Saving Energy and Improving Light Quality in Street Lighting Applications of the SEAD Street Lighting Tool Neal Humphrey CLASP
AGENDA • About SEAD and the Tool • Tool Features • Future of the Tool
S UPER - EFFICIENT E QUIPMENT AND A PPLIANCE D EPLOYMENT (SEAD) I NITIATIVE SEAD engages governments and the private sector to accelerate market transformation for energy-efficient equipment and appliances 16 Participating Governments • Australia Brazil Canada European Commission • France Germany India Japan • Korea Mexico Russia South Africa • Sweden United Arab Emirates United Kingdom • United States China (observer) Partners
Why Make a Tool for Street Lighting? Problem: With new fixture choices, wattage and light distribution classifications have less correlation with fixture performance on a specific road. Improved performance and energy savings depend on proper fixture selection. Solution: Simplified photometric analysis, integrated with energy and life cycle cost considerations, can allow lighting specifiers to find better fixtures for their lighting upgrades.
What is the SEAD Street Lighting Tool? The SEAD Street Lighting Tool , is a new, free software tool for analyzing fixture choices for street and roadway lighting that analyzes energy use, light quality, and lifecycle costs. The tool can be used for: a) Batch calculations of dozens to hundreds of fixtures at once; distinct advantage in retrofit scenarios b) Streamlined analysis for initial road configurations/lighting in early stages of the design process c) An introduction to photometric analysis for novice users Download the tool at www.superefficient.org
Tool Features Core Purpose: Integrating a photometric analysis of a batch of fixtures with an analysis of energy consumption and life cycle cost
Overview Tool Summary • Excel tool, compatible with 2003 and later • Available in English, French and Spanish – Can support additional languages if partners can help with translation • Available from: http://superefficient.org/sltool
Road Configuration Options 0.0 • Lane options: 2.0 4.0 – Two, four and six lane roads with or 6.0 without medians 8.0 – User specified lane width 10.0 12.0 • Pole configurations: 14.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 – Single-side, Staggered, Median- mounted • User specified spacing and sizing: – Pole height – Pole spacing – Arm length
Fixture Choices & Calculations Fixture Choices: • 37 generic fixtures (including HPS, MH and LED) • Add your own fixtures by uploading the IES data to the tool
Fixture Choices & Calculations Fixture Calculations: • Luminance and illuminance calculations using IES methodology • Graphical results indicate which fixtures meet your light level and uniformity targets • Energy and costs reported in a variety of methods: • $/kilometer/year • kWh/kilometer/year • NPV of lifecycle installation, • kWh/fixture/year energy, and maintenance costs
Analysis Methods • Quick Comparison of a single fixture to a baseline
Analysis Methods • Batch method to simulate up to hundreds of fixtures for a given layout at once • Multiple batches and single runs can be saved and compared • Quick assessment of functionality with three example analyses Annual Energy Use - All Fixtures (Illuminance Filtered) kWh/kilometer/year 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Baseline Energy Meets Illuminance Criteria Fails Illuminance Criteria
Basic Financial Analysis • Projects level inputs for fixture installation labor, pole installation and bulb replacement cost • Fixture-specific inputs for fixture costs and expected life • Life cycle cost analysis Net Present Value - Lifetime Cost $140,000 NPV $120,000 Maintenance Lifecycle cost $100,000 Cost ($/km) NPV Energy $80,000 Cost $/km $60,000 $40,000 Installation $20,000 $/km $0
Future of the Tool
Tool Implementation Plan Tool Implementation Tool Upgrades Additional Street Partnerships Lighting Projects • Improved usability • Feedback on tool • Identification of other • Improved financial utility and features key barriers to SL analysis installations • Assurance to future • CIE calculations users of tool • Considering additional capabilities projects to address Tool Dissemination barriers • Informing potential users of the tool • Improved training and documentation
Tool Implementation Partnerships • First location is with LightSavers Canada (January 2012) • Seeking additional locations Benefits: Partner Needs: • Training on tool • Initial planning stage • Assistance in analysis • Feedback on tool usability • Case study report • Time available for conducting analysis Summary of implementation pilot concept on tool website, or by emailing sltoolkit@superefficient.org
Discussion and Questions sltoolkit@superefficient.org
Using the Tool (tool screenshots if needed for questions)
Getting Started • Excel based, free to download and distribute – Available from SEAD website, www.superefficient.org • Uses macros, which must be enabled • Tool is a series of worksheets, navigable by the tabs or links located on each sheet • On download, no entries in input field or results saved – For a quick start to explore the tool’s functionality, three examples are available
Doing an Analysis • Analysis steps revolve around the “Input” worksheet • Input cells are yellow, calculated cells are blue
Step 1: Road Geometry
Step 2: Light Levels
Step 3: Select Fixtures
Step 3: Select Fixtures
Step 3: Select Fixtures
Step 4: Cost Information
Single Fixture Comparison
Measurement Grid Results
Batch Analysis Results
Batch Analysis Results
Batch Analysis Results
Batch Analysis Results Net Present Value - Lifetime Cost $140,000 NPV $120,000 Maintenance Cost ($/km) $100,000 Lifecycle cost $80,000 NPV Energy Cost $/km $60,000 $40,000 Installation $20,000 $/km $0
SEAD Tool – Planned Upgrades • Usability EXAMPLE - Simple Payback compared to Light Output • Definitions and Average Illuminance clarifications 41 • Potential training videos 36 31 • Languages 26 21 16 • CIE calculation method 11 6 1 • Additional pole 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 configuration scenarios Simple Payback (with user supplied fixture costs) Fails Criteria Passes Criteria Exceeds Criteria by 50% or more • Financial Inputs and Reporting
Recommend
More recommend
