a roadmap for green building products in china - umd
TRANSCRIPT
PNNL-27954
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
A Roadmap for Green Building Products in China
Towards a National Standard, Testing, Certification, and Labeling System
September 2018
Yuanrong Zhou, Meredydd Evans, Sha Yu
(Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)
Jun Ruan, Hao Xu
(China Solid State Lighting Alliance)
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the
United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency
thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any
warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility
for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not
necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by
the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial
Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily
state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY
operated by
BATTELLE
for the
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Printed in the United States of America
Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the
Office of Scientific and Technical Information,
P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062;
ph: (865) 576-8401
fax: (865) 576-5728
email: [email protected]
Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service
5301 Shawnee Rd., Alexandria, VA 22312
ph: (800) 553-NTIS (6847)
email: [email protected] <http://www.ntis.gov/about/form.aspx>
Online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov
PNNL-27954
i
A Roadmap for Green Building Products in China
Towards a National Standard, Testing, Certification, and Labeling System
September 2018
Yuanrong Zhou, Meredydd Evans, Sha Yu
(Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)
Jun Ruan, Hao Xu
(China Solid State Lighting Alliance)
Prepared for
the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Richland, Washington 99352
PNNL-27954
ii
Executive Summary
Certification helps expand the market for green building products (with high product performance
including energy efficiency and resource efficiency) because customers have a clearer sense of
product value and certification can simplify policy linkages to promote green products. Greater
market uptake in turn leads to societal benefits, including improved building energy efficiency and
environmental protection. The Chinese government is committed to promoting green building
products in China through a more robust national green building product standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system. This report aims to provide recommendations for a roadmap on
such a national system in China.
To have a deep understanding of the existing system in China, we selected two types of building
products, window glass products and LED lighting products, focusing on product energy
performance as two case studies. For each product, we organized a working group to collect
feedback from U.S. and Chinese stakeholders. We also conducted detailed gap analyses comparing
the U.S. and Chinese systems on standards for window glass products and certification of LED
lighting products, respectively. Based on inputs from the two working groups and the gap analyses,
we provided recommendations with suggested implementation steps and timelines for the two
cases. Using the lessons learned from these two cases, we also drew a roadmap of implementation
steps broadly to enhance the national green building product standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system in China.
Our two most important recommendations for the existing system in China are (1) better linkages
among different components and programs within the system, and (2) improved quality assurance.
A robust national green building product system requires combined efforts from different parties
related to product testing (standard and accreditation), product certification, and product labeling.
Measurement standards are the foundation of product testing (including physical testing and
simulation) and certification; accreditation ensures the qualification of the testing and simulation
laboratories and certification bodies; product certification ensures that products perform as good
as advertised; and labeling tells product features and supports consumers’ purchasing process.
Policy, such as incentive programs or linking certification with building acceptance code, also
plays the role of providing overall support for a national system and in promoting product
certification. The full system with coordination among relevant stakeholders could streamline the
process, build consumer confidence, and accelerate the market uptake of certified green building
products. Government agencies overseeing these components would need to work collaboratively
to design a comprehensive and robust system, set program rules and regulations, effectively engage
stakeholders in the development of the system, encourage public participation in certification, and
promote high-performance building products in the market. Quality assurance is a crucial element
of the system, which ensures the credibility and quality of certification and in turn increases
consumer confidence in certified products. Verification testing is proven an effective approach for
quality assurance.
PNNL-27954
iii
We summarize the four key factors for the success of a national standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system in the following table.
Factor Approach
Greater coordination and
alignment
Greater alignment and consistency among testing and calculation
standards could help streamline the certification process
Greater coordination and linkage among different components of the
system could help smooth the certification process, be more cost
effective, and accelerate the overall industry development
Robust testing (simulation
and physical testing) and
certification
Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and certification
body could ensure the integrity and quality of product rating
Verification testing (either within certification program or an
independent program) could add another level of assurance in
product performance and enhance consumer confidence in product
label or certification
Third-party certification could help ensure certification program
integrity
Better information
Information transparency could help engage manufacturers in
product certification, smooth the testing and certification process,
and build consumer confidence
Product database could be used to analyze and support the overall
development of the industry
Supporting programs
Supportive policies that could help promote product certification and
the use of certified products, such as building codes and incentive
schemes
Capacity building among consumers is necessary for the system to
realize its true value
We also provide recommendations specific to the two case studies to highlight opportunities in
different portions of the certification system. The recommendations below focus on
standardization of window glass products and certification of LED lighting products. The details
of these recommendations also helped inform the broader cross-cutting recommendations outlined
above, and as such, these recommendations serve as examples of how the cross-cutting
recommendations can be applied to given technical areas.
Standardization of window glass products
1. Adapt measurement standards (both physical testing and calculation/simulation standards)
to enhance consistency among existing Chinese standards (e.g. the use of shading
coefficient vs solar heat gain coefficient); enhance the consistency between the boundary
conditions and the climate in China; and enhance alignment with international metrics and
standards used in other countries (e.g. the measurement of glazing transmittance and
reflectance);
PNNL-27954
iv
2. Enhance the linkage between measurement standards and other components (accreditation
and certification) within the system;
3. Improve the transparency of the product testing process (physical testing and
calculation/simulation) by providing open resources, including manuals of simulation
software and relevant databases;
4. Identify areas that need additional measurement standards (physical testing and
calculation/simulation) with input from industry. Such areas include standards for window
films and window attachments.
Certification of LED lighting products
1. Strengthen the accreditation requirements for testing laboratories and certification bodies;
2. Strengthen the linkages and coordination between different components within the system
(e.g., standards, accreditation, certification, and labeling);
3. Strengthen verification testing for quality assurance;
4. Reshape the certification programs from self-certification to third-party certification.
The Chinese government is committed to enhance the national standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system for green building products. This report provides recommendations for the next
steps.
PNNL-27954
v
执行摘要
产品认证可以使消费者对产品品质的好坏形成更加清晰的认识，因此可以促进扩大高性能
产品，如绿色建筑产品（高性能产品包括节能、资源节约等）的市场规模。同时，产品认
证也可以简化政策对于绿色产品的推广。绿色建筑产品的广泛使用可以带来多重社会效益，
诸如提升建筑能效以及环境保护等等。中国政府正在致力于通过一个更完善的国家级绿色
建筑产品标准、检测、认证、和标识体系来推广绿色建筑产品的市场占有率。本报告就加
强该体系提出了路线图建议。
为了能够更加深入地了解中国体系现状，我们在建筑产品范围内选取了建筑用窗玻璃和
LED 照明产品作为两个案例，深入研究产品能效性能方面的相关标准、检测、认证和标识。
为取得业内专家的反馈和建议，我们就窗玻璃和 LED照明产品分别组建了相对应的工作组
以收集中美双方意见。同时，我们针对窗玻璃能效性能测试标准和 LED照明产品的能效认
证进行了详细的中美对比。基于工作组意见整理和中美对比分析，我们分别对窗玻璃测试
标准和 LED 照明产品认证提出了完善方案和实施计划时间表。根据这两类产品的案例研究，
我们总结出更加普适性的路线图实施方案，以完善中国的绿色建筑产品标准、测试、认证
和标识体系。
针对中国现有的体系我们提出两个主要建议：（1）体系内不同环节更紧密地衔接与合作；
（2）更严格的质量保证措施。一个有效的国家绿色建筑产品体系需要产品检测（测试标
准和实验室资质认可）、认证和标识的多方协作。标准是产品性能检测（包括实物检测标
准和模拟计算标准）和认证的基础；资质认可能够确保检测实验室和认证单位的权威性；
产品认证能够确保产品的实际性能与宣传无异；认证标识能够清晰标明产品性能参数并帮
助消费者选购。此外，针对产品认证的扶持政策，如财政鼓励和将建筑规范中与建筑产品
认证相连接，可以有效地扶持体系的建立和推广应用。一个完善且各环节紧密联系的体系
可以提升产品认证效率、有效地建立消费者对于认证产品的信任、并加快绿色认证建筑产
品的市场占有率。监督管理体系内各环节的政府部门需要共同协调配合来设计完整而有效
的体系、设置体系各环节的规章细则、采纳相关干系人的意见、增强公众参与度、推广高
性能建筑产品在市场中的占有率。除此之外，质量保证是体系中极为重要的一个元素，因
其确保了产品认证的真实性与可信度，从而增强了消费者对于认证产品的信任。产品验证
试验就是质量保证中极为有效的方法。
我们针对一个完善的国家级标准、检测、认证、标识体系总结了以下四点要素：
PNNL-27954
vi
要素 方法
紧密地整合、衔接与协作
同类产品同类性能的检测标准的统一性可以简化认证流程
体系中不同环节更紧密地衔接与协作可以使认证过程更顺畅、更
高效益、并促进产业发展
严格有效的检测（实物检测
和模拟计算）和认证
对检测、模拟实验室和认证机构进行资质认可能够确保检测和认
证的质量和真实性
验证检测（包含在认证项目内或者建立一个独立的项目）能够针
对产品的性能增加另一层保证，同时也能增强消费者对于产品认
证标识的信任
由第三方认证机构进行产品认证能够确保认证的客观完整性
更好的信息公开性
信息的透明公开能够促使企业积极参与产品认证、使检测和认证
流程更加顺畅，同时也建立了消费者的信任
产品数据库能够应用于产品的数据分析并支撑产业发展规划
扶持性项目
扶持性政策能够推动产品认证以及已认证产品的应用和推广，比
如财政补贴或将建筑规范与建筑产品认证相连接
消费者的能力建设对于整个体系是否能够发挥真正的效果有着重
要影响
我们同时也针对两个产品案例提出了推荐性建议。这些建议聚焦在建筑用窗玻璃产品的检
测标准和 LED 照明产品的认证项目。
建筑用窗玻璃产品的标准化工作
1. 提高测试标准（包括实物检测标准和模拟计算标准）间的统一性和一致性，例如遮
阳系数和太阳得热系数的使用；确保标准所用边界条件与中国气候情况相符；增强
与国际测试标准的统一性，例如玻璃太阳辐射与透射率的计算；
2. 增强测试标准与体系内其它环节的衔接，包括实验室认可和产品认证；
3. 通过信息公开（包括检测模拟软件的使用说明以及相关数据库）提升产品检测过程
的信息透明度；
4. 制定和完善检测标准，并听取业界反馈。工作组提出需要新标准的领域包括窗玻璃
贴膜以及窗配件。
LED照明产品认证
1. 增强对检测实验室和认证机构的资质认可要求；
2. 增强体系中每一个环节（包括标准、资质认可、认证、标识）的衔接和整合；
3. 增强验证试验力度以达到质量保证；
4. 在认证环节中，由自我认证转化为第三方认证。
中国政府正在致力于增强绿色建筑产品的国家级标准、检测、认证和标识体系。本报告旨
在为下一步提供一些建议。
PNNL-27954
vii
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for research support provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
and the U.S. Department of State. The authors would like to thanks the following organizations
and individuals for their inputs: 3M, American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA),
Beihang University, CESI (Guangzhou) Opto-Electronics Standard & Testing Institute Co., Ltd.,
China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC), China National Institute of
Standardization (CNIS), China Standard Conformity Assessment Co., Ltd. (CSCA), Cree Inc.,
CSG Holding Co., Ltd. (CSG), DesignLights Consortium (DLC), GIGA, Guangdong Testing
Institute of Products Quality Supervision, Guangzhou LEDIA Lighting Co., Ltd., Honeywell
(EnVision (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.), International Window Film Association (IWFA), KDX Optical
Film Material, Keystone Certifications, Inc., Kolbe Windows & Doors, Lutron Electronics Co.,
Inc., Mackinac Technology, Nanjing Fiberglass Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd., National
Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), Shenzhen Unilumin Technology Co., Ltd., Solatube CECEP
Daylighting Technology Co., Ltd., State Key Laboratory of Solid-State Lighting, Tospo Lighting
Co., Ltd., U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), Vitro Architectural Glass, Xiamen Leedarson
Lighting Co., Ltd., Xinyi Glass Holdings Limited, Charlie Curcija from Lawrence Berkley
National Laboratory (LBNL), the Standardization Administration of China (SAC), Renne Hancher
from Department of Commerce, colleagues from the Building Technologies Office at DOE,
including Marc Lafrance, and Arlene Fetizanan from International Affairs at DOE. PNNL is
operated for DOE by Battelle Memorial Institute under contract DE-AC05-76RL01830. The views
and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily state or
reflect those of the United States Government or any of the above organizations and individuals.
PNNL-27954
ix
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ANSI American National Standard Institute
CALiPER Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting
CCIC China Certification & Inspection Group
CCMS Compliance Certification Management System
CCT Correlated color temperature
CECC China Energy Conservation Certification
CEL China Energy Label
CFEEPL China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program
CFLs Compact fluorescent bulbs
CRI Color rendering index
CMA China Metrology Accreditation
CNAS China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment
CNCA Certification and Accreditation Administration of China
CNIS China National Institute of Standardization
CQC China Quality Certification Centre
CSA China Solid State Lighting Alliance
CTC China Building Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd.
DLC DesignLights Consortium
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
ECMs energy conservation measures
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
LED Light-emitting diode
FTC Federal Trade Commission
GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office
GBME Green Building Materials Evaluation
HVAC Heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning
IESNA Illuminating Engineering Society North America
ISO International Organization for Standardization
PNNL-27954
x
ISTMT In situ temperature test
LSG Light-to-solar-gain
MIIT Ministry of Industry and Information Technology
MOHURD Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development
NDRC National Development and Reform Commission of China
NFRC National Fenestration Rating Council
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NRTL Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory
NVLAP National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PNNL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
QPL Qualified Product List
R&D Research and development
RISN Research Institute of Standards & Norms
SAC Standardization Administration of China
SAMR State Administration for Market Regulation
SC Shading coefficient
SHGC Solar heat gain coefficient
SSL Solid-state lighting
UL Underwriter Laboratories
VT Visible transmittance
PNNL-27954
xi
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... ii
执行摘要 ...................................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................................... vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... ix
Figures ....................................................................................................................................................... xiii
Tables ......................................................................................................................................................... xiv
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1
Scope, Objective, and Methodology ......................................................................................................... 2
Prioritization and Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 4
Window Glass ....................................................................................................................................... 4
LED Lighting ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Working Groups........................................................................................................................................ 5
Audience ................................................................................................................................................... 6
Gap Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Window Glass Measurement Standards ................................................................................................... 7
Standard System in the U.S. and China ................................................................................................ 7
Existing Standards ................................................................................................................................ 8
Standard Comparisons ........................................................................................................................ 10
Lighting: LED Lighting Product Certification ........................................................................................ 13
Product Testing ................................................................................................................................... 13
Accreditation of Testing Laboratory ................................................................................................... 14
Comparison Certification Programs in the U.S. and China ................................................................ 16
Endorsement Certification Programs in the U.S. and China ............................................................... 20
Additional Verification Testing Program............................................................................................ 23
Recommendations for Roadmap ................................................................................................................. 24
Key Factors for Success .......................................................................................................................... 25
I. Greater coordination and alignment ................................................................................................ 26
II. Robust testing and certification ...................................................................................................... 27
III. Better information ......................................................................................................................... 28
IV. Supporting programs..................................................................................................................... 28
PNNL-27954
xii
Recommendations for Two Case Studies ............................................................................................... 29
Roadmap for a National Green Building Product Certification System ................................................. 34
Institutional Roles ............................................................................................................................... 34
Roadmap ............................................................................................................................................. 36
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 38
References ................................................................................................................................................... 39
Appendix A: Product Prioritization Example ............................................................................................. 42
Appendix B: Members of the Working Groups .......................................................................................... 44
List of Members (Alphabetic Order) ...................................................................................................... 44
Appendix C: Window Standard Comparison: Thermal Transmittance ...................................................... 45
Appendix D: U.S. and Chinese Certification Programs for Windows ........................................................ 46
Comparison Certification Program – Rating of Performance Metrics .................................................... 46
Endorsement Certification Program – Energy-Efficient Products .......................................................... 49
Appendix E: U.S. and Chinese Testing Standards for LED Lighting Products .......................................... 51
Standard Comparisons – Lumen Maintenance and Lifetime Projection ................................................. 51
Lifetime Projection Methodology Comparisons ................................................................................. 52
PNNL-27954
xiii
Figures
Figure 1. Components within a standard, certification, and labeling system for green building products ... 2
Figure 2. Existing Chinese, U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, and ISO standard for
measurement of thermal, solar, and light transmittance of window and glass products. ...................... 9
Figure 3. An example of FTC Lighting Facts label .................................................................................... 18
Figure 4. An example of LED Lighting Facts label .................................................................................... 18
Figure 5. An example of China Energy Label of non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp ....................... 19
Figure 6. Verification testing process under the LED Lighting Facts ........................................................ 20
Figure 7. Energy Star certification process ................................................................................................. 22
Figure 8. An illustration of the levels of rules and standards that a manufacturer or a testing laboratory
needs to go through in the U.S. and Chinese programs ...................................................................... 27
Figure 9. Key ministries and institutions in the work of green building product standardization, labeling,
and certification. Coral is the ministry. ............................................................................................... 35
Figure 10. Linkage among components of the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system and
between policies and the system ......................................................................................................... 37
Figure 11. Organizational chart of the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), adapted from
NFRC .................................................................................................................................................. 46
Figure 12. Organizational chart of the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling
program (CFEEPL), adapted from RISN ............................................................................................ 47
Figure 13. Examples of NFRC and CFEEPL labels ................................................................................... 49
Figure 14. Flow chart to determine the use of 1000h Method or Direct Method (SAC, 2017) .................. 52
Figure 15. Screenshots of Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculator ....................................................... 56
PNNL-27954
xiv
Tables
Table 1. Classification of two types of certification programs ..................................................................... 4
Table 2. The use of information from each section of this report by stakeholder groups ............................. 6
Table 3. Measurement standards of window air leakage and condensation resistance metrics used in the
U.S. and China ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Table 4. Boundary conditions for calculating SHGC in U.S. -domiciled organization developed standard,
Chinese standard, and ISO standard ................................................................................................... 11
Table 5. Existing LED lighting testing standards of photometric performance, reliability, and lifetime
projection in the U.S. and China ......................................................................................................... 14
Table 6. Accreditation/Recognition programs for LED products testing laboratories in the U.S. and
China ................................................................................................................................................... 16
Table 7. Comparison certification programs (of product performance metrics) for LED lighting products
in the U.S. and China .......................................................................................................................... 17
Table 8. Endorsement certification programs for energy-efficient LED lighting products in U.S. and
China ................................................................................................................................................... 21
Table 9. Four key factors for success in developing a green building product standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system ....................................................................................................... 25
Table 10. Recommendations for standardization and measurement of window glass products in China .. 30
Table 11. Recommendations for certification of LED lighting products in China ..................................... 32
Table 12. Prioritization evaluation for four building product categories .................................................... 42
Table 13. Boundary conditions for calculating U-factor in U.S.-domiciled organization developed
standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard .................................................................................... 45
Table 14. Fenestration product energy performance rating program in the U.S. and China ...................... 48
Table 15. Certification programs of energy-efficient building window products in the U.S. and China ... 50
Table 16. Comparison of general testing conditions between LM-84-2014 and GB/T 33721-2017 .......... 51
Table 17. 1000h testing conditions and criteria (SAC, 2017) ..................................................................... 52
Table 18. Comparisons of LED lifetime projection methods between GB/T 33721-2017 (China) and TM-
28-2014 (U.S.) .................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 19. Multiplier x of different sample sizes to determine the maximum rated lumen maintenance life
in both GB/T 33721-2017 and TM-28-2014 ...................................................................................... 55
PNNL-27954
1
Introduction
Background
With rapid economic development and urbanization, buildings have become a crucial part of
modern society in China. The country now has the largest construction market in the world.
However, buildings are large energy consumers collectively. The building sector accounts for
about one-third of final energy consumption globally and among which, China alone takes up 16 %
(IEA, 2015). Nonetheless, the size and energy use in the Chinese building sector is still growing
rapidly as China is projected to contribute an additional 18% to global floor area by 2050,
equivalent to over 30 billion square meters above the 2012 level (IEA, 2015). Building energy
consumption in China has grown by 37% from 2000 to 2012 and could increase by an additional
70% from 2012 to 2050 if no actions were taken to slow down the growth (IEA, 2015).
Building energy efficiency is particularly important in the context of such fast growth, which can
lead to increased emissions and high costs for new supply. Studies have shown that with robust
building energy codes, building energy use in China could be reduced by up to 22% (Yu, Eom,
Evans, & Clarke, 2014). Building products, including fenestration, lighting, wall/insulation, and
HVAC, play an important role in building energy efficiency. Specifically, building envelope and
fenestration affect the amount of thermal loss and solar energy gained by the building, which in
turn affect energy demand and usage. The efficiency of lighting products and HVAC systems
directly affects building energy consumption. Therefore, the use of energy-efficient building
products could help China improve building energy efficiency and avoid a rapid increase in energy
consumption and emissions. Policymakers in China have adopted various measures to promote the
development and market uptake of green building products, of which superior energy performance
is one of the features. Such measures include strengthening requirements for building material
performance in the building code and promoting the use of green building products through
incentives.
Promotion of the use of green building products, those with high product performance including
energy efficiency and resource efficiency, alone is not enough. Two related challenges are the
identification of high-performance green building products from the numerous products in the
market, and the assurance of product performance. A robust national certification system for green
building products could help in overcoming theses challenges. A robust system to test, certify, and
label product performance based on national standards can help consumers choose products. This
in turn can make high-performance products stand out and grow in market share. The Chinese
government has realized the importance of a robust national standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system and has taken action. In December 2017, five Chinese ministries1 co-issued a
1 The five governments are the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ),
the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
Development (MOHURD), the Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA), and the Standardization
Administration of China (SAC).
PNNL-27954
2
Guideline on Promoting Standards, Certification, and Labels for Green Building Materials and
Products. This guideline states that the five ministries will collaborate to establish a uniform,
scientific, comprehensive, and effective green building product standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system. It also addresses the need of an integrated framework to streamline the standard
and certification for each building product, in other words, “one product category, one standard,
one list, one certification, one label” in China (MIIT, 2017).
In 2013, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Development and Reform
Commission of China (NDRC) launched an initiative to improve building energy efficiency.
Developing a roadmap for a national green building product standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system in China later became one of the tasks under this collaboration.
Scope, Objective, and Methodology
The development of a robust national certification system for green building products requires
combined efforts from different stakeholder groups involved in the process (Figure 1). Standards
are the foundation of product measurement (both physical testing and calculation/simulation) and
certification; accreditation proves the ability of the testing and simulation laboratories and
certification bodies; product certification ensures the true performance of a product; and labeling
reflects product features and supports consumers’ purchasing process. Policies and certification
could support each other. Supportive policies, such as incentive programs, could greatly engage
stakeholders and promote product certification; meanwhile, product certification could also
provides insights for policy development, especially R&D planning. The full system, with
collaborations among relevant stakeholders, could build up consumer confidence and accelerate
the market uptake of certified green building products. A roadmap laying out the linkages among
different stakeholder groups and components could contribute to the enhancement of a robust
national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. This report
provides recommendations on such a roadmap and hereafter, we will call it roadmap report.
Figure 1. Components within a standard, certification, and labeling system for green
building products
PNNL-27954
3
To be defined as “green”, a building product needs to be evaluated from several aspects along the
product life cycle , including environmental impacts, energy performance, resource efficiency
(including recyclability), and quality. This roadmap report focuses on the energy side of green
building products. Although only the energy aspect is covered in this report, the recommendations
are designed to also provide broader implications for the standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system of green building products in general, highlighting key areas for cross-cutting
improvements.
This roadmap report aims to 1) improve the current standard, testing, certification, and labeling
system in China to allow for more consistent and robust results and 2) grow the market for high-
performance building products through reliable and unbiased product performance information.
To address these issues, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) research team,
together with Chinese collaborators, has undertaken the following steps to present the research
results in this report.
(1) Selected two types of building products for detailed analysis based on prioritization criteria
and stakeholder inputs;
(2) Organized two working groups (by product) to collect feedback from the U.S. and Chinese
stakeholders on interested topics, gap analysis, recommendations, and roadmap
development;
(3) Conducted detailed gap analysis between the U.S. and Chinese energy-related testing
standards and certification systems of the two selected building products;
(4) Provided recommendations of potential steps to improve the standard, testing, certification,
and labeling system of the two products in China;
(5) Created a roadmap with recommendations for implementation steps to enhance the national
certification system of green building products in China.
Usually, there are two forms of certification programs with two types of labels for building
products: (1) comparison certification and (2) endorsement certification. Taking energy-related
certification as an example (Table 1), comparison certification program certifies and rates product
energy performance. With detailed performance ratings labeled on the products, this type of
certification provides transparent while reliable product information to consumers and enables
product comparisons. Endorsement certification program takes a step further to certify and endorse
products that meet minimum energy performance requirements as energy-efficient products. It is
a common practice that participation in the comparison certification program is a prerequisite for
participation in the endorsement certification program. This report covers both types of
certification programs.
PNNL-27954
4
Table 1. Classification of two types of certification programs Comparison Certification Program Endorsement Certification Program
Purpose Certifies products’ energy performance Certifies products that are energy-efficient
by passing certain performance thresholds
Label Products’ performance ratings of various
energy-related properties
A program label or logo indicating a
product is certified to be energy-efficient
Label
Example
Prioritization and Analysis
It is unrealistic to develop or enhance a full standard, testing, certification, and labeling system
covering all kinds of building products at the same time. Therefore, it is necessary to start by
prioritizing certain products and characteristics. Such a product prioritization process should be
conducted based on reasonable criteria as well as inputs from relevant stakeholders. Once certain
products are prioritized, detailed analyses of the selected products is necessary to understand
potential flaws in the current system and identify possible solutions.
Appendix A provides an example of a product prioritization process done by the research team.
We believe that impacts and the demand for the products are the two critical factors that should be
considered; for instance, energy savings potential and market size. Stakeholder buy-in is also a
crucial factor to consider during the prioritization process. Relevant stakeholders include
policymakers, manufacturers, and industry associations. This prioritization exercise conducted by
the research team (Appendix A) could serve as an example of the thought process and provide
insights for Chinese policy makers as they determine the products and characteristics to start with.
Through this initial prioritization process, the project stakeholders selected two building products
as two case studies for the evaluation of the current system in China. Specifically, we develop
detailed recommendations for a roadmap for window glass products and LED lighting. After the
prioritization exercise, we also conduct a more detailed analysis of the selected products. The
following two sections further evaluate the significance of window glass products and LED
lighting products in achieving building energy efficiency.
Window Glass
The energy performance of the building envelope has a crucial impact on building demand for
space heating and cooling, which typically accounts for over 30% of all energy consumed by a
building (IEA, 2013). Researchers have estimated that windows alone could account for about 40%
PNNL-27954
5
of the total heat loss through the building envelope (Gustavsen, et al., 2011). More specifically, a
study has found that windows could be responsible for 34% of all commercial space conditioning
energy use and 29% of residential buildings in the U.S. (LBNL, 2006). In addition to this energy
importance, window products show a huge market potential in China as demand is growing. This
is because high-rise multi-family building, of which the window-to-wall ratio is as high as 60%
and four times that of single-family building, is and will remain the largest building segment in
China (IEA, 2015).
LED Lighting
Lighting in general accounts for 11% of building energy consumption in the U.S. (DOE, 2015)
and the use of LED lighting products can help improve building energy efficiency. A report by
DOE estimated that the energy use by LED lamps is only one third that of halogen lamps and
roughly one fifth that of incandescent lamps. In addition, the lifetime of LED is twenty-five times
that of halogen and incandescent and three times compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs). As LED
technology develops, LED lighting products will likely see increased efficiency (DOE, 2012),
indicating high cost-effectiveness. Moreover, when implementing a building energy retrofit
project, lighting upgrades could also bring the co-benefit of increasing building occupants’
satisfaction and productivity. Because of these benefits, the market share of LED in the Chinese
lighting market is projected to increase from 12% in 2011 to 69% in 2020, reaching a market size
of $17.25 billion (McKinsey&Company, 2012).
Working Groups
Stakeholder inputs are crucial for a better understanding of the industry and the market; identifying
barriers and challenges; and finding effective practices to enhance a national standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system. In order to provide effective recommendations and design an
application roadmap, the research team, together with Chinese collaborators, organized two
working groups by product category. DOE and the Standardization Administration of China (SAC)
are co-leading the work on window glass, and PNNL and the China Building Material Test &
Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC) are the U.S. and Chinese coordinators to organize the window
glass working group. DOE and NDRC are co-leading the work on LED lighting products and
PNNL and the China Solid State Lighting Alliance (CSA) are the U.S. and Chinese coordinators.
Members of the two working groups include policy makers, standard makers, researchers,
manufacturers, industry associations, and experts in window glass and LED lighting industry.
Appendix B provides a full list of the members of the working groups.
The working groups held several meetings and conference calls throughout the development of the
roadmap recommendations. The discussion sheds light on following topics:
(1) The comparisons of the testing standards, accreditation programs, and certification
programs in the U.S. and China;
(2) Challenges during the testing and certification process;
(3) Market barriers for deploying high-performance products; and
PNNL-27954
6
(4) Recommendations and proposals on priorities for the roadmap with implementation
processes.
Comments and feedback from various groups of stakeholders in both the U.S. and China have led
to a holistic understanding of testing and certification of window glass and LED lighting products
and preliminary ideas on enhancing a robust national green building product standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system in general. However, enhancing the national system is a
complicated and comprehensive thought process. The discussions by the working groups did not
reach a conclusion and future dialogues are needed.
Audience
This roadmap report provides insights to various stakeholder groups relevant to the standard,
testing, certification, and labeling of building products and each group could obtain information
from each section in the report for own uses (Table 2).
Table 2. The use of information from each section of this report by stakeholder groups
Section Stakeholder Group How to Use the Information
Introduction
Policy makers Understand the linkages and set-up of the standard,
testing, certification, and labeling system; Gain
insights on options for product prioritization
Public Understand linkages and set-up of the standard,
testing2, certification, and labeling system and the
U.S.-China initiative
Gap Analysis
Policy makers, standard
makers, program
administrators, testing
laboratories, and
certification bodies
Understand the differences in measurement
standards, and accreditation and certification
programs in the U.S. and China; Identify area for
improvements
Manufacturers Understand the differences in measurement
standards, and accreditation and certification
programs in the U.S. and China; Plan accordingly
for obtaining product certification and market
access in each country
Recommendation
and Roadmap
Policy makers Gain insights on areas for improvement and steps
to achieve a robust national system
Standard-makers and
program administrators
Gain insights on areas for improvement in
measurement standards, accreditation and
certification
Manufacturers, testing and
simulation laboratories,
accreditation and
certification bodies
Learn about the potential dynamics in the system
design to keep up with future trends
2 Testing, here and elsewhere of the report, includes product physical testing and calculation/simulation.
PNNL-27954
7
Gap Analysis To develop the roadmap, it is necessary to first identify significant issues that have been
overlooked or not been fully addressed. The research team first conducted a gap analysis of testing
standards and the two types of certification programs in the U.S. and China, using the two selected
products as case studies. Then, we integrated the gap analysis results and stakeholders’ feedback
and provide recommendations on how to address these gaps of the Chinese systems through
standards, policies, and market mechanisms. By taking inputs from the working groups, this report
focuses on the (1) measurement standards, including thermal and optical performance
characterization, such as solar and light transmittance, of window glass products and (2)
certification of LED lighting products.
Window Glass Measurement Standards
Window energy performance is largely affected by its insulating ability, air tightness, and
transparency to solar radiation. A high-quality window is expected to present good thermal
insulation and prevent air leakage. Ideally, it should also be able to allow for visible light to enter,
while blocking infrared and ultraviolet light, particularly in hot climates (DOE, 2015). In cooler
climates, it may also be desirable to have windows that allow infrared light to enter for beneficial
passive solar heating.
Measurement methodologies (including calculation and simulation as well as physical testing)
define and determine the above-mentioned characteristics and thus window energy performance.
Studies have found that the same window simulated or measured with different methods would
result in different performance values, up to 25% variation (Ebanks, 2014; Hanam, Jaugelis, &
Finch, 2014). Therefore, following appropriate measurement standards is crucial.
Standard System in the U.S. and China
In the U.S., most fenestration manufacturers follow the technical standards developed by the
National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC), a U.S.-domiciled independent non-profit
organization, to rate a product’s energy-related performance (comparison certification). Unlike the
U.S. where the standardization process is mostly industry or market driven with some supports
from the government, in China, government agencies, especially the Standardization
Administration of China (SAC) and the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development
(MOHURD), play a crucial role of overseeing the development of measurement standards. In
addition, the U.S. and China are different in the system. The U.S. industry is mainly looking at the
window product as a whole. Whereas in China, window and glass are usually separated and
standards are overseen by different ministries – window under MOHURD while glass under SAC3.
3 While it is important to understand the energy performance of the whole window product, this report focuses on
the measurement of energy-related metrics at the glass area.
PNNL-27954
8
The NFRC technical standards4, by building on calculation and simulation standards developed by
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and testing standards developed by the
ASTM International, combine calculation, simulation, and testing procedures all together. This
enables the users to have a holistic view of the different components of the product rating
procedure. In China, calculation, simulation, and physical testing standards for fenestration
products are standalone. In addition, the NFRC technical standards reference the ISO standards
for detailed calculation methodologies, rather than having its own technical methodologies, with
the exception of the specification of boundary conditions, product sizes, interpretations of
ambiguous situations, and additional explanations to better support the simulation process. The
calculation standards in China are very similar to the ISO standards with additions or deletions of
certain sections from the ISO standards and minor modifications to the equations.
Existing Standards
The main metrics describing a window glass product’s energy-related performance are thermal,
solar, and visible transmittance, air leakage, and condensation resistance. For an overview, this
section lists the existing standards used in the U.S. and China as well as the referenced ISO
standards relevant to the above-mentioned metrics. Table 3 shows the standards to measure air
leakage and condensation resistance and Figure 2 demonstrates the standards to measure thermal
transmittance, total solar energy transmittance, and visible transmittance.
Table 3. Measurement standards of window air leakage and condensation resistance
metrics used in the U.S. and China
U.S. Testing Protocols Chinese Standards
Air Leakage NFRC 400 series
Refer to ASTM E 283
GB/T 7106-2008
Refer to ISO 6613:1980
Condensation Resistance
NFRC 500 series
Refer to ASTM C 1199 and
ASTM E 1423
GB/T 8484-2008
4 The NFRC standards, along with other standards developed by U.S.-domiciled standard development organizations
in this report, are international standards that are consistent with the WTO TBT Committee guidance.
PNNL-27954
9
Figure 2. Existing Chinese, U.S.-domiciled organization developed standard, and ISO standard for measurement of thermal, solar,
and light transmittance of window and glass products. Arrows indicate referenced standards. Orange is for glass products and yellow is for whole window products. The two Chinese calculation standards (GB/T 2680 and JGJ/T 151)
do not provide simulation procedures, but only calculation equations. The RISN-TG03 guideline provides simulation procedures for window products.
U.S. developed ISO Standards China
ISO 9050:2003
Glass in building
- Light transmittance
- Solar direct
transmittance
- Total solar energy
transmittance
- Ultraviolet
transmittance
ISO 15099:2003
Whole window product
- Thermal
transmittance
- Total solar energy
transmittance
- Light transmittance
ISO 10077-1&2
Whole window product
- Thermal
transmittance
GB/T 2680-1994
Glass in building
- Light transmittance
- Solar direct
transmittance
- Total solar energy
transmittance
- Ultraviolet
transmittance
JGJ/T 151-2008
Whole window
product
- Thermal
transmittance
- Total solar energy
transmittance
- Light transmittance
NFRC 100 Series
Whole window
product
- Thermal
Transmittance
NFRC 300 Series
Glass in building
- Transmittance
- Reflectance
- Emissivity
NFRC 200 Series
Whole window
product
- Total solar heat
gain (SHGC)
- Visible
transmittance (VT)
RISN-TG013-2012
- Simulation and
testing guideline
PNNL-27954
10
Standard Comparisons
Based on stakeholder feedback, this report focuses on the total solar heat gain and visible
transmittance standards for window products particularly at glazing area, i.e. comparisons between
the U.S. NFRC 200 series and the Chinese JGJ/T 151-2008 standard.
In general, both the U.S. and China follow ISO 15099 for the calculation of total solar heat gain
and visible transmittance. The methodology provided by ISO 15099 utilizes energy balance
equations that take solar absorptance and actual temperatures into consideration (ISO, 2003). This
standard provides comprehensive calculation methods and is designed for computer simulation of
product metrics (ISO, 2003). Although the two countries follow the same general calculation
methods, differences still exist.
Total Solar Energy Transmittance
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient vs. Shading Coefficient
In order to describe a fenestration product’s behavior of absorbing and transmitting total solar
radiation, NFRC requires the measurement of the solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC), equivalent
to total solar energy transmittance. SHGC is defined as “the ratio of the solar heat gain entering
the space through the fenestration product to the incident solar radiation… Solar heat gain includes
directly transmitted solar heat and that portion of the absorbed solar radiation which is then
reradiated, conducted, or convected into the space” (NFRC, 2017a).
The Chinese standard JGJ/T 151-2008, on the other hand, uses a shading coefficient (SC) factor,
which is the ratio of a product’s total solar energy transmittance (g-factor or SHGC) to that of
standardized 3-mm clear glass. The total solar energy transmittance of clear, single pane, 3-mm
thick glass used in JCJ/T 151-2008 is 0.87, consistent with the value provided in the NFRC 201
standard (NFRC, 2017b). However, this value only accounts for the glazing area instead of the
whole window, including the frame. In other words, the SC in the Chinese standard is comparing
SHGC of a whole window product to SHGC of standardized glass, which might not be able to
describe the whole product performance accurately. In addition, SC does not account properly for
optical performance of coated glazing, especially spectrally selective glazing.
Although JGJ/T 151-2008 notes that the fenestration industry in China is more accustomed to SC,
the use of SHGC is emerging in China due to the increased amount of international collaboration.
Particularly, GB 50189-2015 the Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Public Buildings
replaced SC with SHGC metric. Replacing SC with SHGC can 1) ensure a more accurate
evaluation of whole window product performance; 2) accurately represent all types of glazing; 3)
ensure consistency among different standards; and 4) align better with international standards.
Calculation Method
Both the NFRC 200 series and the JGJ/T 151-2008 standard follow the ISO 15099 methodology
to calculate whole product total solar heat gain, which is an area-weighted average of contributions
from the glass and frame (ISO, 2003).
PNNL-27954
11
Regarding the calculation of total solar heat gain at the frame area, although the same equation is
used in both countries, the result is likely to be different because one of the required variables,
which is the frame thermal transmittance, is calculated with different methods by NFRC 200 series
and JGJ/T 151-2008. These two methods differ in the way to treat heat transfer (U-factor) through
the frame and the edges or corners (Appendix C).
For glass contribution, the two countries are consistent in the calculation for glazing units as they
both use the equations from ISO 9050. When calculating performance of glazing systems, both
countries follow the energy balance method provided by ISO 15099 in general to take into account
the conditions at each glazing layer. However, calculating the absorbed amount of solar radiation
at one single glazing layer, NFRC 200 series use the equations from ISO 15099 to obtain the
numerical integration over the solar spectrum while JGJ/T 151-2008 uses the equations from ISO
9050. ISO 9050 provides a table of normalized relative spectral distribution of global solar
radiation. In the U.S., the spectral distribution of incident solar radiation is specified in ASTM
E893.
Boundary Conditions
In general, summer conditions are used when calculating SHGC. The boundary conditions,
including temperature and incident solar radiation, for calculating SHGC are different between the
NFRC 200 series and the JGJ/T 151-2008 standard, shown in Table 4. The SHGC boundary
conditions in the JGJ/T 151-2008 standard are mainly adapted from the ISO 15099 standard with
minor modification. On the other hand, the NFRC standards have modified the boundary
conditions to better fit with the U.S. climate. The boundary conditions in ISO 15099 might not be
representative of the climate in China; thus, revisions of boundary conditions in the JGJ/T 151-
2008 standard might be necessary to get better simulation of product performance in China.
Table 4. Boundary conditions for calculating SHGC in U.S. -domiciled organization
developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard
NFRC 200 JGJ/T 151-2008 ISO 15099
Interior air temperature Tin 24°C 25°C 25°C
Exterior temperature Tout 32°C 30°C 30°C
Wind speed V 2.75 m/s N/A N/A
Convective heat transfer
coefficient hc, in
Temperature
dependent 2.5 W/(m2K)
Temperature
dependent
Convective heat transfer
coefficient hc, out 15 W/(m2K) 16 W/(m2K) 8 W/(m2K)
Interior mean radiant
temperature Trm, in Trm, in = Tin Trm, in = Tin Trm, in = Tin
Exterior mean radiant
temperature Trm, out Trm, out = Tout Trm, out = Tout Trm, out = Tout
Solar radiation Is 783 W/m2 500W/m2 500W/m2
PNNL-27954
12
The different calculation methods as well as different boundary conditions in U.S. and Chinese
standards would result in different evaluations of the same product. This might make testing and
certification results from the two countries incomparable.
Visible Transmittance
Visible transmittance (VT) describes a window’s ability to transmit visible light, which affects the
building occupants’ demand for lighting. In evaluating the whole product VT, only glass area are
in effect. Both NFRC protocol and JGJ 151-2008 standard assume VT is the same at glazing center
and edge.
Similar to total solar energy transmittance across the glass, both countries follow ISO 9050.
However, in calculating the properties of glazing systems, the U.S. uses equations from ISO 15099,
while China uses equations from ISO 9050. Again, ISO 9050 provides a table of normalized
relative spectral distribution of illuminant D65, while ISO 15099 does not refer to such normalized
value. Instead, automated software following ISO 15099 could be used to simulate product
performance. For the U.S., the spectral distribution of incident solar radiation is specified in ASTM
E893 and NFRC 200 technical standards stipulates the use of the same D65 illuminant.
Light to Solar Gain Ratio vs Total Solar Infrared Energy Transmittance
Certain types of window glass are able to reduce solar heat gain while allowing a good amount of
visible light to pass through. In the U.S., the light-to-solar-gain (LSG) ratio is used to describe
such spectral selective characteristics of window glass products. LSG is defined as a ratio between
VT and SHGC. High LSG indicates the ability to block solar heat energy but transmit visible light.
Although this parameter is widely acknowledged in the window glass industry in North America,
Europe, and Australia, it is not officially defined in any of the industry standards.
The window glass industry in China has been using a different parameter to describe the spectral
selective characteristics of window glass products, the total solar infrared energy transmittance
(gIR) factor. This factor describes the solar energy transmittance performance of window glass at
near infrared band of solar spectrum. Currently, standard makers in China are adding the gIR factor
into some of the calculation standards.
Members of the window glass working group have provided several comments regarding LSG and
gIR factor. First, while both gIR and LSG describe spectral selective characteristics of window
glass products, the use of LSG could save efforts by manufacturers and testing laboratories because
it is a simple calculation of two already simulated parameters, while the use of gIR would require
additional simulation process. Second, the working group members addressed that gIR factor
should never be used alone to describe product energy performance, particularly that some
manufacturers might falsely use it to advertise the energy feature of their products. Instead, the
gIR factor should only be a supplementary to the g-factor or SHGC, which is the parameter
describing the true energy savings. Third, the members also mentioned the need of transition from
PNNL-27954
13
SC to g-factor (i.e. SHGC) in the adoption of gIR factor (i.e. the g-factor at near infrared band) to
ensure consistency in parameters and avoid confusion to the industry and end-users.
Lighting: LED Lighting Product Certification
LED lighting products in buildings are growing rapidly as costs have dropped. They are now
common in new constructions, retrofits, and the consumer market. Therefore, transparent and
accurate product information helps building designers and consumers to select the energy-efficient
lighting products. Certification could assist consumers with purchasing energy-efficient products
and increase the market uptake of these products. Comparison certification of product performance
metrics provides assurance of product properties and enables consumers to understand the product
quality from product label and make comparisons among all kinds of products, while endorsement
certification of energy-efficient products directly indicates products with better energy
performance. However, it is important to make sure metrics labels reflect the true product quality
and that certified products are indeed energy-efficient. This requires a comprehensive design of a
robust standard, testing, certification, and labeling system involving all necessary stakeholder
groups (Figure 1). This section introduces and compares the two types of certification programs
on LED lighting products in the U.S. and China and summarizes some of the key features that
could contribute to the programs’ success.
Product Testing
Product testing, which distinguishes the performance characteristics of a product, is essential in
any certification program. In order to ensure that testing accurately reflects a product’s true
performance, two prerequisites need to be fulfilled: 1) having robust testing standards and 2)
maintaining high testing quality.
Testing Standards in the U.S. and China
The main metrics describing lighting product quality and energy related performance are light
quantity (luminous flux), light quality (color), product efficiency, and product reliability (lumen
maintenance or lifetime). Table 5 lists some of the main testing standards for the measurement of
the above-mentioned metrics of LED modules (i.e. light sources) and LED luminaires in the U.S.
and China.
The standards developed by U.S.-domiciled standards development organizations listed in Table
5 are all developed by the Illuminating Engineering Society North America (IESNA). Other U.S.
organizations that also develop testing/measurement standards for lighting products include the
National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), which develops design and testing
standards of product performance, and the Underwriter Laboratories (UL), which provides
standards to test electrical safety. Based on the standards in Table 5, the U.S. Department of Energy
has developed a uniform test method for integrated LED lamps and non-integrated LED lamps that
are classified as general services lamps. DOE developed the test method under the “Energy
Conservation Program for Consumer Products,” which is a federal regulatory program complying
PNNL-27954
14
with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. This Federal test method references the
industry standards in Table 5 with modifications (Code of Federal Regulations, 2016).
The listed Chinese standards are all developed by LED lighting industry experts and administered
by SAC. More details about standards and standard comparisons can be found in Appendix E.
Table 5. Existing LED lighting testing standards of photometric performance, reliability,
and lifetime projection in the U.S. and China Orange indicates standards for LED modules and green indicates standards for LED lamps or luminaires.
U.S. China
Standard Issuer Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) SAC
Electrical and
photometric
LM-79-2008
Approved Method for the Electrical and
Photometric Measurements of Solid-State
Lighting Products
GB/T 24824-2009
Measurement methods of LED modules
for general lighting
GB/T 29293-2012
Measurement methods of performance
for LED downlights
GB/T 29295-2012
Test methods of performance of self-
ballasted LED reflector lamps
Lumen
maintenance
and lifetime
LM-80-2008
Approved Method for Measuring Lumen
Maintenance of LED Light Sources
TM-21-2011
Projecting Long Term Lumen
Maintenance of LED Light Sources
LM-84-2014
Measuring Luminous Flux and Color
Maintenance of LED Lamps, Light
Engines, and Luminaires
GB/T 33721-2017
Reliability test methods for LED
luminaires
GB/T 33720-2017
Accelerated test method of luminous
flux depreciation for LED lighting
products
TM-28-2014
Projecting Long Term Luminous Flux
Maintenance of LED Lamps and
Luminaires
Accreditation of Testing Laboratory
With robust testing standards in place, it is then necessary to make sure standards are followed
strictly and testing is performed accurately so that the testing quality can be guaranteed.
Accreditation of testing laboratories by an independent professional accreditation organization
could confirm a laboratory’s ability to perform testing, follow certain testing standards, and present
accurate testing results and reports. This is crucial in product certification since it helps ensure the
credibility of the certification program.
PNNL-27954
15
In the U.S., the Federal test procedure established by DOE requires the testing laboratories to be
accredited by an accreditation body that is a signatory member to the International Laboratory
Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition Arrangement (ILAC-MRA). One of the qualified
accreditation programs for LED product testing laboratories is the National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation Program (NVLAP), which accredits laboratories with the ability to perform
electrical, photometric, and reliability testing. Another program, the Nationally Recognized
Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program, although not an accreditation program, recognizes
laboratories with the ability to perform in situ temperature test (ISTMT)- a parameter used for
product lifetime projection. The accreditation/recognition process of the two programs is similar.
Particularly, they both require on-site assessment to investigate laboratory facility, equipment, and
testing procedures following the applicable standards. Moreover, they both provide post-
accreditation/recognition supervision to the testing laboratories through on-site assessment or
audits. One difference is that NVLAP requires proficiency testing, which helps to determine the
competence and the effectiveness of the management system of a testing laboratory.
The Certification and Accreditation Administration of China (CNCA) supervises the accreditation
and certification system in China. In addition to its supervision role, CNCA also administers the
China Inspection Body and Laboratory Mandatory Approval program and issues the China
Metrology Accreditation (CMA). The CMA certificate is a mandatory inspection and testing
market access requirement for any third-party testing laboratories and inspection bodies in China,
which complies with the Article 22 of the Metrology Law of China5. Moreover, CNCA established
proficiency testing program for testing laboratories. Laboratories who have participated in
proficiency testing and passed could skip on-site assessment when applying for CMA certification
for the same testing scope within a certain timeframe. Laboratories who failed in proficiency
testing need to rectify and reform and their accreditation certificate might be suspended. The
China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS), the national
accreditation body established and authorized by CNCA, is a signatory member to ILAC-MRA.
Unlike CNCA that only targets third-party laboratories or inspection bodies, CNAS on the other
hand provides voluntary accreditation to all kinds of certification bodies, testing laboratories, and
inspection bodies in China, not limited to third parties.
5 Article 22 of the Metrology Law of China5 requires that testing laboratories and inspection bodies who provide
notarial data of product quality must be investigated for its capability and reliability by a metrological administrative
department at above provincial level (CNCA, 2012)
PNNL-27954
16
Table 6. Accreditation/Recognition programs for LED products testing laboratories in the
U.S. and China
Program
National Voluntary
Laboratory
Accreditation
Program (NVLAP)
Nationally
Recognized
Testing Laboratory
(NRTL)
China Metrology
Accreditation
(CMA)
CNAS
Accreditation
Administrator National Institute
of Standards and
Technology
(NIST) – part of
the U.S.
Department of
Commerce
Occupational
Safety and Health
Administration
(OSHA) – part of
the U.S.
Department of
Labor
Certification and
Accreditation
Administration of
China (CNCA)
China National
Accreditation
Service for
Conformity
Assessment
(CNAS) – part of
CNCA
ILAC – MRA
Signatory
Yes No No Yes
Post-
recognition
Monitoring
On-site assessment
every two year
after the initial
visit
Annual on-site
audits; office
audits;
unscheduled or
special audits
N/A Scheduled and
unscheduled audit;
reassessment every
2 years
Term of
Validity
Each certificate is
assigned with a
term of validity
Initial recognition
valid for 5 years
Each certificate is
assigned with a
term of validity
6 years
Database of
Approved
Labs
Yes Yes Yes Yes
The U.S. and Chinese programs are similar in the accreditation process and assessments. The
difference between the U.S. and Chinese programs is that the U.S. accreditation programs have
clear linkage with testing standards. The two U.S. programs both clearly list out the testing
standards that are covered for each type of testing products. In contrast, the two Chinese
accreditation programs do not specify testing standards that could be accredited under the program.
This might cause confusion and extra efforts in product certification process as manufacturers
would not necessarily know which testing laboratories are accredited for what kinds of testing
abilities; particularly, whether the laboratories are able to follow certain testing standards for the
testing of performance metrics that are required to be evaluated under the certification programs.
Comparison Certification Programs in the U.S. and China
Labeling of product performance metrics is a way to demonstrate compliance with standards to
which a product has been tested and meanwhile, it makes the information of product quality more
transparent to consumers and helps consumers purchase more wisely. Comparison certification
program determines whether product information is considered valid to be put on the product label.
Table 7 lists the programs in the U.S. and China. The two programs in the U.S. are the Lighting
Facts established by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the LED Lighting Facts by DOE,
PNNL-27954
17
now run by D&R International. The Chinese labeling program is the China Energy Label (CEL)
program. These three programs differ in many ways.
Table 7. Comparison certification programs (of product performance metrics) for LED
lighting products in the U.S. and China
U.S. U.S. China
Program Lighting Facts LED Lighting Facts China Energy Label
(CEL)
Administrator Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) D&R International
China National Institute
of Standardization
(CNIS)
Government-
backed Yes Yes Yes
Covered
Products
General services lamps
(light bulb) with medium
screw bases
General solid-state
lighting (SSL) products
Non-directional self-
ballasted LED lamps for
general lighting services
Mandatory/
Voluntary Mandatory Voluntary Mandatory
Product
Information on
Label
- Light output
- Estimated annual
energy cost
- Life expectancy
- Correlated color
temperature (CCT)
- Average initial wattage
- Design voltage
- Mercury
- Lumens
- Watts
- Efficacy
- Color rendering index
(CRI)
- CCT
- Lumen maintenance
(optional)
- Warranty (optional)
- Efficiency grade
- Initial luminous
efficacy
- Power
- Light color
Post-
certification
Verification
No Yes No
Accreditation
of Testing
Laboratory
Required Required
Testing by an accredited
testing laboratory or
manufacturer’s own lab6
Product
Database Yes7 Yes8 Yes
6 Manufacturer’s own laboratory are not necessarily accredited but need to show proofing materials of testing
abilities and compliance with testing standards. 7 For the FTC program, once the product compliance form is submitted to DOE’s CCMS, it would be publicly
available on the DOE’s Compliance Certification Database site. 8 The LED Lighting Facts program lists all product information and performance metrics on its “Products” webpage.
This webpage also provides a comparison feature that allows a user to compare different products of his/her own
choice to assist the user to find the product with desired quality.
PNNL-27954
18
Under the Energy Labeling Rule of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the U.S. FTC
established the Lighting Facts program in 2011. The FTC Lighting Facts label is a mandatory label
for most general services lamps (light bulbs) with medium screw bases9 to be sold on the market
(FTC, 2017). The aim of this program is to assist consumers to choose the right lighting products
through information display. Manufacturers do not need to get FTC pre-approval to label and sell
the labeled products, but they need to comply with all the rules and requirements under the program,
including testing requirements and reporting requirements.
Figure 3. An example of FTC Lighting Facts label Left: front label on the product; right: side or back label on the product
The LED Lighting Facts program, developed by the U.S. DOE, is a voluntary certification and
labeling program run by D&R International. While the Lighting Facts label by FTC covers only
lamp products but different lighting technologies (incandescent, CFL, LED), the LED Lighting
Facts covers general illumination, white-light SSL products but only LED lighting technology.
Figure 4. An example of LED Lighting Facts label
9 Products include most incandescent, compact fluorescent (CFL) and light-emitting diode (LED) light bulbs.
PNNL-27954
19
The China Energy Label (CEL) serves a similar function to the FTC Lighting Facts program. It is
a mandatory label for covered products to be sold in the Chinese market. However, the CEL
program is different from the FTC program in many ways. First, CEL has a much narrower product
coverage. The one and only LED lighting product for building use covered under the CEL program
is the non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp for general lighting services. Second, product
information on the label is different between the two programs. While the FTC label provides five
required product metrics (Figure 3), the CEL provides information of three performance metrics:
initial luminous efficacy, power, and light color (Figure 5). Additionally, the CEL provides an
efficiency grade for the product: grade 1 represents low energy consumption, grade 2 as medium,
and grade 3 as high. The efficiency grade of LED lamp is determined based on product’s initial
luminous efficacy. Third, unlike FTC that does not pre-approves the use of the label, the CEL
program requires manufacturers to complete online application with manufacturer and product
information as well as product testing reports. The China National Institute of Standardization
(CNIS) reviews the submitted materials and approves the use of CEL if meeting program
requirements.
Figure 5. An example of China Energy Label of non-directional self-ballasted LED lamp
The product certification and label of all the three programs is based on testing results. DOE sets
all the testing, rules, and procedures for the two U.S. programs (Code of Federal Regulations,
2016). The testing procedures clearly refer to the standards that should be followed for testing each
of the metrics on the label. The CEL program similarly refers to multiple Chinese national
standards for product testing and efficiency grade evaluation. The two U.S. certification programs
also strictly require that product testing must be conducted by an accredited testing laboratory. The
CEL program, on the other hand, allows products to be tested either at an accredited third-party
laboratory or at manufacturer’s own testing laboratory, which is not necessarily accredited.
One approach that effectively helps ensure true product quality and maintain a high level of
confidence in consumers is verification of labeled information. The LED Lighting Facts takes such
PNNL-27954
20
an approach: all approved products are subject to verification testing. The program selects a
product for testing, which shall be purchased by an independent procurement agent directly from
retailers to reflect true product performance in the market (Figure 6). Purchased products are sent
to and tested by an accredited independent testing laboratory. Testing results are then reported
back to the LED Lighting Facts program and the information is updated on the program webpage.
Such a post-market verification testing assures consumers the accurate description of product
quality.
Figure 6. Verification testing process under the LED Lighting Facts
Endorsement Certification Programs in the U.S. and China
While comparison certification program with detailed labeling of product metrics helps consumers
to understand product quality and compares products, endorsement certification of an energy-
efficient product can further enable consumers to easily identify products with superior energy
performance and thus, market uptake of high-performance products is likely to increase.
Certification program of energy-efficient LED lighting products exists in both the U.S. and China
(Table 8). The two programs in the U.S. are the Energy Star and the SSL Qualified Product List
(QPL). The Chinese certification program of energy-efficient LED lighting product is the China
Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program.
PNNL-27954
21
Table 8. Endorsement certification programs for energy-efficient LED lighting products in
U.S. and China
U.S. U.S. China
Program Name Energy Star SSL Qualified
Product List (QPL)
China Energy
Conservation
Certification (CECC)
Administrator
Environmental
Protection Agency
(EPA)
DesignLights
Consortium (DLC)
China Quality
Certification Centre
(CQC)
Government-backed Yes No10 Yes
Covered Products
Light lamp (bulb) and
light luminaire
(fixture)
Commercial LED
lamp and luminaire not
covered by Energy
Star
Certain types of LED
lamp and luminaire11
Mandatory/Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary
Label Energy Star logo DLC QPL logo Energy Conservation
Certification logo
Term of Validity N/A N/A 4 years
Accreditation
Requirement Yes Yes N/A
Online Certified
Product Data Yes Yes No12
Energy Star, established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992, is a symbol for
energy efficiency. Lighting is one of the product categories that are covered under the Energy Star
program. This program covers both LED lamps and LED luminaires, but mainly focuses on
consumer/residential products with a small coverage of commercial products. The SSL Qualified
Product List (QPL) program established by the DesignLights Consortium (DLC), a non-profit
organization, also certifies energy-efficient LED lighting products. The DLC QPL program
differentiates from Energy Star in product coverage in that DLC only certifies commercial LED
lighting products that are not covered by Energy Star. In other words, one product can only be
10 DLC is a non-profit organization. 11 For building use LED products, the covered lamps are self-ballasted LED reflector lamps, non-directional self-
ballasted LED lamps for general lighting services, and double-capped LED lamps designed to retrofit linear
fluorescent lamps. Covered luminaire is LED down lights. 12 Although CQC does not host an online product directory, CQC does post announcements about certified
manufacturer and products periodically.
PNNL-27954
22
certified under either Energy Star or DLC, not both. Both Energy Star and DLC QPL certified
products could participate in regional, state, and utility incentive programs.
The China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program, administered by the China Quality
Certification Centre (CQC), is a government-backed program in China. Compared to the two U.S.
certification programs, the CECC program covers a smaller range of LED products for building
use.
Similarities exist among the three certification programs. First, they are all voluntary. Second, the
general certification process is similar in that a manufacturer submits an application with
manufacturer and product information as well as product testing reports of required testing metrics.
If the products are certified because they meet minimum energy performance, the program logo
could be put on the products as a certificate of energy efficiency. Third, they all provide detailed
testing requirements, which specify testing metrics and testing standards that must be followed for
each metrics.
Nonetheless, there are many differences among the three programs. First, the QPL and CECC
programs are self-certified, meaning that the program administrators reviews the application and
certifies the product. In contrast, the Energy Star program is not self-certification; instead, an
accredited, third-party certification body reviews the application and certifies whether the product
meets program requirements and product performance criteria (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Energy Star certification process
PNNL-27954
23
Second, the two U.S. programs require products to be tested by an accredited testing laboratory
following the required industry testing standards or the federal test procedure for LED lamps, while
such specification is lacking in the CECC program. Moreover, under the U.S. programs,
manufacturers have the flexibility to choose testing laboratories themselves. In contrast, the
administrator of the CECC program, CQC, appoints a testing laboratory to perform product testing
instead of allowing manufacturers to make their own choice. However, it is not clear how CQC
selects the testing lab in different cases.
Third, Energy Star requires post-market verification testing every year in order to maintain
consumer confidence in the Energy Star label. For the verification testing, the partner certification
bodies select products from the certified product list to be tested13; obtain the products have them
tested by an accredited independent laboratory; and report to Energy Star whether the tested
products meet program requirements and performance criteria. The CECC program also requires
verification through annual sample testing. The difference is that each of the certified products
shall be tested annually under CECC while a sampling of certified products needs to undergo
verification testing under Energy Star.
Lastly, the U.S. certification programs have strong coordination and linkages in product coverage
and testing. The coordination between the two endorsement certification programs (Energy Star
and DLC) is that there is no overlap in the product coverage, which avoids wasted efforts of double
certification and avoids confusion of different certificates by the consumers. The linkage between
comparison certification programs and endorsement certification programs in the U.S. is that some
of the testing reports can work for multiple programs since the testing metrics and requirements
are more or less the same. For example, lamps included in these programs must be tested according
to the federal test procedures by DOE. Also, if a manufacturer already has the LM-79 testing
reports by an accredited testing laboratory for comparison certification (e.g. LED Lighting Facts),
it could submit the same report for endorsement certification (e.g. Energy Star) as long as meeting
program requirements. Moreover, some of the verification testing reports under Energy Star could
also work for the verification testing in LED Lighting Facts as long as the requirements are the
same in order to eliminate duplicate testing efforts and costs. Whereas in China, the CEL and
CECC programs are not well linked because 1) the required testing metrics are not consistent as
CECC requires a lot more metrics than CEL and 2) testing requirements are different; for instance,
CEL allows manufacturers to choose testing labs while CECC appoints testing labs. This means
that products would have to go through two different sets of product testing in China to get product
a performance label and to be certified as energy-efficient product.
Additional Verification Testing Program
In addition to the with-in certification program verification testing, the U.S. Department of Energy
has established an independent verification testing program for LED lighting products, the SSL
13 Selection of products for verification is through product nomination as well as random selection.
PNNL-27954
24
Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting (CALiPER) program. The goal
of the CALiPER program is to “provide accurate and comparable data on LED products by
arranging for reliable independent testing and data reporting of commercially available products”
(DOE, 2018d). This program tests SSL products with the goals of 1) providing objective
information on products to the public, 2) supporting the development and refinement of testing
standards, methods, and procedures, and 3) supporting planning for research and development
(R&D) and market development activities (DOE, 2018a). The Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory (PNNL), by operating a nationally accredited lighting test laboratory, leads the work
under the CALiPER program through product testing and reporting.
In general, the CALiPER program selects products that could represent the SSL market; purchases
products from the market; and tests these products at accredited testing laboratories following the
industry standards. To provide objective product information to the public, the CALiPER program
ensures that the testing results are verifiable in several ways. First, tests are usually conducted with
two or more samples to account for variability in product. Second, the CALiPER program adopts
“round-robin” tests that the same product is tested by two or more testing laboratories to account
for variability among laboratories. The testing results are also compared to data from certification
programs in the U.S., including the LED Lighting Facts, Energy Star, and DLC. The program
shares its testing results, summaries, and analyses with the public in the format of report, webinar,
videos, and presentations (DOE, 2018b). Moreover, the CALiPER program clearly specifies that
the testing results are only for public interest and cannot be used for commercial purpose, such as
advertising and product promotion. Such an independent program by providing unbiased testing
results could help build consumer confidence in LED products on the market.
In addition to providing objective product information through verification testing, the CALiPER
program also supports the standard development and R&D with testing results. Particularly,
product testing conducted under the CALiPER program is also used to identify the needs for
standard refinement and development (DOE, 2018c). Testing results are also used to understand
the features and potential technology developments and improvements of lighting products14. Thus,
there is a feedback loop between standard setting, testing, validation, and the market which
improves the overall process.
Recommendations for Roadmap Based on the gap analysis and feedback from the two working groups, the research team developed
recommendations for a roadmap on a national green building product standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system. In this section, we first summarize the key factors that ensure
14 The CALiPER program conducts benchmarking testing of other lighting sources, such as halogen or CFL. This
enables the comparison of LED lighting with other lighting technologies to understand the development and market
trend of the lighting industry, identify potential issues in LED products, and plan for future R&D activities.
PNNL-27954
25
the success of the system based on the analysis of the two product case studies; then, we provide
detailed recommendations of steps that could be taken in different time frames for the
standardization of window glass products and improvement of LED lighting product certification
programs. Lastly, we outline a roadmap that could be applied broadly to a national green building
product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system.
Key Factors for Success
By analyzing the two examples of window glass testing standards and LED lighting product
certification, the research team identifies four key factors that are vital for the success of a robust
standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. The four factors are (1) greater coordination
and alignment; (2) robust testing and certification; (3) better information; and (4) supporting
programs. Several approaches that could help fulfill each factor are also proposed. Table 9 provides
a summary of the four factors and associated approaches.
Table 9. Four key factors for success in developing a green building product standard,
testing, certification, and labeling system
Factor Approach
Greater coordination and alignment
Greater alignment and consistency among testing standards
could help streamline the certification process
Greater coordination and linkage among different
components of the system could help smooth the
certification process, be more cost effective, and accelerate
the industry overall development
Robust testing (simulation and
physical testing) and certification
Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and
certification body could ensure the integrity and quality of
product rating
Verification testing (either within the certification program
or an independent program) could add another level of
assurance in product performance and enhance consumer
confidence in the product label or certification
Third-party certification could help ensure certification
program integrity
Better information
Information transparency could help engage manufacturers
in product certification, smooth the testing and certification
process, and build consumer confidence
Product database could be used to support the overall
development of the industry
Supporting programs
Supportive policies, such as building codes and incentive
schemes, could help promote product certification and the
use of certified products
Capacity building among consumers is necessary for the
system to realize its true value
PNNL-27954
26
I. Greater coordination and alignment
1. Standards
Greater alignment and consistency among testing standards could help streamline the
certification process. In the U.S., different testing standards might cross-reference each
other but do not overlap. In China, however, standards tend to overlap even in the same
category of products (Staniszewski, et al., 2017b). This might cause confusion to
manufacturers and testing laboratories, and would cost more since manufacturers and
testing laboratories might have to test to multiple standards for a single metric (Figure 8 as
an example). Overlap in standards is also costly to standard makers and certification
program rule makers when maintaining multiple overlapping standards. Furthermore,
consistency of metrics among testing standards could also be enhanced in China (e.g. the
use of shading coefficient vs. solar heat gain coefficient for window glass products). In
addition, since window standards and glass standards are overseeing by different ministries
(MOHURD and SAC) in China, the collaborations and coordination between the two
ministries are crucial as window and glass are closely related.
8a. Certification of LED luminaire under the Energy Star
PNNL-27954
27
8b. Certification of LED downlights under the China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC) program
Figure 8. An illustration of the levels of rules and standards that a manufacturer or a
testing laboratory needs to go through in the U.S. and Chinese programs
2. Components of the system
Greater coordination and linkage among different components within the standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system could help smooth the certification process, be more cost
effective, and accelerate the overall industry development. The U.S. programs provide
clear descriptions of the responsibilities by each stakeholder group and provide resources
to connect stakeholder groups. For example, the U.S. certification programs are well linked
with standard and testing by providing (1) a list of testing standards required for
certification of a specific performance metrics of a certain product; (2) information of
partner testing laboratories that are accredited for testing following certain testing standards;
and (3) information of accreditation programs to assist testing laboratories and certification
bodies to get accreditation. The U.S. accreditation programs also clearly list the testing
standards that are within the scope of the program. This helps each stakeholder group have
a holistic picture of the certification process by understanding each other’s responsibilities
and the necessary testing standards associated with each program, making the process
smoother. Moreover, the certification programs themselves are well linked by having
similar testing requirements and allowing the mutual use of testing reports among programs.
This saves manufacturers’ efforts and time in familiarizing different programs, obtaining
required testing reports, and being certified and labeled. However, the linkage among
different components within the system is relatively weak in China.
II. Robust testing and certification
1. Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratory and certification body
Accreditation of testing and simulation laboratories by an independent professional
accreditation organization could confirm a laboratory’s ability to perform testing, follow
certain testing standards, and present accurate testing results and reports. Members of the
working groups especially addressed that the ability of the personnel who conducts testing
PNNL-27954
28
should be ensured. Proficiency testing, which is also called inter-laboratory comparison,
could also help ensure the integrity and quality of testing results. Accreditation of a
certification body also helps ensure the integrity and credibility of product certification.
Certification programs in China could strengthen the accreditation requirements.
2. Verification testing
Verification testing, either within-certification program or an independent program like
CALiPER, could add another level of assurance in product performance and enhance
consumer confidence in a product label. The CECC program in China takes a similar
approach by requiring post-certification monitoring of each single certified product and
manufacturer’s factory. This approach is more stringent than random sampling done by the
U.S. programs. However, this might only be feasible when the amount of certified products
is relatively small. If product category expands and number of certified products increases,
it might be too costly and a verification testing of randomly selected products might be
more suitable. In addition, when conducting verification testing, obtaining testing samples
through a normal market channel, such as a retailer instead of the manufacturer, could
better reflect the true product quality in the market. An independent verification testing
program, which China is currently lacking , could also help quality assurance of products
on the market.
3. Third-party certification
Third-party certification could help ensure certification program integrity. The U.S.
Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that self-certification by the program
administrator instead of a third-part certification body is subject to fraud and abuse (GAO,
2010). Specifically, 75% of the bogus products developed by GAO successfully obtained
Energy Star certifications (GAO, 2010). To solve this problem, EPA reshaped the Energy
Star program by implementing a third-party certification system starting in 2011 (Energy
Star, 2018).
III. Better information
1. Transparency
Information transparency could help engage manufacturers in product certification, smooth
the testing and certification process, and build consumer confidence. Reviewing both U.S.
and Chinese programs, the research team found that the U.S. programs tend to provide
clear and detailed program descriptions, rules, requirements, and guidelines, which are
lacking in the Chinese programs. Making program information publicly available is crucial
to gaining stakeholder buy-in.
2. Database
A product database could help support the overall development of the industry. A
comprehensive database of product information could record product performance and
market trends. This enables the understanding of the evolving technology and helps with
next-generation development planning. The certification programs in China could
strengthen the maintenance of a product database and allow for data access and analysis
from the industry.
IV. Supporting programs
1. Supportive policies
PNNL-27954
29
Supportive policies are necessary to promote product certification and the use of certified
products. One example is to link building codes with certification by explicitly requiring
the use of certified building products under certain certification programs in the building
codes. Currently in China, the building codes require developers to send products for
testing at local testing laboratories. These local testing laboratories are not necessarily
accredited and might be insufficient in testing capability, particularly those in remote and
small towns. Linking building codes with a national standard, testing, certification, and
labeling system brings benefits from three folds: (1) ensures the quality of product testing;
(2) cost-effective so developers do not need to go through the testing process themselves,
but rather purchase certified building products directly; and (3) promotes product
certification. In addition, establishing incentive programs for product certification could
greatly motivate industry to participate in certification work, which in turn promotes high-
performance products in the market.
2. Capacity building program
Capacity building among consumers is necessary. Ensuring the quality of a product label
and certification is one thing; whether consumers are able to understand what the label and
certification means and make informed decisions as the programs intended is another thing.
A U.S. study indicates that most of the general consumers cannot fully understand the
information on the Lighting Facts label (Nevius, et al., 2012). Therefore, in order to achieve
the ultimate goal of a standard, testing, certification, and labeling system, which is to assist
consumer purchasing process with useful information, capacity building among consumers
is vital. In the U.S., Energy Star provides different kinds of educational materials, such as
case studies, cost saving calculators, and purchasing guidance to help consumers
understand the importance of energy efficiency and assist them in choosing and purchasing
green products. Nonetheless, the working groups emphasized the need of additional
capacity building programs and approaches in both the U.S. and China.
Recommendations for Two Case Studies
In this section, we provide detailed recommendations of activities that should be prioritized for the
standardization of window glass products (Table 10) and improvement of LED lighting product
certification programs (Table 11). For each activity, we also estimate a feasible timeline for
completion. Prioritization and timeline is set based on our own analysis and stakeholder inputs.
PNNL-27954
30
Table 10. Recommendations for standardization and measurement of window glass products in China
Gap Recommendations Priority Time for
Completion Government Support
Stakeholder
Involvement
Insufficient linkage
between
measurement
standards,
certification
programs, and
building energy
policies
Develop a clear system to better link
measurement standards with the
evaluation of product energy
performance under certification
programs and testing requirements in
building codes. This could start with
revision to building acceptance code.
High
priority 2 – 4 years
Agencies that oversee the
standards, certification
programs, and building
codes shall coordinate, plan,
organize, and supervise the
system development.
Standard markers,
administrators of
certification
programs shall
provide technical
support.
Insufficient
transparency of
measurement
process and
standardization of
the testing and
simulation process
Provide more open resources about
simulation of window glass products,
including manuals of simulation
software and relevant databases. Also
consider participating in international
glazing and shading database.
High
priority Ongoing
Agencies that oversee the
standard development,
certification program,
simulation software and
database shall supervise the
work.
Standard makers,
software
developers,
program
administrators,
and industry
experts shall
provide technical
support to the
work.
Boundary
conditions might
not be
representative of
climate in China
Revise the boundary conditions in the
JGJ/T 151-2008 standard and
consequently, simulation software to fit
better with climate in China. This
enables the simulation of real product
energy performance in China.
Medium
priority 3 – 5 years
Agencies that oversee the
standardization process and
software development work
shall organize and supervise
the revision.
Standard makers,
software
developers, and
industry experts
shall provide
technical support.
PNNL-27954
31
The use of shading
coefficient (SC)
instead of solar heat
gain coefficient
(SHGC) or g-factor
Replace SC with SHGC in relevant
standards, including measurement,
certification standards and building
energy codes to ensure consistency in
produce performance metrics. Such
replacement is needed when adopting
the g-factor at near infrared band (gIR)
to avoid confusion among the industry
and end-users. Moreover, it enables the
alignment with other countries,
including the U.S.
Medium
priority ~ 3 years
Agencies that oversee the
standardization process
(including measurement
standards, certification
standards and building
energy codes) shall organize
and supervise the revision.
Standard makers
and industry
experts shall
provide technical
support to the
revision.
Areas that are
lacking standards
Identify areas that need development of
additional standards by taking inputs
from the industry. Such areas include
window films and window attachments,
such as shading devices. The
development of measurement standards
happens first, then followed by the
revision of certification standards and
building energy codes accordingly.
Medium
priority Ongoing
Agencies that oversee the
standardization process
(including measurement
standards, certification
standards and building
energy codes) shall organize
the review process and make
decisions in new standard
development.
Industry
associations shall
provide feedback
about needed
standards.
Standard makers
and industry
experts shall
provide technical
support in
development of
new standards.
Simulation of solar
and visible
transmittance at the
glazing area is using
methodologies
partially from ISO
9050 and partially
from ISO 15099
Revise the methodology in the
measurement standard (JGJ/T 151-2008)
and consequently, simulation software to
better align with ISO 15099, which
avoids confusion to the industry and
enables better alignment with other
countries.
Medium
priority ~ 3 years
Agencies that oversee the
standardization process
(measurement standard) and
software development work
shall organize and supervise
the revision.
Standard makers,
software
developers, and
industry experts
shall provide
technical support
to the revision.
PNNL-27954
32
Table 11. Recommendations for certification of LED lighting products in China
Gap Recommendations Priority Time for
Completion
Government
Support
Stakeholder
Involvement
Insufficient
practices to
maintain the
integrity and
credibility of
certification
Reshape the certification programs from
self-certification to third-party
certification. Introduce an independent
verification testing program (like
CALiPER).
High
priority 1 – 2 years
Agencies that oversee
the certification
programs shall
supervise reshaping
the certification
program. Decision
makers shall plan,
organize, and
supervise the design
and operation of the
verification testing
program.
Certification program
administrators and
certification bodies shall
coordinate in reshaping
the program.
Certification bodies,
accreditation bodies,
testing laboratories, and
industry experts shall
provide technical
support and coordinate
on the operation of
verification program.
Weak coordination
and linkage among
different
components in the
system
Different components of the system
(standard, accreditation, and certification)
could cross-reference each other and each
could provide clearer guidelines and
resources for stakeholders to get a
holistic picture of product certification.
The two types of certification programs
could be consistent in program
requirements, product categories, and
certification process.
High
priority ~ 2 years
Agencies that oversee
different components
(standard,
accreditation, and
certification) of the
system shall
collaborate and
organize the
coordination work.
Standard makers, testing
laboratories,
accreditation bodies,
certification bodies,
certification program
administrators, and the
LED lighting industry
shall all participate in
the coordination work.
Weak or unclear
requirements for
testing laboratories
Revise the program requirements and
provide clear guidelines to require testing
at accredited third-party testing
laboratories explicitly.
High
priority < 1 year
Agencies that oversee
certification programs
shall organize and
supervise the
revision.
Program administrators
shall revise requirements
and guidelines.
PNNL-27954
33
Weak incentives for
product
certification
Establish financial incentive programs to
motivate product certification
Medium
priority 2 – 4 years
Agencies shall plan
and make rules of
financial incentive for
product certification.
Industry experts,
industry associations,
and program
administrators shall
provide feedback and
technical support.
Product categories
covered under
certification
programs are
relatively narrow
Expand product categories covered under
certification programs
Medium
priority Ongoing
Agencies that oversee
the certification
programs shall
prioritize products,
and plan and organize
the expansion.
Industry experts and
industry associations
shall provide feedback
about product
prioritization. Program
administrators shall
expand the program.
PNNL-27954
34
Roadmap for a National Green Building Product Certification System
By building on the analysis and recommendations based on the two examples (standardization of
window glass products and certification of LED lighting products), this section draws a roadmap
with a broader implication in China. This roadmap is intended to be systems-based so that it could
be applied to any kind of building products and certification programs not only featuring energy
efficiency but other “green” metrics. It first introduces the roles of the key government agencies
and institutions involved in the system and then rolls out the steps to be taken by the responsible
parties to develop a comprehensive national green building product certification system.
Institutional Roles
Figure 9 demonstrates the key government agencies and institutions in the development of a
national green building product certification system in China. We should note that the
organizational chart of Figure 9 as well as the following descriptions are based on information
retrieved in March 2018. As some of the ministries and institutions are under reorganization,
information provided in this section might not be current.
NDRC plays the role of formulating the national development plans, including economic
restructuring and promoting sustainable development strategies. MOHURD regulates construction
activities in China, including developing building codes, supervising the construction market, and
promoting energy conservations in buildings. MOHURD oversees the China Green Building
Evaluation Label program and the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling
program. MOHURD also oversees the testing requirements for building products required to show
compliance with the building codes. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT)
is responsible for formulating the industrialization development in China, including promoting
new materials and new technology and strategic planning for natural resources utilization and
industrial energy conservation. MIIT, together with MOHURD, oversees the certification of green
building materials (Green Building Materials Evaluation program) in China.
The State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR, formerly AQSIQ15) is in charge of
national metrology, standardization, certification and accreditation, and commodity inspection.
Directly subordinate to SAMR, the China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) is a public
institution addressing standardization issues and it administers the China Energy Label program.
Under SAMR, SAC supervises the standardization work while the Certification and Accreditation
Administration of China (CNCA) oversees the certification and accreditation system. The China
National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS) under CNCA administers the
accreditation programs. Qualified by CNCA and accredited by CNAS, the China Certification &
Inspection Group (CCIC) is an independent third-party certification and inspection organization.
The China Quality Certification Centre (CQC), which is the administrator and the certification
body for the China Energy Conservation Certification program, is under CCIC.
15 AQSIQ stands for the Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine.
PNNL-27954
35
Figure 9. Key ministries and institutions in the work of green building product standardization, labeling, and certification. Coral is the ministry. Blue is the institution. Yellow is the comparison certification program; green is the endorsement certification program; and purple is the accreditation
program16.
16 The institutional chart is based on information retrieved in March 2018. At time of publication, the Chinese government is undergoing reorganization so the
relationship and roles of the ministries and institutions may require further update.
PNNL-27954
36
Roadmap
The development of a national standard, testing, certification, and labeling system for green
building products requires coordination among different components and associated government
agencies and stakeholders. Standards are the foundation of product testing and certification.
Accreditation ensures the qualification of the testing laboratories and certification bodies, which
in turn ensures the quality of product testing and the integrity of the certification program. Product
certification ensures products perform as advertised; and labeling reflects product features and
supports consumers’ purchasing process.
The roadmap recommendations (Figure 10) developed by the research team with inputs from the
working groups include broader cross-cutting activities for each component to realize a robust
national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling system. In addition to
the components within the system, developing supportive policies and programs is also necessary
for the success of product certification, as policies and certification could support each other. A
main area for improvement is to link building codes with the national standard, testing,
certification, and labeling system. With a robust system in place, the requirement of using certified
building products in building codes could ensure the quality of product testing and thus ensure that
product performance truly meets the requirements for building acceptance. Linking certification
with building codes could also make the whole product testing process more efficient and
streamlined. The development of supportive policies also requires detailed and thoughtful planning
by decision makers with inter-agency collaboration. The roadmap recommendations we provide
are high-level recommendations. In order to reach the goal of having a robust national standard,
testing, certification, and labeling system in place, a more detailed action plan developed
collaboratively by government agencies in China is necessary.
PNNL-27954
37
Figure 10. Linkage among components of the standard, testing, certification, and labeling system and between policies and the
system
PNNL-27954
38
Conclusions Certification of green building products could enable consumers to understand product
performance and easily identify products with superior performance; thus, accelerating the market
uptake of green building products. This in turn will provide large economic and social benefits,
including improved building energy efficiency and reduced emissions. China is currently making
efforts to enhance the national green building product standard, testing, certification, and labeling
system. This report analyzes the key components in the system using two case studies
(standardization of window glass products and certification of LED lighting products). Based on
the analyses, this report then provides recommendations for a roadmap on a national green building
product certification system in China.
Two major improvements that could be made to the existing certification system in China are (1)
better linkages among different components and programs within the system, and (2) quality
assurance. A robust national green building product system requires coordinated efforts from
different parties related to product testing (standard and accreditation), certification, and labeling.
Government agencies overseeing different components in China would need to work
collaboratively to design a comprehensive and robust system, set program rules and regulations,
effectively engage stakeholders in the development of the system, and encourage public
participation in certification and promote high-performance building products in the market.
Quality assurance is crucial and verification testing could help ensure the credibility of certification
and increases consumer confidence in certified products.
The Chinese government has already taken important first steps in developing a green building
product certification system, including launching multiple certification programs and the issue of
promoting and coordination guidelines. The recommendations in this report aim to provide
guidance for the next steps in building a comprehensive and robust green building product standard,
testing, certification, and labeling system.
PNNL-27954
39
References
CEL. (2016). CEL 034-2016: Energy Efficiency Labeling Implementation Rule for Non-directional Self-
ballasted LED Lamp for General Lighting Services. Retrieved from
http://www.energylabel.gov.cn/userfiles/2/files/cms/article/2017/04/6%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B
636_%E6%99%AE%E9%80%9A%E7%85%A7%E6%98%8E%E7%94%A8%E9%9D%9E%E5
%AE%9A%E5%90%91%E8%87%AA%E9%95%87%E6%B5%81LED%E7%81%AF%E8%83
%BD%E6%BA%90%E6%95%88%E7%8E%87%E6%A0%87%E8%AF%86
ChinaIRN. (2014). China Makes up 29 Percent of Global Insulation Material Market. Retrieved from
http://www.chinairn.com/news/20140109/115313357.html
CNAS. (2015). China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment. Retrieved from
https://www.cnas.org.cn/dzzz/images/CNAS_2015.pdf
CNCA. (2012). Metrology Accreditation to testing laboratories and inspection bodies who provide
notarial data of product quality . Retrieved from
http://www.cnca.gov.cn/bsdt/xzxk/zljyjgjlrz/201203/t20120320_38105.shtml
DOE. (2012). Life-Cycle Assessment of Energy and Environmental Impacts of LED Lighting Products.
Retrieved from
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/2012_LED_Lifecycle_Report.pdf
DOE. (2015). Chapter 5: Increasing Efficiency of Building Systems and Technologies. In An Assessment
of Energy Technologies and Research Opportunities. Retrieved from
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/09/f26/QTR2015-05-Buildings.pdf
DOE. (2018a). Frequently Asked Questions about the CALiPER Program. Retrieved from
https://www.energy.gov/eere/ssl/frequently-asked-questions-about-caliper-program
DOE. (2018b). CALiPER. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/eere/ssl/caliper
DOE. (2018c). Standards Development Support. Retrieved from
https://www.energy.gov/eere/ssl/standards-development-support
DOE. (2018d). CALiPER Testing Laboratories. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/eere/ssl/caliper-
testing-laboratories
DOE. (2018d). GATEWAY Evaluations. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/eere/ssl/gateway-
evaluations
Ebanks, P.-G. (2014). A Comparison of the NFRC and CEN Thermal Transmittance Calculation Methods
in North America's Eight Climate Zones. Retrieved from
http://digital.library.ryerson.ca/islandora/object/RULA%3A3299/datastream/OBJ/view
Energy Star. (2018). EPA Ensures Energy Star Program Integrity. Retrieved 2018, from
https://www.energystar.gov/about/origins_mission/epas_role_energy_star/program_integrity
Freedonia Group. (2011). Windows and Doors in China: Industry Study with Forecasts for 2014-2019.
FTC. (2017). The FTC "Lighting Facts" Label: Questions and Answers for Manufacturers. Retrieved
from https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/ftc-lighting-facts-label-questions-
answers-manufacturers#Do labels need to be approved by the FTC before they’re placed on
products?
GAO. (2010). Energy Star Program: Covert Testing Shows the Energy Star Program Certification
Process is Vulnerable to Fraud and Abuse. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-
10-470
PNNL-27954
40
Grand View Research. (2016). Insulation Market Analysis By Product (Fiberglass, Foamed Plastic,
Mineral Wool), By Application (Residential Construction, Industrial, HVAC And OEM,
Nonresidential Construction) And Segment Forecast To 2024.
Gustavsen, A., Grynning, S., Arasteh, D., Jelle, B. P., & Goudey, H. (2011). Key Elements of and
Material Performance Targets for Highly Insulating Window Frames. Energy and Buildings,
43(10), 2583-2594.
Hanam, B., Jaugelis, A., & Finch, G. (2014). Energy Performance of Windows: Navigating Northe
American and European Window Standards. 14th Canadian Conference on Building Science and
Technology. Toronto. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305347757_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_OF_WIND
OWS_NAVIGATING_NORTH_AMERICAN_AND_EUROPEAN_WINDOW_STANDARDS
IEA. (2013). Technology Roadmap: Energy Efficient Building Envelopes. Retrieved from
https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/TechnologyRoadmapEnergyEfficie
ntBuildingEnvelopes.pdf
IEA. (2015). Building Energy Use in China: Transforming Construction and Influence Consumption to
2050. Retrieved from
http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/PARTNERCOUNTRYSERIESBuil
dingEnergy_WEB_FINAL.pdf
ISO. (2003). ISO 15099: Thermal Performance of Windows, Doors and Shading Devices - Detailed
Calculations. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
LBNL. (2006). Window-Related Energy Consumption in the US Residential and Commercial Building
Stock. Retrieved from https://facades.lbl.gov/publications/window-related-energy-consumption-
us
McKinsey&Company. (2012). Lighting the Way: Perspectives on the Global Lighting Market. Retrieved
from
http://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/dotcom/client_service/Automotive%20and%20As
sembly/Lighting_the_way_Perspectives_on_global_lighting_market_2012.ashx
MIIT. (2017). Guideline on Promoting Standards, Certification, and Labels for Green Building Materials
and Products. Retrieved from
http://www.miit.gov.cn/n1146290/n4388791/c5996006/content.html
MOGURD. (2012). 12th Five-Year Plan for Building Energy Efficiency. Retrieved from
http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2012-05/31/content_2149889.htm
MOHURD. (2015). Action Plan of Promoting the Production and Application of Green Building
Material. Retrieved from http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201509/t20150906_224666.html
NDRC. (2017). Development Plan of the 13th FYP for Semiconductor Lighting Industry. Retrieved from
http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201707/t20170728_856262.html
Nevius, M., Browne, C., Trapp, K. v., & Murray, C. (2012). Consumer Understanding of Key Lighting
Facts and Implications for Energy Savings. Retrieved from
http://aceee.org/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193-000193.pdf
NFRC. (2017a). NFRC 200-2017: Procedure for Determining Fenestration Product Solar Heat Gain
Coefficient and Visible Transmittance at Normal Incidence. Greenbelt, MD: National
Fenestration Rating Council.
NFRC. (2017b). NFRC 201-2017: Procedure for Interim Standard Test Method for Measuring the Solar
Heat Gain Coefficient of Fenestration Systems Using Calorimetry Hot Box Methods.
PNNL-27954
41
NFRC. (2017b). THERM 7/WINDOW 7 NFRC Simulation Manual. Retrieved from
http://nfrccommunity.site-ym.com/?page=Techdocs
SAC. (2017). GB/T 33721-2017: Reliability Test Methods for LED Luminaries.
Staniszewski, A., Evans, M., Parker, L., & Yu, S. (2017a). Best Available Technologies in the U.S.
Buildings Sector. Richland, Washington: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Retrieved from
http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Best-Available-Technologies-in-
the-U.S.-Buildings-Sector-2017.09.28.pdf
Staniszewski, A., Yu, S., Evans, M., Liu, T., Tan, Q., Shao, Z., . . . Song, B. (2017b). Evaluating the
Certification System of Green Building Materials in China. Retrieved from
http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2017/06/Evaluating_the_Certification_System_of_Green_Building_Materials_in
_China.pdf
Yu, S., Eom, J., Evans, M., & Clarke, L. (2014). A long-term, integrated impact assessment of alternative
building energy code scenarios in China. Energy Policy, 67, 626-639.
Yu, S., Evans, M., & Shi, Q. (2014). Analysis of the Chinese Market for Building Energy Efficiency.
Richland, Washington: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Retrieved from
https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-22761.pdf
PNNL-27954
42
Appendix A: Product Prioritization Example The research team evaluated two criteria when prioritizing among four broad categories of building
products: (1) energy savings potential and (2) market size of each product. These two criteria
together determine the extent and the scale of a product’s impact on building energy efficiency.
The four product categories are: (1) fenestration, (2) wall/insulation, (3) HVAC (heating,
ventilation, and air-conditioning), and (4) lighting. The research team also consulted with relevant
stakeholders, including policy makers and industry experts, for their interested product categories.
For simplicity, data on energy savings potential are derived from previous analysis using Scout
model, which provides energy savings percentage of certain energy conservation measures (ECMs)
to the U.S. residential and commercial buildings (Staniszewski, et al., 2017a). These data provide
a sense of energy savings potential by each product for the purpose of comparison. The research
team referred to other studies for the projection of each product’s market size in China in 2020.
However, in order to do a thorough evaluation, Chinese policy makers could refer to other national
or international models that are able to provide detailed analysis of product’s energy savings
potential and future market size in China.
Last, the research team consulted with relevant stakeholders, including policy makers,
manufacturers, and industry associations, to understand their interested areas. As mentioned earlier,
a robust certification system cannot function without combined efforts from relevant stakeholders.
Therefore, stakeholder buy-in is also a crucial factor to consider during the prioritization process.
Table 12. Prioritization evaluation for four building product categories
Fenestration Insulation HVAC Lighting
Energy
Savings
Potential17
Low-e glass Interior insulation Duct air leakage
sealants LED Lighting
Residential: 25%
Commercial: 25%
Residential: 58%
Commercial: 73%
Residential: 15%
Commercial: 10%
Residential: 72%
Commercial: 32%
Market Size in
China in 2020
~$90 billion
(￥570 billion)18
~$19.5 billion
(￥122.7 billion)19
~$44 billion
(￥276 billion)20
~$25 billion
(￥156 billion)21
Stakeholder
Interest Window glass N/A N/A LED lighting
17 Previous analysis selected one specific product under each of the four broad product categories for the modeling of
energy savings potential in the U.S. (Staniszewski, et al., 2017a). 18 Market size of doors and windows in China was￥365 billion in 2014 with 7.7% annual growth rate (Freedonia
Group, 2011). 19 The global insulation market will be $67.16 billion in 2020 (Grand View Research, 2016) and China makes up
about 29% of it (ChinaIRN, 2014). 20 Market size of HVAC in China was ￥50 billion in 2011 with 20% growth rate (Yu, Evans, & Shi, 2014). 21 Source: (McKinsey&Company, 2012).
PNNL-27954
43
Interior insulation and light-emitting diode (LED) lighting showed greatest energy savings
potential among the four products modeled. Fenestration products are likely to have a much greater
market size in China in 2020, about the same as the combined market size of wall/insulation,
HVAC, and lighting. The stakeholders that the research team has engaged with have expressed
particular interests in fenestration and lighting. By looking at the three factors all together,
fenestration and lighting products are prioritized. For this report the research team selected window
glass and LED lighting products for detailed analysis, but this does not imply these products should
be exclusively prioritized in China. The roadmap recommendations suggest conducting one’s own
prioritization exercise.
PNNL-27954
44
Appendix B: Members of the Working Groups
The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) together with Chinese collaborators have
organized two working groups to gain feedback from the industry. PNNL and the China Building
Material Test & Certification Group Co., Ltd. (CTC) are co-organizing the window glass working
group. PNNL and the China Solid State Lighting Alliance (CSA) are co-organizing the LED
lighting working group. Members in the working groups include standard makers, researchers,
manufacturers, testing laboratories, accreditation and certification bodies, industry associations,
and experts in window glass and LED lighting industry. Following is a list of all the U.S. and
Chinese members in the two working groups by alphabetic order.
List of Members (Alphabetic Order)
3M
American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA)
Beihang University
CESI (Guangzhou) Opto-Electronics Standard & Testing Institute Co., Ltd.
China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS)
China Standard Conformity Assessment Co., Ltd. (CSCA)
Cree Inc.
CSG Holding Co., Ltd. (CSG)
DesignLights Consortium (DLC)
GIGA
Guangdong Testing Institute of Products Quality Supervision
Guangzhou LEDIA Lighting Co., Ltd.
Honeywell (EnVision (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.)
International Window Film Association (IWFA)
KDX Optical Film Material
Keystone Certifications, Inc.
Kolbe Windows & Doors
Lutron Electronics Co., Inc.
Mackinac Technology
Nanjing Fiberglass Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd.
National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC)
Shenzhen Unilumin Technology Co., Ltd.
Solatube CECEP Daylighting Technology Co., Ltd.
State Key Laboratory of Solid-State Lighting
Tospo Lighting Co., Ltd.
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC)
Vitro Architectural Glass
Xiamen Leedarson Lighting Co., Ltd.
Xinyi Glass Holdings Limited
PNNL-27954
45
Appendix C: Window Standard Comparison: Thermal Transmittance
Thermal transmittance, or U-factor, measures the heat gain/loss from fenestration product through
conduction, convection, and radiation due to the interior and exterior temperature difference,
without the effects of solar radiation. Thermal transmittance of a whole window product is
estimated by area-weighted contributions from components of glass, frame, and glass edge. ISO
15099 standard provides two methods to treat frame and glass edge thermal indices. NFRC 100
series and JGJ/T 151-2008 follow the different methods.
The overall U-factor in NFRC is an area-weighted average of the U-values of the glass center, the
frame, the glass edge, the divider, and the divider edge. In contrast, JGJ/T 151-2008 considers the
thermal transmittance of glass area and window frame and a linear thermal transmittance due to
the interaction of the frame and the glass edge. These two methods differ in the way to treat frame
and edge heat transfer at the corners (ISO, 2003).
Similar to total solar transmittance, boundary conditions for the measurement of U-factor are
different between U.S. and Chinese standards (Table 13). Therefore, with the different calculation
methodology and different boundary conditions, the evaluation of thermal transmittance of the
same product would be different by following U.S. or Chinese standards, which in turn affects the
estimation of frame total solar energy transmittance mentioned in the report.
Table 13. Boundary conditions for calculating U-factor in U.S.-domiciled organization
developed standard, Chinese standard, and ISO standard
NFRC 100 Series JGJ/T 151-2008 ISO 15099
Interior air temperature Tin 210C 200C 200C
Exterior temperature Tout -180C -200C 00C
Wind speed v 5.5m/s N/A N/A
Heat transfer coefficient
(Interior convective film
coefficient) hc, in
2.44 - 3.29 W/m2K
(Value depends on
frame type and glass
temperature)22
3.6 W/m2K Temperature
dependent
Heat transfer coefficient
(Exterior convective film
coefficient) hc, out
26 W/m2K
8 W/m2K
(12 W/m2K for glass
edge and 16 W/m2K
for glass center)
20 W/m2K, or
calculated from
wind speed
Interior mean radiant
temperature Trm, in
Trm, in = Tin Trm, in = Tin Trm, in = Tin
Exterior mean radiant
temperature Trm, out
Trm, out = Tout Trm, out = Tout Trm, out = Tout
Solar radiation Is 0 W/m2 0W/m2 0W/m2
PNNL-27954
46
Appendix D: U.S. and Chinese Certification Programs for Windows
Comparison Certification Program – Rating of Performance Metrics
Labeling measured product metrics could be an effective way to utilize the testing results and
provide transparent product information to the consumers. NFRC is the rating program for energy-
related performance of fenestration products in the U.S. A similar organization to NFRC in China
is the Research Institute of Standards & Norms (RISN), which is managed and supervised by
MOHURD. The China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance Labeling program (CFEEPL)
under RISN is similar to NFRC’s rating program. The two U.S. and Chinese programs do not
evaluate nor certify whether a product is energy-efficient or not; rather they certify energy
performance of the product.
Figure 11. Organizational chart of the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC),
adapted from NFRC
PNNL-27954
47
Figure 12. Organizational chart of the China Fenestration Energy Efficiency Performance
Labeling program (CFEEPL), adapted from RISN
The NFRC and the CFEEPL are similar in general. They evaluate and certify same performance
metrics, except that NFRC allows for the optional labeling of condensation resistance performance.
They both (1) require products to be tested and simulated at third-party accredited laboratories; (2)
require the use of designated simulation software; (3) publish certified product information; and
(4) develop testing protocols to guide users. The main difference between these two programs is
that under the NFRC program, testing results are evaluated and certified by an independent certifier
or inspection agency. Whereas under the CFEEPL, an expert group organized by RISN instead of
independent certifier reviews the results and determines whether a certificate could be issued.
PNNL-27954
48
Table 14. Fenestration product energy performance rating program in the U.S. and China
U.S. China
Program Name NFRC Certified Energy
Performance Ratings
China Fenestration Energy
Efficiency Performance Labeling
(CFEEPL)
Administrator National Fenestration Rating
Council (NFRC)
Research Institute of Standards &
Norms (RISN) - under MOHURD
Voluntary or
Mandatory Voluntary Voluntary
Label Contents
1. Certificate number
2. Certificate date
3. Product description: frame
and glazing material and type
4. Window energy performance:
- U-factor
- Air leakage (no
differentiation of
positive/negative
pressures)
- Solar heat gain coefficient
- Visible transmittance
- Condensation resistance
(optional)
1. Certificate number
2. Date of certification and
expiration date
3. Product description: frame and
glazing materials
4. Window energy performance:
- K-value (equivalent to U-
factor)
- Air leakage (measurement
under both positive and
negative pressures)
- Shading coefficient
- Visible transmittance
5. Suitable region
Validity 5 years 3 years
Accreditation
Requirement Yes Yes
Simulation Software WINDOW and THERM
(based on ISO 15099) MOC-I (based on JGJ/T 151-2008)
Product Database Yes Yes
Standard/ Guideline NFRC 100 to NFRC 900 series;
Simulation manuals RISN-TG013-2012
PNNL-27954
49
Figure 13. Examples of NFRC and CFEEPL labels
Endorsement Certification Program – Energy-Efficient Products
Endorsement certification program of energy-efficient window products exists in both the U.S.
and China. These programs set product performance criteria and only those products that meet the
criteria and comply with program requirements can be certified as an energy-efficient product. In
other words, a product with an endorsement certificate tend to have superior energy performance.
In the U.S., Energy Star, an endorsement certification program, is well connected with the NFRC
rating program, a comparison certification program. Particularly, the fenestration products that are
to be certified with Energy Star must have gone through the NFRC testing procedures and
certification process. Moreover, the products must have gone through additional verification
testing to ensure certified products are truly superior in energy performance.
In China, two certification programs certify energy-efficient window products: (1) Green Building
Materials Evaluation (GBME), administered by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
Development (MOHURD); and (2) China Energy Conservation Certification (CECC),
administered by the China Quality Certification Centre (CQC). The GBME program is different
from Energy Star and CECC in that it is a tiered evaluation from one to three stars and products
with three stars are superior. In addition, GBME evaluates more than energy efficiency, but covers
water conservation, environmental impacts, and resource efficiency, which is consistent with
program’s name of “green” building materials.
PNNL-27954
50
Table 15. Certification programs of energy-efficient building window products in the U.S.
and China
U.S. China China
Program
Name Energy Star
Green Building Materials
Evaluation
China Energy
Conservation
Certification
Administrator Energy Protection Agency
(EPA)
Ministry of Housing and
Urban-Rural
Development
(MOHURD)
China Quality
Certification Centre
(CQC)
Government-
backed Yes Yes Yes
Voluntary or
Mandatory Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary
Evaluation
1. Energy savings
2. Deliver the features
and performance
demanded by
consumers
3. Increased energy
efficiency through
utility bill savings to
recover their
investment
4. Product energy
consumption and
performance can be
measured and verified
with testing
1. Three stars
2. Scoring tier system:
low score as one star;
middle as two stars;
high as three stars.
Total score of 100
3. Five evaluation criteria
- Energy
conservation
- Emission reduction
- Safety
- Convenience
- Recyclable
4. Weighted scoring of
each criteria
Energy savings
Label Content 1. Energy Star logo
2. Applicable region
3. NFRC label
Green Building Materials
logo with star(s)
China Energy
Conservation
Certification logo
Performance
Criteria
Performance criteria
for U-factor and SHGC
differentiated in 4
climate zones
- Three scores for
performance of U-
factor and visible
transmittance
differentiated in 4
climate zones
- Thermal performance
weighting as 30%
among all variables
- Air leakage
- Insulation
- Shading (visible
transmittance, shading
coefficient)
- Differentiated in 5
climate zones
Accreditation
Requirement Yes Yes N/A
Certified
Product Data Yes Yes No
PNNL-27954
51
Appendix E: U.S. and Chinese Testing Standards for LED Lighting
Products
Standard Comparisons – Lumen Maintenance and Lifetime Projection
The research team compared the U.S. and Chinese testing standards and found that these two
countries follow similar testing methods in general, although details do differ in certain ways. As
mentioned in the report (Table 16), there is no standard of lumen maintenance testing and lifetime
projection for LED modules in China (i.e. no equivalence to LM-80 and TM-21). The LED
industry in China generally follows LM-80 and TM-21 for the testing of lumen maintenance and
lifetime projection of LED light sources. Based on inputs from the LED lighting working group,
lifetime projection of lumen maintenance is a hot topic in the LED industry recently. This section
only compares the U.S. and Chinese industry standards from this aspect, i.e. comparing LM-84
and TM-28 with GB/T 33721-2017 for LED lamp and luminaire products. It should be noted that
the Federal test procedures for integrated LED lamps developed by DOE, although references LM-
84 and TM-28, are somewhat different from these two industry standards, particularly regarding
the projection of lifetime (Code of Federal Regulations, 2016).
Table 16. Comparison of general testing conditions between LM-84-2014 and GB/T 33721-
2017
LM-84-2014 GB/T 33721-2017
Applicable
Products
LED lamps integrated or non-
integrated; LED light engines; LED
luminaires
Indoor and outdoor LED luminaires
with voltage <1000v
Environmental
Condition
- Ambient temperature at 25C0±5 C0
and be monitored
- Relative humidity < 65%
- No restriction of device self-
induced airflow; all other airflow
shall be minimized
-
- Ambient temperature 25C0±1 C0
- Relative humidity < 65%
- No airflow
Electrical
Condition
- Continuous rated input voltage by
manufacturer specification
- Power supply shall have a voltage
waveshape that total harmonic
distortion not exceed 3% of the
fundamental
- Input voltage be within ≤ 2% of the
rated rms value and verified
periodically by less then 3000 hours
- Wiring be in accordance with
electrical code and manufacturer
recommendations
- Testing under the max rated voltage
if manufacturer provides a range
- Stability of power voltage and
frequency shall be within ±0.5%
- Allowed measurement error of
lumen maintenance shall be within
±2%
- Allowed measure error of voltage
and frequency shall be within
±0.2%
- Total harmonic distortion shall not
exceed 3%
PNNL-27954
52
Lifetime Projection Methodology Comparisons
The IES LM-28-2014 standard provides two methods of lifetime projection for LED lamps and
luminaires: the Direct Extrapolation and the Combined Extrapolation (Table 18). The Direct
Extrapolation shall be used when at least 6000 hours of LM-84 data are available. If the available
LM-84 data are less than 6000 hours but are at least 3000 hours, the Combined Extrapolation could
be used as long as at least 6000 hours of LM-80 data are also available. The GB/T 33721-2017
standard also provides two methods of lifetime projection for LED luminaires: the 1000h Method
and the Direct Method (Table 18). Figure 13 lists the decision points of which method to adopt.
Figure 14. Flow chart to determine the use of 1000h Method or Direct Method (SAC, 2017)
At decision point 6 from Figure 13, the product needs to go through a 1000h prequalification
testing under certain conditions. Only if the product meets the criteria specified in Table 17 that
the 1000h Method could be adopted; otherwise, the Direct Method should be used.
Table 17. 1000h testing conditions and criteria (SAC, 2017)
Claimed lifetime
≤ 25000h
25000h < Claimed
lifetime ≤ 35000h
35000h < Claimed
lifetime ≤ 50000h
Ambient
Temperature and
Relative Humidity
40C0±2 C0
65%±5%
50C0±2 C0
65%±5%
60C0±2 C0
65%±5%
Testing Time (h) 1000 1000 1000
Lumen Maintenance >93% >94% >95%
Solder-point
Temperature Change
<5C0 <5C0 <5C0
Input Power Change <3% <3% <3%
Chromaticity Shift
(Δu’v’)
0.004 (in
consideration)
0.004 (in
consideration)
0.004 (in
consideration)
PNNL-27954
53
Table 18. Comparisons of LED lifetime projection methods between GB/T 33721-2017 (China) and TM-28-2014 (U.S.)
GB/T 33721-2017 TM-28-2014
Method 1000h Method Direct Method Direct Extrapolation Combined Extrapolation
LM-80 Data Yes No No Yes
LM-84 Data No No Yes Yes
Sample Size At least 3 At least 3 At least 5
Projection
Temperature
Manufacturer claimed working temperature ±2C0; if multiple
claims, test under the highest temperature claimed
In-situ case temperature
Testing
Hours
- 1000h prequalification
test
- LM-80 data with at least
6000h testing
- At least 6000h testing
- At least 10000h for
claimed lifetime
> 50000h
LM-84 data with at least 6000h
testing
- LM-80 data with at
least 6000h testing
- LM-84 data with 3000h
to 6000h testing
Testing
Interval
LM-80: 1000h - 1000h
- The first 1000h: testing
interval could be shorter
LM-84: 1000h ± 48h - LM-84: 1000h ± 48h
initial; 500h ± 48h after
- LM-80: 1000h
Data Needed LM-80 data:
- Input current
- LM80 testing
temperature(s)
- Lumen maintenance at
each testing interval
Other data:
- Manufacturer claimed
working temperature
- Lumen maintenance at
claimed lifetime
- Degradation with time
due to secondary optics
material
- Degradation due to heat
dissipation structure
- Lumen maintenance at
each testing interval
- Testing duration
- Manufacturer claimed
working temperature
- Sample size
LM-84 data:
- Tested ambient and case
temperatures
- Lumen maintenance at
each testing interval
- Sample size
- Testing duration
Other data:
- In-situ temperature
LM-84 and LM-80 data:
- Tested ambient and
case temperatures
- Lumen maintenance at
each testing interval
- Sample size
- Testing duration
Other data:
- In-situ temperature
PNNL-27954
54
Methodology 1. Product undergoes 1000h
prequalification test and
meets criteria (Table 17)
2. LM80: 6000h lumen
maintenance L1
- Product t’ ≤ tmin from
LM80, use LM80 6000h
data as L1
- If product t’ is in
between LM80 testing
temperatures, estimate L1
at t’ by linear
interpolation
- Product t’ > tmax from
LM80, Direct Method
3. Minimum lumen
maintenance L’1 at 6000h
for claimed lifetime
< 35000h; at 9000h if
35000h < claimed
lifetime < 50000h
- Variables for calculation:
lumen maintenance at
claimed lifetime;
degradation due to
secondary optics
material; degradation due
to heat dissipation
structure
1. Normalization: data at
each testing point shall
be normalized to 0h
2. Arithmetic average: of
normalized data from all
samples
3. Least-squares curve fit
- Test duration of 6000h:
use data after 1000h
- Test duration of 6000-
10000h: use data during
the last 5000h
- Test duration > 10000h:
use data in the second
half period. If no data
measured at the half
point, the interval shall
start from the data right
before the half point
- Fitting results: Projected
initial constant (B);
Φ(t) = Bexp(-αt)
4. Lifetime projection:
- 𝐿𝑝 =1
𝛼ln(
𝐵
𝑝)
5. Result adjustment: the
max projected lifetime
L’p = t*x (Table 19)
1. Normalization: normalize
the light output to 1 at 0h
for each sample in the
dataset
2. Average normalized data
of all samples
3. Least-squares curve fit
- Test duration 6000h to
10000h: at least 5000h of
data after the first 1000h
shall be used
- Test duration > 10000h:
use data in the second half
period. If no data
measured at the half point,
the interval shall start from
the data right before the
half point
- Curve-fit:
Φ(t) = Bexp(-αt)
4. Lifetime projection:
- 𝐿𝑝 =1
𝛼ln(100 ∗
𝐵
𝑝)
5. Result adjustment: the max
projected lifetime L’p = t*x
(Table 19)
6. Use the Arrhenius
Equation to interpolate
lifetime projection at in-
situ temperature
1. Normalization:
normalize LM84 data to
1 at 0h for each unit in
the dataset
2. Average normalized
LM84 data
3. Select LM80 data set at
the same or closest
higher Ts (forward
current) as in-situ Ts
(forward current)
4. Least-squares curve-fit
of LM80 data
5. Claculate Δα using both
LM84 and LM80 data
- the next lower time
point
6. Exponential projection:
- Φ(t) = Β ∗exp[−(𝛼+Δ𝛼)∗𝑡]
exp(𝑏)
7. Lifetime projection:
- 𝐿𝑝 =ln(100∗
𝐵
𝑝)−𝑏
𝛼+Δ𝛼
8. Result adjustment: the
max projected lifetime
L’p = t*x (Table 19)
9. Linear interpolation of
lifetime projection at in-
situ temperature
Projection
Result
N/A - Lp ≤ L’p, Lp
- Lp > L’p, L’p
- Lp < 0, L’p
- Lp ≤ L’p, Lp
- Lp > L’p, L’p
- Lp < 0, L’p
- Lp ≤ L’p, Lp
- Lp > L’p, L’p
- Lp < 0, L’p
Pass/Fail
condition
Only when L’1 > L1, the
claimed lifetime can be
accepted
Manufacturer claimed
lifetime cannot exceed
projected lifetime
N/A N/A
PNNL-27954
55
The lumen maintenance life projection results from GB/T 33721-2017 Direct Method and the two
TM-28-2014 methods are to be adjusted that the project lifetime cannot exceed a certain threshold.
The threshold is determined by the testing time and a multiplication factor. If the projected lumen
maintenance life is less or equal to the threshold, the projected value is valid. If the projected value
is greater than the threshold or less than zero, the lifetime shall be the threshold value. Table 19
shows the multiplier to be used based sample size.
Table 19. Multiplier x of different sample sizes to determine the maximum rated lumen
maintenance life in both GB/T 33721-2017 and TM-28-2014
GB/T 33721-2017
Direct Method
TM-28-2014
Direct Extrapolation
TM-28-2014
Combined Extrapolation
Sample Size Multiplier Sample Size Multiplier Sample Size Multiplier
3 3 3 3 5 1.5
4 4 4 4 6 2
5-6 5 5-6 5 7 2.5
7-9 5.5 7-9 5.5 8 3
10+ 6 10+ 6 9 3.5
10 4
11 4.5
12 5
13 - 14 5.5
≥ 15 6
Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculators
The Energy Star program in the U.S. has developed a TM-21 and a TM-28 Calculator, following
the TM-21-2011 and TM-28-2014 standards, to support the LED industry to project LED module
and luminaire lifetime based on LM-80 and LM-84 data. Figure 14 displays the look of the
Calculator with input and output fields. The development of such a calculator tool following the
right standard could help avoid any misinterpretation of the calculation methodology by the users
and make the projection results more accurate and comparable.
PNNL-27954
56
Figure 15. Screenshots of Energy Star TM-21 and TM-28 Calculator
Yellow fields are user inputs and blue fields are results. Input data shall be retrieved from LM-80 or LM-84 report and the In-Situ
Temperature Measurement Test (ISTMT) report.