Goodbye light bulb jokes?
Once upon a time, joking about‘how many it takes to screw in a light bulb’ was a great way to
poke fun at people’s intelligence. After all, what could be easier
than screwing in a light bulb? Any idiot could do it.
Not so any more. Lighting has exploded into a sophisticated
business. And for those who manage commercial buildings it can be
downright intimidating.
Figuring out the difference between LEDs and CFLs is just the
start. Then there are a whole range of dimmers, sensors, data
loggers and controllers, both wired and wireless, and computer
software to bring it all together. There are considerations to be
made about light harvesting, interior space planning, and human
behavior.
And while learning all of this, the building manager is
constantly wondering, ‘Will I really save energy? Will my utility
bills drop enough to justify the investment?”
target=”_blank”>Clanton & Associates, a Silicon Valley
lighting company, is trying to help answer the big cost questions
in a newly released, six-month study of life cycle costs for
lighting control systems and technologies. Researchers looked at
buildings in Boston and Los Angeles that had installed efficient
lighting systems.
Dane Sanders, professional engineer at Clanton & Associates,
says his company was trying to address the “fear factor” that
exists for building owners when it comes to lighting projects.
“The growth of these types of systems is happening so fast that
keeping up with the technology is difficult,” he said. “This
helps people understand the real benefits of advanced lighting
control, and gives some basis for people to make decisions about
what lighting control systems best suit their
ends.”
The study offers some interesting findings for those making
their way through the maze of options. Wireless controls, for
example, deliver up to 25% lower lifetime costs than comparable
wired systems, according to the paper.
Wireless systems with full dimming capability - a Cadillac
system - seem to offer the best bang for the buck. “It pays back
relatively soon; that is a very interesting conclusion. Just
doing the minimum isn’t necessarily the best. A bit more investment
upfront can pay back very quickly,” he said.
Dimmers also get points for being less jarring on the eyes than
a sudden on/off of lights. “With dimming it happens slowly and
smoothly and is imperceptible,” Sanders said.
In addition, it does make a difference who sits where in a
building. The study finds the ‘inverted space plan’ works best,
even though it runs counter to traditional office planning.
In the inverted plan open offices are located on the perimeter,
where the maximum number of people can take advantage of natural
lighting. Private offices are pushed to the interior
Underwritten by target=”_blank”>Daintree Networks, the study can be
target=”_blank”>downloaded free of charge here.
Elisa Wood is a long-time energy writer whose work appears
in many of the industry’s top magazines and newsletters. She serves
as US correspondent for Renewable Energy World.
