Voluntary WELS labelling No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected Mandatory WELS labelling Moderate savings All benefit from higher average efficiency; users benefit more No impact; no incentive to use label Can enhance competition by making efficiency a selling point Benefit from lower water demand; costs borne by purchasers Moderate; very inefficient products still on the market Rebates (assuming no WELS) Moderate savings Recipients benefit from rebate as well as from lower running costs Can influence if rebate rules allow No risk High; worse off if rebate scheme not cost-effective No effect Water warning labels (alone) Very little savings Minimal None No risk Benefit from lower water demand; costs borne by purchasers Moderate; very inefficient products still on the market Voluntary minimum WES No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected No change from status quo - no take-up expected Mandatory minimum WES: low level Some savings Do not need to be better off if minimum WES level meets criteria Influences all purchases, including these Very little risk Benefit from lower water demand; costs borne by purchasers High; very inefficient products excluded from market Mandatory minimum WES: higher level High savings Do not need to be better off if minimum WES level meets criteria Influences all purchases, including Some risk; levels need to be set carefully Benefit from lower water demand; costs borne by purchasers High; very inefficient products excluded from market Table S2. Summary of preferred options Product Method of test Rating method WELS labelling Washing mode minimum WES Drying mode minimum WES level Clothes washer; top loader No change No change No change SRI = 3.0 NA Clothes washer; front loader No change No change No change SRI = 3.0 NA
The most water-efficient model on the market now uses about 10 litres (0.78 litres per place setting) but there is still a wide range in water-efficiencies at each capacity level. (Table 16, Figure 17). Although some of the highest water users are ‘grandfathered’ registrations, which will all run out by March 2012, there are still a range of water efficiencies among the more recent registrations (Figure 18). When the WELS star rating bands were devised, a vertical intercept on the Y-axis was included in recognition that smaller capacity units consume more water per place setting than larger units. The dashed trend line on Figure 17 indicates that the relationship may be more pronounced than originally envisaged. This means that minimum WES levels based on WELS star bands may have disproportionate impacts on smaller units. Table 16. Average, minimum and maximum water consumption rates, DWs water consumption rates litres per place setting Standard (11-15 place settings) litres per place setting Other (10 or less place settings) Minimum 0.8 1.2 Model average 1.2 1.7 Maximum 2.4 3.0 Source: Recent registrations on Rating based on ‘normal’ program. Figure 17. WELS ratings of all DW models on the market at January 2008 Author analysis of registered models Figure 18. WELS ratings of more recently registered dishwasher models on the market at January 2008 Author analysis of registered models
The industry and the Australian Consumers’ Association supported a water warning (either on the energy label or as a WELS-style water warning label) and a total litre value, but no star rating value until a new CWD test, based on further usage research, is devised. 19. Proposals for water and energy labelling of CWDs Proposals Clothes washing function Clothes drying function Combined function 0. Present situation (3 labels) Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & stars based on litres/kg washed No Water Efficiency Label No label 0. Present situation (3 labels) Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg No label 1. EL-015 proposal (3 labels) Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & stars based on litres/kg washed No Water Efficiency Label No label 1. EL-015 proposal (3 labels) Energy – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg + Water use message & litres for drying No label 2. WS-032 proposal (3 labels) No Water Efficiency Label No Water Efficiency Label Efficiency Label – litres/wash & dry ‘hybrid’ load & stars based on ‘hybrid’ load (full load washed + drying load dried) 2. WS-032 proposal (3 labels) Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & dry ‘hybrid’ load & stars based on ‘hybrid’ load (full load washed + drying load dried) 3. Access (2008) proposal (4 labels)(a) Efficiency Label – litres/wash & stars based on litres/kg washed Water Efficiency Label – litres/dry & stars based on litres/kg dried No
3. Access (2008) proposal (4 labels)(a) Energy – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg No 3A. Modified Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & stars based on litres/kg washed Water Warning Label – litres used in drying mode No label 3A. Modified Energy – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg No label 4. Long term proposal (4 labels) Efficiency Label – litres/wash & stars based on litres/kg washed No Water Efficiency Label Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & dry ‘process’ load & stars based on ‘process’ load (drying load washed + drying load dried) 4. Long term proposal (4 labels) Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Energy label – kWh/year & stars based on kWh/kg Water Efficiency Label – litres/wash & dry ‘process’ load & stars based on ‘process’ load (drying load washed + drying load dried) (a) This proposal was been endorsed by Australian Standards committee WS-032 at its meeting on 12 March 2008 Consequently, the following steps are now proposed: A mandatory WELS for the drying function of CWDs, to take effect in mid 2011, with a ‘Water Warning’ heading and indicating the total litres of water used during the drying cycle by that model (3A Modified in Table 19) and Consideration of a star rating WELS label for the drying function of CWDs , to take effect 12-18 month later. This could be either based solely on drying-mode water consumption per kg dried (i.e. Proposal 3 in Table 19) or on combined washing and drying performance (i.e. Proposal 4 in Table 19). Figure 24 illustrates the range in total water use in drying-mode that CWD WELS labels would show in Step 1 – the range is from 11.4 litres to 76 litres. Buyer awareness of water use in drying-modes and the removal of water authority rebates incentive should lead a proportion of purchasers who would otherwise select a CWD to purchase a conventional FL instead. Buyers who are so sensitised to water use that they will forgo a CWD