4.7 Article

Analysis and development trends of Chinese energy efficiency standards for room air conditioners

Journal

ENERGY POLICY
Volume 125, Issue -, Pages 368-383

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.10.038

Keywords

Energy efficiency standards; Room air conditioners; Development trends; China

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51776076]
  2. Program of International Science and Technology Cooperation of China [2016YFE0118100]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Energy efficiency standards have crucial roles in reducing the energy consumption of room air conditioners (RACs) in many countries around the world. In this paper, a review of the policy rules of energy efficiency standards is presented. The characteristics and rationality for the evaluation metrics in various countries are analyzed. The difference between the energy efficiency standards for RACs in China and those for other countries are discussed. The development trends for the energy efficiency standards of Chinese RACs are provided in this paper. The division of temperature zones, various operation modes and the long-term performance of RACs should be considered when establishing the energy efficiency standards of RACs. Note that the improvement in the energy efficiency standards of RACs is a vital measure for energy conservation and environmental protection. Therefore, the environmental impact of the energy efficiency standards for RACs with refrigerants will become a major direction in the enhancement of future standards of RACs. Finally, two methods based on a logarithmic function and a linear function are proposed in this paper, which combine global warming potential (GWP) and energy efficiency evaluation metrics. This paper will significantly contribute to the formulation and revision of the energy efficiency standards of RACs and provide guidance to manufacturers of air conditioners.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available