Parking Lighting Efficiency
A Green Parking Council Webinar – May 31st, 2012
Michael Myer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Michael Myer is a lighting engineer experienced in architectural lighting design and knowledge specializing in sustainable lighting design, controls, and new technologies. He received an MS in Lighting from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and has been Lighting Certified (LC) by the National Council on Qualifications for the Lighting Professions (NCQLP). Within the lab, Mr. Myer works on different lighting-related projects including: Rulemaking and Standards Work; Commercial Lighting Solutions; the Energy Alliances; and the National Accounts.
Program Name or Ancillary Text eere.energy.gov
Green Parking Council, May 31, 2012
Review of CBEA Parking Lot and
Structure Lighting Specifications Michael Myer - PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Overview
Source: PNNL
• Overview
– Focus on site (parking lot) lighting
– Only allows LEDs
• Per Alliance members request
– Sets a power density
– Sets a minimum illuminance
– Warranty information
– Life extrapolation requirements
• Target energy savings of 50% or
more
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Notes:
1. Values in table are minimum values
2. Horizontal illuminance is on the parking surface
3. Vertical illuminance is taken 5’ above finished grade (AFG)
Main Parking Area
Ambient Condition Horizontal Illuminance Vertical Illuminance
Lighting Zone 2 0.50 fc 0.25 fc
Lighting Zone 3 0.75 fc 0.40 fc
Lighting Zone 4 1.00 fc 0.50 fc
Illuminance Requirements in the Specification
Illuminance What is required?
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Illuminance What is required?
Perimeter Parking
Front Aisle
Parking Lot Areas
Loading/Rear Drive
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Illuminance What is required?
Notes:
1. Values in table are minimum values
2. Horizontal illuminance is on the parking surface
Other Parking Areas
Ambient
Condition
Perimeter
Parking
Front Aisle Entry Drives, Loading
Areas, Rear Drives
Lighting Zone 2 0.20 fc 1.00 fc 0.20 fc
Lighting Zone 3 0.40 fc 1.50 fc 0.40 fc
Lighting Zone 4 0.50 fc 2.00 fc 0.50 fc
Illuminance Requirements in the Specification
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Lighting Power Density
Comparison of Power Density
Zone CBEA
Spec
ASHRAE/IESNA
Std. 90.1-2007
ASHRAE/IESNA
Std. 90.1-2010
CA
Title 24-2008
All Zones 0.15 W/sf
4 0.08 W/sf 0.13 W/sf 0.115 W/sf
+1,030W
3 0.06 W/sf 0.10 W/sf 0.092 W/sf
+770W
2 0.05 W/sf 0.06 W/sf 0.045 W/sf
+510W
Limiting LPD → Energy Savings
Consult specific code for all requirements
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification in Practice Leavenworth, KS
Highlights:
• Walmart
• 500,000 sq feet (parking area)
• 92 LED luminaires
– GE Evolve
• Pole height 37’ AFG
• Avg: 1.27 fc Min: 0.8 fc (initial)
• Payback: 6 – 10 years
• Cost of electricity: ≈$0.06 / kWh
• ≈60% energy savings compared to
standard design
• 0.04 W/SF
Source: GE
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification in Practice Manchester, NH
Highlights:
• T.J. Maxx (Anchor)
• 150,000 sq feet (parking area)
• 25 LED luminaires
– BetaLED Edge
• Pole height 33’ AFG
• Avg: 2.03 fc Min: 1.03 fc (initial)
• Payback: 3 – 10 years
• Cost of electricity: ≈$0.14 / kWh
• 63% energy savings compared to
previous installation design
• 0.04 W/SF
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification in Practice Falls Church, VA
Highlights:
• Safeway (Anchor)
• 127,450 sq feet (parking area)
• 55 LED luminaires
– Cooper Lighting
• Pole height 30’ AFG
• Avg: 2.97 fc Min: 0.9 fc (initial)
• Payback:
– 3.5 years against 1,000W MH
– 6.5 years against 400W PMH (alternate option)
• Cost of electricity: $0.096 / kWh
• Energy savings:
– 75% compared to 1,000W MH
– 40% compared to 400W PMH (alternate option)
• 0.05 W/SF
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
• Overview
– Fluorescent, induction, LED
– Sets a power density
– Sets a minimum illuminance
– Warranty information
• Under revision (incorporating new
standards)
• Target energy savings of 40% before
adding in controls
• Works with federal tax deduction
(179D) – IRS allows a pass through
– www.179d.energy.gov
– www.lightingtaxdeduction.com
DOE CBEA – Parking Structure Specification
commercialbuildings.energy.gov
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification Overview Energy Conservation
Energy Conservation
1. 0.18 W/sf
Background
1. EPAct 40% Parking Structure
LPD: 0.18
2. Parking Structures are covered
by EPAct deduction
Internal Revenue Bulletin:
2008-14 Section 6.
APPLICATION OF THE
INTERIM LIGHTING RULE TO
UNCONDITIONED GARAGE
SPACE
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification Overview Technologies
Fluorescent LED
Induction Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Specification Overview Lighting Requirements
Area of Structure Horizontal1
Illuminance
Requirement
Vertical2
Illuminance
Requirement
Uniformity
Max:Min
Covered Parking Areas 2.0 (Min) 1.2 7:1
Ramps (Day) 2.0 (Min) 1.0 10:1
Ramps (Night) 2.0 (Min) 0.5 10:1
Vehicle Entry (Day)3 60.0 (Min) 30.0 10:1
Vehicle Entry (Night) 1.0 (Min) 1.2 10:1
Uncovered (Top Deck) 0.75 (Min) 0.4 10:1
1. Measured on parking surface
2. Vertical measurements at 5’ AFG
3. Contributions from the sun should be factored in
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Parking Structure Specification Controls
Source: PNNL
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Controls Sample Usage Data Thursday, January 27
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
12
:01
AM
1
2:3
0 A
M
12
:59
AM
1
:28
AM
1
:57
AM
2
:26
AM
2
:55
AM
3
:24
AM
3
:53
AM
4
:22
AM
4
:51
AM
5
:20
AM
5
:49
AM
6
:18
AM
6
:47
AM
7
:16
AM
7
:45
AM
8
:14
AM
8
:43
AM
9
:12
AM
9
:41
AM
1
0:1
0 A
M
10
:39
AM
1
1:0
8 A
M
11
:37
AM
1
2:0
6 P
M
12
:35
PM
1
:04
PM
1
:33
PM
2
:02
PM
2
:31
PM
3
:00
PM
3
:29
PM
3
:58
PM
4
:27
PM
4
:56
PM
5
:25
PM
5
:54
PM
6
:23
PM
6
:52
PM
7
:21
PM
7
:50
PM
8
:19
PM
8
:48
PM
9
:17
PM
9
:46
PM
1
0:1
5 P
M
10
:44
PM
1
1:1
3 P
M
11
:42
PM
Am
pe
rage
Hour of Day
Daily Fixture Amperage
PRELIMINARY DATA – Dept. of Labor
Green Parking Council Webinar, May 31, 2012
eere.energy.gov
Controls Sample Usage Data Saturday, January 29
PRELIMINARY DATA – Dept. of Labor
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
12
:01
AM
1
2:3
0 A
M
12
:59
AM
1
:28
AM
1
:57
AM
2
:26
AM
2
:55
AM
3
:24
AM
3
:53
AM
4
:22
AM
4
:51
AM
5
:20
AM
5
:49
AM
6
:18
AM
6
:47
AM
7
:16
AM
7
:45
AM
8
:14
AM
8
:43
AM
9
:12
AM
9
:41
AM
1
0:1
0 A
M
10
:39
AM
1
1:0
8 A
M
11
:37
AM
1
2:0
6 P
M
12
:35
PM
1
:04
PM
1
:33
PM
2
:02
PM
2
:31
PM
3
:00
PM
3
:29
PM
3
:58
PM
4
:27
PM
4
:56
PM
5
:25
PM
5
:54
PM
6
:23
PM
6
:52
PM
7
:21
PM
7
:50
PM
8
:19
PM
8
:48
PM
9
:17
PM
9
:46
PM
1
0:1
5 P
M
10
:44
PM
1
1:1
3 P
M
11
:42
PM
Am
pe
rage
Hour of Day
Daily Fixture Amperage
GARY L. CUDNEY, P.E. Carl Walker, Inc.
Gary Cudney, P.E. is President of Carl Walker, Inc., a specialist in parking structure design, restoration, and parking studies and operations consulting serving clients nationally. During his 28 years in parking consulting, he has developed wide-ranging expertise in parking planning, sustainable and green parking design, functional design, lighting, security, revenue control systems, and structural engineering.
• Carl Walker Green Garage Demonstrator Sites
• City of Ann Arbor South 5th Avenue Underground
• Colorado State University (CSU) Lake Street
Green Parking Council (GPC)
Parking Lighting Used to be Easy!
High Pressure Sodium
“Before”
Metal Halide
“After”
Parking Lighting Used to be Easy!
High Pressure Sodium
(HPS)“Before”
Metal Halide (MH)
“After”
With Painted Ceiling
Parking Structure Lighting Options Today • Fluorescent – T8 or T5
• Induction
• LED
• HPS & MH not used much
Parking Lighting
Induction
LED
Fluorescent
LED
• HID No Longer the Light of Choice
• A Lot of Interest in LED & Induction
• Fluorescent still seems most popular
• Install Demo Fixtures
• Have Lighting Analysis Performed
• Consider Wireless Control Technology
• Time of Day
• Photocell
• Motion Detector
• Instant On / Off
Parking Structure Lighting Trends
• IESNA RP-20-98 Garage Illuminance • Minimum Horizontal 1.0 fc on the floor
• Non-Parking Ramps 2.0 fc day / 1.0 fc night
• Entrance Areas 50.0 fc day / 1.0 fc night
• Max/MinUniformity Ratio 10:1 (Horizontal)
• 5.0 fc Average w/ 4:1 Avg/Min Ratio
Lighting Design Criteria
Single Row Layout
Not Preferred
Double Row Layout
Preferred
• Parking Structure Lighting
• Replace HID with fluorescent, induction, or LED
• Fact Sheet: Very good comparison matrix of technologies
• CBEA Performance Spec
• Efficient, yet well lit parking
• Promoting photocell and motion detector control
• Five year warranty
• Parking Lot Lighting
• Replace HID with LED
• Fact Sheet: Very good overview of LED system features
• Illuminance levels based on type of use and location
• Reduce light trespass
US DOE CBEA Campaign
• Improved Security Less Crime
• Enhanced Perception More Revenue
• Reduced Energy 40%+ Cost Savings
• Longer Lamp Life Less Maintenance
• Other Financial Incentives • Local & State Credits and Rebates
• Utility Company Rebates (Database at dsireusa.org)
• EPAct of 2005 Tax Deductions of 30¢-60¢/SF
• Very Short Payback Period (2 – 4 Years) for Conversions
• Manufacturers Finance or Lease for No Upfront Cost
Benefits of New Lighting Options
• Cost to Implement
• Technological Concerns
• LED: Uncertain Life, Quality of Offshore Suppliers, Glare,
Poor Uniformity of Early Luminaries, Highest 1st Cost
• Induction: Lower Lumen Output, Replace Entire Fixture
at End of Lamp Life, Quality of Offshore Suppliers
• Fluorescent: Old Technology (Lower Quality Perception),
Mercury Disposal, Cold Weather Lumen Depreciation, More
Maintenance Than LED or Induction
• Control Technology
• Concerns of Operational Complexity, Security, and Liability
• Waiting for “Better LED” (Cost, Glare & Illumination)
Obstacles to Lighting Upgrades
Lighting 10-Year Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Floor Area = 240,000 SF, 750 Covered Spaces, Lights on 24/7
Assume conduit and electrical panels reused and 1 for 1 Replacement of Existing MH
Caution: Results will vary depending on fixtures selected, environment/climate, labor costs, electricity costs, structure type, etc.
Type of Light
175 W MH
Existing
T8 3-Lamp
Fluorescent
T8 3-Lamp
Fluorescent
w/ Wireless
Controller 100-W LED
ECO Parking
Lights 100-W
Induction
# of Fixtures 300 300 300 300 300
Fixture Input Wattage 210 111
35-76-111
(Avg = 64) 103 98
Average Illuminance (fc) 6.5 6.7 2.2 - 6.7 5.6 4.3
Power Density (W/SF) 0.26 0.14 0.5 - 0.14 0.13 0.12
Maintained Lumens 9,750 10,600 10,600 7,000 6,250
Efficacy (Lumens/W) 46.4 95.4 95.4 67.9 63.8
Lamp Life (Hours/Years) 15,000 / 1.71 36,000 / 4.1 36,000 / 4.1 50,000 / 5.7 100,000 / 11.4400
Fixture Installed Unit Cost Existing $275 $430 $550 $400
Total Fixture First Cost Existing $82,500 $129,000 $165,000 $120,000
Total Fixture Cost /Space Existing $110 $172 $220 $160
Energy Cost @ 15¢/KWH $827,800 $437,600 $252,300 $406,000 $386,300
Maintenance Cost $135,000 $43,200 $98,900 $210,000 $150,000
Total 10-Year LCC $962,800 $480,800 $351,200 $616,000 $536,300
Energy Savings / Year Existing $39,000 $57,600 $42,200 $44,200
Payback Period in Years N/A 2.1 2.2 3.9 2.7
NOTE: Tax Incentives and Utility Company Rebates Not Included Due to Locational Variability
High Pressure Sodium Lighting
High Pressure Sodium Advantages High Pressure Sodium Disadvantages
Lower First Cost Nearing Obsolescence in Parking
Match Existing Facilities…If Not Retrofitted Already
Yellowish Light Color
Lower Operating Cost Than Metal Halide Shorter Lamp Life than Newer Technology
Higher Lamp Cost than Fluorescent
Higher Energy Consumption
Higher Life Cycle Operating Cost
Metal Halide Lighting
Metal Halide Advantages Metal Halide Disadvantages
Lower First Cost Nearing Obsolescence in Parking (TBD)
Match Existing Facilities…If Not Retrofitted Already
Highest Energy Consumption
White Light Higher Life Cycle Operating Cost
Shorter Lamp Life than Newer Technology
Higher Lamp Cost than Fluorescent
Fluorescent Lighting
Fluorescent Advantages Fluorescent Disadvantages
Lowest First Cost Perception of Lower Quality – Some Poor Quality Fixtures on the Market
Lowest life Cycle Operating Cost Reduced Illuminance in Cold Weather
White Light Disposal of Lamps with Mercury
Low Energy Consumption More Maintenance (Cleaning, Gasket)
Lowest Lamp Cost
Long Lamp Life
Instant On / Off For Lighting Management
LED Lighting
LED Advantages LED Disadvantages
Low Energy Consumption Highest First Cost
Long Life…But, a Moving Target
Replace Entire Fixture When LED’s Fail
White Light Some Poor Quality Foreign LED’s
No Mercury Disposal Light Distribution: Glare, Little Up Light, Less Uniform
Great in Cold Climates
Little History…Rapid Change
Instant On / Off For Lighting Management
Lumens per Watt is too Low
Induction Lighting
Induction Advantages Induction Disadvantages
Low Energy Consumption Higher First Cost than Fluorescent
Long Lamp Life
More Fixtures Required Due to Low Light Output
White Light Lumens per Watt is too Low
Great in Cold Climates
Some Poor Quality Foreign Lamps
Instant On / Off For Lighting Management
Good Light Distribution
Questions
Thank You Presenters!
This webinar and additional supplemental materials will be available at:
http://greenparkingcouncil.org/lighting
For more information please contact:
Michael Myer: [email protected]
Gary Cudney: [email protected]
Paul Wessel: [email protected]
If you have any suggestions for future webinars please email me at: [email protected]