Summary

LED Parking Lot Lighting

Parking Lot Lighting: LED vs. HPS

Outdoor parking lot lighting employing LED technology.

Synopsis:

Outdoor area and parking lot luminaires employing LED technology are available from a number of manufacturers. The U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) is encouraging research development and market adoption of the technology, and is providing resources to ensure that objective, ongoing information is available. Replacement of the entire luminaire is most common, although retrofit options for existing housings are beginning to reach the market.

LEDs are well-suited to outdoor lighting applications. In addition to saving energy, LEDs limit light pollution, withstand cold temperatures, are highly durable and produce high-quality light. For these reasons, LEDs are already being deployed in parking lot and outdoor lighting applications. In some circumstances, LEDs in parking lot applications can provide simple paybacks of around three years. It is expected that by 2030, LEDs will reduce energy usage in the outdoor sector by 50%.

LED outdoor area luminaires are available with efficacies over 100 lumens/watt. LEDs are ultimately expected to achieve efficacies over 200 lumens/watt. Energy savings over traditional area lighting systems may be significant – 30% to 75% – depending on the original light levels, technology and controls. In addition, LED luminaires benefit from improved directionality and uniformity, which can allow visibility goals to be achieved at lower peak light levels. LEDs generally do not suffer from frequent on-off cycles or dimming operations. Thus, LEDs are well-suited for applications where the lighting system is under occupancy sensor control, providing increased energy savings in parking lot or other outdoor lighting applications.

Retrofit kits for existing luminaires are also available. Well-designed retrofit kits can deliver the same benefits of integral luminaires.

Energy Savings: 46%

Energy Savings Rating: Comprehensive Analysis What's this?

Level	Status	Description
1	Concept not validated	Claims of energy savings may not be credible due to lack of documentation or validation by unbiased experts.
2	Concept validated:	An unbiased expert has validated efficiency concepts through technical review and calculations based on engineering principles.
3	Limited assessment	An unbiased expert has measured technology characteristics and factors of energy use through one or more tests in typical applications with a clear baseline.
4	Extensive assessment	Additional testing in relevant applications and environments has increased knowledge of performance across a broad range of products, applications, and system conditions.
5	Comprehensive analysis	Results of lab and field tests have been used to develop methods for reliable prediction of performance across the range of intended applications.
6	Approved measure	Protocols for technology application are established and approved.

Simple Payback, New Construction (years): 3.8 What's this?

Simple Payback, Retrofit (years): 12.8 What's this?

Simple Payback is one tool used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a proposed investment, such as the investment in an energy efficient technology. Simple payback indicates how many years it will take for the initial investment to "pay itself back." The basic formula for calculating a simple payback is:

Simple Payback = Incremental First Cost / Annual Savings

The Incremental Cost is determined by subtracting the Baseline First Cost from the Measure First Cost.

For New Construction, the Baseline First Cost is the cost to purchase the standard practice technology. The Measure First Cost is the cost of the alternative, more energy efficienct technology. Installation costs are not included, as it is assumed that installation costs are approximately the same for the Baseline and the Emerging Technology.

For Retrofit scenarios, the Baseline First Cost is $0, since the baseline scenario is to leave the existing equipment in place. The Emerging Technology First Cost is the Measure First Cost plus Installation Cost (the cost of the replacement technology, plus the labor cost to install it). Retrofit scenarios generally have a higher First Cost and longer Simple Paybacks than New Construction scenarios.

Simple Paybacks are called "simple" because they do not include details such as the time value of money or inflation, and often do not include operations and maintenance (O&M) costs or end-of-life disposal costs. However, they can still provide a powerful tool for a quick assessment of a proposed measure. These paybacks are rough estimates based upon best available data, and should be treated with caution. For major financial decisions, it is suggested that a full Lifecycle Cost Analysis be performed which includes the unique details of your situation.

The energy savings estimates are based upon an electric rate of $.09/kWh, and are calculated by comparing the range of estimated energy savings to the baseline energy use. For most technologies, this results in "Typical," "Fast" and "Slow" payback estimates, corresponding with the "Typical," "High" and "Low" estimates of energy savings, respectively.

TAG Technical Score: 3.54

Details

LED Parking Lot Lighting

Parking Lot Lighting: LED vs. HPS

Outdoor parking lot lighting employing LED technology.

Item ID: 417

Sector: Commercial

Energy System: Lighting--Fixtures: Outdoor

Technical Advisory Group: 2012 LED Lighting TAG (#5)
Average TAG Rating: 3.7 out of 5
TAG Ranking Date: 04/05/2012
TAG Rating Commentary:

There are a lot of really good products available now. We are at the point where the only challenge is education of the market players, and assuring good system design practices.

Synopsis:

Retrofit kits for existing luminaires are also available. Well-designed retrofit kits can deliver the same benefits of integral luminaires.

Baseline Example:

Baseline Description: Metal Halide area light
Baseline Energy Use: 1989 kWh per year per unit

Comments:

Baseline calculated using typical wattage for 400W MH, including ballast (454 W) and assuming all night operation (4380 hr/yr).

Manufacturer's Energy Savings Claims:

"Typical" Savings: 50%
Savings Range: From 30% to 75%

Comments:

Manufacturers typically claim savings of approximately 50%, with higher savings available from integral controls. References from CREEs EDGE High Output Brochure (CREE, 2013).

Best Estimate of Energy Savings:

"Typical" Savings: 46%
Low and High Energy Savings: 38% to 57%
Energy Savings Reliability: 5 - Comprehensive Analysis

Comments:

Demonstration studies have shown energy savings for LED parking lot lighting of 38% to 57% as compared to standard HID sources. LEDs are now widely available and used for street lighting, area lighting, parking garage lighting, and parking lot lighting.

As of 2010, outdoor stationary lighting used 116 terawatt-hours/year of electricity in the U.S., representing approximately 16.7% of all lighting energy consumption. This percentage of energy use by outdoor stationary lighting will likely apply to the Northwest as well.

The USDOE indicates that LEDs have “tremendous potential” for outdoor lighting applications, and LEDs are expected to achieve 87% of outdoor lighting sales by 2030. Overall reductions in baseline energy consumption in the outdoor lighting sector are estimated to be 46%. Between 2010 and 2030, LEDs for outdoor stationary lighting are projected to save 670 terawatt-hours of electricity nationally.

Energy Use of Emerging Technology:

1,074.1 kWh per unit per year What's this?

Energy Use of an Emerging Technology is based upon the following algorithm.

Baseline Energy Use - (Baseline Energy Use * Best Estimate of Energy Savings (either Typical savings OR the high range of savings.))

Comments:

The May 2011 GATEWAY study at Walmart showed LED replacement for a 400 W MH at 211 W. (PNNL, 2012)

Technical Potential:
Units: unit
Potential number of units replaced by this technology: 3,220,000
Comments:

Technical potential estimates are based on Navigant's 2011 report for U.S. DOE SSL Program, "Energy Savings Estimates of Light Emitting Diodes in Niche Lighting Applications" http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/nichefinalreport_january2011.pdf

Navigant indicates a total of 14,300,000 HPS and MH parking lot lights nationwide (Table 3.6). Assuming that number of lights is proportional to population, the estimate of potential LED versus MH or HPS parking lot replacement lights in the Northwest is 0.04 x 14,300,000 = 572,000. Garage lighting generally uses much lower wattages. Navigant additionally identifies a total of 66,200,000 mercury vapor, HSP, and MH area and flood lights (Table 3.10). Again assuming that 4% of these lights are in use and potentially replaceable in the Northwest, an additional 2,648,000 lamps are available for a total of 3,220,000 lamps.

Regional Technical Potential:
2.95 TWh per year
336 aMW
What's this?

Regional Technical Potential of an Emerging Technology is calculated as follows:

Baseline Energy Use * Estimate of Energy Savings (either Typical savings OR the high range of savings) * Technical Potential (potential number of units replaced by the Emerging Technology)

First Cost:

Installed first cost per: unit
Emerging Technology Unit Cost (Equipment Only): $1000.00
Emerging Technology Installation Cost (Labor, Disposal, Etc.): $50.00
Baseline Technology Unit Cost (Equipment Only): $685.00

Comments:

The May 2011 GATEWAY study (PNNL, 2012) at Walmart showed pricing for LED parking lot luminaires at approximately $1,000, compared to approximately $685 for the incumbent pulse-start MH luminaires. Costs for LED lighting continue to drop and product performance continues to improve.

Installation cost is the author's estimate of approximately 0.5 hr @ $70/hr plus bucket truck and disposal.

Retrofit kits can be lower cost than integral luminaires, but not always as the price of integral luminaires continues to decline. In addition, depending on the design of the retrofit kit, the labor hours required to gut an existing housing and install a retrofit kit may be greater than the labor hours required to simple replace the entire luminaire.

Cost Effectiveness:

Simple payback, new construction (years): 3.8

Simple payback, retrofit (years): 12.8

What's this?

Cost Effectiveness is calculated using baseline energy use, best estimate of typical energy savings, and first cost. It does not account for factors such as impacts on O&M costs (which could be significant if product life is greatly extended) or savings of non-electric fuels such as natural gas. Actual overall cost effectiveness could be significantly different based on these other factors.

Comments:

A variety of case studies have been performed to assess the payback periods for LED deployments in parking lots and outside area lighting. The literature clearly shows that the cost effectiveness of the LEDs varies greatly based on a variety of factors, including the electricity rate, maintenance savings, and whether the LEDs are incorporated into new construction, are replacing luminaires at the end of their service life, or are replacing luminaires with remaining service life. In addition, with the availability, quality, and price of LEDs improving so rapidly, an economic analysis should be done at the time of installation; it will likely be better than economic results reported here or elsewhere.

Detailed Description:

This technology includes lighting systems for outdoor parking facilities and other area- and flood-lighting applications (but does not include indoor parking garages or wall packs used for architectural lighting). These lighting systems are used to draw attention to businesses and other spaces, to provide a sense of security, and to help traffic move safely through the space.

Today, the most efficient commercially available LED luminaires achieve higher than 100 lumens per watt (LM/W) efficacies. This high efficacy, combined with very long lifespans and low maintenance costs, already make LEDs cost-competitive in many applications. It is anticipated that LEDs will achieve upwards of 200 LM/W, but it should be noted that a straight LM/W comparison does not fully capture the advantages offered by LEDs. Many advocate that white-light sources such as LEDs, which provide broad spectral light distribution, provide greater aesthetic value to an area and a perception of greater security because colors and images are more clearly visible. In addition, at the low light levels typical of outdoor area lighting, white light sources can achieve the same level of visual performance with lower light levels than sources such as high-pressure sodium (HPS) or low-pressure sodium (LPS) that have more of a yellow light color.

The directionality of LED sources also makes them well-suited to applications where down-lighting is desired without excess light being emitted in undesired directions. This attribute is sought after in many outdoor and parking lot applications, in particular when sky glow (light pollution), light trespass, or glare is a concern. In a typical fixture with traditional light sources, 40% to 60% of produced light is lost, meaning that only about half of the light reaches the intended surface. For an LED fixture, losses are only 10% to 20%, meaning that 80% to 90% of the light reaches the intended surface. This means that an overall reduction in light output can achieve the same result as a conventional lighting system.

LEDs generally start up instantaneously and are not subject to the lifetime degradation penalties of fluorescents in applications with frequent on-off cycles. These characteristics combine to ensure that LEDs are well-suited to parking lot or area/security lighting applications, where lighting levels are under automated control with bi-level or multilevel lighting. These controls can include timers, motion sensors, photosensors, curfew dimming, and step switching, all of which may provide further energy savings, particularly in parking lots or outdoor areas with variable traffic levels.

LEDs seldom burn out or fail catastrophically, but rather fade gradually over time. This holds particular promise for parking lot or other outdoor applications because only minimal maintenance is needed. Maintenance can be scheduled rather than dispatched in response to catastrophic light failures that would normally result in blacked-out sections of a parking lot. Emergency maintenance is expensive, so the ability to plan maintenance activities can greatly reduce costs. LEDs are also easily dimmable, and are quite unique in that dimming the lamp generally increases – rather than decreases – the efficiency of the device.

Retrofit kits for existing luminaires are also available. Well-designed retrofit kits can deliver the same benefits of integral luminaires. Retrofit kits typically include a complete LED lighting system, including LED modules and/or arrays, optics, driver, and mounting hardware. Retrofit kits can be lower cost than integral luminaires, but not always as the price of integral luminaires continues to decline. Retrofit kits allow reuse of existing housings, which can be of particular benefit for some applications, such as decorative applications. On the other hand, lumen maintenance, thermal management, light distribution, and physical mounting can be of concern for retrofit kits, as the design must allow for proper operation in a wide variety of housings. For reliable performance, utilize retrofit kits certified for compatibility with the specific make and model of the existing street lights.

Standard Practice:

As of 2010, the outdoor lighting sector (including parking lot and area lighting applications), is almost entirely captured by high-intensity discharge (HID) luminaires, including mercury vapor, metal halide, high-pressure sodium, and low-pressure sodium lamps. Of the total, 86% of typical lamp operating hours for outdoor applications are currently provided by HID lamps.

Development Status:

LED technology has been in development for over 60 years. The technology was developed alongside the discovery of the first semiconductor p-n junction in 1940 at Bell Labs, and concurrent with the creation of bipolar transistors and the demonstration of efficient light generation from certain alloys in the 1950s and 1960s. While it was clear from an early stage that LEDs held the potential to provide light at very high efficacies, early LEDs had low LM/W outputs and were only suitable for use as signaling and indicator lights.

During the 1990s, LEDs reached a level of efficiency that made them appropriate for high-power lighting application. By 2000, a “new era” of solid-state lighting was emerging. As LED technology became more refined, manufacturers quickly recognized that this technology was a promising solution for parking lot or other stationary outdoor lighting applications. And indeed, this was the first sector for which LEDs would become cost competitive. LEDs can leverage their directionality, dimmability, low maintenance costs, and long service life to effectively compete with more traditional parking lot lighting solutions. LEDs have been deployed in multiple pilot projects, and have begun to be deployed at commercial scale by companies such as at Walmart stores.

The USDOE LED Lighting Facts1 program provides verified performance data and the Design Lights Consortium2 provides a Qualified Products List many utilities use for incentive programs. As of June 2013, the DOE LED Lighting Facts program listed 1,045 LED roadway and area lighting luminaires, and the Design Lights Consortium listed over 8,000 LED roadway and area luminaires on its Qualified Products List.

Non-Energy Benefits:

LED luminaires promise long life and robust design. In contrast with the sudden, catastrophic failure of traditional technologies, LED lamps gradually produce less light as they get older so they do not need to be replaced immediately, which can reduce maintenance costs.

When used in parking lot applications, where the lamp typically operates an average of 12 hours per day, the long life of these lamps results in equipment and labor savings gained from less frequent lamp replacement.

Environmental benefits include no mercury content so disposal issues and costs are reduced compared to most of the competing technologies.

LED “white” light is available in a range of color temperatures. Light distribution is more even than that of most other technologies, sometimes allowing lower light levels per fixture or greater spacing between fixtures while still providing better visibility than traditional sources. LED sources are inherently controllable and do not experience life degradation with frequent switching.

Case studies indicate that pedestrian safety increases with the use of these lights in combination with bi-level controls that respond to occupancy sensors. This alerts drivers that pedestrians may be in the area.

End User Drawbacks:

The primary barrier to consumer acceptance of LEDs is the higher up-front costs of the technology. A case study performed in 2009 found that LEDs were approximately 3.5 times as expensive as MH lamps for a parking lot application, although costs have declined since then and continue to drop rapidly. Customers may also hesitate to adopt a technology whose benefits are largely predicated on a long operating life that has not yet been demonstrated in the real world at large-scale, long-term deployments. This concern is fueled by experiences with failure of lamp drivers, which seem to lack the LED lamps’ longevity and are essential for the fixture’s operation.

Operations and Maintenance Costs:

Baseline Cost: $74.00 per: unit per year
Emerging Technology Cost: $20.00 per: unit per year

Comments:

Due to the robust nature of the technology, LEDs are expected to have significantly reduced regular maintenance costs as compared to incumbent HID sources. LED sources are expected to operate 50,000 hours and more, unlike HID sources that typically require lamp replacement at about 20,000 to 34,000 hours. However, LED drivers may fail before the end of useful life of the LED source, and these will require replacement.

At this time, there are no additional costs for disposal of LED products at end of life. Manufacturers have expressed some interest in making them recyclable.

Estimated costs are from a 2011 DOE Gateway study at Walmart. (PNNL, 2012)

Effective Life:

Anticipated Lifespan of Emerging Technology: 15 years

Comments:

Performance specifications available from the USDOE state that LED luminaires produced in 2012 for use in outdoor applications are expected to achieve a 58,800 hour lifespan. Given an assumed operating cycle of 11 hours per day, this translates to approximately 14.6 years of daily operation.

The effective life of well-designed retrofit kits is expected to be equivalent to that of new luminaires, however can be impacted by the housing in which the retrofit kit is installed. The DLC specifies a minimum required lumen maintenance for retrofit kits that is equal to the minimum required lumen maintenance for new luminaires. This lumen maintenance must be demonstrated in a representative housing.

Competing Technologies:

Primary competition in this market is from HID lighting, primarily MH and HPS lamps. Approximately 86% of the current outdoor stationary lighting systems are of the HID type.

Reference and Citations:

DOE, 08/14/2014. LED Lighting Facts
U.S. Department of Energy

Jean Paul Freyssinier, 10/14/2009. Considerations for Successful LED Applications
Lighting Research Center

EERE, 02/01/2012. 2010 US Lighting Market Characterization
Navigant Consulting, Inc.

EERE, 01/25/2012. Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in General Illumination Applications
Navigant Consulting, Inc.

Navigant , 01/01/2011. Energy Savings Estimates of Light Emitting Diodes in Niche Lighting Applications
U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program

Charles Zimmerman, 01/31/2011. Lighting the Future: Walmart Converting Hundreds of Stores’ Lot Lighting to LEDs
TreeHugger

Brittany Biddy, 07/12/2011. Jo-Ann Installs Largest LED Parking Lot Lighting System in the Nation
Retail Facility Business

PG&E, 03/18/2009. Application Assessment of Bi-Level LED Parking Lot Lighting
Pacific Gas & Electric Company

PNNL, 05/31/2012. Demonstration Assessment of Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Parking Lot Lighting
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

PNNL, 06/22/2010. Demonstration Assessment of Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Parking Lot Lighting, Phase I
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

E. E. Richman, 11/01/2009. Exterior Lighting for Energy Savings, Security and Safety
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Russell Dupuis, 05/01/2008. History, Development, and Applications of High-Brightness Visible Light-Emitting Diodes
Journal of Lightwave Technology , 26
Special Notes: pp. 1154-1171

LRC, 08/28/2013. Parking Lot Luminaire Calculator
Lighting Research Center

LRC, 01/01/2009. Outdoor Lighting: A Short Guide to Applications, Objectives and Considerations
Assist recommends... (Alliance for Solid-State Illumination Systems and Technologies) , 6

LRC, 01/01/2010. Recommendations for Evaluating Parking Lot Luminaires
ASSIST recommends... (Alliance for Solid-State Illumination and Technologies) , 7

EERE, 07/22/2008. LED Outdoor Area Lighting Fact Sheet
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

DLC, 01/01/2013. DesignLights Consortium Qualified Products List
DesignLights Consortium, Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships, Inc.

CREE, 11/09/2013. CREE Edge High Output Brochure
CREE

Rank & Scores

LED Parking Lot Lighting

2012 LED Lighting TAG (#5)

Technical Advisory Group: 2012 LED Lighting TAG (#5)
TAG Ranking:
Average TAG Rating: 3.7 out of 5
TAG Ranking Date: 04/05/2012
TAG Rating Commentary:

There are a lot of really good products available now. We are at the point where the only challenge is education of the market players, and assuring good system design practices.

Technical Score Details

TAG Technical Score: 3.5 out of 5

How significant and reliable are the energy savings?
Energy Savings Score: 3.9 Comments:

Energy savings of over 50% for LED parking lot lighting have been demonstrated through numerous independent field assessments.
Experience has shown that substantial savings are achievable due primarily to improved uniformity. However, savings are much more difficult to achieve with poles taller than roughly 30 ft because incumbent technology is more efficient for these high flux products, and because the price premium paid for SSL is higher for high flux products.
50% energy savings potential over the "incumbent" HID technology
Savings significance and reliability ranges depending on products. If the program can be designed with a good set of criteria, there is a higher chance of “4-Better” products. Overall, from a strictly efficiency perspective, lumen/watt to lumen/watt, the savings are not that significant (ie similar source lm/w for new and existing). However, at a fixture level, the savings are more significant due to the fixture efficacy. Savings reliability is primarily dependent on quality and lifetime of products. Retrofit kits have performed poorly compared to full fixtures. Therefore, fixture replacements are much more highly recommended than retrofit kits for more significant savings and reliability.
The performance and reliability will be inversley proportional (somewhat), to product wattage. The higher the wattage, the more demanding the thermal management needs. So the lower wattage products will generally be more reliable (all else being equal).
By experience, we have seen a 40-50% energy savings with a one-for-one replacement and around a 70% energy savings with controls.
Will vary(possibly widely) with what is replaced and with which unit-most noticeable when reducing light levels in overlit spaces.
The energy savings realized is really a factor of relative light levels. If lumen levels are to be maintained based upon absolute photometry, then energy savings would be diminished. If light levels are reduced significantly, then energy savings can be tremendous. The issue is how to ensure that significantly diminished light levels do not create dangerous illuminated environment. The idea of establishing a minimum baseline of average luminance and an upper limit on Max to Min ratio, could allow for maximum energy savings, while still maintaining a minimum lighting quality standard.
Generally speaking, fixture savings are pretty reliable. Control savings are less reliable than the fixture savings.
Good savings are available now if you accept lower light levels and more even distribution; efficacy is improving rapidly; and controls will increase savings levels more.
Considering potential acceptability of the LED technology in this application, efficacy, light distribution flexibility, color property requirements, longevity, this is definitely an appropriate place for LED.
Acceptable

How great are the non-energy advantages for adopting this technology?
Non-Energy Benefits Score: 3.8
Comments:

Maintenance savings can be significant, but will depend on existing maintenance costs and practices, and on the LED luminaire's ability to deliver on promised long term operation.
Very much depends on the incumbent technology. Color is much improved if HPS is incumbent, but not necesarily lumen maintenance. Lumen maintenance can be improved if incumbent is MH, but not color. Maintenance savings knowledge with SSL improving, but still not well understood with regard to long-term reliability and dirt depreciation.
Less maintenance required. more controllable. better cut off - less glare more directable.
The non-energy benefits are good. However, the cost, lack of awareness and understanding are major barriers to the adoption of the technology. If customers can be informed, educated and trained on the benefits and limitations of the technology, they would be more willing to adopt them. If the program can help provide some of the education, it would help increase adoption quite a bit, especially if it is targeted training to those making the purchasing decisions.
Assuming that they were using HPS, there will be significant light quality improvements. If they were using MH or CFL, there will be significant maintenance benefits (if the LED product is reliable). There is also the improved possibility of more advanced control strategies (other than just a photocell). Maintenance is the biggest factor since maintenance budgets seem to be cut or greatly reduced often.
In the eyes of the beholder/owner and depends on what is being replaced. Better color than HPS is good, expected longer life should be good but no long term real world performance record and quality still varies widely.
LED is the most control and optical friendly lighting technology available today. Well engineered LED area lighting luminaires provide better optical distribution than any other light source on the market. LEDs can offer higher CRI and CCT light than most other alternative sources, which can allow for minimum allowable light levels within IES recommendation specification. The operating cost, after installation, is lower than the alternative sources available. The biggest obstacles are high initial cost and actively debated guidelines on recommended light levels. The cost on this technology will continue to decline; however, the debate on recommended light levels for particular applications like parking and area lighting, may never be settled.
Lifetime may be improved. Light distribution should improve. Light polution should decrease.
Potential is there for lower maintenance costs and lower levels of light pollution but have to make sure you get the right products.
In the NW maintenance savings in terms in dollars can be much greater than energy savings.

How ready are product and provider to scale up for widespread use in the Pacific Northwest?
Technology Readiness Score: 3.6
Comments:

A large number of high quality LED products are available. Minimum product quality should be validated through a qualification process such as Design Lights.
Many reputable companies are mfg LED area luminaires.
The “4-Better” rating is based on qualified products. Overall, as a product category, there are few products that are amazing and many more that are insufficient in quality and quantity. There are products that are technologically ‘there’ in terms of performance to meet customer wants and needs, and manufacturers that can provide the volume if scaled up. However, there are many more products that are not ‘there’ technologically and cannot scale up in volume. This is where program qualification criteria play a key role.
Availability has been a consistent issue with emerging technologies. This is especially true with small manufacterers. However, many of these products are available from major manufacturers, so there would be less of a concern.
Lots of good product out there now.
Wide variety on market, careful selection is key.
There are sufficient numbers of products available on the market today to effectively replace current HID technologies for parking and area applications up to current source wattage of 400. While there are also a few products available that could replace higher wattage HID sources, that market is just beginning to develop. LED luminaires targeted for replacement of 400w and lower HID sources are now available in sufficient quantities to allow for widespread adoption.
Products are ready as far as we can tell. Contractors need training to be ready. Suppliers are not stocking the fixtures in any significant quantities. But, the bottleneck to adoption will be the price, not the availability (in my opinion).
Improving every day

How easy is it to change to the proposed technology?
Ease of Adoption Score: 3.2
Comments:

Many LED products can provide good lighting performance and significant energy savings in a one-for-one replacement scenario. However, as a relatively new technology with different possible technical approaches to replacement and with variability in product quality and pricing, utilities could consider providing support in properly specifying LED lighting systems as part of early incentive programs. Also, monitoring should be included as part of early incentive programs so that data collected can be added to existing documentation of energy savings and occupancy patterns. Ideally, this data could be used as the basis for workpapers to support a prescriptive incentive program for this technology in the future.
Depends on light level requirements, pole spacing and height, all of which dictate acceptable photometrics for new luminaires. For most applications one should be able to find acceptable photometrics.
This is a product that requires an electrician and a lift or bucket-truck to install. Therefor installation costs are high to aquire the KWh savings potential. First cost is still high. It will come down with increased competition in the market.
Most of the higher quality products are very easy to install and maintain. A few bolts and wires and it’s installed or a simple latch and the driver can be accessed. However, there are products out there that require 20 small screws to be removed to change a driver. Customers should be made aware of these maintenance issues if they are not.
Most of these products can be exchanged one for one with little noticable loss of performance (assuming it is specified correctly). They are designed to easily adapt to existing infrastructure (poles, wiring, etc). Also, exterior lighting is an area that generally has a wide latitude of acceptible performance.
If they can get around the cost, I think they would change.
Will vary widely with local officials and policies, ownership of product and financial requirements. Big up front cost, should decrease with time.
For area and exterior parking lot lighting applications, adopting to LED is really no different than switching between two more established technologies. While some existing fixtures may be retrofitable, in most cases a simple one for one fixture replacement is all that is required.
Fixture changeouts are pretty easy. Controls.
Will get easier as retrofit kits improve in terms of both light distribution and UL listing.
Great opportunities for one for one changeouts. Products can look like original, or like they're from outer space, so this can appeal to a wide audience.
I huge engineering training hurtle to overcome. Many in the business are use to plug and play and need to go back to a time when illumination engineering meant knowing the basics.

Considering all costs and all benefits, how good a purchase is this technology for the owner?
Value Score: 3.2
Comments:

Costs are still relatively high, but are dropping. Again, given the significant savings and the pricing and performance trends of LED lighting, utility support is warranted. However, given the emerging nature of the technology, consider a program that includes technical assistance, incentives and monitoring of energy savings and occupancy patterns to add to existing documentation. A program of this nature will be more costly than a prescriptive program, but may be considered on a limited basis to help foster continued development of the technology.
Owner will need expert advice to avoid purchase of products likely to perform poorly over time.
Avoided maintenance costs along with energy savings make this an attractive investment, if installation costs can be brought down to provide a resonable payback expectation.
This highly depends on the customer, but overall, it is OK for most (without incentive). Although there are many advantages to the technology (maintenance, lifetime, quality, etc.), the initial cost and lack of knowledge and understanding of the benefits and limitations of the technology really holds them back. This is where an incentive/education program can really help.
I think that there is a convergence point of material cost and performance and savings that needs to be considered for each project. If the fixture is too scaled down there is a proportionaly high fixture cost to energy savings potential (the performance will be easier too). If the fixture is scaled up, then the proportional fixture cost to energy savings is lower, but, the performance and reliability may suffer.
Good if no controls Better with controls (other than a photocell)
But should continue to get better.
For the owner who is willing to invest for the long-term (>10 years) the LED area luminaires available to day are a wise investment. The problem is most owners (or their property managers) are not willing to invest for the long term. Most businesses will likely want to see a simple payback in 2 years or less. A minority of property owners may be willing to look as far out as 5 years but that is likely the upper limit. It is the exception, rather than the norm to find any property owner willing to look at a lighting upgrade project with a return in excess of five years. Currently, other lighting technologies offer significantly shorter simple payback terms.
Right now the cost effectiveness is not that good. Most installations would barely pass a b/c ratio test. Some installations would not pass the test. However, costs will come down over time and quality will increase.
Will get better as costs come down

Completed:
5/15/2012 1:04:56 PM
Last Edited:
5/15/2012 1:04:56 PM

Market Potential

LED Parking Lot Lighting

Last Edited:

11/21/2013 2:02:23 PM by AngelaP

Market Segment:

Any place that has lighted parking areas might be a candidate for LED area and parking lot lighting. This technology is a good replacement for incumbent lighting systems at shopping malls; corporate, hospital or educational campuses; parks and plazas; sport and entertainment venues; airports and ports; highway rest areas and weigh stations; and residential and rural areas where yards, driveways, tennis courts and horse arenas are illuminated.LED area and parking lot lighting is particularly

Regional Fit:

In the Pacific Northwest, the dark days and long nights in winter require that outdoor areas be lit for many hours each day to extend outdoor activities and enhance safety in parking lots and on the roads. Outdoor parking lots are more common than indoor parking garages in medium and small towns and rural/suburban areas of the Northwest. One unique regional activity that would benefit from LED area lighting is night skiing. LEDs perform very well in cold temperatures.

Zones:

Heating Zone 1, Heating Zone 2, Heating Zone 3, Cooling Zone 1, Cooling Zone 2, Cooling Zone 3

Load Shape:

Other - Street & Area Lighting (Photo Sensor Controlled)

Performance Trajectory:

This technology has advanced quickly; the number of products available is growing and their efficacy is continually improving. Optics are being refined, a wider selection of color temperatures is available, and control strategies are being developed. Efforts by government agencies, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) and the Zhaga Consortium are underway to standardize products to enhance their interchangeability. Other efforts aim to design LED luminaires with modular and/or field replaceable parts and with components that have similar expected useful lives.

The estimated performance trajectory for LED lighting sources is well documented by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).1 Luminaire efficacy is predicted to double from 70 lumens per watt (lm/watt) in 2010 to 145 lm/watt in 2015. The LED Lighting Facts program published a Product Snapshot2 that provides an analysis of the products listed in the LED Lighting Facts database. The Product Snapshot states that “The efficacies of listed commercial outdoor luminaires, including area and roadway, parking garage, and wall packs, are all increasing at approximately 17 lm/watt per year, near DOE’s Multi-year Program Plan (MYPP) projections in 2011.”

Cost Trajectory:

The estimated cost trajectory for LED lighting sources is well documented by the DOE.1 Prices for the LED luminaire are anticipated to drop by approximately 85% between 2010 and 2020, from $181/kilolumens (klm) to $24/klm.

Product Supply and Installation Risk:

The number of LED products on the market new and established companies continues to grow. Many of these products are manufactured overseas. The DOE is encouraging product development and no shortages are anticipated. Price is likely the biggest barrier to installation. If area lighting is billed at a flat rate rather than for measured energy use, it will be important to change the rate structure so the customer will benefit from the lower energy consumption of LED lighting.

Technical Dominance:

Electronically ballasted ceramic metal halide is a competing technology that is undergoing improvements to enhance performance and lengthen functional life.

Like LED sources, fluorescents – both linear and induction – can offer documented long life, white light and a variety of control strategies. However, their lumen output declines in cold conditions, which is not the case for LED sources. In addition, China’s current restriction of phosphor availability is resulting in cost increases for fluorescent technologies and uncertainty about future price points.

As a directional light source, LED luminaires can be designed to provide a more even light distribution, saving energy by eliminating the wasted “hot spot” of light typical of high-intensity discharge (HID) and induction lights. LED lights are inherently controllable, and can be combined with occupancy and/or daylight-based control capability to reduce energy consumption. Environmental benefits include no mercury content so disposal issues and costs are reduced compared to most of the competing technologies.

Numerous independent assessments of LED lighting verify that this technology is a good performer. However, long-term performance data do not exist, given the early stage of the technology’s development. Additionally, product quality is highly variable; it is important to carefully research and review available information to assess quality, performance and overall value. Product qualifications for LED exterior lighting available through organizations such as the DesignLights Consortium (DLC) can be useful in vetting product quality.

Given predicted improvements in efficacy and decline in price, LED lighting is expected to continue to gain market share.

Target Customer:

Owners of parking lot lighting systems, including government jurisdictions, would be the primary users of this technology. Others who are key to implementation of this technology are people who specify and install the lighting, such as lighting distributors, lighting contractors, electricians and lighting designers.

Market Channels:

Traditionally, specification-grade lighting products for the commercial market have used a system employing manufacturers’ representatives and distributors to sell products. Manufacturers’ representatives provide technical support to lighting designers, architects and other specifiers to select products. Distributors execute the sale with contractors and commercial customers and handle shipping and distribution. LED lighting products offered by established lighting companies are sold via these market channels.

Many LED lighting products are available directly from manufacturers through Internet sales and other direct methods. These companies are often startup in nature and their owners frequently have a background in electronics rather than lighting. As the industry has grown, some of these “LED-only” lighting companies, such as CREE, have become significant players in the lighting market.

Regulatory Issues:

The DLC develops specifications and qualifies products for commercial LED lighting, including LED parking and area lights. The DLC lists the products that qualify on their Qualified Products List (QPL -- http://www.designlights.org/solidstate.about.QualifiedProductsList_Publicv2.php). Many utilities require that products included in incentive programs have DLC qualification, and some accept only the top-performing products on the QPL.

The Lighting Design Lab also maintains a list of qualified LED lighting products on behalf of several utilities in the Northwest, including Puget Sound Energy, Seattle City Light, Snohomish PUD, Tacoma Power, the Energy Trust of Oregon, Bonneville Power Administration, Idaho Power, and the Eugene Water and Electric Board. This is an interim qualifying process that lists products for 12 months while they are being reviewed by ENERGY STAR or DLC.

A number of building energy codes set regulations that address exterior lighting for commercial facilities. Nationally, the International Energy Conservation Code® (IECC) and ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Energy Standard for Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings are commonly used to set commercial building energy standards. Many state and local governments have established their own building energy standards that are often more strict than ASHRAE 0.1-2010. In the Northwest, Oregon and Washington have developed state-specific building energy codes. Utilities typically use the applicable code to establish baseline energy use, from which savings from efficient lighting technologies are calculated. As energy codes become more stringent, demand for more efficient products will increase.

DOE is currently working on possible energy standards for HID lamps, the traditional baseline lamp technology for exterior area lights. DOE recently published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) for the HID lamp test procedures and must complete the final rule by January 1, 2013. DOE must also complete the HID lamp energy conservation standards rulemaking by July 1, 2014. During the standards rulemaking, DOE will decide whether and at what level(s) to promulgate energy conservation standards.3 Should new standards be adopted, the energy consumption for baseline existing wall-mounted area lighting would decrease.

The DOE is also scheduled to update the federal standards for metal halide luminaires in 2012. Changes to these standards would also potentially impact baseline energy use.

Other risks and barriers:

Product quality: The DOE’s CALiPER program conducts laboratory photometric testing of LED products using industry standard test methods. These studies continue to demonstrate that product performance and application suitability vary widely. Accurate performance data is needed to conduct detailed comparisons for particular applications.

Product qualification organizations, such as the DLC, provide independent evaluation and qualification of LED products. DLC members, who are utilities and energy-efficiency programs throughout the United States and Canada, establish the specifications for qualification.

High first cost and cost effectiveness: LED luminaires are currently more expensive than the incumbent lighting technologies. LED costs are expected to decline due to technological advances and increased demand; these cost reductions are becoming noticeable in the marketplace. Evaluating all of these technologies based on total cost of ownership will take into account potential non-energy benefits, such as maintenance savings, and will improve the cost-effectiveness analysis.

Customer education: To assure that good products are chosen for the selected application, it will be important to educate users about the unique aspects of LED lighting, especially users who may purchase and install LED lighting without the help of a lighting professional. Utilities can help with education by offering technical assistance as part of incentive programs.

Citations:

“Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in General Illumination Applications,” Navigant Consulting Inc. for the Solid-State Lighting Program, Building Technologies Program Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, January 2012. http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/ssl_energy-savings-report_jan-2012.pdf
LED Lighting Facts Product Snapshot: LED Luminaires, DOE, December 2011. http://www.lightingfacts.com/default.aspx?cp=productsnapshot
DOE 10 CFR Part 431 [Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–STD–0043] RIN 1904–AC36, Energy Conservation Program: Public Meeting and Availability of the Framework Document for High Intensity Discharge Lamps. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/hid_ecs_framework_frnopm.pdf

Comment:

Second paragraph to be included in the "Market Segment" field, for when the new editing feature is done (about 8/1/12):

LED area and parking lot lighting is particularly well suited to applications where white light is desired, such as retail parking lots. LED lighting will work particularly well where automatic bi-level control or on/off control is important.The directionality of LED lighting can provide an advantage where Dark Sky or light trespass ordinances are in force.

Completed:

11/21/2013 2:02:23 PM by Angela Phillips