standard, and to compare this against the increase in the number of products and the average increase in cooling capacity. Air conditioners (ACs) are one of the major contributors to energy consumption in a household. To assess the magnitude of this factor, we developed a formula to decompose total energy consumption from ACs into the number of ACs, their average cooling capacity, and energy efficiency. In the case of ACs in Thailand, energy efficiency improvement has offset the increase in the average AC cooling capacity. However, energy consumption from ACs increases with the number of ACs.

Should energy efficiency be traded off for other product attributes? : an analysis of air-conditioner regulation in Japan

This paper examines the functioning of energy efficiency standards and labeling policies for air conditioners in Japan. The results of our empirical analysis suggest that consumers respond more to label information, which benchmarks the energy efficiency performance of each product to a pre-specified target, than to direct performance measures. This finding provides justification for the setting, and regular updating, of target standards as well as their use in calculating relative performance measures. We also find, through graphical analysis, that air conditioner manufacturers face a tradeoff between energy efficiency and product compactness when they develop their products. This tradeoff, combined with the semi-regular upward revision of minimum energy efficiency standards, has led to the growth in indoor unit size of air conditioners in recent years. In the face of this phenomenon, regulatory rules were revised so that manufacturers could adhere to less stringent standards if the indoor unit size of their product remains below a certain size. Our demand estimates provide no evidence that larger indoor unit size causes disutility to consumers. It is therefore possible that the regulatory change was not warranted from a consumer welfare point of view.