Appraisal of policy instruments for reducing buildings' CO2 emissions

The building sector currently contributes approximately one-third of energy-related CO2 emissions worldwide. It is economically possible to achieve a 30% reduction. However, numerous barriers such as financial and behavioural issues, market failures, and misplaced incentives prevent the realization of the high economic potentials. Which policy instruments are the most appropriate and cost-effective for reducing these barriers? To address this question, 20 policy instruments were assessed for their effectiveness in reducing emissions, cost-effectiveness, applicability and special conditions for success. The appraisal is based on over 60 ex-post policy evaluation reports from about 30 countries and country groups, representing best-practice examples of the application of these instruments. Appliance standards, building codes, tax exemptions and voluntary labelling were found to be the most effective policy instruments contrary to others such as Kyoto Protocol flexible mechanisms or energy/carbon taxation. The most cost-effective instruments, all achieving energy savings at negative costs for society, were appliance standards, demand-side management programmes and mandatory labelling. Since all policy instruments have limitations and only help overcome some barriers, they are most effective if combined into policy packages designed for the respective location, economy and culture. Le secteur du bâtiment est actuellement responsable d'environ un tiers des émissions de CO2 dans le monde liées à la production d'énergie. Il est économiquement possible de réduire ces émissions de 30%. Toutefois, de nombreux obstacles comme les questions financières et comportementales, les échecs commerciaux et des incitations mal orientées empêchent d'atteindre cet objectif. Quels sont les moyens d'action les plus appropriés et les plus rentables pour réduire ces obstacles? Pour répondre à cette question, on a évalué 20 de ces moyens en ce qui concerne leur efficacité à réduire les émissions, leur rentabilité, leur applicabilité et les conditions particulières pour assurer leur succès. Cette étude repose sur 60 rapports d'évaluation d'incidence concernant une trentaine de pays ou groupes de pays; ils donnent des exemples des meilleures pratiques de l'application de ces moyens d'action. Les normes des appareils, les codes du bâtiment, les exemptions fiscales et l'étiquetage volontaire se sont avérés être les moyens les plus efficaces contrairement à d'autres comme les mécanismes souples du Protocole de Kyoto ou la fiscalité de l'énergie/carbone. Les moyens les plus rentables, qui permettent tous des économies d'énergie à des coûts négatifs pour la société, sont les normes des appareils, les programmes de gestion de la demande et l'étiquetage obligatoire. Vu que tous les moyens des limitations et ne font que seulement contribuer à lever certains obstacles, leur efficacité est maximisé quand ils sont combinés en fonction des différents lieux, des conditions économiques et de la culture. Mots-clés: parc de bâtiments, réduction du CO2, changement climatique, instruments économiques, efficacité énergétique, atténuation, politique publique, réglementation

[1]  Paolo Bertoldi,et al.  Voluntary Agreements for Energy Efficiency: Review and Results of European Experiences , 2007 .

[2]  Sarah C. Darby,et al.  Social learning and public policy: Lessons from an energy-conscious village , 2006 .

[3]  Energy Charter.  Carbon Trading and Energy Efficiency , 2006 .

[4]  K. Gillingham,et al.  ENERGY EFFICIENCY POLICIES: A Retrospective Examination , 2006 .

[5]  Lynn Price,et al.  Sectoral trends in global energy use and greenhouse gasemissions , 2006 .

[6]  Thomas Lützkendorf,et al.  Using an integrated performance approach in building assessment tools , 2006 .

[7]  Jeffrey P. Harris,et al.  Two Paths to Transforming Markets through Public Sector Energy Efficiency: Bottom Up versus Top Down , 2006 .

[8]  Satoshi Tanishima,et al.  Polices for increasing energy efficiency: Thirty years of experience in OECD countries , 2006 .

[9]  Osamu Saeki,et al.  Effectiveness of an energy-consumption information system on energy savings in residential houses based on monitored data , 2006 .

[10]  T. Lützkendorf,et al.  Sustainable property investment: valuing sustainable buildings through property performance assessment , 2005 .

[11]  Edward Vine,et al.  An international survey of the energy service company (ESCO) industry , 2005 .

[12]  Thomas Lützkendorf,et al.  Alleviating asymmetric information in property markets: building performance and product quality as signals for consumers , 2005 .

[13]  Rubens Alves Dias,et al.  Energy education: breaking up the rational energy use barriers , 2004 .

[14]  S. Sorrell,et al.  Interactions between the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the UK Renewables Obligation and Energy Efficiency Commitment , 2003 .

[15]  N. Eyre,et al.  Public policy analysis of energy efficiency and load management in changing electricity businesses , 2003 .

[16]  Marla Sanchez,et al.  2006 Status Report Savings Estimates for the ENERGY STAR(R)Voluntary Labeling Program , 2003 .

[17]  Charles Goldman,et al.  Review of US ESCO industry market trends: an empirical analysis of project data , 2003 .

[18]  Jeffrey P. Harris,et al.  Market leadership by example: Government sector energy efficiency in developing countries , 2002 .

[19]  Jennifer Thorne,et al.  Interim findings of an evaluation of the U.S. EnergyGuide label , 2000 .

[20]  P. Berkhout,et al.  Defining the rebound effect , 2000 .

[21]  Robert Lowe,et al.  Defining and meeting the carbon constraints of the 21st century , 2000 .

[22]  L Berry,et al.  Metaevaluation of National Weatherization Assistance Program Based on State Studies, 1993-2002 , 1999 .

[23]  Nick Eyre,et al.  A golden age or a false dawn? Energy efficiency in UK competitive energy markets , 1998 .

[24]  David Gann,et al.  Do regulations encourage innovation? The case of energy efficiency in housing. , 1998 .

[25]  L. Lutzenhiser.  Social and Behavioral Aspects of Energy use , 1993 .

[26]  Gilbert E. Metcalf,et al.  Energy conservation investment: Do consumers discount the future correctly? , 1993 .

[27]  M Grubb,et al.  Energy policies and the greenhouse effect. Vol.1, Policy appraisal , 1991 .

[28]  Arthur H. Rosenfeld,et al.  Conservation Screening Curves to Compare Efficiency Investments to Power Plants , 1990 .

[29]  J. Koomey,et al.  Unit costs of carbon savings from urban trees, rural trees, and electricity conservation: A utility cost perspective , 1990 .

[30]  Stefan Thomas,et al.  Release the power of the public purse , 2006 .

[31]  Zvonimira Šverko Grdić,et al.  Economic instruments in environmental protection , 2006 .

[32]  E. Shove,et al.  Debating the future of comfort: environmental sustainability, energy consumption and the indoor environment , 2005 .

[33]  W. L. Lee,et al.  Regulatory and voluntary approaches for enhancing building energy efficiency , 2004 .

[34]  Jeffrey P. Harris,et al.  Energy-efficient purchasing by state and local government: Triggering a landslide down the slippery slope to market transformation , 2004 .

[35]  D. Bosseboeuf,et al.  Energy Efficiency: A Worldwide Review , 2004 .

[36]  E. Shove.  Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience: The Social Organization of Normality , 2003 .

[37]  Sylvia Bender.  Using Mass Media to Influence Energy Consumption Behavior : California ’ s 2001 Flex Your Power Campaign as a Case Study , 2002 .

[38]  Sam C. M. Hui.  Using Performance-Based Approach in Building Energy Standards and Codes , 2002 .

[39]  P. J. Heinzelmann,et al.  Bringing Energy Efficiency to the Liberalised Electricity and Gas Markets , 2002 .

[40]  Sarah C. Darby,et al.  Making it Obvious: Designing Feedback into Energy Consumption , 2001 .

[41]  P. Chan,et al.  Impacts of U.S. Appliance Standards to Date , 2001 .

[42]  Christoph Weber,et al.  Effective policy instruments for energy efficiency in residential space heating : an international empirical analysis (EPISODE) , 2000 .

[43]  Michael Grubb,et al.  Energy Policies and the Greenhouse Effect , 1990 .

[44]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The new science of management decision , 1960 .