LIGHTING. Table of Contents

Transcription

1 LIGHTING Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Assumptions Considerations Energy Efficiency Environmental Impact Costs & Maintenance Case Study 1- New Leaf Market grocery (Tallahassee, Florida) 12 Case Study 2- Bashas Grocery (Tempe, Arizona) 13 Case Study 3- TOPS Friendly Market (Geneva, NY) 14 Case Study 3- Walter and Joan Hobbs Gallery (New York) Case Study 4- Chestnut Hill Star Market (Boston, MA) Quality of Light & Aesthetics Potential Lighting Systems Integrated LEDs Retrofitted LEDs Additional Lighting Efficient Product Summary & Recommendation Sources 31 Table 6- GROCERY STORE LIGHTING DETAILS 32 Table 7- OFFICE BUILDING LIGHTING DETAILS 33 Grocery Store Option 1 Layout 34 Grocery Store Option 2 Layout 35

2 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Introduction For the Hazelwood grocery store and office building, we propose the use of light emitting diodes (LEDs) over more conventional lighting systems that consist of compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) and/or incandescent lights. CFLs are a viable option but LEDs are the future of lighting. Case studies are included in the analysis to highlight proven benefits of using LEDs in grocery stores over CFLs. LEDs have several benefits including but not limited to a longer service life (that is unaffected by switching them on/off), work well in cold temperatures, and higher efficacy (less energy is lost to heat). However, LEDs potentially come at a higher initial cost and researchers question whether their environmental impact is in fact less than CFLs. Below are the two recommended lighting systems for the Hazelwood grocery store and office building, followed by a comprehensive analysis of each option. 1. LED fixtures with integrated LEDs. This option specifically addresses LED fixtures developed and manufactured by Cree, Inc. 2. Fluorescent fixtures retrofitted with LEDs. This option addresses fixtures manufactured by RLE Industries and RentAlite. Using RentAlite products can potentially eliminate first cost investment, where the customer instead leases the lighting system. The following lighting proposal analyzes the three lighting options according to energy efficiency, environmental impact, cost and maintenance, and lighting quality. Additionally, successful case studies of retrofitting CFL-lit grocery stores with LEDs.

3 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Assumptions In order to use modeling software for the analysis, the following assumptions were made. 1. Baseline lighting meets IECC 2009 standards 2. No current fixtures in either building will be reused. 3. The following are the illuminance values in which the lighting designs were developed from the following table: Location Illuminance [lux] Office Cashier Bakery/Butcher Prep Bakery/Butcher display Refrigeration Bathroom Corridors 200 Storage Room/Closet 200 Dining Area To determine the necessary lumens needed for an area, the area of the space was multiplied by the suggested lux value to determine the necessary total lumens of space. The number of light fixtures was calculated by dividing the total number of lumens by the lumens emitted by an individual fixture. 5. For energy consumption analysis, the assumed operating hours (or lighting hours) are 6am to 9pm for the grocery store and 8am to 5pm for the office and the cost of electricity is $0.066 per kwh or $0.019 per kbtu. 6. All light fixture specifications were obtained from Cree s website. 7. Glare was not assessed in the simulations. 8. The grocery store lighting layout designs were based off of the architectural drawings created by Moss Architects. 9. The office building layout consists of a front room (along 2 nd Avenue), a backroom and a stairwell. Bathroom locations were not identified for the lighting design. 10. The office space will be open plan. 11. The office will have a drywall ceiling rather than a grid system with acoustical tiles 12. Butcher and Bakery prep areas will have dropped drywall ceilings 13. Basements of both the office and grocery store are excluded from the lighting design

4 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Considerations The following considerations were made when proposing a sustainable lighting system for the two Hazelwood buildings. (They are ranked in order of most importance.) 1. Energy efficiency: Incorporate daylight (store front windows in the grocery store and conventional windows surrounding the office building) into the design to reduce the need for lighting fixtures. The light fixtures must be energy efficient in hopes of reducing electricity consumption. Specifically, you want to address the lumens produce per watt of power supplied to a fixture as well as the light power density (LPD) in terms of the quantity of watts needed to light the space (measured in W/ft2). LEDs are more energy efficient than CFLs. There are both LEDs and CFLs that meet LEED standards. 2. Environmental Impact: Address the environmental impact through life cycle assessment (LCA) which includes the impact of manufacturing, transporting and using the products. According to the US DOE s life cycle analysis (see pg 4-9 for details) of the three lighting options previously mentioned, current generation LEDs and CLFs have similar environmental impacts where one study (CMU/Booz Allen report) states LEDs have a significantly higher impact and others state CFLs are more impactful. There is an agreement that incandescent lamps are significantly worse than the two. 3. Costs & Maintenance: Consider the initial investment of the lighting design as well as the costs to maintain the system over a designated lifetime. Additionally, choose products based on their ease of installation, replacement as well as addressing the lifetime of the lights. LEDs have a higher initial cost than CFLs, but CFLs have higher maintenance costs. CFLs have shorter lifetimes than LEDs, but an LED fixture with builtin LEDs must be entirely replaced at the end of its life rather than simply replacing the lamp (and reusing the fixture). 4. Quality of Light & Aesthetics: Selecting lighting fixtures that produce the best type of illumination for the specific areas they are lighting whether it is an office space, grocery aisle or produce. Different color temperatures are found to be more appealing to costumers. LEDs illuminate instantly when they are turned on a have a more consistent spread, but they have the potential to flicker or hum without the proper use of a driver. The color temperature of a CFL changes over its lifetime. 3.1 Energy Efficiency Lighting is the second largest source, behind grocery equipment, in the consumption of electricity. Lighting and equipment account for 80% of the consumed electricity in a grocery store and 50% of total energy consumption. Specifically, lighting accounts for 23% of electricity consumption in a grocery store. On average, U.S. supermarkets spend $5.31/ft 2 on electricity and $0.38/ft 2 on natural gas (Energy Right, 2010). Enhancing lighting efficiency can drastically cut energy costs. Based on luminous efficacy (lumens per watt), LEDs are equally if not more efficient than CFLs. Some LEDs on the market have an efficacy of 90 lumens per watt, whereas conventional CFLs are around 50 lumens per watt and incandescent bulb can reach 20 lumens per watt (Energy Right, 2010). If the

5 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 5 lighting efficacy of LEDs and CFLs continue at their projected trends (see figure below), conventional LEDs will significantly surpass the efficacy level of CFLs. Waiting to invest in LEDs for their efficacy to increase more may be beneficial. Source: Ehrlich, 2011 LEDs use 80% of their energy to produce light and 20% for heat. Currently, LEDs can produce the same amount of illuminance power for less than 20% the power of incandescent bulbs and 50% of CFLs. Current generation LEDs can last up to 50,000 hours which is 50 time longer than incandescent and 10 times longer than CFLs. 3.2 Environmental Impact The following life cycle assessment data was obtained from a three part LCA report done by the US Department of Energy in that compared LEDs, CFLs and incandescent bulbs. (See sources [1], [2] and [3].) The LCA was not done on a specific brand. Using numerous LCA studies, the DOE concludes that LEDs and CFLs have similar environmental impacts. However, if the results of another study (done by Carnegie Mellon/Booz Allen in 2010), were used for the life cycle energy consumption, LEDs could actually use 30% more energy than CFLs. During analysis, the DOE uses a common performance measurement of 20 million lumen-hours when calculating the life cycle assessments of the different lighting types. Figure 4.1 from the DOE s LCA report highlights the significantly higher lifetime hours for LEDs than CFLs and incandescent lamps. LEDs had a lifetime that is nearly 3 times that of CFLs and 25 times incandescent lamps. Frequency of bulb replacement greatly affects the environmental impact of a lamp type. In order to supply 20 million lumen-hours, one must use 22 incandescent lamps, 3 CFLs and only 1 LED with similar light output (lumens).

6 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 6 Although, the manufacturing and transporting of LEDs potentially has a greater environmental impact than CFLs and incandescent lamps, the energy consumed to manufacture and transport the lamps is a small fraction (less than 4%) of the total life cycle energy. In Figure 4.4, a 2010 Carnegie Mellon/ Booz Allen study estimated the primary energy used for manufacturing LEDs to be more than 6 times that of CFLs and more than 15 times that of incandescent lamps. The study s results were significantly different than any other LCA report, but it is important to highlight the worst case scenario.

7 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 7 Overall, the life-cycle energy of one 2011 LED is nearly the same as three CFLs, but with LED technology constantly advancing (represented by LED 2015 in the Table 4.8 and Figure 4.6), LEDs will soon be significantly less impactful on the environment. See Table 4.8 and Figure 4.6 for details. If the results from the CMU/Booz Allen study were used for the manufacturing energy, the total life cycle energy consumption for LEDs would be around 30% more than CFLs.

8 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 8 US DOE investigated the concentration of 17 elements in the lamps using EPA Method For consistency reasons, the US DOE compared their results with another study (Lim, 2012). The results obtained by Lim were within the range of the DOE s measurements. A lamp would be considered hazardous waste if it contains a total concentration of any element exceeding its Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC). The highlighted percentages in Tables 5-2 and 5-3 show which elements exceeded their TTLCs. Although, volatile mercury in the CFLs was not found to exceed the threshold, the researchers believe it was unintentionally released and escaped detection. Some LEDs exceeded their TTLCs for antimony, chromium, copper, nickel and zinc. According to the DOE, examination of components in these above-threshold lamps revealed that the greatest contributors were the screw bases, drivers, ballasts, and wires or filaments (DOE Part III, p 38). The incandescent lamps had the highest impact per unit lighting service. CFLs were the following worst in all environmental indicator categories except hazardous waste landfill. According to the US DOE, the reason that the LED lamp in 2012 has a slightly higher impact than the CFL is due to the manufacturing of the large aluminum heat sink used in the LED lamp, which represents 20% of the total impact measured for this metric (DOE Part II, p 59). The 2017 LEDs are 70% lower than the CFLs and 50% lower than the 2012 LEDs. It is important to note that the 2017 LED is a hypothetical LED, estimated by the current trend in technological advances with LEDs. It does not currently exist.

9 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 9 Below is the US DOE s detailed description of the different lamps air impacts (Part II, p 54). For global warming potential, the incandescent lamp has the largest CO2-equivalent emissions, with over one tonne of emissions associated with the functional unit of 20 million lumen-hours of light. The CFL lamp represents a 70% reduction over the incandescent lamp for equivalent lighting service. The LED lamps are even better, offering a 76% reduction with the 2012 lamp and an 88% savings with the 2017 lamp. For acidification potential, the trend is similar. The incandescent lamp causes the greatest impact, with 7.9 kilograms of sulfur dioxide equivalent emissions for 20 megalumen-hours of light. The CFL offers a reduction of 71% over the incandescent and the two LED lamps offer a 78% and 89% reduction respectively, greatly reducing the acidification potential. Photochemical oxidation leads to urban smog, and the emissions of this air pollutant are the most severe with the incandescent lamp. That lamp will emit approximately 46 grams of ozone for the functional unit of light output. The CFL and both LED lamps offer savings over that baseline of 65%, 73% and 87% respectively.

10 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 10 Stratospheric ozone depletion potential is highest with the incandescent baseline lamp. The other, more efficacious lamps, offer savings potentials of between 53% and 82% when compared with the incandescent baseline. For human toxicity potential, the lamp with the highest impact for the functional unit of light output is the incandescent lamp. The CFL offers a 67% reduction over incandescent and the two LED lamps offer a 71% and 85% savings potential in 2012 and 2017 respectively. In addition to the US DOE, Takhoma et al compare numerous LCA studies on the environmental impact of LEDs. Below is a summary of their analysis. According to Takhoma et al, energy consumption data of manufacturing estimate that the manufacturing of an incandescent lamp (40 60 W) consume 0.15 to 1 kwh, while manufacturing of a CFL (8 15 W) and an LED lamp (6 8 W) ranges from 0.28 to 49 kwh and from 10 to 86 kwh, respectively (Takhoma et al, p 12). These findings are highlighted in the figure below. Similar to the US DOE, different LCAs have concluded that some LEDs take less energy to manufacture than CFLs and some findings have stated the opposite. Typically, LEDs have a larger environmental impact in raw material acquisition and in manufacturing than CFLs. The majority of energy consumed during the lifetime of both CFLs and LEDs is during actual operation. Takhoma et al addresses concerns with the impact of LED s end of life process. The ability to recycle lighting material rather than disposing of it in a landfill has a significant impact on the environment. Both fluorescent and LEDs are more difficult to recycle due to the various materials that make up their structure. Fluorescent lamps contain mercury unlike LEDs. If the mercury gas is not captured during the disposal process, that mercury is directly released into the atmosphere. Currently, there are no recycling processes specifically for LEDs. If and when they are recycled they are usually combined with electronic waste. Otherwise, they are left in landfills or incinerated with general

11 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 11 waste when disposed of improperly. Due to the aluminum and other metal content in LEDs, they contain a significant heat sink. Extracting aluminum from the earth is a highly energy intensive process. It is relatively easy to recycle aluminum into new purposes, but the LEDs must be recycled in the first place for the metal to be reused. Although LEDs may consume more energy during raw material extraction and manufacturing processes than CFLs, the total energy consumed during an LED s lifetime is less than a fluorescent. 3.3 Costs & Maintenance Currently, the biggest obstacle with incorporating LEDs into a space is their high initial cost. Although their efficiency will pay for themselves overtime, the initial investment can potentially be too high to purchase them in the first place. There are federal tax credits and local utility incentives for businesses looking to invest in energy efficient lighting that will help pay for a percentage of the initial costs. Additionally, some fluorescent fixtures can be manufactured to use LEDs such as RLE Industries and Rentalite products. By using an originally fluorescent fixture and converting to LED use can be less expensive than buying LED fixtures with LEDs built into them. See details in the Proposed Lighting System section, starting on page 19. Case Studies The following case studies address the energy efficiency costs, maintenance, and quality of light related to replacing fluorescent fixtures with LEDs. All case studies found lifetime savings when using LEDs as well as visual benefits from the new systems. These case studies are for larger scale grocery stores than the one in Hazelwood, but the savings for a smaller grocery should still be significant. The following case studies saw a 46-70% savings in lighting lifetime costs. These savings will cause significant cuts in grocery store operational costs. As previously mentioned, lighting is the second highest contributor to electricity consumption in a grocery store at 23%. (Refrigeration accounts for 57%.) U.S. supermarkets spend an average of $5.31 / ft2 on electricity and $0.38 / ft2 on natural gas (Energy Right, 2010).

12 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 12 New Leaf Market grocery (Tallahassee, Florida) Description: 13,700ft2 with 34 6-lamp T8 fluorescent light as original lighting Options: Results: Conclusion: Source: 1. T8 Philips Lighting, Energy Advantage fixtures with 4 lamps 2. Cree CS18 linear LED fixtures Costs based on 50,000 hours of use, upfront costs, energy usage, cost of replacement, and maintenance. Option Quantity Watts Used Costs Savings (over 50,000 hours) 6-lamp T $64,787 - Philips $58,189 19% fluorescent Cree LEDs $36,632 57% Payback period of 8 months and annual maintenance savings of $2,798 Switching to the LED option would save the grocery store the most money and the option would also need zero projected maintenance or replacement over the 50,000 hours. New Leaf Market initially installed half of the LEDs to see the comparison and noticed increase spread (products on the bottom shelves were better lit) and overall the merchandise looked better because of the CRI of over 90.

13 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 13 Bashas Grocery (Tempe, Arizona) Description: Family owned and operated grocery chain in western US Options: Analysis: Conclusion: Source: 1. T8s for general illumination, CFLs for downlights in specialty display areas 2. Cree CS18 LED linear luminaires, CR24 LED architectural troffers, and LE6 and LR6 LED downlights The installation was one-for-one replacement which resulted in savings of 47% and a payback period of less than two year. Calculations based on 18 hours of usage per day, $0.11 per kwh electric costs, lighting-related HVAC impact and maintenance reductions. Option Quantity Watts Used Lifetime Savings Percent Savings Original Lighting , New Cree LEDs ,715 $90,198 47% Construction manager of Bashas, Scott Murphy, stated that Bashas is so pleased with our decision to install Cree LED lights, it is now the standard for new and retrofit stores. Bashas appreciated that they didn t have to choose between costs and color quality with their lighting.

14 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 14 TOPS Friendly Market (Geneva, NY) Description: 51,364 ft2 with 13 ft ceilings, operates 24 hours a day 7 days a week, original lighting was T5 lighting Options: lights Results: Conclusion: Source: 1. Cree CR24 recessed and non-recessed troffers and CS18 suspended linear 70% in energy savings and a payback period of 2.5 years Consistent illuminance on all shelves TOPS was so satisfied with the lighting that they are retrofitting additional TOPS grocery stores /

15 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 15 Walter and Joan Hobbs Gallery (New York) Description: 174 ft2 art gallery in the basement of a library (no natural light), currently has CFL downlighting Options: Analysis: Results: Track Lighting Systems 1. halogen MR16 track heads 2. LED track heads The gallery is used for 3300hr/yr so the analysis was done on for that timeframe. The LED system uses 46% less energy than the existing CFL, whereas the halogen system uses 86% and 246% more energy than the CFLs and LED systems, respectively. Unlike the CFL and halogen lights, the LEDs meet the lighting power density (LPD) code (Energy Conservation Construction Code of NY State 2010). The LEDs produce a LPD of 0.9 W/ft2 and the code requires a maximum of 1.1W/ft2. Additionally, the current system does not meet suggested illuminance for art work of at least 2:1 unlike the LEDs and halogen. The LEDs also produced 20% illuminance on the artwork than the halogens.

16 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 16 Conclusion: Sources: The LEDs were more energy efficiency and produced better illuminance that both the CFLs and halogens. Although the LEDs were larger, they were cooler to the touch than the other two systems which made adjusting the angle easier. The gallery users rated the LED lighting system equal to or better than the MR16 halogens.

17 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 17 Chestnut Hill Star Market (Boston, MA) Description: 35,000 ft2, grocery store retail chain, became the first to receive the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s GreenChill Partnership platinum award because of its lighting and other sustainable designs Options: 1. Conventional fluorescent and incandescent lighting (original system) 2. Lithonia RTLEDs Conclusions: RTLEDs have a 50,000-hour rated system life and up to 10 year, whereas their conventional system s lights last 8-18 months without having. The grocery store uses half as many lights than their previous system. The RTLEDs lights will potentially save the supermarket 50-65% in electricity consumption due to lighting. Sources: l_grocery.pdf

18 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Quality of Light & Aesthetics Unlike CFLs, LEDs turn on immediately and come in warm, neutral or cool color temperatures. The varying color temperatures allows for LEDs to highlight different colors, which is an especially important capability for grocery stores. Meats, fish, vegetables, bread, etc. look better under different colors. For example, fish are more appealing under cool color temperatures, whereas bread looks better under warm lights (see image below). LEDs are also capable of being dimmed without losing their color rendition or lifespan. Source: GE Lighting The color rendering index (CRI) which measures how accurately a light source renders an object s colors using a scale. Incandescent bulbs have a CRI of 100, whereas the typical LED is only 80. The high quality LEDs can reach up to 98. Additionally, LEDs have a more uniform spread than CFLs which is especially important when lighting displays. As shown in the case studies, the grocery store shelves were lit uniformly, independent of whether it was a bottom or top shelf. Some LEDs have the potential to flicker because of the AC cycle. The flickering can cause headaches, eye strain and other negative side effects. This was more prominent in first generation LEDs, whereas more recent generations have been able to eliminate the flickering through advancements in design and technology. As seen in the figure below, LEDs match the light spectrum seen by the human eye better than CFLs and incandescent lamps, so less stress is put on the eyes to see under LED lighting.

19 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 19 Source: Ehrlich, Proposed Lighting Systems Due to time constraints, only the Cree lighting system was analyzed using computer modeling. This system includes proposed lighting locations unlike the other two options. Analysis of the RLE Industries and the Rentalite lighting systems includes research obtained from lighting professionals. 4.1 Option 1- LED fixtures with integrated LEDs. Cree, Inc is a leading innovator and manufacturer of LEDs. Their products have some of the highest luminance efficacy levels, but can be more expensive than other options. All of their fixtures are manufactured with integrated LEDs. Below is the proposed lighting design that uses Cree LED products (see Figure 1) for both the grocery store and office building. Grocery Store Figures 1a-1d depict the proposed Cree products for the grocery store. Additional product details can be found in Table 6- Grocery Store Lighting Details on page 32 and the attached product spec sheets. There are two proposed lighting designs, one for each of the grocery store layouts created by Moss Architect. See Figures 4 and 5 on page Table 1 illustrates the Cree LED products that were chosen for the sections in the grocery store. See Figure 1 for product images. CS18 lights will run between the aisles and over the check-out/cashier area. The lights will be suspended from the ceiling. Down lighting will be used in the café to create a softer look than the grocery store. The LBR30 lights should be installed directly above the booths and tables along track lines. Prep areas such as the butcher and bakery area need a lot of light (500 flux). The CPY250 was high lumen values and are directly mounted on the ceiling. The LR6 lights will be used in the corridors, coolers and bathrooms. LEDs work especially well in colder temperatures so they will last even longer in the cooler than CFLs. To highlight the produce, deli and bakery display areas, the LRP38-10L LEDs will be installed on track lighting. The individual lights allow for different color temperatures to be used on the same run of lights to emphasize the

20 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 20 different colors in the food. Seafood looks in cooler temperatures of +4000K, whereas for red meat K is best. Bread and pastries falls between the two at around 3500K. Table 1- Grocery Store LED Products Product Location Brief Description CS18 Aisles, cashier 8' LED Linear Luminaire, suspended from ceiling, 4400 lumens, 44W LBR30 Café BR30 LED Lamp, track and down lighting, 600 lumens, 12 W CPY250 Butcher prep, bakery prep Soffit luminaire direct ceiling mount, drop / flat lens, 8000 lumens, 82 W LR6-LP1000- Corridors, coolers, 165mm LED down light, 1000 lumens, 12.5W 230V bathrooms LRP38-10L Produce, deli, bakery High Output PAR38 LED Lamp, track lighting Figure 1- Proposed LEDs Figure 1a- CS18 Figure 1b- LBR30 Figure 1c- CPY250 Figure 1d- LR6-LP V

21 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 21 Figure 1d- LRP38-10L Figure 1e- LR6-18L Cost Estimates of the Grocery Store Computer modeling and simulation were used to analyze the change in energy consumption and illuminance levels as a result of retrofitting the baseline lighting system (defined as meeting IECC 2009 standards) with LEDs. Tables 3-5 highlight the electricity consumption and costs related to the three lighting layouts (baseline, option 1 and option 2) for the grocery store. In addition to altering the lighting energy consumption, the lighting layouts changed the electricity consumed for heating, cooling, fans and refrigeration due to heat emission. By using more efficient lighting, less heat is outputted by the lighting system, therefore the mechanical system must output more heat than prior. Option A resulted in net electricity savings of $713.60, whereas Option B resulted in $ in savings, annually. Table 3- Annual Electricity Consumption due to Lighting Only Consumption Annual Cost % Reduction [kbtu] Baseline $ 3, Option A $ 2, % Option B $ 2, % Table 4- Electricity Consumption Change from Baseline to Option 1 End Use Electricity [kbtu] Heating Cooling Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting 0 Interior Equipment 0

22 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 22 Exterior Equipment 0 Fans Pumps 0 Heat Rejection 0 Humidification 0 Heat Recovery 0 Water Systems 0 Refrigeration Net Site Cost per kbtu $ NET SAVINGS $ Table 5- Electricity Consumption Change from Baseline to Option 2 End Use Electricity [kbtu] Heating Cooling Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting 0 Interior Equipment 0 Exterior Equipment 0 Fans Pumps 0 Heat Rejection 0 Humidification 0 Heat Recovery 0 Water Systems 0 Refrigeration Net Site COST per kbtu $ NET SAVINGS $

23 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 23 Office Building The office building consists of a simpler lighting design and only uses two types of fixtures (see Table 2). Lighting in the office spaces must to be brighter than the hallways due to task work and other office related operations. The CS18 linear lights allow for a more even spread of lighting rather than focused high illuminance in some areas which would not be ideal for an open plan office space. Additionally, the office space light should be dimmable so that the users can adjust the illuminance levels to their preference and potentially reduce electricity consumption. The lighting layout is depicted in Figures 2 and 3 for the 1st floor and the 2nd and 3rd floor, respectively. See Figures 1a and 1f for images of the products. Table 2- Office Building LED Products Product Location Brief Description LR6-18L corridors 165mm LED recessed and non-recessed down light, 1800 lumens, 20W CS18 Office space 8' LED Linear Luminaire, suspended from ceiling, 4400 lumens, 44W Additional product details can be found in Table 7- Office Building Lighting Details (page 33) and the attached product spec sheets. Figure 2- First Floor Lighting Layout CS18 LR6

24 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 24 Figure 3- Second & Third Floor Lighting Layout CS18 LR6 The following image is taken from the IES analysis of the office building lighting scheme. The green area signifies areas that have at least the recommended 300 lux for doing office work, therefore the proposed lighting design meets the required illuminance level for offices.

25 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 25 In comparison to the baseline lighting system which meets IECC 2009 code, the lighting power density decreases from 1.02 w/ft2 to only 0.44 w/ft2. Under the assumed conditions of the office building, the baseline building would consume 30.6 MBtu per year, whereas the proposed system uses only 13.1 MBtu. The proposed design uses less than half the wattage to light the office space which translates to more than 50% lower energy consumption. 4.2 Option 2- Fluorescent fixtures retrofitted with LEDs RLE Industries Another option is buying fluorescent fixtures and retrofitting them with LEDs. Typically, retrofit LEDs are bought and install in existing fluorescent fixtures but since the grocery store and office building are gut-rehabs, the fixtures must be purchased as well. For retrofitting capabilities, the LED drivers and ballasts are built into the lamp itself rather than in the fixture such as the case in Option 1 or other integrated fixtures. According to a lighting expert, using retrofitted fluorescent fixtures with LEDs can save you up to 50% in initial costs in comparison to LED integrated fixtures. At the end of their life, the lamps are removed (as easily as they were installed during the retrofitting process and) and can be replaced without the need of an electrician. Below are the recommended lighting products depending on the location in the grocery store or office building, with corresponding cost per fixture. The aisles of the sales floor would be lit with cable suspended linear luminaires, HYDLED, that use a grid like reflector system to provide direct light to shelving. Bakery and butcher prep areas can be lit with surface mounted LED lamps. The VPVTLEDs are oblong-shaped (7in x 2-8ft) whereas the CVALEDs are smaller, square-shaped (roughly 12in x 12in) and use higher wattage. Produce in the grocery will be lit with track lights, CTLLED, in order to focus and highlight the different products. The office space and bathrooms can either be lit use surface mounted lights such as (S8LED) and/or recessed lights (LPTLED and RDBLED). LOCATION LED FIXTURES PRICE/FIXTURE SALES FLOOR CABLE SUSPENDED HYDLED SPECIFY LED LAMPS (LED TUBES) PREP ROOMS VPVTLED 4' $165 CVALED 28W $278 COOLERS AND FREEZERS VPVTLED 4' $165 CVALED 28W $278 DOCK LIGHTS DKLED 26W $369 EXTERIOR BUILDING WBBLED 48W $307 CWPBLED 42W $386 PRODUCE AND TABLE DISPLAY CTLLED 42W WALL WASH TRACK FOR DÉCOR SIGNAGE CTLLED 29W

26 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 26 BACK ROOM AREA AND STORAGE 391LED 18W TUBES SPECIFY LED LAMPS BATHROOMS AND OFFICES S8LED 4' SPECIFY LED LAMPS OFFICES RECESSED LPTLED 2X2 $158 LPTLED 2X4 $260 RDBLED 2X2 $155 RDBLED 2X4 $256 CABLE SUSPENDED HYDLED VPVTLED CVALED 28W DKLED 26W WBBLED 48W CWPBLED 42W

27 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 27 CTLLED 29W & 42W 391LED 18W TUBES S8LED 4' LPTLED 2X2 or 2X4 RDBLED 2X2 or 2X4 The lighting product details do not include luminance efficacy (lumens/watt) levels to compare with the efficacy of Cree s products. Due to their retrofitting design, RLE LEDs are more easily replaced than lighting fixtures with integrated LEDs. See the attached product brochures for details.

28 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 28 RentAlite RentAlite also manufactures LEDs, but unlike typical manufacturers such as RLE Industries, it offers a payment plan that requires no initial investment and no maintenance costs. Although RentAlite products are typical used for garages, they have products capable of lighting both grocery stores and office buildings. One of the biggest deterrents for using LEDs is their high initial investment, but the RentAlite option eliminates the initial cost. The lights are rented from RentAlite at an amount dependent on the energy saved from the retrofit. Payment of the lights can be spread over 5 or 10 years (if you are a government organization). The grocery store potentially would be able to spread their costs over a 10 year period due to being a non-profit organization and having government funding. The Premium Power LED products, including the linear luminaires that could be used to light grocery aisles have a high lumen/watt ratio of over 115 lumens/watt. Energy savings are typically between 50-85% when retrofitting a T8 system. These savings are shared with RentAlite and the remaining capital is profit for the owner. Further savings will be seen because RentAlite products are eligible for the EPAct tax deduction which can allow an owner to earn back up to 100% of the investment and all of the complete installation costs: 'The Energy Policy Act created the Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction, which allows building owners to deduct the entire cost of a lighting or building upgrade in the year the equipment.' Additionally, since the LED strips are being retrofitted into existing fixtures, they can be easily replaced or upgraded when RentAlite releases more efficient products. In that case, the products would be switched out and the payment plan would simply be readjusted. There are qualifications that must be met to benefit from RentAlite s payment plan. In the event that 250 lamps must be replaced, the system must be lit for at least 240 days in a year at a minimum of 10 hours per day. Additionally, since the grocery store does not contain existing lamps to be directly retrofitted with RentAlite products, ACTION Housing would have to buy the equipment in addition to material and labor. Buildings with existing lighting systems only have to pay for material and labor paid through spread payments. Using RentAlite for the grocery store and office building is a viable option to lower the cost of the lighting system. See for further details. 5.0 Additional Lighting Efficiency Products Occupancy Sensors Occupancy light switch sensors could be installed in all small closed rooms such as the bathrooms, janitorial closet and coolers. The cost of an occupancy light switch sensor runs from $15 to $150 and will pay for itself within a year, in most cases. Occupancy sensors replace conventional light switches and are an inexpensive way to prevent lights from being left on and wasting electricity. Maestro Occupancy/Vacancy Sensing C L MSCL-OP153M (image on the left) made by Lutron works

29 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 29 in temperatures as low as 32F and can notice minor motion in a 200ft2 room or major motion in a 900ft2 room. The sensor is integrated into the light switch and does not need an overhead sensor. (See attached product details.) Levitron s IPS02-1PI (image on the right) has a similarly compatible wall switch occupancy sensors that work with LEDs as well. Dimmers Dimmers could be installed in the grocery store for the aisles, café and display areas (produce, deli and bakery), whereas the office building should install them in the office spaces. Dimmers allow the users to adjust the lighting to their liking. The lighting in the room can be adjusted depending on the natural daylight without the use of daylighting sensors which are an additional cost. All of the proposed LEDs have the potential to be dimmed to a certain percentage. Dimmers add a level of intricacy that might not be wanted for these buildings. Task Lighting One way to reduce the output of overhead lighting in the office building is to provide task lighting for all work spaces/stations. Typical offices require lux, but up to 1000 lux, depending on the task such as reading spreadsheets, using a computer, etc. Task lighting that provides 300 lux can reduce the overhead lighting from 500 lux down to 200 lux. When higher illuminance levels are needed for detailed work, the user can turn on their task light. Energy consumption would be drastically cut if the overhead lighting were providing 200 lux rather than 500 lux. Task lighting also benefits the user by providing them with more control of their office environment. Lighting preference varies per person. Task lighting does have the potential to create glare, so the location of task lighting is important See for more details on task lighting.

30 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Summary & Recommendation Proposed are two lighting systems for the Hazelwood grocery store and office building which includes integrated LED fixtures manufactured by Cree or LED retrofitted fluorescent fixtures by RLE Industries or RentAlite. Integrated LED fixtures perform better than their retrofitted counterparts. These products are tested and designed specifically as a unit complete with the LEDs, driver and heat sink. Retrofitted LEDs still produce better lighting than fluorescent lamps. There have been no life cycle assessments analyzing the environmental impact of integrated versus retrofitted LEDs. However, LCA data on LEDs and CFLs proves that LEDs consume less energy over their overall lifetime, starting with extraction. Cost and maintenance vary significantly between the two options. Retrofitted LEDs can save up to 50% on the initial investment and the use of the RentAlite payment system could further reduce the cost. In such a small grocery store as the one in Hazelwood, the return on investment for the integrated system would be significantly longer and potentially unrealistic. Installation of both products requires an electrician and an electrician is needed to replace burnt out LEDs in an integrated system, but that is not the case for the retrofitted ones. However, there have been concerns that linear LED tubes for retrofitting purposes can cause electric shock during installation (LED Magazine, 2012). The retrofitted LEDs are no match to the lighting quality of the integrated LEDs. Integrated LED systems allows for more variation in color temperature, have better dimming capability and a higher color rendering index (CRI). After analyzing potential lighting systems for the Hazelwood grocery and office building, the retrofitted LED system is recommended for implementation. Retrofitted LEDs provide a more energy efficient lighting system and better lighting quality than CFLs, but at this time the integrated LED system is too expensive. Although the integrated LEDs produce a higher quality light, cost and maintenance outweigh. Further analysis should be conducted on whether RentAlite is a viable option for this project because it would result in even more drastic cuts to the cost of lighting.

31 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting Sources: Energy Efficiency: Ehrlich. Brent. Environmental Building News Here-CE-Course Decemeber 1st, 2011 Cost & Maintenance LCA Sources: Energy Right (2010). [1] US Department of Energy. Life-Cycle Assessment of Energy and Environmental Impacts of LED Lighting Products Part I: Review of the Life-Cycle Energy Consumption of Incandescent, Compact Fluorescent, and LED Lamps. February [2] US Department of Energy. Life-Cycle Assessment of Energy and Environmental Impacts of LED Lighting Products Part 2: LED Manufacturing and Performance. June [3] US Department of Energy. Life-Cycle Assessment of Energy and Environmental Impacts of LED Lighting Products Part 3: LED Environmental Testing. March 2013 [4] Tahkamo, Leena; Puolakka, Marjukka; Halonen, Liisa; Zissiz Georges. (2012) Comparison of Life Cycle Assessment of LED Light Sources. Journal of Light and Visual Environment. Vol. 36, No Quality of Light g_light_sources_

32 25 Table 6- GROCERY STORE LIGHTING DETAILS Product Location Option1 Quantity Option2 Quantity Manufacturer Input Power (Watts) Light Output (Lumens) Color Temp Configuration Lifetime (base to High efficacy) CS18 Between aisles Cree K Suspended 50,000-75,000 LBR30 café Cree K- Down/Track 35, K lighting 50,000 CPY250 LR6 LRP38-10L butcher prep and bakery prep area corridors, coolers, bathrooms produce, deli, bakery TOTAL Wattage LPD (area=6763 ft2) Cree K Surface Mount Cree K Recessed and non-recessed 50,000 hours Cree K Track lighting 35,000-50,000 Additional details Dimming to 5%, L 96 x W 10 x H 5.8 Dimmable to 20% with ELV dimmers, can be pitched 25 or 50 degrees dimmable to 20% Dimmable to 20% with ELV dimmers, can be pitched at 12.5 or 25 deg.

33 Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 33 Table 7- OFFICE BUILDING LIGHTING DETAILS Product Location Quantity 1 st Floor Quantity 2 nd Floor Manufacturer Input Power (Watts) Light Output (Lumens) Color Temp LR6-18L corridors 3 2 Cree K CS18 office space 8 9 Cree K TOTAL Wattage LPD (area=1020ft2) (area=1000ft2) Configuration Lifetime (base to High efficacy) Additional details recessed and non-recessed 50,000 6 downlight ceiling 50,000- mounted 75,000 L 96 x W 10 x H 5

34 Figure 4- Option 1 Layout Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 34

35 Figure 5- Option 2 Layout Hazelwood Grocery Store & Office Lighting 35