Deep Research Archives

A Global Analysis of Appliance Energy Efficiency Rating Systems: A Comparative Study for the Informed Consumer

Section 1: An In-Depth Analysis of South Korea's Energy Efficiency Grade System

1.1 The 1-to-5 Grade Framework: A Mandatory System for Market Transformation

South Korea's approach to managing appliance energy consumption is anchored by a robust and comprehensive regulatory framework known as the Energy Efficiency Grade Labeling System. This is not a voluntary guideline but a mandatory program, legally enforced under the Energy Use Rationalization Act and managed by the Korea Energy Agency (KEA).1 The system's primary objective is to transform the consumer electronics market by promoting the production, sale, and purchase of high-efficiency products, thereby contributing to national energy conservation goals and reducing environmental impact.3 The program's scope is extensive, targeting products that are both widely used and have significant energy consumption profiles. It currently applies to over 27 distinct product categories, encompassing a vast range of household and commercial equipment, including electric refrigerators, air conditioners, washing machines, televisions, and lighting equipment.4 This broad applicability ensures that the policy has a meaningful impact on overall national energy demand. The core of the system is its clear, hierarchical classification structure. Products are evaluated and assigned a grade from 1 to 5, which must be displayed prominently on a standardized label. Grade 1 represents the highest level of energy efficiency, while Grade 5 signifies the lowest permissible level of efficiency for a product to be legally sold on the market.3 This simple, color-coded visual scale—with Grade 1 typically in green and Grade 5 in red—is designed to be intuitive for consumers, allowing for quick and easy differentiation between efficient and inefficient models at the point of sale.3 The label itself is a rich source of data, providing consumers with multiple metrics to inform their purchasing decisions. Beyond the primary grade, the label details the product's monthly power consumption (measured in kilowatt-hours per month, or kWh/month), its carbon dioxide (CO2​) emissions per hour, and an estimated annual or monthly electricity cost. This multi-faceted approach allows a consumer to assess a product not only by its relative efficiency ranking (the grade) but also by its absolute energy use and direct financial impact. This system is a powerful example of a hybrid policy model that combines market-pull mechanisms with strong regulatory-push enforcement. The clear, data-rich label serves as a market-pull instrument; it empowers consumers with the information needed to choose more efficient products. Studies have shown that Korean households exhibit a positive preference for labeled appliances and are willing to pay a premium for higher efficiency grades, demonstrating the label's effectiveness in shaping consumer behavior.7 This consumer demand, in turn, incentivizes manufacturers to innovate and produce more efficient goods to capture the top-tier market segments. Simultaneously, the system employs a potent regulatory-push mechanism through its Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS), which is discussed in greater detail in section 1.3. By making the Grade 5 level the absolute minimum for market entry, the government actively removes the least efficient products, forcing the entire market's baseline efficiency to rise over time. This dual-pronged strategy—empowering consumers while regulating manufacturers—creates a more resilient and effective framework for market transformation than relying on either public awareness or legal mandates alone. The continuous strengthening of these standards, a hallmark of the Korean system, ensures that the program remains a dynamic driver of technological advancement rather than a static snapshot of the market.

1.2 Quantifying the Efficiency Gap: The "Severe" Difference Between Grade 1 and Grade 5

The distinction between the highest and lowest efficiency grades in the South Korean system is not trivial; it represents a substantial difference in energy consumption and, consequently, in long-term operating costs for the consumer. Official guidance from the Korea Energy Agency and related analyses consistently state that a Grade 1 product consumes approximately 30% to 40% less energy than a Grade 5 product of a similar type and capacity.2 This significant efficiency gap underscores the tangible benefits of the labeling program and provides a clear incentive for consumers to invest in higher-rated appliances. To fully appreciate the impact of this difference, it is instructive to examine its application to specific high-consumption household appliances. Case Study: Refrigerators Refrigerators are among the most energy-intensive appliances in a typical household due to their continuous, 24/7 operation. The efficiency gap between grades is particularly pronounced for these devices. A Grade 1 refrigerator can achieve energy savings of 30% to 45% compared to a Grade 5 model.9 For an average family, this translates into a direct financial benefit, with estimated annual electricity cost savings of around ₩35,000 (approximately $25 USD).9 While this may seem modest on its own, when compounded over the typical 10-plus-year lifespan of a refrigerator, the total savings become a significant factor in the total cost of ownership. Case Study: Air Conditioners In South Korea, air conditioning accounts for a substantial portion of residential electricity demand, particularly during the hot and humid summer months, contributing 11.3% of total household electricity consumption in 2020.8 The 30-40% efficiency differential between Grade 1 and Grade 5 models has profound implications at both the household and national levels. An analysis projected that if all air conditioners in the country were upgraded by just two efficiency grades, the national energy consumption for cooling could be reduced by an estimated 15%.8 This would result in an annual saving of 1,154 GWh of electricity, equivalent to 1.7% of the total household electricity consumption—a clear demonstration of how individual consumer choices, guided by the labeling system, can aggregate into a powerful tool for national energy management.8 It is crucial, however, to contextualize these savings. The actual financial benefit realized by a consumer depends on several variables. South Korea's residential electricity tariff system, known as nujinje, is progressive, meaning the price per kWh increases as total monthly consumption rises. Therefore, the savings from an efficient appliance are amplified in households with high overall energy usage, as the conserved energy is effectively billed at the highest tariff tier. Conversely, even a Grade 1 appliance can lead to a high electricity bill if used excessively.10 Furthermore, the age of an appliance is a critical factor. The standards that define each efficiency grade are periodically tightened to reflect technological progress. Consequently, a Grade 1 air conditioner purchased a decade ago was rated against the most efficient technology of its time, which is considerably less efficient than today's leading models.10 This "grade deflation" is a sign of the program's success in driving innovation, but it creates a knowledge gap for consumers. It is essential for consumers to understand that not all "Grade 1" labels are equal across different product generations; a new Grade 1 product will almost certainly outperform an older one. This dynamic nature of the standards means that replacing an old, even previously high-grade, appliance with a new one can still yield significant energy savings. The following table provides illustrative examples of the energy and cost savings that can be achieved by choosing a Grade 1 appliance over a Grade 5 model for common household items. Appliance Type Grade 5 - Est. Annual Consumption (kWh) Grade 1 - Est. Annual Consumption (kWh) Energy Savings (%) Est. Annual Cost Savings (KRW)* Refrigerator (500L) 540 324 40% ~₩35,000 Air Conditioner (Split-type) 900 600 33% ~₩48,000 Washing Machine (15kg) 45 30 33% ~₩2,400

*Based on an average electricity price of ₩160/kWh and typical usage assumptions. Actual savings will vary based on usage, local utility rates, and the application of progressive tariffs.

1.3 The Regulatory Backbone: MEPS and Evolving Standards

The success of South Korea's energy efficiency labeling system is not solely dependent on consumer choice. It is powerfully reinforced by a robust regulatory framework that actively shapes the market from the supply side. Two key policies form this backbone: the Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS) and the forward-looking practice of setting evolving, long-term efficiency targets. The Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS) serves as the program's foundational enforcement tool. It establishes a mandatory efficiency threshold that all products within a regulated category must meet to be legally manufactured, imported, or sold in South Korea.2 In the context of the 1-to-5 grading system, the MEPS is effectively aligned with the Grade 5 standard. Any product that fails to achieve at least a Grade 5 rating is barred from the market.3 This "regulatory-push" mechanism is critical because it systematically eliminates the least efficient and most wasteful products, thereby continuously raising the average efficiency of all available goods. It ensures that even the least-informed consumer is protected from purchasing grossly inefficient appliances. Complementing the MEPS is the Target Energy Performance Standard (TEPS), which functions as the benchmark for excellence. The TEPS represents the level of efficiency required to achieve a Grade 1 rating.12 While MEPS sets the floor, TEPS establishes the ceiling, creating a clear and ambitious goal for manufacturers who wish to position their products as premium, top-tier options. This provides a tangible target for research and development efforts and fuels competition at the high-efficiency end of the market. A defining characteristic of the Korean system, and a key reason for its sustained effectiveness, is its dynamic and forward-looking nature. The standards for MEPS and TEPS are not static. The Korea Energy Agency and the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) periodically review and tighten these standards to keep pace with technological advancements and prevent market stagnation. This prevents the kind of "grade inflation" that has plagued other labeling systems, where a majority of products eventually cluster in the top efficiency class, rendering the label less effective at differentiating performance. A significant evolution of this policy was announced in late 2020, with the introduction of medium- and long-term target energy efficiency standards for key product categories like refrigerators, air conditioners, and televisions.13 This amendment codifies a schedule for future increases in stringency. For example, the policy stipulates that the Grade 5 standard will be revised upwards every three years to match the current Grade 4 standard. This effectively creates a predictable timeline for phasing out the lowest tier of products on the market.13 For instance, for refrigerators and air conditioners, the Grade 4 standards of 2021 became the new Grade 5 MEPS in October 2024. This proactive approach provides manufacturers with a clear, long-term regulatory roadmap, allowing them to plan their innovation cycles and investment strategies accordingly. It signals the government's unwavering commitment to continuous improvement and ensures that the energy efficiency program remains a powerful driver of technological progress for the foreseeable future. This policy structure reflects a sophisticated understanding of market dynamics, using predictable, incremental regulatory pressure to steer the entire industry toward greater efficiency. This strategic regulatory approach is deeply intertwined with South Korea's broader national context. As the world's 10th largest energy consumer and a nation with very few domestic energy resources, South Korea is heavily dependent on energy imports.14 This economic vulnerability has historically driven a strong governmental focus on demand-side management as a cornerstone of national energy security. Consequently, the Energy Efficiency Grade Labeling System is more than just an environmental initiative; it is a critical component of national economic and energy policy.2 The energy savings achieved through this program directly translate into reduced reliance on imported fossil fuels, enhanced economic stability, and progress toward climate change mitigation goals. This alignment of environmental, economic, and security objectives explains the program's mandatory nature, its comprehensive scope, and the government's ongoing commitment to strengthening its efficacy.

Section 2: A Comparative Review of Global Energy Labeling Programs

While South Korea's 1-to-5 grade system provides a clear and effective model, it is one of several distinct approaches to energy efficiency labeling employed by major economies around the world. A comparative analysis reveals different philosophies regarding the role of government, the type of information provided to consumers, and the mechanisms used to drive technological innovation. Examining these systems—from the European Union, the United States, Japan, and the joint Australia/New Zealand program—provides a comprehensive global perspective on best practices in energy efficiency policy.

2.1 The European Union: The Rescaled A-G Label and the Push for Sustainability

The European Union's energy label is one of the most widely recognized in the world, influencing the purchasing decisions of a vast consumer market. However, its history offers a crucial lesson in the challenges of maintaining a label's effectiveness over time. The original A-G scale, introduced in the 1990s, was so successful in driving manufacturers to improve efficiency that it eventually became a victim of its own success.17 Over the years, the market became saturated with products at the top of the scale, necessitating the addition of A+, A++, and A+++ classes. This proliferation of "plus" categories ultimately diluted the label's clarity, making it difficult for consumers to discern meaningful differences between top-tier products and reducing their motivation to select the most efficient options.17 In response, the EU undertook a major "rescaling" initiative, which came into full effect for the first product groups on March 1, 2021. This reform returned the label to a simple, intuitive A to G scale, eliminating the confusing plus classes.18 The new scale is governed by significantly stricter energy efficiency requirements. As a result, a product that was rated A+++ under the old system might now be classified as a B, C, or even D, despite being just as energy efficient as before.21 This recalibration was designed to create more room for differentiation and to more accurately reflect the current state of technology. A key strategic element of the new EU label is the principle of leaving the top 'A' class empty at the time of introduction for a new product category.17 This is a deliberate policy choice designed to foster innovation. By reserving the highest classification for future, yet-to-be-developed technologies, the EU creates a powerful incentive for manufacturers to invest in research and development to be the first to achieve the coveted 'A' rating. The framework also includes provisions to trigger further rescaling once a significant portion of products on the market achieve the A and B classes, ensuring the label remains a dynamic driver of progress.17 The EU's vision for product efficiency has also expanded dramatically beyond mere energy consumption. In a landmark development for the circular economy, the EU is integrating a Repairability Score into its energy labels for smartphones and tablets, with implementation beginning in June 2025.22 This score, rated on an A-to-E scale, will provide consumers with a clear indication of how easy a product is to repair. The rating is based on a rigorous methodology that assesses factors such as the ease of disassembly, the types of tools required, the long-term availability of spare parts (mandating availability for at least seven years), and the accessibility of repair manuals and software information.23 This initiative represents a profound shift in product regulation, directly challenging the business model of planned obsolescence and formally linking energy policy with broader sustainability goals like waste reduction and resource conservation. To further empower consumers, every new EU energy label features a QR code. Scanning this code with a smartphone provides direct access to the European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL), a comprehensive public database.19 EPREL offers a wealth of detailed product information that goes far beyond what can be displayed on the physical label, including technical specifications and performance data for all registered models. This tool provides an unprecedented level of transparency, allowing consumers to conduct detailed comparisons and make highly informed purchasing decisions.

2.2 The United States: A Dual-Label Approach (EnergyGuide & ENERGY STAR)

The United States employs a dual-system approach to energy efficiency labeling, combining a mandatory informational label with a voluntary high-performance endorsement label. This structure reflects a policy philosophy that provides baseline information to all consumers while separately promoting and rewarding best-in-class products. The first component is the mandatory EnergyGuide label, a distinctive yellow-and-black tag managed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).28 Unlike the comparative grading systems of the EU or South Korea, the EnergyGuide label's primary focus is on financial cost and absolute energy consumption. It does not assign a grade or a star rating. Instead, its central feature is the estimated yearly operating cost in dollars, calculated using a national average electricity rate. It also displays the estimated annual energy consumption in kWh.30 A sliding scale places the model's estimated cost in the context of the cost range for similar models, allowing consumers to see where it falls from least to most efficient. This cost-centric approach is designed to appeal directly to the consumer's financial interests, translating abstract energy units into tangible monetary terms. The second, and more widely recognized, component is the ENERGY STAR program. This is a voluntary endorsement label, symbolized by a blue logo, administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).28 The ENERGY STAR label is not given to all products; it is an mark of distinction awarded only to products that demonstrate significantly superior energy efficiency, typically placing them in the top 10% to 30% of their product category in terms of performance.31 For a product to earn the label, it must meet stringent specifications that deliver energy savings without compromising performance or features.32 The two systems work in tandem. All regulated appliances must display the EnergyGuide label, but only those that meet the higher efficiency criteria of the EPA can also feature the ENERGY STAR logo, which is often incorporated directly onto the yellow EnergyGuide tag.29 This creates a two-tiered system: the EnergyGuide provides a baseline for comparison for all products, while the ENERGY STAR logo acts as a simple, trusted shortcut for consumers seeking to identify the most efficient options on the market. The impact of the ENERGY STAR program has been substantial and is well-documented. Since its inception in 1992, the program and its partners have helped American consumers and businesses save an estimated 5 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity and more than $500 billion in energy costs.33 These savings are associated with a reduction of over 4 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions.34 In 2020 alone, the program was credited with saving consumers $42 billion on their utility bills.35 These figures highlight the immense power of a trusted, government-backed endorsement label to "pull" the market toward higher efficiency by shaping consumer demand and providing a clear marketing advantage for manufacturers of superior products.

2.3 Japan: The "Top Runner" Technology-Forcing Standard

Japan's Top Runner Program represents a fundamentally different and highly innovative approach to energy efficiency regulation. Established in 1999 as part of the Act on the Rational Use of Energy, it is not a comparative labeling system designed to inform consumer choice, but rather a mandatory, technology-forcing standard designed to drive industry-wide innovation from the top down.36 The philosophy of the Top Runner Program is elegantly simple yet powerful. For a given product category (e.g., refrigerators or passenger vehicles), the government identifies the single most energy-efficient model currently available on the Japanese market—the "Top Runner." The performance level of this best-in-class product is then used to set the mandatory energy efficiency standard that all manufacturers and importers in that category must achieve for their products by a designated future target year, typically 3 to 10 years later.37 This mechanism effectively compels every company in the market to match the performance of the current industry leader, forcing a rapid and continuous cycle of technological improvement across the board. The program includes several key features that enhance its effectiveness and flexibility. First, the standards are not a single value for an entire product category. Instead, products are divided into sub-categories based on factors like size, function, or technology (e.g., refrigerators are categorized by internal volume). A specific Top Runner standard is then set for each sub-category, ensuring that the targets are ambitious yet realistic for different types of products.39 Second, compliance is not assessed on a model-by-model basis. Instead, it is determined by the corporate average efficiency, calculated as the weighted average of all units a manufacturer ships in the target year.38 This provides manufacturers with significant flexibility. They can continue to offer a diverse range of products, including some models that may fall below the standard, as long as these are balanced by sales of super-efficient models that exceed the target, ensuring their corporate average meets the requirement. Third, the program is dynamic. The standards are reviewed every few years, and a new Top Runner is identified to set the next benchmark, ensuring that the efficiency bar is constantly being raised in line with the latest technological advancements.39 Enforcement relies on a "name and shame" approach; while the government can issue recommendations, orders, and fines, the primary deterrent is the public disclosure of non-compliant companies, a powerful motivator in Japanese corporate culture. To date, this has been highly effective, with no formal enforcement actions needed.37 The results of the Top Runner Program have been remarkable. For nearly all of the 23 product categories it covered by 2014, the ambitious targets have not only been met but have often been significantly exceeded.37 For example, for refrigerators, the program targeted a 30.5% reduction in energy consumption, but the actual improvement achieved was 55.2%. For computers, an 83% improvement was targeted, and a staggering 99.1% improvement was realized.38 This demonstrates the program's profound success in accelerating innovation and transforming the Japanese market for energy-consuming products.

2.4 Australia & New Zealand: The Joint Star Rating System

Australia and New Zealand collaborate on a joint Equipment Energy Efficiency (E3) Program, which provides a harmonized approach to appliance regulation across both countries. The public-facing component of this program is the Energy Rating Label, a mandatory system characterized by its visual simplicity and adaptability to regional needs.42 The core of the label is a straightforward star rating system. Products are rated on a scale of 1 to 6 stars, displayed in half-star increments. More stars indicate greater energy efficiency compared to other models of the same size and type.44 This simple visual cue allows consumers to make quick, at-a-glance comparisons on the retail floor. To account for significant technological progress in certain product categories, the system incorporates a 10-star "super efficiency" scale. When a product's efficiency surpasses the 6-star threshold, it moves onto this extended scale, which is rated in full-star increments from 7 to 10.45 This allows for better differentiation among the most advanced, high-performance products on the market, preventing the "bunching" effect at the top of the scale that the EU experienced with its A+++ ratings. A particularly sophisticated feature of the Australia/New Zealand system is the Zoned Energy Rating Label (ZERL), which is used for appliances whose performance is highly dependent on climate, such as air conditioners and heat pumps.46 Recognizing the vast climatic differences across the region, the ZERL provides three distinct star ratings for heating and cooling performance based on three climate zones: Hot, Mixed, and Cold. This allows a consumer in a hot climate like Queensland to assess a product's efficiency based on relevant performance data, which may differ significantly from its performance in the colder climate of New Zealand's South Island. This climate-specific information provides a much more accurate and useful basis for consumer decision-making. In addition to the star rating, the label includes a crucial piece of absolute data: the annual energy consumption figure, measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year.42 This number is based on standardized testing and assumptions about average usage patterns. It allows consumers to move beyond the relative comparison of the star rating and calculate the estimated annual running cost of an appliance by multiplying the kWh figure by their local electricity tariff. This empowers them to make a more holistic decision based on both relative efficiency and the total cost of ownership over the product's lifetime. The various approaches to energy labeling across the globe reveal a spectrum of policy philosophies, ranging from systems that primarily aim to inform consumer choice to those that actively force technological advancement. The US EnergyGuide, with its focus on providing absolute cost information, represents the "informing" end of the spectrum. It empowers consumers with financial data but exerts minimal direct pressure on manufacturers beyond what the market demands. The comparative labels of the EU and Australia/New Zealand occupy a middle ground. By ranking products against each other, they actively "guide" consumer choice toward more efficient options, creating a market-pull effect that encourages manufacturers to improve their products to achieve a better rating. The US ENERGY STAR program adds an "endorsing" layer, creating an elite tier of high-performance products that manufacturers aspire to join. At the far end of the spectrum is Japan's Top Runner Program, which is a "forcing" mechanism. By setting the future mandatory standard based on the best-in-class product of today, it leaves no room for laggards and compels the entire industry to engage in a continuous race to the top. A recurring theme in the evolution of these programs is the challenge of "grade inflation." The EU's experience with the A+, A++, and A+++ ratings is the most prominent example of how a successful but static labeling system can lose its efficacy over time as technology outpaces the original scale.17 This saturation at the top end diminishes the label's ability to differentiate products and weakens the incentive for further innovation. The solutions to this problem reveal different strategic choices. The EU opted for a periodic, disruptive "rescale," a complete overhaul of the system to reset the bar for all products. In contrast, Japan's Top Runner Program has this dynamism built into its core design; the standard is automatically reset and raised with each review cycle. South Korea and Australia/New Zealand have also adopted dynamic approaches, with Korea introducing forward-looking targets that schedule future increases in stringency and Australia/New Zealand adding a 10-star scale to create more headroom for super-efficient products. This global experience demonstrates that a successful long-term energy efficiency policy must incorporate a mechanism to adapt to and drive technological progress, rather than merely reflecting it at a single point in time. Perhaps the most significant emerging trend is the expansion of the very definition of "efficiency" beyond operational energy consumption to encompass broader principles of the circular economy. The EU's introduction of a mandatory Repairability Score on its energy labels is a pioneering move in this direction.22 This initiative redefines a high-quality, sustainable product as one that is not only energy-efficient but also durable, repairable, and designed for a long lifespan. It directly confronts the pervasive issue of planned obsolescence and integrates energy policy with wider environmental objectives, such as reducing electronic waste and conserving material resources. This holistic, lifecycle-based approach signals the future direction of product regulation, where a device's impact is assessed from manufacturing to disposal, not just during its use phase. This evolution shows how a policy tool originally conceived for energy conservation is becoming a powerful vehicle for advancing a much larger economic and environmental agenda.

Section 3: Synthesizing the Approaches: A Cross-Program Analysis

While the consumer-facing labels and underlying policy philosophies of global energy efficiency programs differ, they are all built upon a common foundation of standardized testing. The credibility and comparability of any rating system depend entirely on the integrity of these technical procedures. As technology evolves, these systems face new challenges, particularly in integrating smart devices and embracing the principles of a circular economy. A cross-program analysis of these foundational and emerging issues reveals both the shared challenges and the innovative solutions being developed worldwide.

3.1 The Foundation of Trust: Standardized Test Procedures

The energy efficiency label that a consumer sees on an appliance is merely the tip of the iceberg. Beneath the surface lies a complex and critically important framework of standardized test procedures. These technical protocols are the unseen bedrock upon which the entire system of trust and comparability is built. They provide a detailed, repeatable methodology for measuring a product's energy consumption and performance under controlled laboratory conditions, ensuring that a "Grade 1" in Seoul, an "A-class" in Berlin, or an "ENERGY STAR" in Washington are all backed by rigorous, verifiable data.48 To foster global trade and reduce the compliance burden on international manufacturers, many national programs are built upon or harmonized with standards developed by international bodies. The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) are central to this effort. Key standards include: IEC 62552 for household refrigerating appliances, which specifies methods for determining energy consumption and volume. This standard is widely adopted, forming the basis for regulations in the EU, Australia/New Zealand, and other regions.50 ISO 5151 for non-ducted air conditioners and heat pumps, which outlines the conditions and methods for testing and rating their performance.54 National standards, such as South Korea's KS C 9306 for air conditioners, are often modifications of these international standards, adapted to suit local market conditions and regulatory requirements.4 The harmonization of these test procedures is a primary goal for international cooperation in energy efficiency. When countries use different test methods, it creates technical barriers to trade, forcing manufacturers to conduct multiple, costly tests for the same product to enter different markets.59 By aligning on a common set of test procedures, countries can facilitate the global flow of efficient products, reduce costs for manufacturers, and simplify the process of comparing and adopting best-practice policies from other nations.60 Despite these efforts, a persistent challenge for all labeling programs is the "lab versus reality" gap. Standardized tests, by their very nature, must be conducted in highly controlled and repeatable environments. This often involves conditions that do not fully capture the variability of real-world usage. For example, a washing machine's energy consumption is tested using a specific type and weight of test cloth, a set water temperature, and a predefined wash cycle, which may not align with a particular family's typical laundry habits.63 Similarly, a refrigerator's energy use is measured at a constant ambient temperature (e.g., 16°C and 32°C in IEC 62552), which does not reflect the daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations in a real kitchen.12 This discrepancy can lead to a performance gap where the actual energy consumed by an appliance in a home is different from what the EnergyGuide label predicts.67 Regulators are continuously working to close this gap by developing more sophisticated test procedures. The move toward seasonal efficiency metrics for air conditioners, such as the Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER), is one such example. Instead of measuring performance at a single temperature point, these metrics combine performance data from multiple test conditions to create a weighted average that better reflects energy consumption over an entire cooling season. The Zoned Energy Rating Label in Australia and New Zealand takes this a step further by providing different seasonal ratings for different climate zones, offering even greater accuracy.46 These evolving, more complex standards represent an ongoing effort to make laboratory measurements a more faithful proxy for the consumer's real-world experience. The harmonization of these intricate test procedures is arguably the most critical factor in creating a truly global market for energy-efficient appliances. A multinational corporation like Samsung, LG, or Bosch aims to design and sell a single refrigerator model across numerous countries. If each country or region mandates a unique test procedure, the logistical and financial burden of testing and certifying that single model for every market becomes a significant barrier to trade and innovation.59 The adoption of international standards, such as IEC 62552, provides a common technical language that streamlines this process. However, achieving perfect, universal harmonization is complicated by legitimate regional differences in climate and consumer usage patterns. A test condition simulating a high ambient temperature of 32°C is highly relevant for assessing a refrigerator's performance in India or Brazil, but less so for its performance in Scandinavia.51 Similarly, consumer laundry habits, such as the preference for hot versus cold water washes, vary significantly between North America and Europe, necessitating different weightings in washing machine test procedures. This creates a fundamental tension between the need for a globally unified standard for trade and the need for regionally adapted parameters for accuracy. The most effective path forward appears to be a hybrid model: global harmonization of the core testing methodology to ensure consistent measurement principles, combined with the flexibility for regions to specify certain test parameters (like temperature points or usage cycles) that reflect local conditions. This approach, exemplified by the Zoned Energy Rating Label, balances the needs of global commerce with the goal of providing locally relevant information to consumers.

3.2 The Next Frontier: Integrating Smart Technology and the Circular Economy

The landscape of consumer products is undergoing a rapid transformation, driven by the proliferation of smart, connected devices and a growing policy emphasis on the circular economy. These trends pose profound challenges and opportunities for traditional energy efficiency labeling programs, pushing them to evolve beyond static, use-phase measurements. The rise of smart technology presents a fundamental challenge to the existing paradigm of appliance testing. Current test procedures are designed to measure energy consumption in fixed, repeatable states (e.g., on, off, standby) under controlled laboratory conditions. However, a smart appliance's energy use is not static; it is dynamic and adaptive. A smart thermostat learns a household's occupancy patterns to optimize heating and cooling schedules; its energy savings are entirely dependent on user behavior and the thermal characteristics of the specific home it is installed in.69 A smart washing machine might connect to the grid and schedule its cycle to run during off-peak hours when electricity is cheaper and has a lower carbon intensity. It might even receive a software update from the manufacturer that introduces a new, more efficient washing algorithm a year after it was purchased. This dynamic functionality cannot be adequately captured by a single, pre-purchase energy consumption value printed on a label. Recognizing this challenge, programs are beginning to explore new ways to evaluate and promote the efficiency of connected products. The ENERGY STAR program, for instance, has introduced a certification for Smart Home Energy Management Systems (SHEMS).69 Instead of rating a single device, this certification recognizes integrated packages of smart devices (including a smart thermostat, smart lighting, and smart plugs) that work together to monitor, control, and automatically reduce a home's overall energy consumption.69 This system-level approach is a crucial first step in moving beyond individual appliance ratings to assess the holistic energy performance of a connected home. Simultaneously, the most forward-thinking regulatory frameworks are expanding their focus from a product's operational energy efficiency to its entire lifecycle. This shift is driven by the principles of the circular economy, which prioritizes durability, repairability, and material recycling to minimize waste and resource consumption. The EU's decision to incorporate a Repairability Score on the energy labels for smartphones and tablets is the most prominent example of this evolution.22 By providing consumers with transparent information about how easy a product is to repair, the policy directly incentivizes manufacturers to design more durable and serviceable products. This holistic view, which considers a product's environmental impact from its creation to its end-of-life, represents the next frontier in sustainable product policy. The "efficiency" of the future will not just be about the watts a device consumes, but also about the years it can be used and the resources that can be recovered when its life is truly over. The integration of smart technology poses what could be considered an existential challenge to the very concept of a static energy label. The entire history of appliance labeling is predicated on the ability to conduct a standardized, repeatable test in a lab that produces a single, fixed value for energy consumption. This value is then printed on a label and remains with the product for its entire life. A smart device fundamentally breaks this model. Its performance is not fixed; it is variable, adaptive, and context-dependent. How can a static label accurately represent the energy savings of a smart thermostat, which could range from 5% to 25% depending on the house, the climate, and the occupants' lifestyle? This question is one that no global program has yet fully answered. It suggests that the future of product energy information may need to be as dynamic as the products themselves. One could envision a future where the physical label is merely a gateway, via a QR code, to a digital platform. This platform could provide a standardized baseline efficiency rating but also incorporate real-world data from the device over time, offering the user a personalized and evolving assessment of their product's actual energy performance. Such a shift from a pre-purchase, static rating to a post-purchase, dynamic report would represent the next major paradigm shift in energy efficiency labeling.

Section 4: Strategic Insights and Recommendations

The global landscape of energy efficiency labeling offers a rich tapestry of strategies, successes, and ongoing challenges. Synthesizing the lessons learned from these diverse programs provides clear, actionable guidance for consumers seeking to make informed choices, and identifies best practices for policymakers aiming to design effective and future-proof regulations.

4.1 Guidance for the Global Consumer: How to Read the Labels

Navigating the different energy labels across international markets can be daunting, but a few core principles can empower consumers to make consistently smart decisions, regardless of the specific format of the label. First and foremost, it is crucial to look beyond the primary grade or rating. While a "Grade 1" in South Korea, an "A-class" in the EU, or a high star count in Australia are excellent indicators of relative efficiency, the single most important and universally comparable metric on any label is the annual energy consumption, typically expressed in kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/year).19 This figure allows for a direct comparison of how much electricity two different models are likely to use under standardized conditions. By multiplying this kWh value by the local electricity tariff, a consumer can calculate a personalized estimated annual operating cost, providing a powerful tool for assessing the total cost of ownership. Second, the principle of comparing like with like cannot be overstated. Energy efficiency ratings are designed to compare models within the same product category and size class. It is misleading to compare the star rating of a large, American-style refrigerator-freezer with that of a small, under-counter model. The larger appliance, even if it has a better efficiency rating (e.g., an 'A' class), may still consume significantly more total electricity over a year than the smaller, less-efficiently rated model due to its sheer volume.19 Consumers should first determine the size and type of appliance that meets their needs, and then use the label to find the most efficient model within that specific category. Finally, consumers should begin to embrace the future of product ratings by paying attention to emerging metrics that go beyond energy use. The EU's Repairability Score is the leading example of this trend. When faced with a choice between two similarly priced and energy-efficient products, a higher repairability score could be the deciding factor. A slightly less energy-efficient device that is built to last and is easy to repair may offer far better long-term value and a lower overall environmental footprint than a highly efficient but sealed, disposable unit that must be replaced entirely if a single component fails. As these circular economy metrics become more common, they will become an essential part of a holistic and truly sustainable purchasing decision.

4.2 Best Practices for Policymakers: Lessons from Global Leaders

The collective experience of the world's leading energy efficiency programs provides a clear blueprint for policymakers seeking to establish or enhance their own national strategies. Three core principles emerge as hallmarks of the most successful and resilient systems. The most effective national strategies employ a hybrid approach that combines multiple policy instruments to influence both the supply and demand sides of the market. This includes: 1) a mandatory floor, in the form of a Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS), to legally prohibit the sale of the least efficient products; 2) a clear, trusted, and mandatory comparative label to guide consumer choice and create a market-pull for more efficient products; and 3) a mechanism to recognize and incentivize top-tier innovation, such as the voluntary ENERGY STAR endorsement or the technology-forcing nature of Japan's Top Runner Program. A strategy that integrates all three elements is more robust and effective than one that relies on any single mechanism alone. Second, clarity is king. The primary purpose of a consumer-facing label is to communicate complex technical information in a simple, intuitive, and unambiguous way. The EU's experience with the A+, A++, and A+++ ratings serves as a cautionary tale, demonstrating that as a rating system becomes more complex and cluttered, it loses its ability to effectively influence consumer behavior.17 The subsequent return to a clean A-G scale underscores the paramount importance of simplicity and clarity in maintaining public trust and engagement. An effective label should allow a consumer to understand the relative performance of a product in a matter of seconds. Finally, a successful program must plan for the obsolescence of its own standards. In a field characterized by rapid technological advancement, a static set of efficiency standards will inevitably become outdated. The most effective programs are therefore dynamic, with a built-in mechanism for regular review and upward revision of the standards. Japan's Top Runner Program is the archetypal example of this, as its very design is based on a continuous cycle of setting new, more ambitious targets. The EU's rescaling provision and South Korea's new long-term target system are other powerful models for ensuring that a labeling program continues to drive innovation rather than simply reflecting past achievements.13 Policymakers should embed a clear, transparent, and predictable process for updating standards into the foundational design of their programs. This provides regulatory certainty for manufacturers and ensures the program remains a relevant and powerful tool for energy conservation for decades to come. 참고 자료 Energy efficiency label - KCR, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://en.kcrlab.co.kr/energy/energy-efficiency/ energy review in korea - Welcome to the United Nations, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/energy/op/clasp_lee.pdf How Does the Energy Efficiency Rating Label Work?, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://gca-korea.tistory.com/entry/How-Does-the-Energy-Efficiency-Rating-Label-Work Korea Testing Lab>Energy Efficiency Certification>Eficiency Rating Test - 한국산업기술시험원, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://customer.ktl.re.kr/en/contents/E303000000.do Energy Efficiency Standard | CERTIFICATION | KTR, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://m.ktr.or.kr/eng/certification/quality/contentsid/1176/index.do 효율등급제도 제도개요 - 효율관리제도 - 한국에너지공단, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://eep.energy.or.kr/business_introduction/effi_summary.aspx The effects of energy efficiency and environmental labels on appliance choice in South Korea - ResearchGate, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275718452_The_effects_of_energy_efficiency_and_environmental_labels_on_appliance_choice_in_South_Korea Evaluation and Promotion of Energy Efficiency in Air Conditioning, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2024/ph240/jeong1/ 에너지소비 효율등급 표시 - 나무위키, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://namu.wiki/w/%EC%97%90%EB%84%88%EC%A7%80%EC%86%8C%EB%B9%84%20%ED%9A%A8%EC%9C%A8%EB%93%B1%EA%B8%89%20%ED%91%9C%EC%8B%9C 에어컨 1등급 vs 5등급...얼마나 절약될까 / YTN (Yes! Top News) - YouTube, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD19S2E5hVU [경제기자M] 1등급 vs 5등급…전기요금 얼마나 차이 날까? [MBN 뉴스7], 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M_2B3Qm911Y refrigerator and air-conditioner testing in the republic of korea, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sdissues/energy/op/clasp_choi.pdf Korea enhances energy efficiency standard for home appliances - Enviliance ASIA, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/kr/report_2847 KOREA'S ENERGY STANDARDS & LABELING - ESCAP Policy Documents Managment, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://policy.asiapacificenergy.org/sites/default/files/KoreaEnergyStandards%26Labeling.pdf Sustainable Development Goals Policy Brief Series No.5, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/seoul_policy_center/USPC-Policy-Brief-No.5-FINAL.pdf KOREA ENERGY EFFICIENCY POLICIES, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://eep.energy.or.kr/download/Korean%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Policies%20(2015).pdf beuc - the new energy label back to the ag scale!, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.beuc.eu/sites/default/files/publications/beuc-x-2017-120_new_energy_label-back_to_the_a-g_scale.pdf European Union energy label - Wikipedia, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_energy_label Energy Labelling - SEAI, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.seai.ie/plan-your-energy-journey/for-your-home/energy-labelling-and-ecodesign/energy-labelling Energy Label 2025: Complete Guide to the New Classification from A to G, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.elettroclick.com/en/blog/how-to-do/energy-label-2025-complete-guide-to-the-new-classification-from-a-to-g What is an Energy Label and why is it changing? -… - Sharp NEC Display Solutions Europe, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.sharpnecdisplays.eu/p/eeme/en/launch/rp/energylabels.xhtml EU introduces new labels to help consumers reduce electronic waste, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/eu-introduces-new-labels-to-help-consumers-reduce-electronic-waste/194462/ New EU labels to help consumers choose more repairable electronics - EU Science Hub, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/new-eu-labels-help-consumers-choose-more-repairable-electronics-2025-06-20_en New EU rules for durable, energy-efficient and repairable smartphones and tablets start applying - Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs - European Union, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/news/new-eu-rules-durable-energy-efficient-and-repairable-smartphones-and-tablets-start-applying-2025-06-20_en Apple devices in EU getting repair scores & battery life labels - AppleInsider, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://appleinsider.com/articles/25/06/20/apple-devices-in-eu-getting-repair-scores-battery-life-labels Understanding the Energy Label - European Commission, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://energy-efficient-products.ec.europa.eu/ecodesign-and-energy-label/understanding-energy-label_en In focus: Energy efficient appliances, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://energy.ec.europa.eu/news/focus-energy-efficient-appliances-2025-02-17_en Shopping for Appliances and Electronics | Department of Energy, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/shopping-appliances-and-electronics What is the difference between the EnergyGuide label and the ENERGY STAR label?, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://energystarhelp.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/34537233645587-What-is-the-difference-between-the-EnergyGuide-label-and-the-ENERGY-STAR-label Appliance Energy Guide Labels: How to Read and Use Them - Maytag, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.maytag.com/blog/washers-and-dryers/energy-guide-labels-explained.html What's the difference between EnerGuide and ENERGY STAR - Efficiency Manitoba, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://efficiencymb.ca/articles/whats-the-difference-between-energuide-and-energy-star/ How a Product Earns the ENERGY STAR Label, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energystar.gov/products/how-product-earns-energy-star-label About ENERGY STAR, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energystar.gov/about ABOUT ENERGY STAR® – 2020, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/2021%20About%20ENERGY%20STAR%20Overview%204.12.21%20v1.pdf ENERGY STAR Program - Congress.gov, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF10753 Good Practice Policy Example package for Top Runner Approach in ∙ bigEE - Your guide to energy efficiency in buildings., 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://bigee.net/en/policy/guide/appliances/policy_examples/22/ Japan's Top Runner Programme - futurepolicy.org, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.futurepolicy.org/climate-stability/japans-top-runner-programme/ Japanese Top Runner Approach for energy efficiency standards, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://criepi.denken.or.jp/jp/serc/research_re/download/09035dp.pdf The Role of Standards: The Japanese Top Runner Programme for End-Use Efficiency (Chapter 17) - Energy Technology Innovation - Cambridge University Press, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/energy-technology-innovation/role-of-standards-the-japanese-top-runner-programme-for-enduse-efficiency/B1835E3EB6B0C12FC4EE0DF03A93053F TOP RUNNER PROGRAM Jun Arima Japan - UNFCCC, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/workshops/other_meetings/application/pdf/jpnja.pdf Top Runner Program | Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://sdgs.un.org/partnerships/top-runner-program Energy Ratings, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energy.gov.au/households/energy-rating Energy rating label - Wikipedia, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_rating_label Energy Star Ratings: Save with Efficiency & Sustainability - Nectr., 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://nectr.com.au/news-and-resources/understanding-energy-ratings/ Energy Rating Labels explained - Consumer NZ, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/energy-rating-labels-explained Energy Rating Labels on household appliances - Gen Less, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.genless.govt.nz/for-everyone/at-home/energy-saving-appliances/energy-rating-labels/ Energy Rating Label | EECA, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.eeca.govt.nz/regulations/equipment-energy-efficiency/about-energy-rating-labels/energy-rating-label/ The Case for Bringing Energy Efficiency Labels and Standards Programs to Developing Countries, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2000/data/papers/SS00_Panel9_Paper07.pdf Standards and Labels for Energy Efficiency - UN CC:Learn, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.uncclearn.org/wp-content/uploads/library/undp26.pdf IEC 62552-3:2015, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/21803 ENERGY-EFFICIENT AND CLIMATE-FRIENDLY REFRIGERATORS, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://unepccc.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/09/u4e-refrigerators-model-regulation-20190923.pdf Household refrigerators and freezers - Energy Rating, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energyrating.gov.au/industry-information/products/household-refrigerators-and-freezers IEC 62552-1:2015+AMD1:2020 CSV, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/68114 INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 5151, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://cdn.standards.iteh.ai/samples/63409/7090ee307c51435080835e0d4ed61280/ISO-5151-2017.pdf ISO 5151 - Non-ducted air conditioners and heat pumps — Testing and rating for performance AMENDMENT 1 | GlobalSpec, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14334558/iso-5151 BS ISO 5151:2017+A1:2020 Non-ducted air conditioners and heat pumps. Testing and rating for performance - European Standards, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.en-standard.eu/bs-iso-5151-2017-a1-2020-non-ducted-air-conditioners-and-heat-pumps-testing-and-rating-for-performance/ Non- ducted air conditioners and heat pumps- Testing and rating for performance (standard 4814 / 2022) - IEA, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.iea.org/policies/6165-non-ducted-air-conditioners-and-heat-pumps-testing-and-rating-for-performance-standard-4814-2022 REHVA Journal Review of Certification Procedure for Inverter Air Conditioner, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.rehva.eu/rehva-journal/chapter/review-of-certification-procedure-for-inverter-air-conditioner Improving Global Comparability of Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards and Labels | CLASP.ngo, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.clasp.ngo/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Improving-Global-Comparability-of-Appliance-Energy-Efficiency-Standards-and-Labels.pdf Energy Efficiency Standards and Labels in North America: Opportunities for Harmonization, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2002/data/papers/SS02_Panel9_Paper31.pdf Energy Efficiency Standards and Labels in North America: Opportunities for Harmonization, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://eta.lbl.gov/publications/energy-efficiency-standards-and-labels-north-america-opportunities-harmonization Introducing Energy Efficiency Standards and Labels for Appliances and Equipment, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energycharter.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Thematic/EE_Standards_and_Labels_2009_en.pdf Test Method for Determining Residential Clothes Washer Cleaning Performance - Energy Star, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/Test%20Method%20for%20Determining%20Residential%20Clothes%20Washer%20Cleaning%20Performance%20-%20July%202018_0.pdf Test procedures, measurements and standards for domestic washing machines - bigEE, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://bigee.net/media/filer_public/2013/03/28/bigee_domestic_washing_machines_test_procedures_20130328.pdf Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential and Commercial Clothes Washers - Federal Register, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/01/2022-10715/energy-conservation-program-test-procedures-for-residential-and-commercial-clothes-washers Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Residential Clothes Washers, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/2014-04-11-issuance-test-procedures-residential-clothes-washers-notice A Real-World Test Distribution System with Appliance-Level Load Data for Demand Response and Transactive Energy Studies | Journal Article - Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.pnnl.gov/publications/real-world-test-distribution-system-appliance-level-load-data-demand-response-and Energy-Consumption Pattern-Detecting Technique for Household Appliances for Smart Home Platform - MDPI, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/2/824 Smart Home Tips for Saving Energy, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.energystar.gov/products/smart_home_tips 11 Ways to Optimize Your Smart Home Energy Efficiency Plan, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://energyharbor.com/en/energy-resources/energy-savings-tips/11-tips-to-ensure-smart-home-energy-savings-and-efficiency (PDF) The Impact of Smart Home Technologies on Energy Efficiency, Cost Savings, and Environmental Benefits - ResearchGate, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382314843_The_Impact_of_Smart_Home_Technologies_on_Energy_Efficiency_Cost_Savings_and_Environmental_Benefits Energy Efficiency Assessment in Smart Homes: A Comparative Study of Energy Efficiency Tests - BIO Web of Conferences, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.bio-conferences.org/articles/bioconf/pdf/2024/05/bioconf_rtbs2024_01083.pdf Evolving the EU Energy Label: Shaping Consumer Choices and Market Transformation, 8월 4, 2025에 액세스, https://www.clasp.ngo/report/net-zero-heroes/case-studies/evolving-the-eu-energy-label-shaping-consumer-choices-and-market-transformation/