Energy Efficiency

DOI 10.1007/s12053-014-9274-6

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Efficiency improvement opportunities for ceiling fans

Nihar Shah & Nakul Sathaye & Amol Phadke &
Virginie Letschert

Received: 26 April 2013 / Accepted: 11 June 2014

# The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com

Abstract Ceiling fans contribute significantly to resi- Studies group at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
dential electricity consumption, especially in developing in support of the Super-efficient Equipment and Appliance
countries with warm climates. This paper provides an Deployment (SEAD) initiative.1 SEAD aims to transform
analysis of costs and benefits of several options to the global market by increasing the penetration of highly
improve the efficiency of ceiling fans to assess the efficient equipment and appliances. The objective of this
global potential for electricity savings and green house analysis is to provide the background technical informa-
gas (GHG) emission reductions. Ceiling fan efficiency tion necessary to improve ceiling fan efficiency and
can be cost-effectively improved by at least 50 % using support the voluntary activities of SEAD-participating
commercially available technology. If these efficiency countries.
improvements are implemented in all ceiling fans sold Ceiling fans contribute significantly to residential
by 2020, 70 TWh/year could be saved and 25 million electricity consumption in warm climates and especially
metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) emis- in developing countries. For example, in India, ceiling
sions per year could be avoided, globally. We assess fans alone accounted for approximately 6 % of residen-
how policies and programs such as standards, labels, tial energy use in 2000. This figure is expected to grow
and financial incentives can be used to accelerate the to 9 % in 2020 (De la Rue du Can et al. 2009), an
adoption of efficient ceiling fans in order to realize increase that is equivalent to the energy output of 15
potential savings. mid-sized power plants.2 In addition, ceiling fan

Keywords Ceiling fan . Energy efficiency . Standards . 1

An initiative of the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM) and a task
Labeling . Incentives . Market transformation within the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Coop-
eration (IPEEC), SEAD seeks to engage governments and the
private sector to transform the global market for energy-efficient
equipment and appliances. As of October 2012, the governments
Introduction participating in SEAD are Australia, Brazil, Canada, the European
Commission, France, Germany, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico,
This paper presents the results of an analysis of ceiling Russia, South Africa, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, the
fan efficiency commissioned by the US Department of UK, and the USA. More information on SEAD is available on
its website at http://www.superefficient.org/.
Energy and performed by the International Energy 2
For this estimate, we assume an increase in BAU power con-
sumption of ~20 TWh. We also conservatively estimate that one-
N. Shah (*) : N. Sathaye : A. Phadke : V. Letschert tenth of ceiling fans are used during the peak hour and that a mid-
Energy Analysis Department, Environmental Energy sized power plant has a 500-MW capacity and runs at 70 %
Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National efficiency (as described in Koomey et al. 2010). However, cur-
Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Rd., Berkeley, CA 94720, USA rently installed power plants in India have a much lower
e-mail: nkshah@lbl.gov average efficiency (du Can et al. 2009).
 Energy Efficiency

ownership rates have been shown to significantly in- by characteristics such as fan size, operating speed, or
crease in low-income Indian households as income airflow. Fans have higher efficacy at lower speeds mean-
levels increase (De la Rue du Can et al. 2009). Although ing standards and labeling programs categorize fans by
ceiling fan standards and labeling programs are speci- operating speed (Chakraborty 2004). Fan efficacy can
fied for every major economy in the world, these pro- be increased through increasing blade length because
grams only discourage the use of highly inefficient fans power consumption decreases as blade length increases
(Waide and Harrington 2011). In developed countries assuming constant airflow. Accordingly, some programs
and countries with milder climates, a smaller frac- categorize fan standards and labels by fan size or sweep.
tion of electricity consumption is attributable to Table 1 summarizes fan standards and labeling frame-
ceiling fans. Nevertheless, ceiling fans account works in various countries. In the USA, the ENERGY
for as much as 5 % of residential electricity use STAR program specifies minimum ceiling fan efficacy
in the USA, although this varies greatly by region rankings for three different airflow levels (ENERGY
(Calwell and Horowitz 2001). Even in those areas 2012b). Similarly, the Indian standard IS-374 defines
where they do not constitute a significant fraction minimum efficacy levels for five different ceiling fan
of electricity demand, ceiling fans can reduce en- size categories (BIS 2007). In addition to this, the Indian
ergy consumption by reducing the use of other Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) maintains a star
cooling devices. rating system based on fan efficacy (Singh et al. 2010).
This study assesses the potential for global ceil- However, the Indian star rating system is applicable to
ing fan energy-efficiency improvement. We ana- only one size of fan (1,200 mm) and does not vary by
lyze the cost-effectiveness of ceiling fan efficiency fan speed.
improvements while estimating the global potential
for both energy consumption and CO2-e emission
reductions. We utilize the Bottom-Up Energy Efficiency improvement options for ceiling fan
Analysis System (BUENAS) to make these esti- systems
mates (McNeil et al. 2012). First, we present a
technological economic analysis of fan efficiency The ceiling fan system consists of multiple components
improvement options followed by global energy that together determine the fan’s overall energy con-
saving estimates. Finally, we discuss implications sumption. We focus on engineering improvements that
for the design of market transformation programs are easily quantifiable such as changes to fan motors and
and conclude the paper. blades that improve ceiling fan efficiency.

Fan motors
Technological-economic assessment of efficiency
improvement options in ceiling fans
Historically, ceiling fans have utilized AC induction
motors because these motors are durable, easy to con-
Ceiling fan energy performance is typically mea-
struct, and relatively inexpensive to manufacture. How-
sured in units of meters cubed per minute per watt
ever, these AC induction fan motors are relatively inef-
(m3/min/W). This represents the ratio of air deliv-
ficient because of the slip3 associated with single-phase
ery to power input. The term “efficiency” is com-
induction motors. Brushless DC (BLDC) motors have
monly used to represent the ratio of mechanical-
become increasingly common in appliances in recent
output to electrical-input power. In this paper, we
decades due to developments in electronic commutation
follow the example of earlier studies (Chakraborty
and the availability of inexpensive and high-performing
2004).The term “efficacy” refers to fan perfor-
magnetic materials (Desroches and Garbesi 2011). Such
mance, while the term “efficiency” is used as a
motors are more efficient than brushed DC motors be-
g en er al pe r f or m a nc e de s c r i p t o r an d w he n
cause they do not have the friction loss associated with
discussing the performance of motors.
mechanical commutation. Induction motors are
Standards and labeling programs for ceiling fans are
typically designed to ensure a specified level of efficacy. 3
The slip is the difference between the speed of the rotor and the
Specifications include subcategories that are classified magnetic field in an AC induction motor.
Energy Efficiency

Table 1 Summary of characteristics used in various standards and labeling programs

Country Agency Standard/Label type Speed Size category Rating type

India BIS Standard Voluntary Yes Specifies minimum efficacy for various fan sizes
India BEE Label Voluntary Only 1,200 mm Assigns star ratings to fans meeting minimum
efficacy requirements
China NDRC, AQSIQ Standard Mandatory Yes Assigns ratings based on efficacy, to fans classified
by size
USA EPA Label Voluntary Yes Specifies minimum efficacy for fans classified by
operating speed

Note: In Europe and India, the term “service value” is used to refer to efficacy.

inefficient because their rotors do not rotate synchro- consumption by an estimated 60 % in the USA (Parker
nously with the magnetic field that induces rotor motion and Hibbs 2010). In addition to the potential energy
which results in slip. BLDC motors alleviate these efficiency improvements achieved with BLDC motors,
issues because the rotor moves synchronously with some fans in India incorporate a combination of elements
the rotating AC magnetic field produced by elec- that affect AC induction motor efficiency. These fans
tronic commutation. For instance, a 75-W BLDC consume significantly less energy than normal. At high
motor has been estimated to have an efficiency of speeds, these fans can reduce power consumption from
up to about 90 %, whereas the average new 75-W 70–75 W to about 45–50 W. AC induction motor effi-
AC induction motor has an efficiency of around ciency in these fans are increased with the amount of
75 % (Desroches and Garbesi 2011). Table 2 “active” material (such as lamination steel and copper),
shows this efficiency along with those of other reduced air gap between the stator and rotor, and incor-
75-W motors. poration of standard-grade aluminum for die-cast rotors.4
Multiple engineering studies have estimated the po-
tential for reducing energy consumption through the use
of BLDC motors. One experimental Taiwanese study Fan blades
shows that the energy consumption of a ceiling fan with
a BLDC motor is about 50 % that of a fan with a split- Improving fan blade design has been shown to have a
phase induction motor (Liu et al. 2009).An experimental significant influence on fan efficiency. Efficiency im-
study from Australia shows that BLDC motors de- provements have been achieved by multiple approaches.
creases ceiling fan energy consumption by a factor of For example, these include incorporation of aerodynam-
three at low speeds and a factor of two at high speeds ic attachments for conventional blades (Volk 1990), a
(Schmidt and Patterson 2001). Industry experts indicate decrease in the angle of attack through the use of
that using a BLDC motor can reduce ceiling fan energy twisted, tapered (TT) blades (Bird 2004), and use of TT
blades with an air foil (Sonne and Parker 1998). We focus
Table 2 Efficiency data for various 75-W motor types in the USA
on the last of these options due to the wide use of this type
of blade and the potentially large energy savings that are
Motor type Efficiency associated with this design. TT blades with an airfoil
increase efficiency by reducing energy lost to turbulence
NovaTorquea 90 %
6
and flow separation as discussed by Parker et al. (1999).
Practical limits BLDC 87 %
Optimal blade design requires a balance between multiple
Practical limits AC induction 84 %
objectives including maximization of air speed, uniform
Average new production 75 %
Average installed base 60 % 4
Note: This information including proprietary cost and technolo-
gy data has been collected by the Prayas Energy Group in consul-
Source: Desroches and Garbesi 2011 tations with manufacturers and industry experts during the estab-
a
The company NovaTorque has incorporated technical improve- lishment of the Super Efficient Equipment Program (SEEP) for
ments to push efficiency further beyond the so-called practical ceiling fans in India and shared with the authors confidentially
limits of a BLDC motor. (Prayas Energy Group 2012).
 Energy Efficiency

air speed along the fan radius, and maximization of Eco fan is advertised as having a 75 % reduction in
airflow coverage. A test of one such patented blade energy consumption due to the Emerson EcoMotorTM
design indicates that the subject invention has an effica- (Emerson 2010).
cy 86–111 % higher than that of a conventional flat The figure shows that fans with BLDC motors have
blade, indicating remarkable potential for energy- far higher efficacy than the current ENERGY STAR
efficiency improvements from changes in fan blade high-speed standard requires (2 m3/min/W). These data
design (Parker et al. 2000). These blades can also be indicate that engineering improvements, such as those
used to reduce motor size and cost, and the resulting previously discussed, can be used for purposes other
device will still outperform a conventional fan. Some than increasing efficacy. Other purposes include
efficient blade designs have been adapted for aesthetic reducing motor size or material quality to reduce
purposes to appear like traditional blades from the bot- manufacturing costs in the absence of policy intervention
tom side while being aerodynamic on the top side, thus to improve efficiency.
improving efficiency 10–26 % when compared to con-
ventional designs (Parker and Hibbs 2010). The blade Summary of efficiency improvement options
has been designed to meet a market preference by some
consumers for energy-efficient fans with a traditional Table 3 shows fan power consumption estimates
appearance. resulting from various options from the preceding
discussion.
Fan efficiency improvement opportunities: empirical As discussed earlier, actual reported efficacy im-
evidence from the US market provements for the best blade designs are much higher
than those summarized in Table 3. For the purposes of
Figure 1 shows ENERGY STAR market data for qual- this study, we have assumed that blade design improve-
ifying fans being sold in the USA and Canada ments will lead to relatively lower efficacy increases of
(ENERGY STAR 2012a and 2012b). The information 10–26 % (Sonne and Parker 1998), implying a power
regarding motor and blade type was obtained from consumption of between 55 and63 W, i.e., an approxi-
product catalogs and from ceiling fan manufacturers mately 15 % improvement in power consumption from
producing fans with the highest efficacy, including a 70-W baseline. These lower efficacy improvement
Monte Carlo, Fanimation, Regency, and Emerson. The assumptions for fan blades are justified because (a)
data in the figures are comparable to the performance of blade design has associated aesthetic and customer sat-
the most efficient fans being introduced in US and isfaction trade-offs, (b) many high-efficiency blade de-
Canadian markets. For instance, the Emerson Midway signs are proprietary, and (c) the values assumed are a

Fig. 1 Efficacy for ENERGY

STAR ceiling fans (fan only,
without lights) at high speed
Source: ENERGY STAR
(ENERGY STAR 2012a,
ENERGY STAR 2012b) In 2010
and 2011, the market penetration
of ENERGY STAR-qualified
ceiling fans was 18 and 13 %,
respectively, (ENERGY STAR
2012a, ENERGY STAR 2012b)
Energy Efficiency

Table 3 Summary of power consumption of efficient fans using various options

Efficiency improvement option Efficient fan power consumption (W) Average power Percent reduction
savings (W) from baseline
Prayas Energy Sonne and power
Group (2012) Parker (1998)

Improved AC induction motor 45–50 25 ~36

BLDC motor 30–35 35 ~50
Efficient blades 55.5–63.6 10.5 ~15

conservative estimate. The average efficiency improve- the global cost of materials for a 750-W induction motor
ment estimates shown in Table 3 are used below to (note: ceiling fan motors are typically much smaller,
estimate the cost-effectiveness of these options. rated about 75 W) is about US$ 43.80, and for a BLDC
motor, the material cost ranges from US$ 24.20 to US$
36.74, as of 2011 (Desroches and Garbesi 2011). This
Technical and economic analysis of efficiency indicates that the material cost of a smaller BLDC
improvement options motor, such as what would be used in ceiling fans,
should also range from a little less than to about equal
Here, we estimate the costs of efficiency improvement to that of a comparable AC induction motor. Therefore,
of ceiling fans using the options previously described. the incremental cost of the BLDC motor over an induc-
We estimate the cost of conserved electricity (CCE) to tion motor is essentially the cost of the controller. A
assess the cost-effectiveness of these efficiency im- BLDC motor controller is estimated to have a
provements. Due to data constraints, we only cite costs manufacturing cost between Indian rupees (INRs)
from a few countries while estimating the CCE. 300–700 in India (Prayas Energy Group 2012). The
same controller would cost between US$ 3.2 to US$
Fan motors 22.5 in the USA (Chiang and Fairchild Semiconductor
2010). We assume the incremental cost of a BLDC
Based on data collected from industry experts, we esti- motor that replaces a typical ceiling fan induction motor
mate the incremental cost of efficiency improvements of of 75 W to be approximately US$ 10.50 for the purposes
motors typically used in ceiling fans. We consider two of this paper.
types of efficiency improvement options. First, given
that BLDC motors are significantly more efficient than Fan blades
induction motors, we estimate the incremental cost of
BLDC motors of the same size and performance spec- The cost of manufacturing efficient ceiling fan blades in
ifications over the typical induction motor. Second, we the USA is estimated to be about US$ 2.25, versus US$
consider the cost of improving the efficiency of the 0.25 per conventional flat blade (Parker and Hibbs
induction motor itself, where the efficiency improve- 2010; Parker et al. 2000). The incremental cost of
ments are smaller and less costly compared to those manufacturing an efficient blade versus a conventional
achieved by a BLDC motor. BLDC motors are typically blade in India is about INR 60 for three blades, i.e., US$
more expensive when compared to induction motors 0.36 per blade. Although these appear to be significant
primarily because of the extra cost of the controller. cost increases for these components, they are not very
Note that induction motors and BLDC motors have large (~5 %) compared to the total retail price of a
similar material costs (excluding the BLDC motor con- ceiling fan. An important point to mention in the case
troller). This is primarily because the extra cost of per- of efficiency improvement through blade design is that
manent magnets in a BLDC motor is compensated by blade design and manufacturing are driven by aesthetic
reduction in costs due to less copper and steel (See considerations rather than just efficiency. This is also
Chiang 2010; Desroches and Garbesi 2011 for a reflected in divergent estimates of the costs of
detailed discussion).Desroches and Garbesi find that manufacturing depending on the design, material,
 Energy Efficiency

Table 4 Summary of reported

manufacturing costs in dollars of Efficiency Improvement Option India USA Average ($)
efficiency improvement options
Prayas Energy Chiang Parker and
Group (2012) (2010) Hibbs (2010)

Low High

Improved AC induction motor $1.09 $1.82 $1.5

In converting from a per-blade to BLDC motor $5.45 $10.91 $3.2–$22.5 $10.5
a total incremental cost, we as- Efficient blades $1.09 $6.00 $3.5
sume that the fan has three blades.

manufacturing, and treatment/finishing processes. The as follows: the manufacturing cost of conserved elec-
significance of aesthetic considerations in blade manu- tricity (CCEm) which considers the incremental cost of
facture implies that mandating more efficient blades the higher efficiency fan to the manufacturer and the
through minimum energy performance standards cost to the consumer of conserved electricity (CCEc)
(MEPS) is not likely to be a practical or desirable option. which considers the incremental cost of the higher effi-
However, given that some fans may be designed to meet ciency model to the consumer. The former metric
energy efficiency policy specifications by using more (CCEm) is lower than the latter (CCEc) as it does
efficient blades, it is still useful to estimate the costs of not include markups or taxes. Therefore, CCEm
efficiency improvement through more efficient blades, can be used to measure the cost-effectiveness of
particularly for labeling and incentive programs. Table 4 a market transformation program, such as an up-
reports these costs in dollar terms along with average stream incentive program, while CCEc can be used
numbers, which are used as the input for the cost- to measure the cost-effectiveness of a standards
effectiveness calculation. program or a downstream incentive program.
As shown in Table 5 above, improved AC induction
Cost of conserved electricity motors are the most cost effective single option, follow-
ed by BLDC motors. We also note that our cost and
This section presents the CCE in India for motor and efficiency assumptions (and resulting CCE estimates)
blade improvements described above, using the efficien- regarding efficiency improvement using more efficient
cy assumptions discussed earlier along with correspond- blades are conservative and may very well be lower than
ing cost assumptions. Two kinds of CCEs are calculated those shown. This can be attributed to using cost and

Table 5 Cost of conserved electricity for various efficiency improvement options in India

Efficiency improvement optiona Average power Percent reduction Average incremental CCEm ($/kWh) CCEc ($/kWh)
savings (W) from baseline power manufacturing cost ($)

Improved AC induction motor (A) 25 36 1.5 0.003 0.005

BLDC motor (B) 35 50 10.5 0.014 0.027
Efficient blades (C) 10 15 3.5 0.015 0.031
A+C 32 45 5.0 0.007 0.014
B+C 40 57 14.0 0.016 0.032

We have assumed a 100%markup in estimating costs to the consumer. Lifetime and hours of use assumptions are in line with Boegle (2010).
a
Efficiency improvement options from single components (A, B, and C) are presented first followed by efficiency improvement options
from combining two options (A + C and B + C). The options are subsequently ordered by increasing cost of conserved energy. Also option
C, efficient blades can be used with both BLDC and AC motors. While BLDC motors and AC motors are widely available, efficient blades
may be proprietary designs and also carry associated aesthetic trade-offs.
Assumptions: Lifetime=10 years; hours of use per day=8.7; discount rate=7.6 %; multiplier for markup and taxes=2.0
Energy Efficiency

Table 6 Cost of conserved electricity for various efficiency options in the SEAD economies and China

Efficient blades BLDC motor Improved AC induction Representative

(15 % savings, $3.5 (50 % savings, $10.5 motor (36 % savings, tariff
incremental cost) incremental cost) $1.5 incremental cost) ($/kWh)

Economy Discount rate Baseline CCEm CCEc CCEm CCEc CCEm CCEc
UEC (kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh) ($/kWh)

Australia 3.11 % 21 0.13 0.26 0.12 0.24 0.023 0.047 0.10

Brazil 11.58 % 88 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.008 0.016 0.19
Canada 1.90 % 11 0.23 0.47 0.21 0.42 0.042 0.084 0.08
China 1.63 % 75.3 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.006 0.012 0.19
EU 6.63 % 11 0.30 0.59 0.27 0.53 0.053 0.106 0.19
India 7.60 % 224 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.003 0.005 0.08
Indonesia 1.12 % 150 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.003 0.006 0.09
Japan 3.28 % 21 0.13 0.26 0.12 0.24 0.024 0.047 0.22
Korea 4.19 % 21 0.14 0.28 0.12 0.25 0.025 0.049 0.07
Mexico 3.81 % 88 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.006 0.012 0.08
Russia 3.67 % 11 0.26 0.51 0.23 0.46 0.046 0.092 0.05
South Africa 3.33 % 88 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.006 0.011 0.08
USA 1.47 % 78.1 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.006 0.012 0.11

efficiency estimates for more efficient blades with a economy, but the costs of BLDC motors and AC
traditional appearance as discussed earlier rather than induction motors are driven mainly by the cost of
the most efficient blades (Parker and Hibbs 2010). Also, materials and electronics, which are part of the
data on blades indicated divergent estimates of the costs global market. The cost estimates for efficient
of manufacturing depending on design, material, blades are more uncertain because these blades
manufacturing, and treatment/finishing processes, may be based on proprietary designs, and blade
which varied due to aesthetic considerations. Given design and manufacture are driven by aesthetic
the globally traded nature, maturity, and high con- considerations rather than just efficiency. This is
tribution of material costs to the total costs of the also reflected in divergent estimates of production
efficiency technologies considered, cost estimates costs depending on design, material, manufactur-
based on the data in India and the USA are likely ing, and treatment/finishing processes. Table 6
to be a reasonable approximation of the costs in shows the estimate CCE for efficiency options in
other regions. To give a picture of cost-effectiveness SEAD countries and China.
under various scenarios, we also present the results of As can be seen in Table 6, improved AC induc-
a sensitivity analysis on the CCE in the next section of tion motors are cost-effective in almost all econo-
this article. mies, and BLDC motors and efficient blades are
The cost-effectiveness analysis for other regions cost-effective in countries with higher fan usage
presented in Table 6 takes into account region- (i.e., high unit energy consumption or UEC), such
specific usage assumptions and discount rate esti- as Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, South
mates. The assumptions regarding usage are Africa, and the USA. Tariffs are assumed based on
discussed in more detail later in the energy saving inputs used in LBNL’s BUENAS model and in data
potential section. The assumptions regarding per- collected by Shah et al. (2013).5
cent savings and incremental costs are the same as
those presented earlier. This is a reasonable as- 5
See the section on “Energy Savings Potential” for more details
sumption because the percent saving numbers are on the BUENAS model. http://www.superefficient.org/en/
the same for the same technology regardless of Products/BUENAS.aspx
 Energy Efficiency

Fig. 2 Sensitivity analysis of

cost-effectiveness of incentive
programs in India, assuming 50 %
power savings

Sensitivity of cost-effectiveness analysis assuming low hours of use and high incremental costs of
efficiency improvement. Other countries with high ceil-
To illustrate the cost-effectiveness of the options under ing fan usage (i.e., high UEC from ceiling fans) will also
varying assumptions for hours of use and cost, we find these efficiency improvements cost-effective, as
present three scenarios that have different hours of use. discussed earlier.
We varied the costs of efficiency improvement from
BLDC motors by calculating the CCEm using our high
incremental cost estimate of $22.5 in the “high cost” Energy saving potential
scenario and our low incremental cost of $3.2 in the
“low cost” scenario. These results are presented in We used the BUENAS6 to estimate the potential global
Fig. 2, showing the CCE under the base-cost ($10.5), energy and CO2 emission savings from accelerated im-
low-cost ($3.2), and high-cost ($22.5) scenarios. These plementation of the engineering developments for ceil-
cost estimates are in-line with the high and low ing fans described earlier. A detailed description of the
estimates reported by Chiang (2010). The range of hours methodology is available in (McNeil et al. 2012). This
of use per day (4–12 h) is consistent with Boegle et al. version of BUENAS covers 13 major economies,
(2010), who identify that a lower range of use is 3–5 h representing 80 % of the world’s total energy consump-
per day and a higher range of use of 10–16 h per day. We tion. Our objective is to provide an approximate esti-
also use the CCEc metric discussed earlier to show the mate for the potential savings from accelerated adoption
estimated impact on cost-effectiveness of moving from of efficient fans. More precise estimates of the saving
an upstream program to a downstream incentive or potential in each of the economies covered than those
standards program. This is represented as the curve presented here will require significant further work in
labeled “downstream” in Fig. 2. A typical tariff for India order to provide a more robust empirical basis for the
is approximately 8 cents/kWh (~4.5 INR/kWh). assumptions used. Note that we have more robust data
The results in Fig. 2 show that, for improvements on India, China, and the USA compared to other
equivalent to the 50 % savings in power consumption
obtainable using a BLDC motor, an upstream incentive
6
program for ceiling fans in India is cost-effective even http://www.superefficient.org/en/Products/BUENAS.aspx
Energy Efficiency

countries, and hence, the estimates of saving potential an efficiency case equals the savings. Energy savings
for these countries are likely to be more accurate than for are then converted into CO2 equivalent emission miti-
the others. gation according to the power generation mix from each
country.

Data and methodology

Results
BUENAS is an end-use energy forecasting model de-
signed to provide a detailed assessment of the potential This section presents the BUENAS results in terms of
for energy savings and green house gas GHG emission stock energy consumption and global potential energy
reductions from energy-efficiency standards and label- savings. BUENAS also provides CO2 emission mitiga-
ing programs worldwide (see McNeil et al. 2012 for a tion potential calculated using country-specific carbon
detailed description of the model). The model is “bot- factors (McNeil et al. 2012).
tom-up” in that it calculates energy demand based on
input data for individual appliance products. BUENAS Efficiency scenario
is composed of three modules. The first calculates the
number of appliances per household (diffusion) in a In the efficiency scenario, efficient fans with BLDC
country at a given point in time, primarily based on an motors gradually enter the market, gaining 20 % of
empirical relationship observed between appliance own- market share starting in 2012. The market reaches satu-
ership and macroeconomic household variables such as ration in 2017 when 100 % of fans sold are assumed to
household income. The second module estimates energy be efficient. The UEC for efficient fans is assumed to be
consumption and efficiency improvements at the appli- constant throughout the forecast period. We evaluate
ance level. The third module is a stock turnover module energy saving potentials in 2016, 2020, and 2030.
that calculates the sales of appliances every year based Table 7. shows the results of the energy saving
on retirement of old units and increased penetration of potential analysis, and Fig. 3 shows the correspond-
appliances in households. This module combines the ing CO2 emission results. India represents almost
sales in every year with UEC to estimate the total stock half of the potential electricity savings and CO2
energy consumption. The difference in stock energy emission mitigation potential in the economies covered
consumption between a business as usual (BAU) and in this analysis.

Table 7 Annual and cumulative

energy saving forecasts Annual electricity savings (TWh) Cumulative electricity savings (TWh)

Year 2016 2020 2030 2012–2016 2012–2020 2012–2030

Australia 0.05 0.12 0.21 0.12 0.50 2.31
Brazil 1.43 3.35 6.09 3.29 13.83 65.41
Canada 0.05 0.11 0.19 0.11 0.46 2.08
China 9.01 20.68 35.77 21.02 86.50 396.59
EU 0.48 1.08 1.76 1.14 4.59 20.22
India 14.17 33.54 62.38 32.52 137.91 660.60
Indonesia 1.12 2.63 4.81 2.59 10.88 51.51
Japan 0.24 0.54 0.84 0.56 2.27 9.90
Korea 0.11 0.26 0.44 0.26 1.07 4.91
Mexico 0.41 0.93 1.53 0.96 3.90 17.43
Russia 0.15 0.34 0.52 0.37 1.46 6.19
South Africa 0.17 0.40 0.65 0.40 1.67 7.46
USA 2.43 5.65 9.86 5.61 23.47 108.57
Total 29.82 69.62 125.05 68.94 288.51 1,353.19
 Energy Efficiency

Policy

Fig. 3 Potential CO2 emission reductions resulting from introduction of efficient fans, 2000–2030

Realizing cost-effective efficiency improvements: fan speed on efficacy. First and foremost, size categories
lessons for market transformation programs are important in market transformation programs to
preclude the possibility that simply increasing blade
As discussed earlier in this paper, there are several cost- length, without necessarily delivering better service,
effective options for the improvement of ceiling-fan could circumvent a policy based merely on efficacy.
efficiency that would reduce fan energy consumption For instance, although airflow increases with larger
by more than 50 %. Although highly efficient fans that blades, the amount of cooling felt by the user may not.
incorporate most of the efficiency improvement options This is because the service delivered to the final user (in
discussed in this paper are commercially available in this case, cooling) depends not on the total volume of air
certain countries (e.g., the USA), they constitute a very moved but also on the velocity of the air.7 If market
small percentage of sales. In some countries (e.g., India), transformation policies classify fans by size, fan manu-
fans with BLDC motors and efficient blades are not facturers will not be able to simply install longer blades
currently commercially available. Several barriers, in- to improve efficacy nominally without competing with
cluding high purchase price and lack of information other manufacturers in a separate size category or im-
(e.g., lack of labels that recognize highly efficient per- proving the service delivered to the final user. Second,
formance), have been identified that contribute to the operating speed is also an important criterion in design-
limited adoption of highly efficient fans (Singh et al. ing market transformation programs because efficacy
2010). In this section, we discuss some broad insights varies inversely with increasing fan speed (Davis
for energy efficiency market transformation programs Energy Group Energy Solutions 2004). This effect can
based on the earlier discussion. be addressed either by using standard speed or mini-
mum airflow in the test procedure for the program, such
as in India’s standard and labeling programs, or by
General insights changing the efficacy requirement at various speeds,
such as in the ENERGY STAR program. It should be
Some of the insights that can be drawn from the preced- noted that the testing burden would be lower in the first
ing discussion apply across various types of market case, with a trade-off on the accuracy of the test proce-
transformation programs and policies. We discuss some dure at various speeds.
such general insights with respect to key fan character- The literature discussed earlier indicates that
istics such as fan size and speed, and with respect to there is remarkable potential for energy-efficiency
blade design.
It is important for market transformation programs to 7
The coefficient of convective heat transfer of the human body
classify fans by size and take into account the effect of depends on the velocity of the air.
Energy Efficiency

Fig. 4 BEE (India) star labels

compared to estimates of potential
ceiling fan efficacy. Note: The
baseline efficacy value is based
on the average values reported as
“national player’s models”
presented in (Garg and Jose
2009). Incremental improvements
correspond to those presented
earlier. The efficacy level of the
best available fan corresponds to
the fan with the highest efficacy in
Fig. 1

improvements from changes in fan blade design. We fans(without a light kit) on the US ceiling fan market
also find that blade design improvements have greater were compliant with ENERGY STAR, indicating sig-
efficacy/power consumption saving impact at higher nificant room for efficiency improvement (ENERGY
speeds. This implies that market transformation pro- ENERGY 2012a2a; PWC 2012).
grams in economies with hotter climates and higher These efficacy levels shown in Fig. 4 are tested under
average airflows (e.g., India) will benefit proportionally different conditions (notably airflow requirements/
more from blade design improvements than economies speeds), so they cannot be directly compared against
where average airflows tend to be lower (e.g., the USA). efficacy levels used by the standards or labeling
For example, the most efficient blade designs discussed programs in China, the EU, and the USA without
in the literature will improve efficacy by 86 % at lower accounting for this.8 However, the improvements in
speeds (airflows) versus 111 % at higher speeds efficacy discussed in this paper are applicable across
(airflows) compared with conventional blade designs the range of commonly encountered airflows. This
(Parker and Hibbs 2010). means that these improvements will offer significant
energy savings of a similar order of magnitude regardless
of airflow or test procedure alignment. For comparison, the
Standards and labeling programs US ENERGY STAR label has an efficacy requirement of
4.2 (m3/min/W) at low speeds and 2.1 (m3/min/W) at high
Efficiency levels specified by standards and labeling speeds, while the lowest standard for efficacy in China
programs are far below what can be achieved by varies by fan size from 3.47 (m3/min/W) for 1,800-mm
implementing cost-effective energy-efficiency options fans to 2.75 (m3/min/W) for 900-mm fans (ENERGY
in ceiling fans (see Fig. 4). For example, as seen from 2012b; AQSIQ 2010). Figure 4 makes clear the significant
data on the efficacy of fans meeting the US ENERGY potential for improvement in fan efficacy through increases
STAR requirements, fans using BLDC motors and in specified standards and labels.
efficient blades are significantly more efficient (with
efficacy as high as 15 m3/min/W) compared to the
8
efficiency requirement for qualifying for ENERGY See Davis Energy Group (2004) for a discussion of the effect of
fan speed and motor speed on efficacy. Increasing airflow from
STAR (efficacy of 2.1–4.2 m3/min/W). Furthermore,
5,000 CFM (the US high speed) to 7,415 CFM (i.e., 210 m3/min,
the Indian BEE voluntary star rating program for fans the minimum airflow for star-rated fans in India), i.e., a 48 %
only covered 2 % of the Indian market, and only 18 % of increase will yield a decrease in efficacy of at most 35 %.
 Energy Efficiency

The highest efficacy level recognized by labels in ceiling fan power consumption savings of more than
several countries is significantly lower than what can 50 %. Out of the several types of policies typically used
be achieved by adopting cost-effective efficiency op- to accelerate adoption of efficient products (e.g., awards,
tions. Hence, current efficacy label levels need to be incentives, and standards and labeling programs), stan-
revised significantly to encourage deeper penetration of dards and labeling programs are the most commonly
efficient ceiling fans at the top of the market with used to accelerate the market penetration of efficient
efficacy achievable using BLDC motors and efficient fans.
blades that are already on the market in the USA and Efficacy levels are tested under different conditions
that are cost-effective in other countries. The low pene- (notably airflow requirements/speeds) in various coun-
tration level of efficient ceiling fans in both India and the tries, so they cannot be directly compared against each
USA seems to indicate the presence of barriers to effi- other without accounting for this fact. Nevertheless, the
ciency other than information, such as first cost, that improvements in efficacy discussed in this paper are
may not be able to be addressed within a standards and applicable across the range of commonly encountered
labeling framework. airflows, meaning that these improvements will offer
significant energy savings of a similar order of magni-
Incentive programs tude regardless of airflow or test procedure alignment.
The highest efficacy level required by standards and
Incentive programs for efficient fans could accelerate labeling programs in several countries is significantly
the penetration of superefficient fans for the following lower than what can be achieved by adopting the cost-
reasons. First, adoption of cost-effective efficient appli- effective efficiency improvement options discussed
ances is often hindered by high first cost, e.g., as here. Hence, current efficacy label levels need to be
discussed by Sathaye and Gupta (2010). In emerging revised significantly to encourage deeper penetration
economies, consumers are highly sensitive to high first of efficient ceiling fans at the top of the market.
costs (Singh et al. 2010). Second, due to the importance The low penetration level of efficient ceiling fans in
of aesthetics discussed earlier, it is not practical or both India and the USA, even with labeling programs in
desirable to mandate efficiency improvement from place,9 seems to indicate the presence of barriers. These
blade design through MEPS. However, the full existing barriers to efficiency, in addition to information, such as
potential from more efficient blades, as well as from first cost, may not be able to be addressed fully within a
BLDC motors, could be exploited through incentive standards and labeling framework, particularly in
programs for superefficient fans. Such programs could emerging economies with price-sensitive consumers.
cost-effectively target efficacy of up to 15 m3/min/W , as However, despite the large saving potential, financial
discussed earlier. There are several examples of finan- incentive programs that promote the adoption of highly
cial incentive programs that lower the first cost of cost- efficient fans by removing the first cost barrier are not
effective energy-efficient appliances and equipment to common.
accelerate their adoption. However, despite the large One notable example under development is the SEEP
saving potential, financial incentive programs to pro- in India where financial incentives will be provided to
mote the adoption of highly efficient fans are not fan manufacturers to produce and sell highly efficient
common. fans: fans that consume less than half of the energy
consumed by fans typically sold on the Indian market
(Singh et al. 2010). Even if the entire incremental cost of
Conclusions the highly efficient fans is covered by the financial
incentives, the cost of the conserved electricity for effi-
This paper presents an analysis of the potential for the ciency improvements over 50 % is just 0.7 rupees per
improvement of ceiling fan components to reduce glob- kilowatt hour (US$ 0.014/kWh) which is about one
al energy consumption and GHG emissions. Improved
9
blade design and AC induction motor materials, and the BEE’s voluntary star rating program for fans only covered 2 % of
the Indian market, while only 18 % of the fans (without a light kit)
increased use of BLDC motors, are identified as cost-
on the US ceiling fan market were compliant with ENERGY
effective options to improve the efficiency of ceiling STAR (ENERGY 2012a) indicating significant room for efficiency
fans. Adaptation of these technologies could provide improvement.
Energy Efficiency

sixth of the cost of supplying electricity in India standards development: analysis of standards options
for ceiling fans.”
(Sathaye and Gupta 2010). SEEP or a similar upstream
Desroches, L.-B.,and Garbesi, K. (2011). Max Tech and Beyond:
incentive program for ceiling fans would be cost- maximizing appliance and equipment efficiency by design.
effective even assuming higher costs and lower hours Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
of use as discussed earlier. Therefore, there remains Report LBNL-4998E.
De la Rue du Can, Stephane, Virginie, E, Letschert, Michael A.
significant scope for improved policy design and imple-
McNeil, Nan Zhou, and Jayant, A. (2009). Sathaye.
mentation for aggressive and cost-effective ceiling fan Residential and transport energy use in India: past trend
efficiency improvements. and future outlook. LBNL.
Emerson Climate Technologies. (2010). Midway Eco, http://www.
emersonfans.com/Pages/Fan.aspx?Fan=Midway%20Eco
Acknowledgments This work was funded by the Bureau of Accessed 12/15/2010.
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific ENERGY STAR. (2012a). ENERGY STAR ceiling fan product
Affairs, US Department of State, and administered by the list posted on November 14, 2012. http://www.energystar.
US Department of Energy in support of the SEAD initiative gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=find_a_product.showProduct
through the US Department of Energy under Contract No. Groupandpgw_code=CF.
DE-AC02-05CH11231. ENERGY STAR. (2012b). ENERGY STAR unit shipment and
Michael McNeil and Jing Ke of Lawrence Berkeley National market penetration report calendar year 2011 Summary.
Laboratory provided support for the BUENAS modeling effort. http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/downloads/unit_
Daljit Singh and Adwait Pednekar of Prayas Energy Group shipment_data/2011_USD_Summary_Report.pdf.
provided a lot of the underlying data, as well as insights Garg, S., and Jose, A. (2009). Energy efficiency labelling
and comments on the draft article. Steve Pantano and P.K. of ceiling fans in India: challenges and the way for-
Mukherjee at the Collaborative Labeling and Appliance ward. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference
Standards Program (CLASP), Abigail Daken at the US on Energy Efficiency in Domestic Appliances and
Environmental Protection Agency, Gabrielle Dreyfus at the US Lighting. http://www.enbook.pl/sites/default/files/
Department of Energy, Bonn Maguire of the Department of publikacje/150/20120130/energy_efficinency_in_
Climate Change and Energy Efficiency of Australia, and Won domestic_vol_3_p2.pdf.
Young Park at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory General Administration of Quality Supervision Inspection and
provided helpful comments and suggestions. Any errors or Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China, (AQSIQ).
omissions are the authors’ own. (2010). Minimum allowable values of energy efficiency and
energy efficiency grades of AC electric fans GB 12021.9-
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the 2008, Standardization Administration of the People’s
Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, Republic of China.
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the orig- Koomey, J. et al. (2010). Defining a standard metric for electricity
inal author(s) and the source are credited. savings. Environmental Research Letters, 5.
Liu, Chuan-Sheng, Jong-Chin, Hwang, Liang-Rui, Chen,
Chih-Cheng, Fu. (2009). “Development of new structure of
brushless DC servo motor for ceiling fan,” Industrial
References Electronics and Applications, 2009. ICIEA 2009. 4th IEEE
Conference on , vol., no., pp.2640,2643, 25-27 May.
McNeil, M., Letschert, V., de la Rue du Can, S., and Ke, J.
Bird, G. (2004). High efficiency ceiling fan. United States Patent (2012). Bottom-up energy analysis system – methodol-
Number 6733241. ogy and results. Berkeley CA: Lawrence Berkeley
Boegle, A., Singh, D. and Sant, G. (2010). Estimating technical National Laboratory Report LBNL 5722E.
energy saving potential from improving appliance efficiency Parker, D, and Hibbs, B. (2010), Efficient traditionally
in Indian households. In ACEEE summer study on energy appearing ceiling fan blades with aerodynamical upper
efficiency in buildings: the climate for efficiency is now. surfaces. United States Patent Number 7665967.
Bureau of Indian Standards. (2007). Indian Standard - specification Parker, D., Callahan, M., Sonne J., and Su, G. (1999).
for electric ceiling type fans and regulators (3rd Revision), Development of a high efficiency ceiling fan “the
Edition 4.6 (Incorporating Amendments No. 1-6). gossamer wind.” Tallahassee, FL: Florida Energy
Calwell, C., & Horowitz, N. (2001). Ceiling fans: fulfilling the Office, Department of Community Affairs.
energy efficiency promise. Home Energy, 18(1), 24–30. Parker, D., Hua, G., and Hibbs, B. (2000). High efficiency ceiling
Chakraborty, A. (2004). Energy conservation in ceiling fans. In fan. United States Patent Number 6039541.
Proceedings of the 13th National Power Systems Conference, Prayas Energy Group, (2012). Singh G, Sant G, Chunekar
Chennai, India, pp. 835-838. A, Pednekar A and Dixit S, Development of Super-
Chiang, J., Fairchild Semiconductor. (2010), Power point presentation, Efficient Equipment Program (SEEP) for fans,
September 16. Available at: http://edg1.vcall.com/irwebsites/ Av a i l a b l e a t : h t t p : / / w w w. p r a y a s p u n e . o rg / p e g /
fairchildsemi/Final%20-%20PCIA.pdf. publications/item/175.html.
Davis Energy Group Energy Solutions. (2004). “Codes and Sathaye, J., and Gupta, A. (2010). Eliminating electricity
standards enhancement initiative for PY2004: title 20 deficit through energy efficiency in India: an
 Energy Efficiency

evaluation of aggregate economic and carbon benefits. Singh, D., Barve, A., and Sant, G. (2010).Ceiling fan the
Berkeley CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory overlooked appliance in energy efficiency discussions.
Report LBNL-3381E. Pune, India: Prayas Energy Group.
Schmidt, K., & Patterson, D. (2001). Performance results Sonne, J., and Parker, D. (1998). Measured ceiling fan perfor-
for a high efficiency tropical ceiling fan and compar- mance and usage patterns: implications for efficiency and
isons with conventional fans: Demand side manage- comfort improvement. In Proceedings of ACEEE Summer
ment via small appliance efficiency. Renewable Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Energy Efficiency in
Energy, 22(1–3), 169–176. a Competitive Environment, pp.335-341.
Shah, N., Waide, P., and Phadke, A. (2013). Cooling the Volk, S. (1990). Propeller breeze enhancing blades for conven-
planet: opportunities for deployment of superefficient tional ceiling fans.United States Patent Number 4892460.
room air conditioners, Lawrence Berkeley National Waide, P., and Harrington, L. (2011). Opportunities for success
Laboratory and Navigant Consulting Report, LBNL and CO 2 savings from appliance energy efficiency
6164E, available at:http://superefficient.org/en/ harmonisation. Navigant Consulting in Partnership with
Activities/Technical%20Analysis/~/media/Files/Final% CLASP. Available at: http://www.clasponline.org/clasp.
20SEAD%20Room%20AC%20Report.pdf. online.resource.php?disdoc=781#opportunities.