Lighting Demonstration Showcase Effectiveness Study ...

PG&E’s Emerging Technologies Program ET12PGE2291

Lighting Demonstration Showcase Effectiveness

Study – Pacific Energy Center

ET Project Number: ET12PGE2291

Product Manager: David Lewbin Pacific Gas and Electric Company Prepared By: Kevin Wachowiak RDA Group 450 Enterprise Court Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302

Issued: November 30, 2012

Copyright, 2012, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. All rights reserved.

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Emerging Technologies Program is responsible for this project. It was developed as part of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Emerging Technology – demonstration showcase program under internal project number ET12PGE2291. Kevin Wachowiak conducted this technology evaluation for Pacific Gas and Electric Company with overall guidance and management from David Lewbin and Philip Broaddus. For more information on this project, contact David Lewbin at [email protected], or Philip Broaddus at [email protected].

LEGAL NOTICE

This report was prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company for use by its employees and agents. Neither Pacific Gas and Electric Company nor any of its employees and agents:

(1) makes any written or oral warranty, expressed or implied, including, but not limited to those concerning merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose;

(2) assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, process, method, or policy contained herein; or

(3) represents that its use would not infringe any privately owned rights, including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks, or copyrights.

ii


ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

PEC Pacific Energy Center

ETC Energy Training Center

PP Percentage Points

iii


CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ____________________________________________________ 1

BACKGROUND __________________________________________________________ 2

PEC demonstration schedule ............................................... 2

RESULTS _______________________________________________________________ 3

RECOMMENDATIONS _____________________________________________________ 6

APPENDIX _____________________________________________________________ 7

Demonstration Script, or Narrative ...................................... 7

1


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROJECT GOAL

The primary objective of the study is to measure the impact of the lighting installations and

demonstrations to increase the participants’ knowledge of and likely adoption of the new

and innovative lighting technologies designed to improve energy efficiency.

Specifically, objectives include:

Measure pre- and post-levels of knowledge regarding the lighting products

demonstrated,

Determine the likelihood to purchase, recommend, install, or specify the lighting

products demonstrated, and

Measure ratings of the lighting products demonstrated in regard to key

characteristics. Some of these characteristics include: cost, energy savings, quality,

controllability, ease of retrofit/installation, durability, and reduced maintenance.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To meet the study objectives, a hard-copy survey was used to collect feedback from class

participants at the Pacific Energy Center. In total, 116 surveys were completed among the

participants.

PROJECT FINDINGS/RESULTS

The analysis of the surveys indicate that the lighting demonstrations successfully improve

participant familiarity with the advanced lighting products. Further, the demonstrations

successfully influence the participants to act on the products demonstrated (i.e.

recommend, specify, purchase, install, and seek additional training).

When asked for suggestions for improving the demonstrations, participants most frequently

mention offering more or continuing the classes with a larger selection of days and times,

provide more specific, detailed interactive demonstrations, and improve the

organization/timeliness of demonstrations.

PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS

The lighting demonstrations should not only be continued but should also be considered for

expansion through classes at other locations, additional lighting products demonstrated, and

invitations to more professionals with the empowerment to purchase, specify and install the

products.

2


BACKGROUND During the summer of 2012, the Emerging Technologies program at PG&E collaborated with

PG&E’s training center in San Francisco, the Pacific Energy Center (PEC), to update existing

lighting installations– replacing what are now generally considered to be standard fixtures in

terms of technology and energy efficiency, with newer, more advanced lighting and control

technologies. The lighting classes offered at the PEC are directed at internal and external

parties, including customers, contractors, designers, architects, installers, low income

segment outreach specialists, and other trade allies. The wide array of fixtures installed in

the main lighting classroom will enable a lighting class instructor to demonstrate and

compare multiple types of light fixtures and technologies and discuss the advantages and

disadvantages of each.

As a rule, class participants at the PEC generally include more lighting designers and

architects. Accordingly, at the PEC, in addition to being able to compare a wide range of

pendant, troffer, and downlight lighting, the fixtures are networked and controllable by

wireless, digital controls, which are of greater interest to the designer and architect

communities. The combination of advanced controls and fixtures allows for dynamic

lighting, which is the manipulation of color temperature and light intensity which can be

used to imitate the rhythms of natural light that in turn enhance mood and sense of well-

being.

This report analyzes the surveys gathered after demonstrations to four different classes held

at the PEC in September through October 2012.

PEC DEMONSTRATION SCHEDULE

Below is the schedule of classes at the PEC during the course of which the class

participants observed a demonstration of the newly installed advanced lighting and

subsequently completed a survey, the analysis of which is the subject of this report.

PACIFIC ENERGY CENTER (PEC) SAN FRANCISCO, CA

CLASS DATE EVENT # SURVEYS # TOTAL PARTICIPANTS

9/21/2012 LED vs. Everything Else 46 47

9/28/2012 Hands On Lighting 33 33

10/04/2012 Interplay of Daylight and Electrical Lighting

24 58

10/18/2012 Lighting Fundamentals 13 Not Available

Total 116 Not Available

3


RESULTS Of those attending a demonstration at the PEC, familiarity (8-10 on a 10-pt. scale) with the

lighting products improves dramatically (up 48PP to 68%), while only 2% report being

unfamiliar (1-3 on a 10-pt. scale) at the conclusion of the demonstration.

Note: Proportions may not add to 100%, due to rounding.

Nearly all (93%) PEC demonstration participants are likely (Very/Somewhat) to recommend

a lighting product to a colleague, while a vast majority are likely to specify a lighting

product in designs (84%) or purchase a lighting product (83%). Roughly three-fourths

(74%) are likely to install a lighting product.

6%

0%

14%

18%

16% 16%

14%

8%

6%

3%

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

PEC – Familiarity w/ Products Before

Demo

Familiar Not at all

Familiar (n=116)

20%

17%

(Mean=5.62)

10%

25%

33%

11% 9% 8%

3% 2% 0% 0%

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

PEC – Familiarity w/ Products After

Demo

Familiar Not at all

Familiar (n=116)

68%

2%

(Mean=7.75)

45%

40%

50%

46%

48%

44%

33%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Recommend to Colleague

Specify in Designs

Purchase

Install

PEC Lighitng Products – Likelihood to...

Somewhat Very

93%

84%

83%

74%

(n=113)

(n=105)

(n=105)

(n=109)

4


In regard to dynamic lighting (where a combination of light, color and intensity can be

adjusted to imitate natural day light changes, or be controlled to achive a desired mood or

atmosphere), more than nine of ten (91%) PEC participants are likely to recommend

dynamic lighting solutions to a colleague, while a substantial majority are likely to seek

additional training (86%), specify in designs (85%), or purchase (83%). Roughtly three-

fourths (76%) are likely to install.

Offering more or continueing the classes with a larger selection of days and times is the

most frequently mentioned suggestion among PEC participants (19%). Other suggestions

include: more specific, detailed, interactive demonstrations (15%) and simplify, improve

organization or timeliness of demonstrations (15%).

PEC – Suggestions Proportion

Offer More/Continue Classes/Larger Selection of Days/Times 19%

More Specific/Detailed/Interactive Demonstrations 15%

Simplify/Improve Organization/Timeliness of Demonstrations 15%

Improve Quality/Effectiveness/Knowledge of Presenter 12%

Nothing/Satisfied 38%

Sample Size 26*

*Low sample size; results should be reviewed with caution.

Verbatim Comments:

“Ever considered offering training courses to people taking their architectural

licensing exams? This would be a great resource!”

“More specific on what fixtures yield what lighting effects that were observed (i.e.

translate the subjective effects into design guidelines).”

“Know your technology a little better to make class run smoother and on time. Seemed

very disorganized.”

46%

38%

47%

54%

50%

45%

48%

38%

29%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Recommend to Colleague

Seek Additional Training

Specify

Purchase

Install

PEC – Dynamic Lighting – Likelihood to...

Somewhat Very

91%

86%

85%

83%

76%

(n=110)

(n=109)

(n=105)

(n=105)

(n=105)

5


Participants at the PEC demonstrations mostly comprised of architechs, designers,

participants with an interest in energy efficiency lighting products, and students or interns.

5%

6%

6%

6%

14%

15%

16%

17%

Mgt./Supervision

Contractor

Auditor

Consultant

Student/Intern

Interested Participant

Designer

Architech

PEC – Occupation of Participants

(n=103)

6


RECOMMENDATIONS Continue conducting lighting demonstrations, and consider expanding the demonstrations

by offering classes at additional training locations with a larger selection of days and times.

Further, consider demonstrating other emerging technogies.

Through advertisements in trade publications and direct communications, strive to increase

class attendance among professionals with the empowerment to purchase, specify and

install the products. Such communications should focus on the energy savings from using

the products, as well as the products’ light quality and longevitiy.

Continually verify class instructors are well prepared and knowledgeable about the products

demonstrated.

7


APPENDIX

DEMONSTRATION SCRIPT, OR NARRATIVE

The script, or narrative, below, was written by Milena Simeonova, RA, IES, LC,

Lighting Program Coordinator at the PEC. Milena designed the layout of the lighting

for the Lighting classroom at the PEC and performed the demonstrations. Milena did

not intend the ‘narrative’ to be read verbatim during a demonstration, rather to

serve as a guide for demonstrating the various types of lighting applications and

wireless controls in the room.

PEC Lighting Retrofit Demo and Evaluation – Narrative

A. Intro to Space

We are in the PEC Lighting Classroom and you can see that there is a variety of lighting products. Our goal

is to provide you with awareness of the different lighting fixtures and technologies, and we will touch a

little bit on controls.

First, let us orient in the classroom space. We have a Front wall with Lighting Fundamentals class learning

tools. On one side we have the color booths, and on the other we have a focal niche and lamps technology

trilons display. And then we have the central ceiling with many lighting fixtures.

Fig.1: PEC Lighting Classroom space

B. Intro to Fixtures We have various lighting products/fixtures that can be used in commercial and residential buildings for

retrofits and/or new construction. We group fixtures in Types. You can see in the classroom main ceiling

the following types: 2x2 lensed fixtures, 2x2 parabolic fixtures, linear pendants, downlights, and some

track lighting.

C. Intro to Controls and Graphic Displays

We have lighting controls that enable us to turn on and off the different types of fixtures.

As we turn on lighting products, you will see on the screen displayed information pertaining to these

particular type of fixtures. Sometimes the information is about the optics of the fixtures and their efficacy,

in other words, how much light is produced. This information also contains general light levels and energy

used (watts) per sf.

8


Fig 2: Graphic displays information

Other lighting fixtures provide a report on their real time usage of energy that is called energy dashboard.

In this case, the fixtures that are controlled with wireless controls have energy dashboard, which by the way

will also indicate what fixture is malfunctioning and

what is the cause (bad driver in this case, marked with a red cross).

Fig 3: Energy dashboard with real time energy use indicating the actual watts

per each fixture type. The red X indicates a fixture that is malfunctioning.

D. Lighting Technologies Comparison For each type of fixture, the 2x2 lensed, 2x2 parabolic, linear pendants, and down-lights, we have

examples of different lighting technologies. We are now going to compare within each type of fixtures, the

performance of each technology in terms of energy

use and lighting quality.

a) 2x2 Parabolic fixtures (open louver with exposed lamp)

For instance, the 2x2 parabolics, we can compare between (2) Biax 40W FL lamps or (2)-(3) 2’ 17W FL

lamps or (3) 2’ 17W FL lamps. In most instances, when we audit existing buildings to implement Energy

9


Efficiency Measures, we will encounter the Biax FL parabolic fixtures, that each uses the total of about

80W. And most often we will retrofit

these fixtures with 2’ straight FL lamps, decreasing the energy use by 30%-60%.

Fig 4: Retrofit kits for 2x2 parabolic fixtures provide up to 60% energy savings.

Parabolic fixtures are controlled with Adura wireless and DMX controls.

In addition, the retrofit fixtures provide better air ventilation, lamps breath better and have longer lamp life.

Light levels from the retrofit fixtures are also adequate for wo

b) 2x2 Lensed fixtures Now let’s compare FL to LED technology with the 2x2 lens fixtures. On the side of the color booths (South

ceiling) we have 6 FL lens fixtures, and on the side of the focal niche and trilons (North ceiling) we have 6

LED lens fixtures. These fixtures are identical as looks, and the LEDs are soft to the eye from behind the

lens. The energy use of both the FL and LED lens fixtures are similar and at about 36W each fixture.

However, when we look at how much light is on the walls or the desk surfaces, and when we measure light

levels, we notice that the LED fixtures provide 30% more light. This means that we can dim down the LED

fixtures and save about 30%, while providing adequate levels of light.

10


Fig 5: LED lens fixtures (to the right) provide 30% more light for the same energy use

Note: Audience will have Illuminance meters and will measure light levels and compare light levels under

LED lens (north side) and under FL lens (south side) fixtures.

Note: Volunteers at the dashboard reading aloud the watts/per fixture.

c) 8’ Linear Pendants

We also can compare linear pendants LED and FL technology, how they perform as light delivery, and how

much energy each pendant uses. We also can observe the difference in light distribution. The LEDs are one

directional ( for heat dissipation), while FL fixtures can have both downlight and upward light. You can

observe this on the ceiling, that is lighted above the FL and darker above the LED pendants.

Fig 6: What we find is that LED pendants use half of the energy used for FL pendants,

while delivering more focused light on the desk surface.

Note: Volunteers at the dashboard reading aloud the watts/per fixture.

d) 6” Downlights

We have Halogen, CFL, and LED downlights. We can compare 50W Halogen with only 12W LED

downlights, and we see how much more light we have. We have many different LED fixtures, from screw-

in LED PAR lamp to modules that can be relamped

in less than 1 minute.

E. Dimming Capabilities Time to compare dimming capabilities of LED and FL fixtures, and how efficient is dimming, do we have

a linear or non-linear function, between dimming and power used.

You can observe from the energy dashboard displaying the real time energy use, that when FL fixtures are

dimmed down to 30%, the use of power is decreased by about 50%.

If it was a linear function for the FL fixtures between dimming and power use, the power decrease should

have been 70%.

11


Now let’s see how LED fixtures behave under dimming. We find out that LED fixtures are almost a linear

function, and when dimming them down to 30% we save almost 70% in power use. So it is more efficient

to dim LEDs and there is some truth to the saying that dimming Fluorescent lamps is not that efficient.

Note: We will have volunteers from the audience to come to the energy dashboard and call out the Watts

changes as we dim fixtures. Audience to remember initial watts and dimmed fixtures watts and do the math

at the end.

Fig 7: Comparison of power use between 100% on and 30% dimmed down pendants.

F. Demand Response and Daylight Harvesting We have simulation of Demand Response and Daylight Harvesting scenes.

a) Demand Response

Demand Response is when the Utilities place a call asking to shade power loads during peak hours.

Demand Response is usually through dimming down the lights. In this case we have dimming of the linear

pendants down to 30%.

Fig 8: Demand Response scene with linear pendants dimmed uniformly down to 30%.

b) Daylight Harvesting

Daylight Harvesting in this case is demonstrated with 3 daylight zones. In Zone 1, near the color booths

that simulate daylight, fixtures will extinguish or turn completely off. There is plenty of “daylight” in this

zone and so we can save energy by turning the electrical fixtures off. Zone 2 has some “daylight” but

insufficient to perform work

12


tasks, so this zone will have fixtures on but dimmed down. And zone 3, further away from the simulated

window with “daylight”, will have insignificant or no daylight contribution and electrical fixtures will stay

on at 100% intensity.

Fig 9: Different response of fixtures in different daylight zones.

G. Light Dynamics With the advent of new controls and smart fixtures, lighting can be easily dimmed and changed from cool

to warm. Smart controls can help us to select certain fixtures and change their looks. And with this change

the feel of the space.

These changes in lighting spectrum and intensity, not only create sensory stimulation and somewhat

excitement in the space, but they also can be used to connect people indoor with the passage of time during

the day and to maintain our wellbeing.

Particularly with LEDs that provide both, ease of dimming and energy efficiency.

Note: Demo with FL fixtures on selective color change. One fixture is set to cool and warm lamps mix,

next fixture is set to dimmed cool with warm on, and the last fixture is set to cool off and only warm on. A

gradation of light from cool to warm is demonstrated.

LED warm dim down-lights will be also demonstrated.

G. Controls

Talk of Adura wireless modules and how each fixture is smart, and each fixture can be selected to do things

differently. Therefore it is easy to do cherboard lights on, or turn on lights only above occupied desks, and

turn off lights above unoccupied desks.

Controls are also important for modulation of lighting power loads, allowing for natural connection with

Smart Grid, and work with Variable Rates and Time Of Use TOU new regulations.

H. Evaluation forms Hand over the evaluation forms and ask audience to fill them. Collect on the spot before class proceeds.

Date post:	23-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Lighting Demonstration Showcase Effectiveness Study ...

Documents