|
|
Home  About
Western Power
Marketing Transmission Jobs EPTC Energy
Services |
In my opinion: Look at all options, issues when upgrading lighting
Editor's note: We at Energy Services are aware that lighting technology is changing rapidly, particularly in the area of light-emitting diodes (LED). There is still much to be learned about best practices, economics and appropriate applications. This article is intended to encourage discussion about the pros and cons of different types of energy-efficient lighting systems. For another point of view, see Tri-State embraces next generation lighting. Energy Services Bulletin, and Mike McCoy of Tri-State and the author of this article, Ryan Holl, look forward to hearing your comments. The opinions expressed here are those of Ryan Holl and are not an endorsement by Western or the U.S. Department of Energy. Holl, who works in market development for Orion Energy Systems in Manitowoc, Wis., was a speaker at the DSM technology workshops Western co-sponsored in 2008. As a result of increasing electricity costs, a troubled economy and a push by the Federal government to improve energy efficiency, municipalities throughout North America are taking steps to reduce energy consumption and costs. Street and parking lot lights represent a significant expenditure for municipalities, in terms of both operating and maintenance costs, but also offer an enormous opportunity for energy and cost savings. Recent advances in light emitting diode (LED) and fluorescent technologies have resulted in new options for outdoor lighting. These technologies provide municipalities with impressive advantages when compared to traditional lighting options developed in the 1960s. Advantages include improvements in energy efficiency, longer operating lives and a brighter, whiter light source. Economic considerationsMunicipalities must consider three major issues when considering the economic viability of upgrading their outdoor lighting systems, including 1) the initial acquisition cost, 2) the efficiency of the system and 3) the operating hours of the lamps or diodes. LED technology is still in its infancy and therefore costs significantly more than already proven technologies. The initial costs of LED fixtures range from $500 to more than $1,000 each, while the cost of comparable fluorescent fixtures ranges from $250 to $400 a piece. Typically, an LED outdoor fixture provides 60 to 65 lumens per watt compared to 80 to 85 lumens per watt for fluorescent technology. These efficiencies can lead to energy cost savings of $25 to $50 per fixture per year depending on the utility rate. Both LED and fluorescent lighting have longer life spans than traditional high-intensity discharge lights. The estimated lifespan of LEDs is 50,000 hours or longer, 40,000 hours for fluorescents and 15,000 to 30,000 hours for high-intensity discharge lights. The longer operating lives of LEDs and fluorescent lighting create maintenance savings, which will increase the economic viability of the project. Thermal efficiency is critical to the long-term performance of LED and fluorescent technology. Poorly designed luminaires can degrade and destroy the longevity, light output and lead to outright failure. Compare before buyingThe first step in evaluating outdoor lighting technology is knowing what questions to ask. Questions to be considered include: Are photometric reports available? What is the warranty? Is operating temperature data available? What are the initial costs? Will the manufacturer or vendor stand behind hours of operation claims? To help, the U.S. Department of Energy provides a wealth of information about LED lighting through its Solid State Lighting Program. After collecting initial data, testing and running a pilot program is a cost-effective way of evaluating efficient lighting technology. Invite manufacturers and vendors of LED, fluorescent and induction lighting to install fixtures for 90 days to evaluate their performance. The city of Pittsburgh, Pa., is considering a street and parking lot lighting upgrade, and recently issued a request for information that asks the right questions of potential contractors. A pilot program is vital to a successful project. Recently, city officials in Grand Rapids, Mich., refused to commit to LED streetlights because the pilot program didn’t produce the level of illumination required and officials questioned the actual energy savings of the project. Whether it is lighting or any other energy-efficient system, no one technology is right for every application. Make sure to evaluate all lighting systems available to get the most energy and cost savings from your lighting project.
|
Previous issues
|
|||||
Resources |
People |
Related articlesEnergy Services Bulletin, March 2009 Energy Services Bulletin, May 2008
|
||||
