1

Mariana Figueiro, MSLighting Research CenterRensselaer Polytechnic InstituteMarch 2002

Lighting Controls: Reducing Barriers to Use of High

Efficiency Lighting Systems

Sponsor: U.S. Department of Energy

2

Project Team

Andrew BiermanJennifer Brons Mariana Figueiro Claudia HunterRuss LeslieSteve Purdy Mark Rea

2

3

Goals of the Project

• Identify barriers to the penetration of lighting controls into commercial and industrial (C/I) applications that employ fluorescent lamp technologies, and recommend means of overcoming these barriers

4

Project Scope

• Year 1– Technology assessment (occupancy

sensor, photosensor, dimming ballast, building automation systems)

– Identification of manufacturing partners– Develop Peer Review Group

3

5

Peer Review Group

David Bay – OSRAM SYLVANIAJim Benya – Benya Lighting DesignJim Gallagher – NYS Public Service CommissionArthur Kressner – Con Edison Ron Lewis – USDOEPeter Morante – Northeast UtilitiesDave Peterson – Watt StopperMichael Stein – Universal BallastEdward Yandek – GE Lighting

6

FindingsFindings

• Big picture– Other than codes for new construction, no

compelling economic or societal drivers in place now to make significant impact on the penetration of lighting controls into mainstream C/I application

4

7

FindingsFindings

• Big picture– Load management strategies are necessary

for widespread deployment of lighting controls

– Energy savings alone are not enough, due in part to the success of T8/EB in the 80’s and 90’s

8

FindingsFindings

• Big picture– Industry efforts, by themselves, will not

make a significant impact on the penetration of lighting controls

– Partnerships between industry and utility-related businesses and agencies required

– Open protocols essential for success

5

$ 750

$ 500

$ 250

$ 20100%

Mar

ket p

rice

($/k

W)

% of Capacity

Electric market clearing prices

$ 1000

50%

$ 450

FindingsLoad Management

• Energy efficiency is becoming more about when power is needed than how long power is needed; the real cost of power for certain days and certain times of the day can approach $1/W!

Businessweek

Why does energy grab fewer headlines that Why does energy grab fewer headlines that it did during energy crises of the 1970s? it did during energy crises of the 1970s? Because it costs less as a share of Because it costs less as a share of disposable household disposable household income these days.income these days.And the burden And the burden should continue should continue to lighten. One to lighten. One big contributor: anbig contributor: anenormous increase enormous increase in energy efficiency in energy efficiency since the first oil since the first oil shock in 1973.shock in 1973.

$ 950

Energy efficiency is not just kWh anymore!

FindingsLoad Management

• Plus, society doesn’t want to build new power stations and power lines, particularly in my backyard!

6

11

FindingsFindingsLoad ManagementLoad Management

– Expectation that new pricing structures will occur in less than 5 years

– Need to develop industry consensus on performance specifications for lighting systems and communications protocols

– Need to develop robust customer-utility retailer interface technologies

– Need to develop load-shed ballasts and controls

12

FindingsFindingsDaylight DimmingDaylight Dimming

– High cost of dimming ballasts and commissioning– The effects of dimming on system reliability are

not well known– Installation and commissioning are still a hassle– Deep core buildings limit benefits– Most savings for daylight occur simply by not

turning lights on

7

13

FindingsFindingsAutomatic ShutAutomatic Shut--offoff

Time-of-day scheduling device (“predictable scheduling”)

Occupancy sensors (“unpredictable scheduling”)

14

FindingsFindingsAutomatic ShutAutomatic Shut--offoff

Market Penetration

Now common in new construction (only 1-2% of the total floor space lit in the US).

Penetration in existing buildings is poor.

8

15

FindingsAutomatic shut-off

Barriers in retrofit applicationsWiring more difficult and expensive

Manual controls to be replaced have already been purchased; greater incremental cost

Retrofit does not coincide with production of electrical plans or other construction

Energy code provisions often do not apply

“Hassle factor”, real or imagined

16

FindingsAutomatic shut-off

Lamp/Ballast System ReliabilityReliability has improved due to lamp manufacturers’specification of ballast performance

Today’s fluorescent lamp/ballast reliability complaints: • dimming • residential-grade products• frequent switching

Only frequent switching is a potential barrier for C/I automatic shut-off controls

9

17

FindingsAutomatic shut-off

The Human Element

Goal = turn lights off when unoccupied; don’t annoy occupants

Solutions already exist:

1. manual-on/automatic off

2. manual overrides reset to automatic shut-off mode after each use

18

FindingsAutomatic shut-off

Market BarriersFirst cost

Different budgets/parties pay for first cost & operating costs

Hassle Factor: other priorities to think about

These barriers have been overcome for other energy-efficient lighting technologies with:

Procurement programs

Direct install and/or shared-savings programs

DSM incentives/rebates

Code requirements

10

19

Next Steps

• Year 2– Technology improvement/solutions

• Recommend solutions that will help overcome barriers identified in year 1

20

Next StepsLoad Management

• Year 2– Load shed dimming

• Goals: develop performance specifications for load shed system, which includes lamp, ballast, communication protocols, market signals

11

21

Next StepsLoad Management

• Year 2– Load shed dimming

• Work with lamp/ballast manufacturers to– Build industry consensus on system performance

specifications– Develop an inexpensive, highly efficacious, reliable

dimming ballast that responds to load-shed signals from the utility retailer

• Work with utilities to– Support development of open communications systems

that link utilities and customers for shedding load to building fluorescent dimming systems. This implies a standard ballast-utility interface for load shedding

22

Next StepsLoad Management

• Year 2– Load shed dimming

• Work with SBC agencies to articulate the value of lighting controls in terms of their societal value for helping to ensure an inexpensive and reliable supply of electric power

• Support human factors research that will establish the principles for dimming levels and dimming rates in occupied spaces

• Conduct product testing that will increase confidence in product reliability

12

23

Next StepsDaylight Dimming

• Year 2– Daylight dimming

• Preliminary report on prototype of self-commissioning photosensor by April 2002

• Evaluation of prototype self-commissioning photosensor to be completed by July 2002

24

Next StepsAutomatic shut-off controls

• Year 2– Automatic shut-off

controls• Goals: increase

penetration of automatic shut-off controls in retrofit applications (and new construction)

13

25

Preliminary RecommendationsAutomatic Shut-Off Controls

Aggressively encourage the Aggressively encourage the widespread deployment of widespread deployment of automatic shutautomatic shut--off lighting off lighting controls in existing and new controls in existing and new C&I buildings.C&I buildings.

26

Suggested Activities

• Automatic shut-off controls– Outreach/education

• Develop best practices documents

– Decision making• Compile occupancy loads• Large customers focus groups• Present the value of automatic shut-off lighting

controls to decision makers

14

27

Suggested Activities

• Automatic shut-off controls (cont.)– Code compliance

• Encourage nationwide code requirements

– Technologies• Develop, peer review, and disseminate

performance specifications for automatic shut-off lighting controls

28

Suggested Activities

• Automatic shut-off controls (cont.)– Coordinated effort

• Identify national market transformations groups that will bring together all the stakeholders interested in penetration of automatic shut-off lighting controls