A Roadmap for Green Building Products in China

Transcription

1 A Roadmap for Green Building Products in China Towards a National Standard, Testing, Certification, and Labeling System September 2018 Yuanrong Zhou, Meredydd Evans, Sha Yu (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) Jun Ruan, Hao Xu (China Solid State Lighting Alliance) Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

2 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN ; ph: (865) fax: (865) Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Rd., Alexandria, VA ph: (800) 553-NTIS (6847) < Online ordering:

3 A Roadmap for Green Building Products in China Towards a National Standard, Testing, Certification, and Labeling System September 2018 Yuanrong Zhou, Meredydd Evans, Sha Yu (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) Jun Ruan, Hao Xu (China Solid State Lighting Alliance) Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington i

4 Executive Summary Certification helps expand the market for green building products (with high product performance including energy efficiency and resource efficiency) because customers have a clearer sense of product value and certification can simplify policy linkages to promote green products. Greater market uptake in turn leads to societal benefits, including improved building energy efficiency and environmental protection. The Chinese government is committed to promoting green building products in China through a more robust national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. This report aims to provide recommendations for a roadmap on such a national system in China. To have a deep understanding of the existing system in China, we selected two types of building products, window glass products and LED lighting products, focusing on product energy performance as two case studies. For each product, we organized a working group to collect feedback from U.S. and Chinese stakeholders. We also conducted detailed gap analyses comparing the U.S. and Chinese systems on standards for window glass products and certification of LED lighting products, respectively. Based on inputs from the two working groups and the gap analyses, we provided recommendations with suggested implementation steps and timelines for the two cases. Using the lessons learned from these two cases, we also drew a roadmap of implementation steps broadly to enhance the national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in China. Our two most important recommendations for the existing system in China are (1) better linkages among different components and programs within the system, and (2) improved quality assurance. A robust national green building product system requires combined efforts from different parties related to product testing (standard and accreditation), product certification, and product labeling. Measurement standards are the foundation of product testing (including physical testing and simulation) and certification; accreditation ensures the qualification of the testing and simulation laboratories and certification bodies; product certification ensures that products perform as good as advertised; and labeling tells product features and supports consumers purchasing process. Policy, such as incentive programs or linking certification with building acceptance code, also plays the role of providing overall support for a national system and in promoting product certification. The full system with coordination among relevant stakeholders could streamline the process, build consumer confidence, and accelerate the market uptake of certified green building products. Government agencies overseeing these components would need to work collaboratively to design a comprehensive and robust system, set program rules and regulations, effectively engage stakeholders in the development of the system, encourage public participation in certification, and promote high-performance building products in the market. Quality assurance is a crucial element of the system, which ensures the credibility and quality of certification and in turn increases consumer confidence in certified products. Verification testing is proven an effective approach for quality assurance. ii

5 We summarize the four key factors for the success of a national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in the following table. Factor Greater coordination and alignment Robust testing (simulation and physical testing) and certification Better information Supporting programs Approach Greater alignment and consistency among testing and calculation standards could help streamline the certification process Greater coordination and linkage among different components of the system could help smooth the certification process, be more cost effective, and accelerate the overall industry development Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and certification body could ensure the integrity and quality of product rating Verification testing (either within certification program or an independent program) could add another level of assurance in product performance and enhance consumer confidence in product label or certification Third-party certification could help ensure certification program integrity Information transparency could help engage manufacturers in product certification, smooth the testing and certification process, and build consumer confidence Product database could be used to analyze and support the overall development of the industry Supportive policies that could help promote product certification and the use of certified products, such as building codes and incentive schemes Capacity building among consumers is necessary for the system to realize its true value We also provide recommendations specific to the two case studies to highlight opportunities in different portions of the certification system. The recommendations below focus on standardization of window glass products and certification of LED lighting products. The details of these recommendations also helped inform the broader cross-cutting recommendations outlined above, and as such, these recommendations serve as examples of how the cross-cutting recommendations can be applied to given technical areas. Standardization of window glass products 1. Adapt measurement standards (both physical testing and calculation/simulation standards) to enhance consistency among existing Chinese standards (e.g. the use of shading coefficient vs solar heat gain coefficient); enhance the consistency between the boundary conditions and the climate in China; and enhance alignment with international metrics and standards used in other countries (e.g. the measurement of glazing transmittance and reflectance); iii

6 2. Enhance the linkage between measurement standards and other components (accreditation and certification) within the system; 3. Improve the transparency of the product testing process (physical testing and calculation/simulation) by providing open resources, including manuals of simulation software and relevant databases; 4. Identify areas that need additional measurement standards (physical testing and calculation/simulation) with input from industry. Such areas include standards for window films and window attachments. Certification of LED lighting products 1. Strengthen the accreditation requirements for testing laboratories and certification bodies; 2. Strengthen the linkages and coordination between different components within the system (e.g., standards, accreditation, certification, and labeling); 3. Strengthen verification testing for quality assurance; 4. Reshape the certification programs from self-certification to third-party certification. The Chinese government is committed to enhance the national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system for green building products. This report provides recommendations for the next steps. iv

7 执行摘要 产品认证可以使消费者对产品品质的好坏形成更加清晰的认识, 因此可以促进扩大高性能产品, 如绿色建筑产品 ( 高性能产品包括节能 资源节约等 ) 的市场规模 同时, 产品认证也可以简化政策对于绿色产品的推广 绿色建筑产品的广泛使用可以带来多重社会效益, 诸如提升建筑能效以及环境保护等等 中国政府正在致力于通过一个更完善的国家级绿色建筑产品标准 检测 认证 和标识体系来推广绿色建筑产品的市场占有率 本报告就加强该体系提出了路线图建议 为了能够更加深入地了解中国体系现状, 我们在建筑产品范围内选取了建筑用窗玻璃和 LED 照明产品作为两个案例, 深入研究产品能效性能方面的相关标准 检测 认证和标识 为取得业内专家的反馈和建议, 我们就窗玻璃和 LED 照明产品分别组建了相对应的工作组以收集中美双方意见 同时, 我们针对窗玻璃能效性能测试标准和 LED 照明产品的能效认证进行了详细的中美对比 基于工作组意见整理和中美对比分析, 我们分别对窗玻璃测试标准和 LED 照明产品认证提出了完善方案和实施计划时间表 根据这两类产品的案例研究, 我们总结出更加普适性的路线图实施方案, 以完善中国的绿色建筑产品标准 测试 认证和标识体系 针对中国现有的体系我们提出两个主要建议 :(1) 体系内不同环节更紧密地衔接与合作 ; (2) 更严格的质量保证措施 一个有效的国家绿色建筑产品体系需要产品检测 ( 测试标准和实验室资质认可 ) 认证和标识的多方协作 标准是产品性能检测 ( 包括实物检测标准和模拟计算标准 ) 和认证的基础 ; 资质认可能够确保检测实验室和认证单位的权威性 ; 产品认证能够确保产品的实际性能与宣传无异 ; 认证标识能够清晰标明产品性能参数并帮助消费者选购 此外, 针对产品认证的扶持政策, 如财政鼓励和将建筑规范中与建筑产品认证相连接, 可以有效地扶持体系的建立和推广应用 一个完善且各环节紧密联系的体系可以提升产品认证效率 有效地建立消费者对于认证产品的信任 并加快绿色认证建筑产品的市场占有率 监督管理体系内各环节的政府部门需要共同协调配合来设计完整而有效的体系 设置体系各环节的规章细则 采纳相关干系人的意见 增强公众参与度 推广高性能建筑产品在市场中的占有率 除此之外, 质量保证是体系中极为重要的一个元素, 因其确保了产品认证的真实性与可信度, 从而增强了消费者对于认证产品的信任 产品验证试验就是质量保证中极为有效的方法 我们针对一个完善的国家级标准 检测 认证 标识体系总结了以下四点要素 : v

8 要素紧密地整合 衔接与协作严格有效的检测 ( 实物检测和模拟计算 ) 和认证更好的信息公开性扶持性项目 方法同类产品同类性能的检测标准的统一性可以简化认证流程体系中不同环节更紧密地衔接与协作可以使认证过程更顺畅 更高效益 并促进产业发展对检测 模拟实验室和认证机构进行资质认可能够确保检测和认证的质量和真实性验证检测 ( 包含在认证项目内或者建立一个独立的项目 ) 能够针对产品的性能增加另一层保证, 同时也能增强消费者对于产品认证标识的信任由第三方认证机构进行产品认证能够确保认证的客观完整性信息的透明公开能够促使企业积极参与产品认证 使检测和认证流程更加顺畅, 同时也建立了消费者的信任产品数据库能够应用于产品的数据分析并支撑产业发展规划扶持性政策能够推动产品认证以及已认证产品的应用和推广, 比如财政补贴或将建筑规范与建筑产品认证相连接消费者的能力建设对于整个体系是否能够发挥真正的效果有着重要影响 我们同时也针对两个产品案例提出了推荐性建议 这些建议聚焦在建筑用窗玻璃产品的检测标准和 LED 照明产品的认证项目 建筑用窗玻璃产品的标准化工作 1. 提高测试标准 ( 包括实物检测标准和模拟计算标准 ) 间的统一性和一致性, 例如遮阳系数和太阳得热系数的使用 ; 确保标准所用边界条件与中国气候情况相符 ; 增强与国际测试标准的统一性, 例如玻璃太阳辐射与透射率的计算 ; 2. 增强测试标准与体系内其它环节的衔接, 包括实验室认可和产品认证 ; 3. 通过信息公开 ( 包括检测模拟软件的使用说明以及相关数据库 ) 提升产品检测过程的信息透明度 ; 4. 制定和完善检测标准, 并听取业界反馈 工作组提出需要新标准的领域包括窗玻璃贴膜以及窗配件 LED 照明产品认证 1. 增强对检测实验室和认证机构的资质认可要求 ; 2. 增强体系中每一个环节 ( 包括标准 资质认可 认证 标识 ) 的衔接和整合 ; 3. 增强验证试验力度以达到质量保证 ; 4. 在认证环节中, 由自我认证转化为第三方认证 中国政府正在致力于增强绿色建筑产品的国家级标准 检测 认证和标识体系 本报告旨在为下一步提供一些建议 vi

9 Acknowledgments The authors are grateful for research support provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Department of State. The authors would like to thanks the following organizations and individuals for their inputs: 3M, American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA), Beihang University, CESI (Guangzhou) Opto-Electronics Standard & Testing Institute Co., Ltd., China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC), China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS), China Standard Conformity Assessment Co., Ltd. (CSCA), Cree Inc., CSG Holding Co., Ltd. (CSG), DesignLights Consortium (DLC), GIGA, Guangdong Testing Institute of Products Quality Supervision, Guangzhou LEDIA Lighting Co., Ltd., Honeywell (EnVision (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.), International Window Film Association (IWFA), KDX Optical Film Material, Keystone Certifications, Inc., Kolbe Windows & Doors, Lutron Electronics Co., Inc., Mackinac Technology, Nanjing Fiberglass Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd., National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), Shenzhen Unilumin Technology Co., Ltd., Solatube CECEP Daylighting Technology Co., Ltd., State Key Laboratory of Solid-State Lighting, Tospo Lighting Co., Ltd., U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), Vitro Architectural Glass, Xiamen Leedarson Lighting Co., Ltd., Xinyi Glass Holdings Limited, Charlie Curcija from Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory (LBNL), the Standardization Administration of China (SAC), Renne Hancher from Department of Commerce, colleagues from the Building Technologies Office at DOE, including Marc Lafrance, and Arlene Fetizanan from International Affairs at DOE. PNNL is operated for DOE by Battelle Memorial Institute under contract DE-AC05-76RL The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any of the above organizations and individuals. vii

10

11 Acronyms and Abbreviations ANSI CALiPER CCIC CCMS CCT CECC CEL CFEEPL CFLs CRI CMA CNAS CNCA CNIS CQC CSA CTC DLC DOE ECMs EPA LED FTC GAO GBME HVAC IESNA ISO American National Standard Institute Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting China Certification & Inspection Group Compliance Certification Management System Correlated color temperature China Energy Conservation Certification China Energy Label China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program Compact fluorescent bulbs Color rendering index China Metrology Accreditation China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment Certification and Accreditation Administration of China China National Institute of Standardization China Quality Certification Centre China Solid State Lighting Alliance China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. DesignLights Consortium U.S. Department of Energy energy conservation measures Environmental Protection Agency Light-emitting diode Federal Trade Commission U.S. Government Accountability Office Green Building Materials Evaluation Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning Illuminating Engineering Society North America International Organization for Standardization ix

12 ISTMT LSG MIIT MOHURD NDRC NFRC NIST NRTL NVLAP OSHA PNNL QPL R&D RISN SAC SAMR SC SHGC SSL UL VT In situ temperature test Light-to-solar-gain Ministry of Industry and Information Technology Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development National Development and Reform Commission of China National Fenestration Rating Council National Institute of Standards and Technology Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program Occupational Safety and Health Administration Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Qualified Product List Research and development Research Institute of Standards & Norms Standardization Administration of China State Administration for Market Regulation Shading coefficient Solar heat gain coefficient Solid-state lighting Underwriter Laboratories Visible transmittance x

13 Table of Contents Executive Summary... ii 执行摘要... v Acknowledgments... vii Acronyms and Abbreviations... ix Figures... xiii Tables... xiv Introduction... 1 Background... 1 Scope, Objective, and Methodology... 2 Prioritization and Analysis... 4 Window Glass... 4 LED Lighting... 5 Working Groups... 5 Audience... 6 Gap Analysis... 7 Window Glass Measurement Standards... 7 Standard System in the U.S. and China... 7 Existing Standards... 8 Standard Comparisons Lighting: LED Lighting Product Certification Product Testing Accreditation of Testing Laboratory Comparison Certification Programs in the U.S. and China Endorsement Certification Programs in the U.S. and China Additional Verification Testing Program Recommendations for Roadmap Key Factors for Success I. Greater coordination and alignment II. Robust testing and certification III. Better information IV. Supporting programs xi

14 Recommendations for Two Case Studies Roadmap for a National Green Building Product Certification System Institutional Roles Roadmap Conclusions References Appendix A: Product Prioritization Example Appendix B: Members of the Working Groups List of Members (Alphabetic Order) Appendix C: Window Standard Comparison: Thermal Transmittance Appendix D: U.S. and Chinese Certification Programs for Windows Comparison Certification Program Rating of Performance Metrics Endorsement Certification Program Energy-Efficient Products Appendix E: U.S. and Chinese Testing Standards for LED Lighting Products Standard Comparisons Lumen Maintenance and Lifetime Projection Lifetime Projection Methodology Comparisons xii

15 Figures Figure 1. Components within a standard, certification, and labeling system for green building products... 2 Figure 2. Existing Chinese, U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, and ISO standard for measurement of thermal, solar, and light transmittance of window and glass products Figure 3. An example of FTC Lighting Facts label Figure 4. An example of LED Lighting Facts label Figure 5. An example of China Energy Label of non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp Figure 6. Verification testing process under the LED Lighting Facts Figure 7. Energy Star certification process Figure 8. An illustration of the levels of rules and standards that a manufacturer or a testing laboratory needs to go through in the U.S. and Chinese programs Figure 9. Key ministries and institutions in the work of green building product standardization, labeling, and certification. Coral is the ministry Figure 10. Linkage among components of the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system and between policies and the system Figure 11. Organizational chart of the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), adapted from NFRC Figure 12. Organizational chart of the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program (CFEEPL), adapted from RISN Figure 13. Examples of NFRC and CFEEPL labels Figure 14. Flow chart to determine the use of 1000h Method or Direct Method (SAC, 2017) Figure 15. Screenshots of Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculator xiii

16 Tables Table 1. Classification of two types of certification programs... 4 Table 2. The use of information from each section of this report by stakeholder groups... 6 Table 3. Measurement standards of window air leakage and condensation resistance metrics used in the U.S. and China... 8 Table 4. Boundary conditions for calculating SHGC in U.S. -domiciled organization developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard Table 5. Existing LED lighting testing standards of photometric performance, reliability, and lifetime projection in the U.S. and China Table 6. Accreditation/Recognition programs for LED products testing laboratories in the U.S. and China Table 7. Comparison certification programs (of product performance metrics) for LED lighting products in the U.S. and China Table 8. Endorsement certification programs for energy-efficient LED lighting products in U.S. and China Table 9. Four key factors for success in developing a green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system Table 10. Recommendations for standardization and measurement of window glass products in China.. 30 Table 11. Recommendations for certification of LED lighting products in China Table 12. Prioritization evaluation for four building product categories Table 13. Boundary conditions for calculating U-factor in U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard Table 14. Fenestration product energy performance rating program in the U.S. and China Table 15. Certification programs of energy-efficient building window products in the U.S. and China Table 16. Comparison of general testing conditions between LM and GB/T Table h testing conditions and criteria (SAC, 2017) Table 18. Comparisons of LED lifetime projection methods between GB/T (China) and TM (U.S.) Table 19. Multiplier x of different sample sizes to determine the maximum rated lumen maintenance life in both GB/T and TM xiv

17 Introduction Background With rapid economic development and urbanization, buildings have become a crucial part of modern society in China. The country now has the largest construction market in the world. However, buildings are large energy consumers collectively. The building sector accounts for about one-third of final energy consumption globally and among which, China alone takes up 16 % (IEA, 2015). Nonetheless, the size and energy use in the Chinese building sector is still growing rapidly as China is projected to contribute an additional 18% to global floor area by 2050, equivalent to over 30 billion square meters above the 2012 level (IEA, 2015). Building energy consumption in China has grown by 37% from 2000 to 2012 and could increase by an additional 70% from 2012 to 2050 if no actions were taken to slow down the growth (IEA, 2015). Building energy efficiency is particularly important in the context of such fast growth, which can lead to increased emissions and high costs for new supply. Studies have shown that with robust building energy codes, building energy use in China could be reduced by up to 22% (Yu, Eom, Evans, & Clarke, 2014). Building products, including fenestration, lighting, wall/insulation, and HVAC, play an important role in building energy efficiency. Specifically, building envelope and fenestration affect the amount of thermal loss and solar energy gained by the building, which in turn affect energy demand and usage. The efficiency of lighting products and HVAC systems directly affects building energy consumption. Therefore, the use of energy-efficient building products could help China improve building energy efficiency and avoid a rapid increase in energy consumption and emissions. Policymakers in China have adopted various measures to promote the development and market uptake of green building products, of which superior energy performance is one of the features. Such measures include strengthening requirements for building material performance in the building code and promoting the use of green building products through incentives. Promotion of the use of green building products, those with high product performance including energy efficiency and resource efficiency, alone is not enough. Two related challenges are the identification of high-performance green building products from the numerous products in the market, and the assurance of product performance. A robust national certification system for green building products could help in overcoming theses challenges. A robust system to test, certify, and label product performance based on national standards can help consumers choose products. This in turn can make high-performance products stand out and grow in market share. The Chinese government has realized the importance of a robust national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system and has taken action. In December 2017, five Chinese ministries 1 co-issued a 1 The five governments are the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ), the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD), the Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA), and the Standardization Administration of China (SAC). 1

18 Guideline on Promoting Standards, Certification, and Labels for Green Building Materials and Products. This guideline states that the five ministries will collaborate to establish a uniform, scientific, comprehensive, and effective green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. It also addresses the need of an integrated framework to streamline the standard and certification for each building product, in other words, one product category, one standard, one list, one certification, one label in China (MIIT, 2017). In 2013, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Development and Reform Commission of China (NDRC) launched an initiative to improve building energy efficiency. Developing a roadmap for a national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in China later became one of the tasks under this collaboration. Scope, Objective, and Methodology The development of a robust national certification system for green building products requires combined efforts from different stakeholder groups involved in the process (Figure 1). Standards are the foundation of product measurement (both physical testing and calculation/simulation) and certification; accreditation proves the ability of the testing and simulation laboratories and certification bodies; product certification ensures the true performance of a product; and labeling reflects product features and supports consumers purchasing process. Policies and certification could support each other. Supportive policies, such as incentive programs, could greatly engage stakeholders and promote product certification; meanwhile, product certification could also provides insights for policy development, especially R&D planning. The full system, with collaborations among relevant stakeholders, could build up consumer confidence and accelerate the market uptake of certified green building products. A roadmap laying out the linkages among different stakeholder groups and components could contribute to the enhancement of a robust national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. This report provides recommendations on such a roadmap and hereafter, we will call it roadmap report. Figure 1. Components within a standard, certification, and labeling system for green building products 2

19 To be defined as green, a building product needs to be evaluated from several aspects along the product life cycle, including environmental impacts, energy performance, resource efficiency (including recyclability), and quality. This roadmap report focuses on the energy side of green building products. Although only the energy aspect is covered in this report, the recommendations are designed to also provide broader implications for the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system of green building products in general, highlighting key areas for cross-cutting improvements. This roadmap report aims to 1) improve the current standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in China to allow for more consistent and robust results and 2) grow the market for highperformance building products through reliable and unbiased product performance information. To address these issues, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) research team, together with Chinese collaborators, has undertaken the following steps to present the research results in this report. (1) Selected two types of building products for detailed analysis based on prioritization criteria and stakeholder inputs; (2) Organized two working groups (by product) to collect feedback from the U.S. and Chinese stakeholders on interested topics, gap analysis, recommendations, and roadmap development; (3) Conducted detailed gap analysis between the U.S. and Chinese energy-related testing standards and certification systems of the two selected building products; (4) Provided recommendations of potential steps to improve the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system of the two products in China; (5) Created a roadmap with recommendations for implementation steps to enhance the national certification system of green building products in China. Usually, there are two forms of certification programs with two types of labels for building products: (1) comparison certification and (2) endorsement certification. Taking energy-related certification as an example (Table 1), comparison certification program certifies and rates product energy performance. With detailed performance ratings labeled on the products, this type of certification provides transparent while reliable product information to consumers and enables product comparisons. Endorsement certification program takes a step further to certify and endorse products that meet minimum energy performance requirements as energy-efficient products. It is a common practice that participation in the comparison certification program is a prerequisite for participation in the endorsement certification program. This report covers both types of certification programs. 3

20 Table 1. Classification of two types of certification programs Comparison Certification Program Endorsement Certification Program Purpose Certifies products energy performance Certifies products that are energy-efficient by passing certain performance thresholds Label Products performance ratings of various A program label or logo indicating a energy-related properties product is certified to be energy-efficient Label Example Prioritization and Analysis It is unrealistic to develop or enhance a full standard, testing, certification, and labeling system covering all kinds of building products at the same time. Therefore, it is necessary to start by prioritizing certain products and characteristics. Such a product prioritization process should be conducted based on reasonable criteria as well as inputs from relevant stakeholders. Once certain products are prioritized, detailed analyses of the selected products is necessary to understand potential flaws in the current system and identify possible solutions. Appendix A provides an example of a product prioritization process done by the research team. We believe that impacts and the demand for the products are the two critical factors that should be considered; for instance, energy savings potential and market size. Stakeholder buy-in is also a crucial factor to consider during the prioritization process. Relevant stakeholders include policymakers, manufacturers, and industry associations. This prioritization exercise conducted by the research team (Appendix A) could serve as an example of the thought process and provide insights for Chinese policy makers as they determine the products and characteristics to start with. Through this initial prioritization process, the project stakeholders selected two building products as two case studies for the evaluation of the current system in China. Specifically, we develop detailed recommendations for a roadmap for window glass products and LED lighting. After the prioritization exercise, we also conduct a more detailed analysis of the selected products. The following two sections further evaluate the significance of window glass products and LED lighting products in achieving building energy efficiency. Window Glass The energy performance of the building envelope has a crucial impact on building demand for space heating and cooling, which typically accounts for over 30% of all energy consumed by a building (IEA, 2013). Researchers have estimated that windows alone could account for about 40% 4

21 of the total heat loss through the building envelope (Gustavsen, et al., 2011). More specifically, a study has found that windows could be responsible for 34% of all commercial space conditioning energy use and 29% of residential buildings in the U.S. (LBNL, 2006). In addition to this energy importance, window products show a huge market potential in China as demand is growing. This is because high-rise multi-family building, of which the window-to-wall ratio is as high as 60% and four times that of single-family building, is and will remain the largest building segment in China (IEA, 2015). LED Lighting Lighting in general accounts for 11% of building energy consumption in the U.S. (DOE, 2015) and the use of LED lighting products can help improve building energy efficiency. A report by DOE estimated that the energy use by LED lamps is only one third that of halogen lamps and roughly one fifth that of incandescent lamps. In addition, the lifetime of LED is twenty-five times that of halogen and incandescent and three times compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs). As LED technology develops, LED lighting products will likely see increased efficiency (DOE, 2012), indicating high cost-effectiveness. Moreover, when implementing a building energy retrofit project, lighting upgrades could also bring the co-benefit of increasing building occupants satisfaction and productivity. Because of these benefits, the market share of LED in the Chinese lighting market is projected to increase from 12% in 2011 to 69% in 2020, reaching a market size of $17.25 billion (McKinsey&Company, 2012). Working Groups Stakeholder inputs are crucial for a better understanding of the industry and the market; identifying barriers and challenges; and finding effective practices to enhance a national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. In order to provide effective recommendations and design an application roadmap, the research team, together with Chinese collaborators, organized two working groups by product category. DOE and the Standardization Administration of China (SAC) are co-leading the work on window glass, and PNNL and the China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC) are the U.S. and Chinese coordinators to organize the window glass working group. DOE and NDRC are co-leading the work on LED lighting products and PNNL and the China Solid State Lighting Alliance (CSA) are the U.S. and Chinese coordinators. Members of the two working groups include policy makers, standard makers, researchers, manufacturers, industry associations, and experts in window glass and LED lighting industry. Appendix B provides a full list of the members of the working groups. The working groups held several meetings and conference calls throughout the development of the roadmap recommendations. The discussion sheds light on following topics: (1) The comparisons of the testing standards, accreditation programs, and certification programs in the U.S. and China; (2) Challenges during the testing and certification process; (3) Market barriers for deploying high-performance products; and 5

22 (4) Recommendations and proposals on priorities for the roadmap with implementation processes. Comments and feedback from various groups of stakeholders in both the U.S. and China have led to a holistic understanding of testing and certification of window glass and LED lighting products and preliminary ideas on enhancing a robust national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in general. However, enhancing the national system is a complicated and comprehensive thought process. The discussions by the working groups did not reach a conclusion and future dialogues are needed. Audience This roadmap report provides insights to various stakeholder groups relevant to the standard, testing, certification, and labeling of building products and each group could obtain information from each section in the report for own uses (Table 2). Table 2. The use of information from each section of this report by stakeholder groups Section Stakeholder Group How to Use the Information Policy makers Understand the linkages and set-up of the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system; Gain Introduction insights on options for product prioritization Public Understand linkages and set-up of the standard, testing 2, certification, and labeling system and the U.S.-China initiative Policy makers, standard makers, program administrators, testing laboratories, and Understand the differences in measurement standards, and accreditation and certification programs in the U.S. and China; Identify area for improvements Gap Analysis certification bodies Manufacturers Understand the differences in measurement standards, and accreditation and certification programs in the U.S. and China; Plan accordingly for obtaining product certification and market access in each country Policy makers Gain insights on areas for improvement and steps to achieve a robust national system Recommendation and Roadmap Standard-makers and program administrators Manufacturers, testing and simulation laboratories, accreditation and certification bodies Gain insights on areas for improvement in measurement standards, accreditation and certification Learn about the potential dynamics in the system design to keep up with future trends 2 Testing, here and elsewhere of the report, includes product physical testing and calculation/simulation. 6

23 Gap Analysis To develop the roadmap, it is necessary to first identify significant issues that have been overlooked or not been fully addressed. The research team first conducted a gap analysis of testing standards and the two types of certification programs in the U.S. and China, using the two selected products as case studies. Then, we integrated the gap analysis results and stakeholders feedback and provide recommendations on how to address these gaps of the Chinese systems through standards, policies, and market mechanisms. By taking inputs from the working groups, this report focuses on the (1) measurement standards, including thermal and optical performance characterization, such as solar and light transmittance, of window glass products and (2) certification of LED lighting products. Window Glass Measurement Standards Window energy performance is largely affected by its insulating ability, air tightness, and transparency to solar radiation. A high-quality window is expected to present good thermal insulation and prevent air leakage. Ideally, it should also be able to allow for visible light to enter, while blocking infrared and ultraviolet light, particularly in hot climates (DOE, 2015). In cooler climates, it may also be desirable to have windows that allow infrared light to enter for beneficial passive solar heating. Measurement methodologies (including calculation and simulation as well as physical testing) define and determine the above-mentioned characteristics and thus window energy performance. Studies have found that the same window simulated or measured with different methods would result in different performance values, up to 25% variation (Ebanks, 2014; Hanam, Jaugelis, & Finch, 2014). Therefore, following appropriate measurement standards is crucial. Standard System in the U.S. and China In the U.S., most fenestration manufacturers follow the technical standards developed by the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), a U.S.-domiciled independent non-profit organization, to rate a product s energy-related performance (comparison certification). Unlike the U.S. where the standardization process is mostly industry or market driven with some supports from the government, in China, government agencies, especially the Standardization Administration of China (SAC) and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD), play a crucial role of overseeing the development of measurement standards. In addition, the U.S. and China are different in the system. The U.S. industry is mainly looking at the window product as a whole. Whereas in China, window and glass are usually separated and standards are overseen by different ministries window under MOHURD while glass under SAC 3. 3 While it is important to understand the energy performance of the whole window product, this report focuses on the measurement of energy-related metrics at the glass area. 7

24 The NFRC technical standards 4, by building on calculation and simulation standards developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and testing standards developed by the ASTM International, combine calculation, simulation, and testing procedures all together. This enables the users to have a holistic view of the different components of the product rating procedure. In China, calculation, simulation, and physical testing standards for fenestration products are standalone. In addition, the NFRC technical standards reference the ISO standards for detailed calculation methodologies, rather than having its own technical methodologies, with the exception of the specification of boundary conditions, product sizes, interpretations of ambiguous situations, and additional explanations to better support the simulation process. The calculation standards in China are very similar to the ISO standards with additions or deletions of certain sections from the ISO standards and minor modifications to the equations. Existing Standards The main metrics describing a window glass product s energy-related performance are thermal, solar, and visible transmittance, air leakage, and condensation resistance. For an overview, this section lists the existing standards used in the U.S. and China as well as the referenced ISO standards relevant to the above-mentioned metrics. Table 3 shows the standards to measure air leakage and condensation resistance and Figure 2 demonstrates the standards to measure thermal transmittance, total solar energy transmittance, and visible transmittance. Table 3. Measurement standards of window air leakage and condensation resistance metrics used in the U.S. and China U.S. Testing Protocols Chinese Standards Air Leakage Condensation Resistance NFRC 400 series Refer to ASTM E 283 NFRC 500 series Refer to ASTM C 1199 and ASTM E 1423 GB/T Refer to ISO 6613:1980 GB/T The NFRC standards, along with other standards developed by U.S.-domiciled standard development organizations in this report, are international standards that are consistent with the WTO TBT Committee guidance. 8

25 U.S. developed ISO Standards China NFRC 100 Series Whole window product - Thermal Transmittance NFRC 200 Series Whole window product - Total solar heat gain (SHGC) - Visible transmittance (VT) NFRC 300 Series Glass in building - Transmittance - Reflectance - Emissivity ISO &2 Whole window product - Thermal transmittance ISO 15099:2003 Whole window product - Thermal transmittance - Total solar energy transmittance - Light transmittance ISO 9050:2003 Glass in building - Light transmittance - Solar direct transmittance - Total solar energy transmittance - Ultraviolet transmittance JGJ/T Whole window product - Thermal transmittance - Total solar energy transmittance - Light transmittance GB/T Glass in building - Light transmittance - Solar direct transmittance - Total solar energy transmittance - Ultraviolet transmittance RISN-TG Simulation and testing guideline Figure 2. Existing Chinese, U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, and ISO standard for measurement of thermal, solar, and light transmittance of window and glass products. Arrows indicate referenced standards. Orange is for glass products and yellow is for whole window products. The two Chinese calculation standards (GB/T 2680 and JGJ/T 151) do not provide simulation procedures, but only calculation equations. The RISN-TG03 guideline provides simulation procedures for window products. 9

26 Standard Comparisons Based on stakeholder feedback, this report focuses on the total solar heat gain and visible transmittance standards for window products particularly at glazing area, i.e. comparisons between the U.S. NFRC 200 series and the Chinese JGJ/T standard. In general, both the U.S. and China follow ISO for the calculation of total solar heat gain and visible transmittance. The methodology provided by ISO utilizes energy balance equations that take solar absorptance and actual temperatures into consideration (ISO, 2003). This standard provides comprehensive calculation methods and is designed for computer simulation of product metrics (ISO, 2003). Although the two countries follow the same general calculation methods, differences still exist. Total Solar Energy Transmittance Solar Heat Gain Coefficient vs. Shading Coefficient In order to describe a fenestration product s behavior of absorbing and transmitting total solar radiation, NFRC requires the measurement of the solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC), equivalent to total solar energy transmittance. SHGC is defined as the ratio of the solar heat gain entering the space through the fenestration product to the incident solar radiation Solar heat gain includes directly transmitted solar heat and that portion of the absorbed solar radiation which is then reradiated, conducted, or convected into the space (NFRC, 2017a). The Chinese standard JGJ/T , on the other hand, uses a shading coefficient (SC) factor, which is the ratio of a product s total solar energy transmittance (g-factor or SHGC) to that of standardized 3-mm clear glass. The total solar energy transmittance of clear, single pane, 3-mm thick glass used in JCJ/T is 0.87, consistent with the value provided in the NFRC 201 standard (NFRC, 2017b). However, this value only accounts for the glazing area instead of the whole window, including the frame. In other words, the SC in the Chinese standard is comparing SHGC of a whole window product to SHGC of standardized glass, which might not be able to describe the whole product performance accurately. In addition, SC does not account properly for optical performance of coated glazing, especially spectrally selective glazing. Although JGJ/T notes that the fenestration industry in China is more accustomed to SC, the use of SHGC is emerging in China due to the increased amount of international collaboration. Particularly, GB the Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Public Buildings replaced SC with SHGC metric. Replacing SC with SHGC can 1) ensure a more accurate evaluation of whole window product performance; 2) accurately represent all types of glazing; 3) ensure consistency among different standards; and 4) align better with international standards. Calculation Method Both the NFRC 200 series and the JGJ/T standard follow the ISO methodology to calculate whole product total solar heat gain, which is an area-weighted average of contributions from the glass and frame (ISO, 2003). 10

27 Regarding the calculation of total solar heat gain at the frame area, although the same equation is used in both countries, the result is likely to be different because one of the required variables, which is the frame thermal transmittance, is calculated with different methods by NFRC 200 series and JGJ/T These two methods differ in the way to treat heat transfer (U-factor) through the frame and the edges or corners (Appendix C). For glass contribution, the two countries are consistent in the calculation for glazing units as they both use the equations from ISO When calculating performance of glazing systems, both countries follow the energy balance method provided by ISO in general to take into account the conditions at each glazing layer. However, calculating the absorbed amount of solar radiation at one single glazing layer, NFRC 200 series use the equations from ISO to obtain the numerical integration over the solar spectrum while JGJ/T uses the equations from ISO ISO 9050 provides a table of normalized relative spectral distribution of global solar radiation. In the U.S., the spectral distribution of incident solar radiation is specified in ASTM E893. Boundary Conditions In general, summer conditions are used when calculating SHGC. The boundary conditions, including temperature and incident solar radiation, for calculating SHGC are different between the NFRC 200 series and the JGJ/T standard, shown in Table 4. The SHGC boundary conditions in the JGJ/T standard are mainly adapted from the ISO standard with minor modification. On the other hand, the NFRC standards have modified the boundary conditions to better fit with the U.S. climate. The boundary conditions in ISO might not be representative of the climate in China; thus, revisions of boundary conditions in the JGJ/T standard might be necessary to get better simulation of product performance in China. Table 4. Boundary conditions for calculating SHGC in U.S. -domiciled organization developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard NFRC 200 JGJ/T ISO Interior air temperature Tin 24 C 25 C 25 C Exterior temperature Tout 32 C 30 C 30 C Wind speed V 2.75 m/s N/A N/A Convective heat transfer coefficient hc, in Convective heat transfer coefficient hc, out Interior mean radiant temperature Trm, in Exterior mean radiant temperature Trm, out Temperature dependent 2.5 W/(m 2 K) Temperature dependent 15 W/(m 2 K) 16 W/(m 2 K) 8 W/(m 2 K) T rm, in = T in T rm, in = T in T rm, in = T in T rm, out = T out T rm, out = T out T rm, out = T out Solar radiation Is 783 W/m 2 500W/m 2 500W/m 2 11

28 The different calculation methods as well as different boundary conditions in U.S. and Chinese standards would result in different evaluations of the same product. This might make testing and certification results from the two countries incomparable. Visible Transmittance Visible transmittance (VT) describes a window s ability to transmit visible light, which affects the building occupants demand for lighting. In evaluating the whole product VT, only glass area are in effect. Both NFRC protocol and JGJ standard assume VT is the same at glazing center and edge. Similar to total solar energy transmittance across the glass, both countries follow ISO However, in calculating the properties of glazing systems, the U.S. uses equations from ISO 15099, while China uses equations from ISO Again, ISO 9050 provides a table of normalized relative spectral distribution of illuminant D65, while ISO does not refer to such normalized value. Instead, automated software following ISO could be used to simulate product performance. For the U.S., the spectral distribution of incident solar radiation is specified in ASTM E893 and NFRC 200 technical standards stipulates the use of the same D65 illuminant. Light to Solar Gain Ratio vs Total Solar Infrared Energy Transmittance Certain types of window glass are able to reduce solar heat gain while allowing a good amount of visible light to pass through. In the U.S., the light-to-solar-gain (LSG) ratio is used to describe such spectral selective characteristics of window glass products. LSG is defined as a ratio between VT and SHGC. High LSG indicates the ability to block solar heat energy but transmit visible light. Although this parameter is widely acknowledged in the window glass industry in North America, Europe, and Australia, it is not officially defined in any of the industry standards. The window glass industry in China has been using a different parameter to describe the spectral selective characteristics of window glass products, the total solar infrared energy transmittance (gir) factor. This factor describes the solar energy transmittance performance of window glass at near infrared band of solar spectrum. Currently, standard makers in China are adding the gir factor into some of the calculation standards. Members of the window glass working group have provided several comments regarding LSG and gir factor. First, while both gir and LSG describe spectral selective characteristics of window glass products, the use of LSG could save efforts by manufacturers and testing laboratories because it is a simple calculation of two already simulated parameters, while the use of gir would require additional simulation process. Second, the working group members addressed that gir factor should never be used alone to describe product energy performance, particularly that some manufacturers might falsely use it to advertise the energy feature of their products. Instead, the gir factor should only be a supplementary to the g-factor or SHGC, which is the parameter describing the true energy savings. Third, the members also mentioned the need of transition from 12

29 SC to g-factor (i.e. SHGC) in the adoption of gir factor (i.e. the g-factor at near infrared band) to ensure consistency in parameters and avoid confusion to the industry and end-users. Lighting: LED Lighting Product Certification LED lighting products in buildings are growing rapidly as costs have dropped. They are now common in new constructions, retrofits, and the consumer market. Therefore, transparent and accurate product information helps building designers and consumers to select the energy-efficient lighting products. Certification could assist consumers with purchasing energy-efficient products and increase the market uptake of these products. Comparison certification of product performance metrics provides assurance of product properties and enables consumers to understand the product quality from product label and make comparisons among all kinds of products, while endorsement certification of energy-efficient products directly indicates products with better energy performance. However, it is important to make sure metrics labels reflect the true product quality and that certified products are indeed energy-efficient. This requires a comprehensive design of a robust standard, testing, certification, and labeling system involving all necessary stakeholder groups (Figure 1). This section introduces and compares the two types of certification programs on LED lighting products in the U.S. and China and summarizes some of the key features that could contribute to the programs success. Product Testing Product testing, which distinguishes the performance characteristics of a product, is essential in any certification program. In order to ensure that testing accurately reflects a product s true performance, two prerequisites need to be fulfilled: 1) having robust testing standards and 2) maintaining high testing quality. Testing Standards in the U.S. and China The main metrics describing lighting product quality and energy related performance are light quantity (luminous flux), light quality (color), product efficiency, and product reliability (lumen maintenance or lifetime). Table 5 lists some of the main testing standards for the measurement of the above-mentioned metrics of LED modules (i.e. light sources) and LED luminaires in the U.S. and China. The standards developed by U.S.-domiciled standards development organizations listed in Table 5 are all developed by the Illuminating Engineering Society North America (IESNA). Other U.S. organizations that also develop testing/measurement standards for lighting products include the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), which develops design and testing standards of product performance, and the Underwriter Laboratories (UL), which provides standards to test electrical safety. Based on the standards in Table 5, the U.S. Department of Energy has developed a uniform test method for integrated LED lamps and non-integrated LED lamps that are classified as general services lamps. DOE developed the test method under the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products, which is a federal regulatory program complying 13

30 with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of This Federal test method references the industry standards in Table 5 with modifications (Code of Federal Regulations, 2016). The listed Chinese standards are all developed by LED lighting industry experts and administered by SAC. More details about standards and standard comparisons can be found in Appendix E. Table 5. Existing LED lighting testing standards of photometric performance, reliability, and lifetime projection in the U.S. and China Orange indicates standards for LED modules and green indicates standards for LED lamps or luminaires. U.S. China Standard Issuer Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) SAC Electrical and photometric Lumen maintenance and lifetime LM Approved Method for the Electrical and Photometric Measurements of Solid-State Lighting Products LM Approved Method for Measuring Lumen Maintenance of LED Light Sources TM Projecting Long Term Lumen Maintenance of LED Light Sources LM Measuring Luminous Flux and Color Maintenance of LED Lamps, Light Engines, and Luminaires TM Projecting Long Term Luminous Flux Maintenance of LED Lamps and Luminaires GB/T Measurement methods of LED modules for general lighting GB/T Measurement methods of performance for LED downlights GB/T Test methods of performance of selfballasted LED reflector lamps GB/T Reliability test methods for LED luminaires GB/T Accelerated test method of luminous flux depreciation for LED lighting products Accreditation of Testing Laboratory With robust testing standards in place, it is then necessary to make sure standards are followed strictly and testing is performed accurately so that the testing quality can be guaranteed. Accreditation of testing laboratories by an independent professional accreditation organization could confirm a laboratory s ability to perform testing, follow certain testing standards, and present accurate testing results and reports. This is crucial in product certification since it helps ensure the credibility of the certification program. 14

31 In the U.S., the Federal test procedure established by DOE requires the testing laboratories to be accredited by an accreditation body that is a signatory member to the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition Arrangement (ILAC-MRA). One of the qualified accreditation programs for LED product testing laboratories is the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP), which accredits laboratories with the ability to perform electrical, photometric, and reliability testing. Another program, the Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program, although not an accreditation program, recognizes laboratories with the ability to perform in situ temperature test (ISTMT)- a parameter used for product lifetime projection. The accreditation/recognition process of the two programs is similar. Particularly, they both require on-site assessment to investigate laboratory facility, equipment, and testing procedures following the applicable standards. Moreover, they both provide postaccreditation/recognition supervision to the testing laboratories through on-site assessment or audits. One difference is that NVLAP requires proficiency testing, which helps to determine the competence and the effectiveness of the management system of a testing laboratory. The Certification and Accreditation Administration of China (CNCA) supervises the accreditation and certification system in China. In addition to its supervision role, CNCA also administers the China Inspection Body and Laboratory Mandatory Approval program and issues the China Metrology Accreditation (CMA). The CMA certificate is a mandatory inspection and testing market access requirement for any third-party testing laboratories and inspection bodies in China, which complies with the Article 22 of the Metrology Law of China 5. Moreover, CNCA established proficiency testing program for testing laboratories. Laboratories who have participated in proficiency testing and passed could skip on-site assessment when applying for CMA certification for the same testing scope within a certain timeframe. Laboratories who failed in proficiency testing need to rectify and reform and their accreditation certificate might be suspended. The China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS), the national accreditation body established and authorized by CNCA, is a signatory member to ILAC-MRA. Unlike CNCA that only targets third-party laboratories or inspection bodies, CNAS on the other hand provides voluntary accreditation to all kinds of certification bodies, testing laboratories, and inspection bodies in China, not limited to third parties. 5 Article 22 of the Metrology Law of China 5 requires that testing laboratories and inspection bodies who provide notarial data of product quality must be investigated for its capability and reliability by a metrological administrative department at above provincial level (CNCA, 2012) 15

32 Table 6. Accreditation/Recognition programs for LED products testing laboratories in the U.S. and China National Voluntary Nationally China Metrology Laboratory Recognized CNAS Program Accreditation Accreditation Testing Laboratory Accreditation (CMA) Program (NVLAP) (NRTL) Administrator National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) part of the U.S. Department of Commerce ILAC MRA Signatory Postrecognition Monitoring Term of Validity Database of Approved Labs Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) part of the U.S. Department of Labor Certification and Accreditation Administration of China (CNCA) Yes No No Yes On-site assessment every two year after the initial visit Each certificate is assigned with a term of validity Annual on-site audits; office audits; unscheduled or special audits Initial recognition valid for 5 years N/A Each certificate is assigned with a term of validity China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS) part of CNCA Scheduled and unscheduled audit; reassessment every 2 years 6 years Yes Yes Yes Yes The U.S. and Chinese programs are similar in the accreditation process and assessments. The difference between the U.S. and Chinese programs is that the U.S. accreditation programs have clear linkage with testing standards. The two U.S. programs both clearly list out the testing standards that are covered for each type of testing products. In contrast, the two Chinese accreditation programs do not specify testing standards that could be accredited under the program. This might cause confusion and extra efforts in product certification process as manufacturers would not necessarily know which testing laboratories are accredited for what kinds of testing abilities; particularly, whether the laboratories are able to follow certain testing standards for the testing of performance metrics that are required to be evaluated under the certification programs. Comparison Certification Programs in the U.S. and China Labeling of product performance metrics is a way to demonstrate compliance with standards to which a product has been tested and meanwhile, it makes the information of product quality more transparent to consumers and helps consumers purchase more wisely. Comparison certification program determines whether product information is considered valid to be put on the product label. Table 7 lists the programs in the U.S. and China. The two programs in the U.S. are the Lighting Facts established by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the LED Lighting Facts by DOE, 16

33 now run by D&R International. The Chinese labeling program is the China Energy Label (CEL) program. These three programs differ in many ways. Table 7. Comparison certification programs (of product performance metrics) for LED lighting products in the U.S. and China U.S. U.S. China Program Lighting Facts LED Lighting Facts China Energy Label (CEL) Administrator Governmentbacked Covered Products Mandatory/ Voluntary Product Information on Label Postcertification Verification Accreditation of Testing Laboratory Product Database Federal Trade Commission (FTC) D&R International China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) Yes Yes Yes General services lamps (light bulb) with medium screw bases General solid-state lighting (SSL) products Non-directional selfballasted LED lamps for general lighting services Mandatory Voluntary Mandatory - Light output - Estimated annual energy cost - Life expectancy - Correlated color temperature (CCT) - Average initial wattage - Design voltage - Mercury - Lumens - Watts - Efficacy - Color rendering index (CRI) - CCT - Lumen maintenance (optional) - Warranty (optional) - Efficiency grade - Initial luminous efficacy - Power - Light color No Yes No Required Required Testing by an accredited testing laboratory or manufacturer s own lab 6 Yes 7 Yes 8 Yes 6 Manufacturer s own laboratory are not necessarily accredited but need to show proofing materials of testing abilities and compliance with testing standards. 7 For the FTC program, once the product compliance form is submitted to DOE s CCMS, it would be publicly available on the DOE s Compliance Certification Database site. 8 The LED Lighting Facts program lists all product information and performance metrics on its Products webpage. This webpage also provides a comparison feature that allows a user to compare different products of his/her own choice to assist the user to find the product with desired quality. 17

34 Under the Energy Labeling Rule of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the U.S. FTC established the Lighting Facts program in The FTC Lighting Facts label is a mandatory label for most general services lamps (light bulbs) with medium screw bases 9 to be sold on the market (FTC, 2017). The aim of this program is to assist consumers to choose the right lighting products through information display. Manufacturers do not need to get FTC pre-approval to label and sell the labeled products, but they need to comply with all the rules and requirements under the program, including testing requirements and reporting requirements. Figure 3. An example of FTC Lighting Facts label Left: front label on the product; right: side or back label on the product The LED Lighting Facts program, developed by the U.S. DOE, is a voluntary certification and labeling program run by D&R International. While the Lighting Facts label by FTC covers only lamp products but different lighting technologies (incandescent, CFL, LED), the LED Lighting Facts covers general illumination, white-light SSL products but only LED lighting technology. Figure 4. An example of LED Lighting Facts label 9 Products include most incandescent, compact fluorescent (CFL) and light-emitting diode (LED) light bulbs. 18

35 The China Energy Label (CEL) serves a similar function to the FTC Lighting Facts program. It is a mandatory label for covered products to be sold in the Chinese market. However, the CEL program is different from the FTC program in many ways. First, CEL has a much narrower product coverage. The one and only LED lighting product for building use covered under the CEL program is the non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp for general lighting services. Second, product information on the label is different between the two programs. While the FTC label provides five required product metrics (Figure 3), the CEL provides information of three performance metrics: initial luminous efficacy, power, and light color (Figure 5). Additionally, the CEL provides an efficiency grade for the product: grade 1 represents low energy consumption, grade 2 as medium, and grade 3 as high. The efficiency grade of LED lamp is determined based on product s initial luminous efficacy. Third, unlike FTC that does not pre-approves the use of the label, the CEL program requires manufacturers to complete online application with manufacturer and product information as well as product testing reports. The China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) reviews the submitted materials and approves the use of CEL if meeting program requirements. Figure 5. An example of China Energy Label of non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp The product certification and label of all the three programs is based on testing results. DOE sets all the testing, rules, and procedures for the two U.S. programs (Code of Federal Regulations, 2016). The testing procedures clearly refer to the standards that should be followed for testing each of the metrics on the label. The CEL program similarly refers to multiple Chinese national standards for product testing and efficiency grade evaluation. The two U.S. certification programs also strictly require that product testing must be conducted by an accredited testing laboratory. The CEL program, on the other hand, allows products to be tested either at an accredited third-party laboratory or at manufacturer s own testing laboratory, which is not necessarily accredited. One approach that effectively helps ensure true product quality and maintain a high level of confidence in consumers is verification of labeled information. The LED Lighting Facts takes such 19

36 an approach: all approved products are subject to verification testing. The program selects a product for testing, which shall be purchased by an independent procurement agent directly from retailers to reflect true product performance in the market (Figure 6). Purchased products are sent to and tested by an accredited independent testing laboratory. Testing results are then reported back to the LED Lighting Facts program and the information is updated on the program webpage. Such a post-market verification testing assures consumers the accurate description of product quality. Figure 6. Verification testing process under the LED Lighting Facts Endorsement Certification Programs in the U.S. and China While comparison certification program with detailed labeling of product metrics helps consumers to understand product quality and compares products, endorsement certification of an energyefficient product can further enable consumers to easily identify products with superior energy performance and thus, market uptake of high-performance products is likely to increase. Certification program of energy-efficient LED lighting products exists in both the U.S. and China (Table 8). The two programs in the U.S. are the Energy Star and the SSL Qualified Product List (QPL). The Chinese certification program of energy-efficient LED lighting product is the China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program. 20

37 Table 8. Endorsement certification programs for energy-efficient LED lighting products in U.S. and China U.S. U.S. China Program Name Administrator Energy Star Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) SSL Qualified Product List (QPL) DesignLights Consortium (DLC) China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) China Quality Certification Centre (CQC) Government-backed Yes No 10 Yes Covered Products Light lamp (bulb) and light luminaire (fixture) Commercial LED lamp and luminaire not covered by Energy Star Certain types of LED lamp and luminaire 11 Mandatory/Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Label Energy Star logo DLC QPL logo Energy Conservation Certification logo Term of Validity N/A N/A 4 years Accreditation Requirement Online Certified Product Data Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes No 12 Energy Star, established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992, is a symbol for energy efficiency. Lighting is one of the product categories that are covered under the Energy Star program. This program covers both LED lamps and LED luminaires, but mainly focuses on consumer/residential products with a small coverage of commercial products. The SSL Qualified Product List (QPL) program established by the DesignLights Consortium (DLC), a non-profit organization, also certifies energy-efficient LED lighting products. The DLC QPL program differentiates from Energy Star in product coverage in that DLC only certifies commercial LED lighting products that are not covered by Energy Star. In other words, one product can only be 10 DLC is a non-profit organization. 11 For building use LED products, the covered lamps are self-ballasted LED reflector lamps, non-directional selfballasted LED lamps for general lighting services, and double-capped LED lamps designed to retrofit linear fluorescent lamps. Covered luminaire is LED down lights. 12 Although CQC does not host an online product directory, CQC does post announcements about certified manufacturer and products periodically. 21

38 certified under either Energy Star or DLC, not both. Both Energy Star and DLC QPL certified products could participate in regional, state, and utility incentive programs. The China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program, administered by the China Quality Certification Centre (CQC), is a government-backed program in China. Compared to the two U.S. certification programs, the CECC program covers a smaller range of LED products for building use. Similarities exist among the three certification programs. First, they are all voluntary. Second, the general certification process is similar in that a manufacturer submits an application with manufacturer and product information as well as product testing reports of required testing metrics. If the products are certified because they meet minimum energy performance, the program logo could be put on the products as a certificate of energy efficiency. Third, they all provide detailed testing requirements, which specify testing metrics and testing standards that must be followed for each metrics. Nonetheless, there are many differences among the three programs. First, the QPL and CECC programs are self-certified, meaning that the program administrators reviews the application and certifies the product. In contrast, the Energy Star program is not self-certification; instead, an accredited, third-party certification body reviews the application and certifies whether the product meets program requirements and product performance criteria (Figure 7). Figure 7. Energy Star certification process 22

39 Second, the two U.S. programs require products to be tested by an accredited testing laboratory following the required industry testing standards or the federal test procedure for LED lamps, while such specification is lacking in the CECC program. Moreover, under the U.S. programs, manufacturers have the flexibility to choose testing laboratories themselves. In contrast, the administrator of the CECC program, CQC, appoints a testing laboratory to perform product testing instead of allowing manufacturers to make their own choice. However, it is not clear how CQC selects the testing lab in different cases. Third, Energy Star requires post-market verification testing every year in order to maintain consumer confidence in the Energy Star label. For the verification testing, the partner certification bodies select products from the certified product list to be tested 13 ; obtain the products have them tested by an accredited independent laboratory; and report to Energy Star whether the tested products meet program requirements and performance criteria. The CECC program also requires verification through annual sample testing. The difference is that each of the certified products shall be tested annually under CECC while a sampling of certified products needs to undergo verification testing under Energy Star. Lastly, the U.S. certification programs have strong coordination and linkages in product coverage and testing. The coordination between the two endorsement certification programs (Energy Star and DLC) is that there is no overlap in the product coverage, which avoids wasted efforts of double certification and avoids confusion of different certificates by the consumers. The linkage between comparison certification programs and endorsement certification programs in the U.S. is that some of the testing reports can work for multiple programs since the testing metrics and requirements are more or less the same. For example, lamps included in these programs must be tested according to the federal test procedures by DOE. Also, if a manufacturer already has the LM-79 testing reports by an accredited testing laboratory for comparison certification (e.g. LED Lighting Facts), it could submit the same report for endorsement certification (e.g. Energy Star) as long as meeting program requirements. Moreover, some of the verification testing reports under Energy Star could also work for the verification testing in LED Lighting Facts as long as the requirements are the same in order to eliminate duplicate testing efforts and costs. Whereas in China, the CEL and CECC programs are not well linked because 1) the required testing metrics are not consistent as CECC requires a lot more metrics than CEL and 2) testing requirements are different; for instance, CEL allows manufacturers to choose testing labs while CECC appoints testing labs. This means that products would have to go through two different sets of product testing in China to get product a performance label and to be certified as energy-efficient product. Additional Verification Testing Program In addition to the with-in certification program verification testing, the U.S. Department of Energy has established an independent verification testing program for LED lighting products, the SSL 13 Selection of products for verification is through product nomination as well as random selection. 23

40 Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting (CALiPER) program. The goal of the CALiPER program is to provide accurate and comparable data on LED products by arranging for reliable independent testing and data reporting of commercially available products (DOE, 2018d). This program tests SSL products with the goals of 1) providing objective information on products to the public, 2) supporting the development and refinement of testing standards, methods, and procedures, and 3) supporting planning for research and development (R&D) and market development activities (DOE, 2018a). The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), by operating a nationally accredited lighting test laboratory, leads the work under the CALiPER program through product testing and reporting. In general, the CALiPER program selects products that could represent the SSL market; purchases products from the market; and tests these products at accredited testing laboratories following the industry standards. To provide objective product information to the public, the CALiPER program ensures that the testing results are verifiable in several ways. First, tests are usually conducted with two or more samples to account for variability in product. Second, the CALiPER program adopts round-robin tests that the same product is tested by two or more testing laboratories to account for variability among laboratories. The testing results are also compared to data from certification programs in the U.S., including the LED Lighting Facts, Energy Star, and DLC. The program shares its testing results, summaries, and analyses with the public in the format of report, webinar, videos, and presentations (DOE, 2018b). Moreover, the CALiPER program clearly specifies that the testing results are only for public interest and cannot be used for commercial purpose, such as advertising and product promotion. Such an independent program by providing unbiased testing results could help build consumer confidence in LED products on the market. In addition to providing objective product information through verification testing, the CALiPER program also supports the standard development and R&D with testing results. Particularly, product testing conducted under the CALiPER program is also used to identify the needs for standard refinement and development (DOE, 2018c). Testing results are also used to understand the features and potential technology developments and improvements of lighting products 14. Thus, there is a feedback loop between standard setting, testing, validation, and the market which improves the overall process. Recommendations for Roadmap Based on the gap analysis and feedback from the two working groups, the research team developed recommendations for a roadmap on a national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. In this section, we first summarize the key factors that ensure 14 The CALiPER program conducts benchmarking testing of other lighting sources, such as halogen or CFL. This enables the comparison of LED lighting with other lighting technologies to understand the development and market trend of the lighting industry, identify potential issues in LED products, and plan for future R&D activities. 24

41 the success of the system based on the analysis of the two product case studies; then, we provide detailed recommendations of steps that could be taken in different time frames for the standardization of window glass products and improvement of LED lighting product certification programs. Lastly, we outline a roadmap that could be applied broadly to a national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. Key Factors for Success By analyzing the two examples of window glass testing standards and LED lighting product certification, the research team identifies four key factors that are vital for the success of a robust standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. The four factors are (1) greater coordination and alignment; (2) robust testing and certification; (3) better information; and (4) supporting programs. Several approaches that could help fulfill each factor are also proposed. Table 9 provides a summary of the four factors and associated approaches. Table 9. Four key factors for success in developing a green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system Factor Approach Greater coordination and alignment Robust testing (simulation and physical testing) and certification Better information Supporting programs Greater alignment and consistency among testing standards could help streamline the certification process Greater coordination and linkage among different components of the system could help smooth the certification process, be more cost effective, and accelerate the industry overall development Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and certification body could ensure the integrity and quality of product rating Verification testing (either within the certification program or an independent program) could add another level of assurance in product performance and enhance consumer confidence in the product label or certification Third-party certification could help ensure certification program integrity Information transparency could help engage manufacturers in product certification, smooth the testing and certification process, and build consumer confidence Product database could be used to support the overall development of the industry Supportive policies, such as building codes and incentive schemes, could help promote product certification and the use of certified products Capacity building among consumers is necessary for the system to realize its true value 25

42 I. Greater coordination and alignment 1. Standards Greater alignment and consistency among testing standards could help streamline the certification process. In the U.S., different testing standards might cross-reference each other but do not overlap. In China, however, standards tend to overlap even in the same category of products (Staniszewski, et al., 2017b). This might cause confusion to manufacturers and testing laboratories, and would cost more since manufacturers and testing laboratories might have to test to multiple standards for a single metric (Figure 8 as an example). Overlap in standards is also costly to standard makers and certification program rule makers when maintaining multiple overlapping standards. Furthermore, consistency of metrics among testing standards could also be enhanced in China (e.g. the use of shading coefficient vs. solar heat gain coefficient for window glass products). In addition, since window standards and glass standards are overseeing by different ministries (MOHURD and SAC) in China, the collaborations and coordination between the two ministries are crucial as window and glass are closely related. 8a. Certification of LED luminaire under the Energy Star 26

43 8b. Certification of LED downlights under the China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program Figure 8. An illustration of the levels of rules and standards that a manufacturer or a testing laboratory needs to go through in the U.S. and Chinese programs 2. Components of the system Greater coordination and linkage among different components within the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system could help smooth the certification process, be more cost effective, and accelerate the overall industry development. The U.S. programs provide clear descriptions of the responsibilities by each stakeholder group and provide resources to connect stakeholder groups. For example, the U.S. certification programs are well linked with standard and testing by providing (1) a list of testing standards required for certification of a specific performance metrics of a certain product; (2) information of partner testing laboratories that are accredited for testing following certain testing standards; and (3) information of accreditation programs to assist testing laboratories and certification bodies to get accreditation. The U.S. accreditation programs also clearly list the testing standards that are within the scope of the program. This helps each stakeholder group have a holistic picture of the certification process by understanding each other s responsibilities and the necessary testing standards associated with each program, making the process smoother. Moreover, the certification programs themselves are well linked by having similar testing requirements and allowing the mutual use of testing reports among programs. This saves manufacturers efforts and time in familiarizing different programs, obtaining required testing reports, and being certified and labeled. However, the linkage among different components within the system is relatively weak in China. II. Robust testing and certification 1. Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and certification body Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratories by an independent professional accreditation organization could confirm a laboratory s ability to perform testing, follow certain testing standards, and present accurate testing results and reports. Members of the working groups especially addressed that the ability of the personnel who conducts testing 27

44 should be ensured. Proficiency testing, which is also called inter-laboratory comparison, could also help ensure the integrity and quality of testing results. Accreditation of a certification body also helps ensure the integrity and credibility of product certification. Certification programs in China could strengthen the accreditation requirements. 2. Verification testing Verification testing, either within-certification program or an independent program like CALiPER, could add another level of assurance in product performance and enhance consumer confidence in a product label. The CECC program in China takes a similar approach by requiring post-certification monitoring of each single certified product and manufacturer s factory. This approach is more stringent than random sampling done by the U.S. programs. However, this might only be feasible when the amount of certified products is relatively small. If product category expands and number of certified products increases, it might be too costly and a verification testing of randomly selected products might be more suitable. In addition, when conducting verification testing, obtaining testing samples through a normal market channel, such as a retailer instead of the manufacturer, could better reflect the true product quality in the market. An independent verification testing program, which China is currently lacking, could also help quality assurance of products on the market. 3. Third-party certification Third-party certification could help ensure certification program integrity. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that self-certification by the program administrator instead of a third-part certification body is subject to fraud and abuse (GAO, 2010). Specifically, 75% of the bogus products developed by GAO successfully obtained Energy Star certifications (GAO, 2010). To solve this problem, EPA reshaped the Energy Star program by implementing a third-party certification system starting in 2011 (Energy Star, 2018). III. Better information 1. Transparency Information transparency could help engage manufacturers in product certification, smooth the testing and certification process, and build consumer confidence. Reviewing both U.S. and Chinese programs, the research team found that the U.S. programs tend to provide clear and detailed program descriptions, rules, requirements, and guidelines, which are lacking in the Chinese programs. Making program information publicly available is crucial to gaining stakeholder buy-in. 2. Database A product database could help support the overall development of the industry. A comprehensive database of product information could record product performance and market trends. This enables the understanding of the evolving technology and helps with next-generation development planning. The certification programs in China could strengthen the maintenance of a product database and allow for data access and analysis from the industry. IV. Supporting programs 1. Supportive policies 28

45 Supportive policies are necessary to promote product certification and the use of certified products. One example is to link building codes with certification by explicitly requiring the use of certified building products under certain certification programs in the building codes. Currently in China, the building codes require developers to send products for testing at local testing laboratories. These local testing laboratories are not necessarily accredited and might be insufficient in testing capability, particularly those in remote and small towns. Linking building codes with a national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system brings benefits from three folds: (1) ensures the quality of product testing; (2) cost-effective so developers do not need to go through the testing process themselves, but rather purchase certified building products directly; and (3) promotes product certification. In addition, establishing incentive programs for product certification could greatly motivate industry to participate in certification work, which in turn promotes highperformance products in the market. 2. Capacity building program Capacity building among consumers is necessary. Ensuring the quality of a product label and certification is one thing; whether consumers are able to understand what the label and certification means and make informed decisions as the programs intended is another thing. A U.S. study indicates that most of the general consumers cannot fully understand the information on the Lighting Facts label (Nevius, et al., 2012). Therefore, in order to achieve the ultimate goal of a standard, testing, certification, and labeling system, which is to assist consumer purchasing process with useful information, capacity building among consumers is vital. In the U.S., Energy Star provides different kinds of educational materials, such as case studies, cost saving calculators, and purchasing guidance to help consumers understand the importance of energy efficiency and assist them in choosing and purchasing green products. Nonetheless, the working groups emphasized the need of additional capacity building programs and approaches in both the U.S. and China. Recommendations for Two Case Studies In this section, we provide detailed recommendations of activities that should be prioritized for the standardization of window glass products (Table 10) and improvement of LED lighting product certification programs (Table 11). For each activity, we also estimate a feasible timeline for completion. Prioritization and timeline is set based on our own analysis and stakeholder inputs. 29

46 Table 10. Recommendations for standardization and measurement of window glass products in China Gap Recommendations Priority Time for Completion Government Support Stakeholder Involvement Insufficient linkage between measurement standards, certification programs, and building energy policies Develop a clear system to better link measurement standards with the evaluation of product energy performance under certification programs and testing requirements in building codes. This could start with revision to building acceptance code. High priority 2 4 years Agencies that oversee the standards, certification programs, and building codes shall coordinate, plan, organize, and supervise the system development. Standard markers, administrators of certification programs shall provide technical support. Insufficient transparency of measurement process and standardization of the testing and simulation process Boundary conditions might not be representative of climate in China Provide more open resources about simulation of window glass products, including manuals of simulation software and relevant databases. Also consider participating in international glazing and shading database. Revise the boundary conditions in the JGJ/T standard and consequently, simulation software to fit better with climate in China. This enables the simulation of real product energy performance in China. High priority Medium priority Ongoing 3 5 years Agencies that oversee the standard development, certification program, simulation software and database shall supervise the work. Agencies that oversee the standardization process and software development work shall organize and supervise the revision. Standard makers, software developers, program administrators, and industry experts shall provide technical support to the work. Standard makers, software developers, and industry experts shall provide technical support. 30

47 The use of shading coefficient (SC) instead of solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) or g-factor Areas that are lacking standards Replace SC with SHGC in relevant standards, including measurement, certification standards and building energy codes to ensure consistency in produce performance metrics. Such replacement is needed when adopting the g-factor at near infrared band (gir) to avoid confusion among the industry and end-users. Moreover, it enables the alignment with other countries, including the U.S. Identify areas that need development of additional standards by taking inputs from the industry. Such areas include window films and window attachments, such as shading devices. The development of measurement standards happens first, then followed by the revision of certification standards and building energy codes accordingly. Medium priority Medium priority ~ 3 years Ongoing Agencies that oversee the standardization process (including measurement standards, certification standards and building energy codes) shall organize and supervise the revision. Agencies that oversee the standardization process (including measurement standards, certification standards and building energy codes) shall organize the review process and make decisions in new standard development. Standard makers and industry experts shall provide technical support to the revision. Industry associations shall provide feedback about needed standards. Standard makers and industry experts shall provide technical support in development of new standards. Simulation of solar and visible transmittance at the glazing area is using methodologies partially from ISO 9050 and partially from ISO Revise the methodology in the measurement standard (JGJ/T ) and consequently, simulation software to better align with ISO 15099, which avoids confusion to the industry and enables better alignment with other countries. Medium priority ~ 3 years Agencies that oversee the standardization process (measurement standard) and software development work shall organize and supervise the revision. Standard makers, software developers, and industry experts shall provide technical support to the revision. 31

48 Table 11. Recommendations for certification of LED lighting products in China Time for Gap Recommendations Priority Completion Insufficient practices to maintain the integrity and credibility of certification Weak coordination and linkage among different components in the system Weak or unclear requirements for testing laboratories Reshape the certification programs from self-certification to third-party certification. Introduce an independent verification testing program (like CALiPER). Different components of the system (standard, accreditation, and certification) could cross-reference each other and each could provide clearer guidelines and resources for stakeholders to get a holistic picture of product certification. The two types of certification programs could be consistent in program requirements, product categories, and certification process. Revise the program requirements and provide clear guidelines to require testing at accredited third-party testing laboratories explicitly. High priority High priority High priority 1 2 years ~ 2 years < 1 year Government Support Agencies that oversee the certification programs shall supervise reshaping the certification program. Decision makers shall plan, organize, and supervise the design and operation of the verification testing program. Agencies that oversee different components (standard, accreditation, and certification) of the system shall collaborate and organize the coordination work. Agencies that oversee certification programs shall organize and supervise the revision. Stakeholder Involvement Certification program administrators and certification bodies shall coordinate in reshaping the program. Certification bodies, accreditation bodies, testing laboratories, and industry experts shall provide technical support and coordinate on the operation of verification program. Standard makers, testing laboratories, accreditation bodies, certification bodies, certification program administrators, and the LED lighting industry shall all participate in the coordination work. Program administrators shall revise requirements and guidelines. 32

49 Weak incentives for product certification Establish financial incentive programs to motivate product certification Medium priority 2 4 years Agencies shall plan and make rules of financial incentive for product certification. Industry experts, industry associations, and program administrators shall provide feedback and technical support. Product categories covered under certification programs are relatively narrow Expand product categories covered under certification programs Medium priority Ongoing Agencies that oversee the certification programs shall prioritize products, and plan and organize the expansion. Industry experts and industry associations shall provide feedback about product prioritization. Program administrators shall expand the program. 33

50 Roadmap for a National Green Building Product Certification System By building on the analysis and recommendations based on the two examples (standardization of window glass products and certification of LED lighting products), this section draws a roadmap with a broader implication in China. This roadmap is intended to be systems-based so that it could be applied to any kind of building products and certification programs not only featuring energy efficiency but other green metrics. It first introduces the roles of the key government agencies and institutions involved in the system and then rolls out the steps to be taken by the responsible parties to develop a comprehensive national green building product certification system. Institutional Roles Figure 9 demonstrates the key government agencies and institutions in the development of a national green building product certification system in China. We should note that the organizational chart of Figure 9 as well as the following descriptions are based on information retrieved in March As some of the ministries and institutions are under reorganization, information provided in this section might not be current. NDRC plays the role of formulating the national development plans, including economic restructuring and promoting sustainable development strategies. MOHURD regulates construction activities in China, including developing building codes, supervising the construction market, and promoting energy conservations in buildings. MOHURD oversees the China Green Building Evaluation Label program and the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program. MOHURD also oversees the testing requirements for building products required to show compliance with the building codes. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) is responsible for formulating the industrialization development in China, including promoting new materials and new technology and strategic planning for natural resources utilization and industrial energy conservation. MIIT, together with MOHURD, oversees the certification of green building materials (Green Building Materials Evaluation program) in China. The State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR, formerly AQSIQ 15 ) is in charge of national metrology, standardization, certification and accreditation, and commodity inspection. Directly subordinate to SAMR, the China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) is a public institution addressing standardization issues and it administers the China Energy Label program. Under SAMR, SAC supervises the standardization work while the Certification and Accreditation Administration of China (CNCA) oversees the certification and accreditation system. The China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS) under CNCA administers the accreditation programs. Qualified by CNCA and accredited by CNAS, the China Certification & Inspection Group (CCIC) is an independent third-party certification and inspection organization. The China Quality Certification Centre (CQC), which is the administrator and the certification body for the China Energy Conservation Certification program, is under CCIC. 15 AQSIQ stands for the Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine. 34

51 Figure 9. Key ministries and institutions in the work of green building product standardization, labeling, and certification. Coral is the ministry. Blue is the institution. Yellow is the comparison certification program; green is the endorsement certification program; and purple is the accreditation program The institutional chart is based on information retrieved in March At time of publication, the Chinese government is undergoing reorganization so the relationship and roles of the ministries and institutions may require further update. 35

52 Roadmap The development of a national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system for green building products requires coordination among different components and associated government agencies and stakeholders. Standards are the foundation of product testing and certification. Accreditation ensures the qualification of the testing laboratories and certification bodies, which in turn ensures the quality of product testing and the integrity of the certification program. Product certification ensures products perform as advertised; and labeling reflects product features and supports consumers purchasing process. The roadmap recommendations (Figure 10) developed by the research team with inputs from the working groups include broader cross-cutting activities for each component to realize a robust national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. In addition to the components within the system, developing supportive policies and programs is also necessary for the success of product certification, as policies and certification could support each other. A main area for improvement is to link building codes with the national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. With a robust system in place, the requirement of using certified building products in building codes could ensure the quality of product testing and thus ensure that product performance truly meets the requirements for building acceptance. Linking certification with building codes could also make the whole product testing process more efficient and streamlined. The development of supportive policies also requires detailed and thoughtful planning by decision makers with inter-agency collaboration. The roadmap recommendations we provide are high-level recommendations. In order to reach the goal of having a robust national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system in place, a more detailed action plan developed collaboratively by government agencies in China is necessary. 36

53 Figure 10. Linkage among components of the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system and between policies and the system 37

54 Conclusions Certification of green building products could enable consumers to understand product performance and easily identify products with superior performance; thus, accelerating the market uptake of green building products. This in turn will provide large economic and social benefits, including improved building energy efficiency and reduced emissions. China is currently making efforts to enhance the national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. This report analyzes the key components in the system using two case studies (standardization of window glass products and certification of LED lighting products). Based on the analyses, this report then provides recommendations for a roadmap on a national green building product certification system in China. Two major improvements that could be made to the existing certification system in China are (1) better linkages among different components and programs within the system, and (2) quality assurance. A robust national green building product system requires coordinated efforts from different parties related to product testing (standard and accreditation), certification, and labeling. Government agencies overseeing different components in China would need to work collaboratively to design a comprehensive and robust system, set program rules and regulations, effectively engage stakeholders in the development of the system, and encourage public participation in certification and promote high-performance building products in the market. Quality assurance is crucial and verification testing could help ensure the credibility of certification and increases consumer confidence in certified products. The Chinese government has already taken important first steps in developing a green building product certification system, including launching multiple certification programs and the issue of promoting and coordination guidelines. The recommendations in this report aim to provide guidance for the next steps in building a comprehensive and robust green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. 38

55 References CEL. (2016). CEL : Energy Efficiency Labeling Implementation Rule for Non-directional Selfballasted LED Lamp for General Lighting Services. Retrieved from 636_%E6%99%AE%E9%80%9A%E7%85%A7%E6%98%8E%E7%94%A8%E9%9D%9E%E5 %AE%9A%E5%90%91%E8%87%AA%E9%95%87%E6%B5%81LED%E7%81%AF%E8%83 %BD%E6%BA%90%E6%95%88%E7%8E%87%E6%A0%87%E8%AF%86 ChinaIRN. (2014). China Makes up 29 Percent of Global Insulation Material Market. Retrieved from CNAS. (2015). China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment. Retrieved from CNCA. (2012). Metrology Accreditation to testing laboratories and inspection bodies who provide notarial data of product quality. Retrieved from DOE. (2012). Life-Cycle Assessment of Energy and Environmental Impacts of LED Lighting Products. Retrieved from DOE. (2015). Chapter 5: Increasing Efficiency of Building Systems and Technologies. In An Assessment of Energy Technologies and Research Opportunities. Retrieved from DOE. (2018a). Frequently Asked Questions about the CALiPER Program. Retrieved from DOE. (2018b). CALiPER. Retrieved from DOE. (2018c). Standards Development Support. Retrieved from DOE. (2018d). CALiPER Testing Laboratories. Retrieved from DOE. (2018d). GATEWAY Evaluations. Retrieved from Ebanks, P.-G. (2014). A Comparison of the NFRC and CEN Thermal Transmittance Calculation Methods in North America's Eight Climate Zones. Retrieved from Energy Star. (2018). EPA Ensures Energy Star Program Integrity. Retrieved 2018, from Freedonia Group. (2011). Windows and Doors in China: Industry Study with Forecasts for FTC. (2017). The FTC "Lighting Facts" Label: Questions and Answers for Manufacturers. Retrieved from labels need to be approved by the FTC before they re placed on products? GAO. (2010). Energy Star Program: Covert Testing Shows the Energy Star Program Certification Process is Vulnerable to Fraud and Abuse. Retrieved from

56 Grand View Research. (2016). Insulation Market Analysis By Product (Fiberglass, Foamed Plastic, Mineral Wool), By Application (Residential Construction, Industrial, HVAC And OEM, Nonresidential Construction) And Segment Forecast To Gustavsen, A., Grynning, S., Arasteh, D., Jelle, B. P., & Goudey, H. (2011). Key Elements of and Material Performance Targets for Highly Insulating Window Frames. Energy and Buildings, 43(10), Hanam, B., Jaugelis, A., & Finch, G. (2014). Energy Performance of Windows: Navigating Northe American and European Window Standards. 14th Canadian Conference on Building Science and Technology. Toronto. Retrieved from OWS_NAVIGATING_NORTH_AMERICAN_AND_EUROPEAN_WINDOW_STANDARDS IEA. (2013). Technology Roadmap: Energy Efficient Building Envelopes. Retrieved from ntbuildingenvelopes.pdf IEA. (2015). Building Energy Use in China: Transforming Construction and Influence Consumption to Retrieved from dingenergy_web_final.pdf ISO. (2003). ISO 15099: Thermal Performance of Windows, Doors and Shading Devices - Detailed Calculations. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. LBNL. (2006). Window-Related Energy Consumption in the US Residential and Commercial Building Stock. Retrieved from McKinsey&Company. (2012). Lighting the Way: Perspectives on the Global Lighting Market. Retrieved from sembly/lighting_the_way_perspectives_on_global_lighting_market_2012.ashx MIIT. (2017). Guideline on Promoting Standards, Certification, and Labels for Green Building Materials and Products. Retrieved from MOGURD. (2012). 12th Five-Year Plan for Building Energy Efficiency. Retrieved from MOHURD. (2015). Action Plan of Promoting the Production and Application of Green Building Material. Retrieved from NDRC. (2017). Development Plan of the 13th FYP for Semiconductor Lighting Industry. Retrieved from Nevius, M., Browne, C., Trapp, K. v., & Murray, C. (2012). Consumer Understanding of Key Lighting Facts and Implications for Energy Savings. Retrieved from NFRC. (2017a). NFRC : Procedure for Determining Fenestration Product Solar Heat Gain Coefficient and Visible Transmittance at Normal Incidence. Greenbelt, MD: National Fenestration Rating Council. NFRC. (2017b). NFRC : Procedure for Interim Standard Test Method for Measuring the Solar Heat Gain Coefficient of Fenestration Systems Using Calorimetry Hot Box Methods. 40

57 NFRC. (2017b). THERM 7/WINDOW 7 NFRC Simulation Manual. Retrieved from SAC. (2017). GB/T : Reliability Test Methods for LED Luminaries. Staniszewski, A., Evans, M., Parker, L., & Yu, S. (2017a). Best Available Technologies in the U.S. Buildings Sector. Richland, Washington: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Retrieved from Staniszewski, A., Yu, S., Evans, M., Liu, T., Tan, Q., Shao, Z.,... Song, B. (2017b). Evaluating the Certification System of Green Building Materials in China. Retrieved from _China.pdf Yu, S., Eom, J., Evans, M., & Clarke, L. (2014). A long-term, integrated impact assessment of alternative building energy code scenarios in China. Energy Policy, 67, Yu, S., Evans, M., & Shi, Q. (2014). Analysis of the Chinese Market for Building Energy Efficiency. Richland, Washington: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Retrieved from 41

58 Appendix A: Product Prioritization Example The research team evaluated two criteria when prioritizing among four broad categories of building products: (1) energy savings potential and (2) market size of each product. These two criteria together determine the extent and the scale of a product s impact on building energy efficiency. The four product categories are: (1) fenestration, (2) wall/insulation, (3) HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning), and (4) lighting. The research team also consulted with relevant stakeholders, including policy makers and industry experts, for their interested product categories. For simplicity, data on energy savings potential are derived from previous analysis using Scout model, which provides energy savings percentage of certain energy conservation measures (ECMs) to the U.S. residential and commercial buildings (Staniszewski, et al., 2017a). These data provide a sense of energy savings potential by each product for the purpose of comparison. The research team referred to other studies for the projection of each product s market size in China in However, in order to do a thorough evaluation, Chinese policy makers could refer to other national or international models that are able to provide detailed analysis of product s energy savings potential and future market size in China. Last, the research team consulted with relevant stakeholders, including policy makers, manufacturers, and industry associations, to understand their interested areas. As mentioned earlier, a robust certification system cannot function without combined efforts from relevant stakeholders. Therefore, stakeholder buy-in is also a crucial factor to consider during the prioritization process. Table 12. Prioritization evaluation for four building product categories Fenestration Insulation HVAC Lighting Energy Savings Potential 17 Low-e glass Residential: 25% Commercial: 25% Interior insulation Residential: 58% Commercial: 73% Duct air leakage sealants Residential: 15% Commercial: 10% LED Lighting Residential: 72% Commercial: 32% Market Size in China in 2020 Stakeholder Interest ~$90 billion ( 570 billion) 18 ~$19.5 billion ( billion) 19 ~$44 billion ( 276 billion) 20 ~$25 billion ( 156 billion) 21 Window glass N/A N/A LED lighting 17 Previous analysis selected one specific product under each of the four broad product categories for the modeling of energy savings potential in the U.S. (Staniszewski, et al., 2017a). 18 Market size of doors and windows in China was 365 billion in 2014 with 7.7% annual growth rate (Freedonia Group, 2011). 19 The global insulation market will be $67.16 billion in 2020 (Grand View Research, 2016) and China makes up about 29% of it (ChinaIRN, 2014). 20 Market size of HVAC in China was 50 billion in 2011 with 20% growth rate (Yu, Evans, & Shi, 2014). 21 Source: (McKinsey&Company, 2012). 42

59 Interior insulation and light-emitting diode (LED) lighting showed greatest energy savings potential among the four products modeled. Fenestration products are likely to have a much greater market size in China in 2020, about the same as the combined market size of wall/insulation, HVAC, and lighting. The stakeholders that the research team has engaged with have expressed particular interests in fenestration and lighting. By looking at the three factors all together, fenestration and lighting products are prioritized. For this report the research team selected window glass and LED lighting products for detailed analysis, but this does not imply these products should be exclusively prioritized in China. The roadmap recommendations suggest conducting one s own prioritization exercise. 43

60 Appendix B: Members of the Working Groups The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) together with Chinese collaborators have organized two working groups to gain feedback from the industry. PNNL and the China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC) are co-organizing the window glass working group. PNNL and the China Solid State Lighting Alliance (CSA) are co-organizing the LED lighting working group. Members in the working groups include standard makers, researchers, manufacturers, testing laboratories, accreditation and certification bodies, industry associations, and experts in window glass and LED lighting industry. Following is a list of all the U.S. and Chinese members in the two working groups by alphabetic order. List of Members (Alphabetic Order) 3M American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA) Beihang University CESI (Guangzhou) Opto-Electronics Standard & Testing Institute Co., Ltd. China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) China Standard Conformity Assessment Co., Ltd. (CSCA) Cree Inc. CSG Holding Co., Ltd. (CSG) DesignLights Consortium (DLC) GIGA Guangdong Testing Institute of Products Quality Supervision Guangzhou LEDIA Lighting Co., Ltd. Honeywell (EnVision (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.) International Window Film Association (IWFA) KDX Optical Film Material Keystone Certifications, Inc. Kolbe Windows & Doors Lutron Electronics Co., Inc. Mackinac Technology Nanjing Fiberglass Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd. National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) Shenzhen Unilumin Technology Co., Ltd. Solatube CECEP Daylighting Technology Co., Ltd. State Key Laboratory of Solid-State Lighting Tospo Lighting Co., Ltd. U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Vitro Architectural Glass Xiamen Leedarson Lighting Co., Ltd. Xinyi Glass Holdings Limited 44

61 Appendix C: Window Standard Comparison: Thermal Transmittance Thermal transmittance, or U-factor, measures the heat gain/loss from fenestration product through conduction, convection, and radiation due to the interior and exterior temperature difference, without the effects of solar radiation. Thermal transmittance of a whole window product is estimated by area-weighted contributions from components of glass, frame, and glass edge. ISO standard provides two methods to treat frame and glass edge thermal indices. NFRC 100 series and JGJ/T follow the different methods. The overall U-factor in NFRC is an area-weighted average of the U-values of the glass center, the frame, the glass edge, the divider, and the divider edge. In contrast, JGJ/T considers the thermal transmittance of glass area and window frame and a linear thermal transmittance due to the interaction of the frame and the glass edge. These two methods differ in the way to treat frame and edge heat transfer at the corners (ISO, 2003). Similar to total solar transmittance, boundary conditions for the measurement of U-factor are different between U.S. and Chinese standards (Table 13). Therefore, with the different calculation methodology and different boundary conditions, the evaluation of thermal transmittance of the same product would be different by following U.S. or Chinese standards, which in turn affects the estimation of frame total solar energy transmittance mentioned in the report. Table 13. Boundary conditions for calculating U-factor in U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard NFRC 100 Series JGJ/T ISO Interior air temperature Tin 21 0 C 20 0 C 20 0 C Exterior temperature Tout C C 0 0 C Wind speed v 5.5m/s N/A N/A Heat transfer coefficient (Interior convective film coefficient) hc, in Heat transfer coefficient (Exterior convective film coefficient) hc, out W/m 2 K (Value depends on frame type and glass temperature) W/m 2 K Temperature dependent 26 W/m 2 K 8 W/m 2 K (12 W/m 2 K for glass edge and 16 W/m 2 K for glass center) 20 W/m 2 K, or calculated from wind speed Interior mean radiant T rm, in = T in T rm, in = T in T rm, in = T in temperature Trm, in Exterior mean radiant T rm, out = T out T rm, out = T out T rm, out = T out temperature Trm, out Solar radiation Is 0 W/m 2 0W/m 2 0W/m 2 45

62 Appendix D: U.S. and Chinese Certification Programs for Windows Comparison Certification Program Rating of Performance Metrics Labeling measured product metrics could be an effective way to utilize the testing results and provide transparent product information to the consumers. NFRC is the rating program for energyrelated performance of fenestration products in the U.S. A similar organization to NFRC in China is the Research Institute of Standards & Norms (RISN), which is managed and supervised by MOHURD. The China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program (CFEEPL) under RISN is similar to NFRC s rating program. The two U.S. and Chinese programs do not evaluate nor certify whether a product is energy-efficient or not; rather they certify energy performance of the product. Figure 11. Organizational chart of the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), adapted from NFRC 46

63 Figure 12. Organizational chart of the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program (CFEEPL), adapted from RISN The NFRC and the CFEEPL are similar in general. They evaluate and certify same performance metrics, except that NFRC allows for the optional labeling of condensation resistance performance. They both (1) require products to be tested and simulated at third-party accredited laboratories; (2) require the use of designated simulation software; (3) publish certified product information; and (4) develop testing protocols to guide users. The main difference between these two programs is that under the NFRC program, testing results are evaluated and certified by an independent certifier or inspection agency. Whereas under the CFEEPL, an expert group organized by RISN instead of independent certifier reviews the results and determines whether a certificate could be issued. 47

64 Table 14. Fenestration product energy performance rating program in the U.S. and China U.S. China Program Name Administrator Voluntary or Mandatory Label Contents NFRC Certified Energy Performance Ratings National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) Voluntary 1. Certificate number 2. Certificate date 3. Product description: frame and glazing material and type 4. Window energy performance: - U-factor - Air leakage (no differentiation of positive/negative pressures) - Solar heat gain coefficient - Visible transmittance - Condensation resistance (optional) China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling (CFEEPL) Research Institute of Standards & Norms (RISN) - under MOHURD Voluntary 1. Certificate number 2. Date of certification and expiration date 3. Product description: frame and glazing materials 4. Window energy performance: - K-value (equivalent to U- factor) - Air leakage (measurement under both positive and negative pressures) - Shading coefficient - Visible transmittance 5. Suitable region Validity 5 years 3 years Accreditation Requirement Yes Yes Simulation Software WINDOW and THERM (based on ISO 15099) MOC-I (based on JGJ/T ) Product Database Yes Yes Standard/ Guideline NFRC 100 to NFRC 900 series; Simulation manuals RISN-TG

65 Figure 13. Examples of NFRC and CFEEPL labels Endorsement Certification Program Energy-Efficient Products Endorsement certification program of energy-efficient window products exists in both the U.S. and China. These programs set product performance criteria and only those products that meet the criteria and comply with program requirements can be certified as an energy-efficient product. In other words, a product with an endorsement certificate tend to have superior energy performance. In the U.S., Energy Star, an endorsement certification program, is well connected with the NFRC rating program, a comparison certification program. Particularly, the fenestration products that are to be certified with Energy Star must have gone through the NFRC testing procedures and certification process. Moreover, the products must have gone through additional verification testing to ensure certified products are truly superior in energy performance. In China, two certification programs certify energy-efficient window products: (1) Green Building Materials Evaluation (GBME), administered by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD); and (2) China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC), administered by the China Quality Certification Centre (CQC). The GBME program is different from Energy Star and CECC in that it is a tiered evaluation from one to three stars and products with three stars are superior. In addition, GBME evaluates more than energy efficiency, but covers water conservation, environmental impacts, and resource efficiency, which is consistent with program s name of green building materials. 49

66 Table 15. Certification programs of energy-efficient building window products in the U.S. and China U.S. China China Program Name Administrator Governmentbacked Voluntary or Mandatory Evaluation Label Content Performance Criteria Accreditation Requirement Certified Product Data Energy Star Energy Protection Agency (EPA) Green Building Materials Evaluation Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (MOHURD) China Energy Conservation Certification China Quality Certification Centre (CQC) Yes Yes Yes Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary 1. Energy savings 2. Deliver the features and performance demanded by consumers 3. Increased energy efficiency through utility bill savings to recover their investment 4. Product energy consumption and performance can be measured and verified with testing 1. Energy Star logo 2. Applicable region 3. NFRC label Performance criteria for U-factor and SHGC differentiated in 4 climate zones 1. Three stars 2. Scoring tier system: low score as one star; middle as two stars; high as three stars. Total score of Five evaluation criteria - Energy conservation - Emission reduction - Safety - Convenience - Recyclable 4. Weighted scoring of each criteria Green Building Materials logo with star(s) - Three scores for performance of U- factor and visible transmittance differentiated in 4 climate zones - Thermal performance weighting as 30% among all variables Energy savings China Energy Conservation Certification logo - Air leakage - Insulation - Shading (visible transmittance, shading coefficient) - Differentiated in 5 climate zones Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes No 50

67 Appendix E: U.S. and Chinese Testing Standards for LED Lighting Products Standard Comparisons Lumen Maintenance and Lifetime Projection The research team compared the U.S. and Chinese testing standards and found that these two countries follow similar testing methods in general, although details do differ in certain ways. As mentioned in the report (Table 16), there is no standard of lumen maintenance testing and lifetime projection for LED modules in China (i.e. no equivalence to LM-80 and TM-21). The LED industry in China generally follows LM-80 and TM-21 for the testing of lumen maintenance and lifetime projection of LED light sources. Based on inputs from the LED lighting working group, lifetime projection of lumen maintenance is a hot topic in the LED industry recently. This section only compares the U.S. and Chinese industry standards from this aspect, i.e. comparing LM-84 and TM-28 with GB/T for LED lamp and luminaire products. It should be noted that the Federal test procedures for integrated LED lamps developed by DOE, although references LM- 84 and TM-28, are somewhat different from these two industry standards, particularly regarding the projection of lifetime (Code of Federal Regulations, 2016). Table 16. Comparison of general testing conditions between LM and GB/T LM GB/T Applicable Products Environmental Condition Electrical Condition LED lamps integrated or nonintegrated; LED light engines; LED luminaires - Ambient temperature at 25C 0 ±5 C 0 and be monitored - Relative humidity < 65% - No restriction of device selfinduced airflow; all other airflow shall be minimized - - Continuous rated input voltage by manufacturer specification - Power supply shall have a voltage waveshape that total harmonic distortion not exceed 3% of the fundamental - Input voltage be within 2% of the rated rms value and verified periodically by less then 3000 hours - Wiring be in accordance with electrical code and manufacturer recommendations Indoor and outdoor LED luminaires with voltage <1000v - Ambient temperature 25C 0 ±1 C 0 - Relative humidity < 65% - No airflow - Testing under the max rated voltage if manufacturer provides a range - Stability of power voltage and frequency shall be within ±0.5% - Allowed measurement error of lumen maintenance shall be within ±2% - Allowed measure error of voltage and frequency shall be within ±0.2% - Total harmonic distortion shall not exceed 3% 51

68 Lifetime Projection Methodology Comparisons The IES LM standard provides two methods of lifetime projection for LED lamps and luminaires: the Direct Extrapolation and the Combined Extrapolation (Table 18). The Direct Extrapolation shall be used when at least 6000 hours of LM-84 data are available. If the available LM-84 data are less than 6000 hours but are at least 3000 hours, the Combined Extrapolation could be used as long as at least 6000 hours of LM-80 data are also available. The GB/T standard also provides two methods of lifetime projection for LED luminaires: the 1000h Method and the Direct Method (Table 18). Figure 13 lists the decision points of which method to adopt. Figure 14. Flow chart to determine the use of 1000h Method or Direct Method (SAC, 2017) At decision point 6 from Figure 13, the product needs to go through a 1000h prequalification testing under certain conditions. Only if the product meets the criteria specified in Table 17 that the 1000h Method could be adopted; otherwise, the Direct Method should be used. Table h testing conditions and criteria (SAC, 2017) Claimed lifetime 25000h < Claimed 25000h lifetime 35000h Ambient Temperature and Relative Humidity 40C 0 ±2 C 0 65%±5% 50C 0 ±2 C 0 65%±5% 35000h < Claimed lifetime 50000h 60C 0 ±2 C 0 65%±5% Testing Time (h) Lumen Maintenance >93% >94% >95% Solder-point <5C 0 <5C 0 <5C 0 Temperature Change Input Power Change <3% <3% <3% Chromaticity Shift (Δu v ) (in consideration) (in consideration) (in consideration) 52

69 Table 18. Comparisons of LED lifetime projection methods between GB/T (China) and TM (U.S.) GB/T TM Method 1000h Method Direct Method Direct Extrapolation Combined Extrapolation LM-80 Data Yes No No Yes LM-84 Data No No Yes Yes Sample Size At least 3 At least 3 At least 5 Projection Temperature Manufacturer claimed working temperature ±2C 0 ; if multiple claims, test under the highest temperature claimed In-situ case temperature Testing Hours Testing Interval Data Needed h prequalification test - LM-80 data with at least 6000h testing - At least 6000h testing - At least 10000h for claimed lifetime > 50000h LM-80: 1000h h - The first 1000h: testing interval could be shorter LM-80 data: - Input current - LM80 testing temperature(s) - Lumen maintenance at each testing interval Other data: - Manufacturer claimed working temperature - Lumen maintenance at claimed lifetime - Degradation with time due to secondary optics material - Degradation due to heat dissipation structure - Lumen maintenance at each testing interval - Testing duration - Manufacturer claimed working temperature - Sample size LM-84 data with at least 6000h testing - LM-80 data with at least 6000h testing - LM-84 data with 3000h to 6000h testing LM-84: 1000h ± 48h - LM-84: 1000h ± 48h initial; 500h ± 48h after - LM-80: 1000h LM-84 data: - Tested ambient and case temperatures - Lumen maintenance at each testing interval - Sample size - Testing duration Other data: - In-situ temperature LM-84 and LM-80 data: - Tested ambient and case temperatures - Lumen maintenance at each testing interval - Sample size - Testing duration Other data: - In-situ temperature 53

70 Methodology 1. Product undergoes 1000h prequalification test and meets criteria (Table 17) 2. LM80: 6000h lumen maintenance L 1 - Product t t min from LM80, use LM h data as L 1 - If product t is in between LM80 testing temperatures, estimate L 1 at t by linear interpolation - Product t > t max from LM80, Direct Method 3. Minimum lumen maintenance L 1 at 6000h for claimed lifetime < 35000h; at 9000h if 35000h < claimed lifetime < 50000h - Variables for calculation: lumen maintenance at claimed lifetime; degradation due to secondary optics material; degradation due to heat dissipation structure Projection Result Pass/Fail condition 1. Normalization: data at each testing point shall be normalized to 0h 2. Arithmetic average: of normalized data from all samples 3. Least-squares curve fit - Test duration of 6000h: use data after 1000h - Test duration of h: use data during the last 5000h - Test duration > 10000h: use data in the second half period. If no data measured at the half point, the interval shall start from the data right before the half point - Fitting results: Projected initial constant (B); Φ(t) = Bexp(-αt) 4. Lifetime projection: - L p = 1 α ln (B p ) 5. Result adjustment: the max projected lifetime L p = t*x (Table 19) N/A - L p L p, L p - L p > L p, L p - L p < 0, L p Only when L 1 > L 1, the claimed lifetime can be accepted Manufacturer claimed lifetime cannot exceed projected lifetime 1. Normalization: normalize the light output to 1 at 0h for each sample in the dataset 2. Average normalized data of all samples 3. Least-squares curve fit - Test duration 6000h to 10000h: at least 5000h of data after the first 1000h shall be used - Test duration > 10000h: use data in the second half period. If no data measured at the half point, the interval shall start from the data right before the half point - Curve-fit: Φ(t) = Bexp(-αt) 4. Lifetime projection: - L p = 1 α ln (100 B p ) 5. Result adjustment: the max projected lifetime L p = t*x (Table 19) 6. Use the Arrhenius Equation to interpolate lifetime projection at insitu temperature - L p L p, L p - L p > L p, L p - L p < 0, L p N/A 1. Normalization: normalize LM84 data to 1 at 0h for each unit in the dataset 2. Average normalized LM84 data 3. Select LM80 data set at the same or closest higher T s (forward current) as in-situ T s (forward current) 4. Least-squares curve-fit of LM80 data 5. Claculate Δα using both LM84 and LM80 data - the next lower time point 6. Exponential projection: - Φ(t) = Β exp [ (α+δα) t] exp (b) 7. Lifetime projection: - L p = ln(100 B p ) b α+δα 8. Result adjustment: the max projected lifetime L p = t*x (Table 19) 9. Linear interpolation of lifetime projection at insitu temperature - L p L p, L p - L p > L p, L p - L p < 0, L p N/A 54

71 The lumen maintenance life projection results from GB/T Direct Method and the two TM methods are to be adjusted that the project lifetime cannot exceed a certain threshold. The threshold is determined by the testing time and a multiplication factor. If the projected lumen maintenance life is less or equal to the threshold, the projected value is valid. If the projected value is greater than the threshold or less than zero, the lifetime shall be the threshold value. Table 19 shows the multiplier to be used based sample size. Table 19. Multiplier x of different sample sizes to determine the maximum rated lumen maintenance life in both GB/T and TM GB/T Direct Method TM Direct Extrapolation TM Combined Extrapolation Sample Size Multiplier Sample Size Multiplier Sample Size Multiplier Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculators The Energy Star program in the U.S. has developed a TM-21 and a TM-28 Calculator, following the TM and TM standards, to support the LED industry to project LED module and luminaire lifetime based on LM-80 and LM-84 data. Figure 14 displays the look of the Calculator with input and output fields. The development of such a calculator tool following the right standard could help avoid any misinterpretation of the calculation methodology by the users and make the projection results more accurate and comparable. 55

72 Figure 15. Screenshots of Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculator Yellow fields are user inputs and blue fields are results. Input data shall be retrieved from LM-80 or LM-84 report and the In-Situ Temperature Measurement Test (ISTMT) report. 56