Car CO2 labelling - overview and best practice
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
1 j'aime•1,586 vues
Most European member states have voluntarily developed car CO2 labels based on the EU energy label format. The document analyzes different label designs and whether ratings should be absolute or relative. It recommends harmonizing labels across countries to an absolute 7-band A-G scale for simplicity, but including best-in-class information for comparison. A composite label displaying both absolute ratings and best/worst in class is suggested. Examples of existing country labels are also presented.
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Similaire à Car CO2 labelling - overview and best practice
Similaire à Car CO2 labelling - overview and best practice (20)
Plus de Ricardo Energy & Environment
Plus de Ricardo Energy & Environment (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Car CO2 labelling - overview and best practice
- 1. XXXXX © Ricardo plc 2013 Gena Gibson 30th April 2013 Car CO2 labelling in Europe
- 2. © Ricardo plc 2013 Overview Based on a study by AEA for the European Commission in 2012 Focussing on… • Format of the label & • Basis for ratings
- 3. © Ricardo plc 2013 Most Member States have voluntarily developed labels based on the EU energy label Format Member State Rating categories Example Based on EU Energy label Denmark, France, Romania, Spain, Netherlands, Finland A-G categories Germany A+ to G UK A-N categories (2 per band) Own style Belgium A-G categories Austria Continuous comparative label Hungary Italy Sweden List format N/A
- 4. © Ricardo plc 2013 Recommendations on choosing label design Harmonise the design of the car CO2 label to reflect the EU Energy Label… Improving consumer recognition Reducing risk of confusion Building on existing work … Use a closed system (i.e. always limited to 7 bands) Avoids confusion over differences between A, A+, A++ etc. Periodic reviews to align with technological progress
- 5. © Ricardo plc 2013 What are the ratings based on? Definitions of absolute and relative comparison Absolute Relative Cars are rated according to the actual CO2 emissions compared to the entire range of potential models. Hence, a car with low emissions would be in category “A” no matter what its size or type, while a car in category “G” would have high emissions, independent of its size or type. Compares cars within the same type or class, i.e. a large car can receive an “A” rating if it is the best performing of its type (even if its absolute emissions are high)
- 6. © Ricardo plc 2013 Most Member States use absolute ratings* Absolute Relative 1. Belgium, 2. Denmark, 3. France, 4. Romania, 5. UK 6. Finland, 7. Austria 1. Germany (weight), 2. Spain (footprint) 3. Netherlands (CO2 performance) * Based on AEA(2012) “Report on the implementation of Directive 1999/94/EC” and European Parliament (2010) “Study on consumer information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions of new passenger cars”, .
- 7. © Ricardo plc 2013 However, there are pros and cons for each option Advantages Disadvantages Absolute Simple to administer; Easy to understand; Directly encourages consumers to buy cars with fewer emissions Erodes differences between the ratings assigned to similar cars Relative Enables comparison of cars with similar characteristics; Larger cars do not automatically fall into the worst classes Difficult to agree on the method; Harder for consumers to understand; Gives no incentive for downsizing within the complete car fleet; Manufacturers could manipulate car characteristics to achieve a better rating without improving CO2 performance e.g. by increasing weight in a weight- related system
- 8. © Ricardo plc 2013 Recommendations on choosing absolute or relative labelling: • We are more convinced by the arguments in favour of an absolute label over those in favour of a relative label, • But providing consumers with information on best (and worst) in class could be beneficial… • Therefore, a composite label could be used, which shows absolute ratings and “best and worst in class”
- 9. © Ricardo plc 2013 Recommendations on choosing absolute or relative labelling: • We are more convinced by the arguments in favour of an absolute label over those in favour of a relative label, • But providing consumers with information on best (and worst) in class could be beneficial… • Therefore, a composite label could be used, which shows absolute ratings and “best and worst in class”
- 10. © Ricardo plc 2013 Questions?
- 11. © Ricardo plc 2013 Annex: Examples of labels Presentation of rating scale (blue background) Mandatory information (in black) Information that exceeds minimum requirements (in red)
- 12. © Ricardo plc 2013 Belgium CO2 information presented in scaled and coloured format Absolute label 7 bands A to G Fuel consumption in litre/100km CO2 emissions in g/km Vehicle make and model information
- 13. © Ricardo plc 2013 Denmark Fuel consumption presented in EU Energy Labelling-style format Absolute label 7 bands – A to G Euro NCAP star rating Economic running costs: •Annual road tax •Typical fuel costs for 20,000 kmInformation on whether diesel cars have particle trap (if not, required to pay additional tax) Fuel consumption in km/litre CO2 emissions in g/km Vehicle make and model information
- 14. © Ricardo plc 2013 France CO2 information presented in EU Energy Labelling- style format Absolute label 7 bands – A to G CO2 in g/km Fuel consumption in litres/100 km Vehicle make and model information
- 15. © Ricardo plc 2013 Germany CO2 information presented in EU Energy Labelling- style format Relative label 8 bands A+ to G (currently) Economic running costs: •Annual road tax •Typical energy costs (fuel and electricity) CO2 in g/km Fuel consumption in litres/100 km (natural gas or biogas in kg/100km) Power consumption pure electric and hybrid electric vehicles (external recharge) in kWh/100km Vehicle make and model information
- 16. © Ricardo plc 2013 Hungary Vehicle make and model information Fuel consumption in litre/100km CO2 emissions in g/km
- 17. © Ricardo plc 2013 Romania CO2 information presented in EU Energy Labelling- style format Absolute label 7 bands A to G CO2 in g/km Fuel consumption in litres/100 km Vehicle make and model information
- 18. © Ricardo plc 2013 Spain CO2 information presented in EU Energy Labelling- style format Relative label 7 bands A to G CO2 in g/km Fuel consumption in litres/100 km and km/litre Vehicle make and model information
- 19. © Ricardo plc 2013 UK CO2 information presented in EU Energy Labelling-style format Absolute label 7 bands A to M Fuel consumption in litres/100 km and miles/gallon CO2 in g/km Economic running costs: •Annual road tax •Typical fuel costs for 12,000 miles Vehicle make and model information
- 20. © Ricardo plc 2013 Gena Gibson Senior Consultant gena.gibson@ricardo-aea.com
Notes de l'éditeur
- The main argument in favour of an absolute label is that it is less confusing for consumers, and ensures that a car with a better rating would always be more fuel efficient. The main argument in favour of a relative approach is that they allow consumers to better compare similar types of cars, e.g. within car classes, as the relative approach can provide a wider range of categorisations for similar cars. Additionally, some stakeholders argued that basing a relative approach on a car’s weight meant that the approach taken for the label was consistent with that which is taken by the passenger car CO2 Regulation, which is also weight-based.
- Note: these are for information only – I do not intend to talk through these slides unless someone asks a specific question