December is often a time of reflection. Maybe it’s the long, dark nights or the prospect of another year passing. Perhaps our work has become less inspired or the international news has caused us to pause and wonder: is there reason for hope in the world?

I’d like to highlight a project that should give us all reason to hope, and more than that, new inspiration to push through perceived barriers and strive for excellence. The Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability, CIRS, is a building that transforms the way we design and build urban structures. CIRS is all about accelerating sustainability through experimentation and creative partnerships. It is a project that hopes to spark new ideas about how to make cities more sustainable, and because its goal is to promote dialogue, I’m going to need your help spreading the word.

CIRS is a spectacularly beautiful structure. With streaming light from the surrounding windows and pine beetle wood beams, it feels more like a cathedral than a university research building. Beyond the aesthetic, CIRS has shattered the leading environmental LEED building standards and has achieved a net-positive energy performance. By harvesting renewable and waste energy, CIRS is able to supply not only its own energy needs but also a portion of the needs of an adjacent building. The end result is that the addition of CIRS to the University of British Columbia (UBC) campus – a 4-storey, 61,085 square feet building – actually reduces UBC’s overall energy consumption by over 1 million kilowatt hours per year. Imagine! This is a building that improves the surrounding environment.

With such impressive technical achievements, you might think that CIRS is an architectural snob; that guy at the party who is so fully aware of his own success that he can’t be bothered to engage in conversation. Rather than relying on its display case of design medals, CIRS is active in the community and has developed numerous partnerships across public and private sectors. It is also a “living laboratory”, testing the effect that highly efficient design has on the usability of the space. Occupants of the building are asked for feedback about what it’s like to have the temperature centrally controlled, or how they would suggest adjusting the on-site waste water treatment system to reduce noise disruption.

Most of you are probably in the business of improving the performance of existing buildings, and a project like CIRS can offer numerous options that you may want to integrate into future retrofit plans. Have a look at the lighting features and think about how you can replicate the system design in your own context, or consider the energy sourcing and monitoring framework. These kinds of innovations can be adapted to fit into an existing structure – and they’ll have to be if we are truly serious about conserving resources and operations costs.

There are so many innovative design components to the building that I couldn’t fit them all into this short space, but I encourage you to take a virtual tour in the near future – or better yet, visit the place. A project like CIRS takes years to develop, and along the way there were many challenges and setbacks. Rather than giving in to the barriers, the leaders behind the project, particularly the principal John Robinson, strengthened the partnerships they had with key supporters.

Now I’ll ask you to join the conversation: What are you going to do differently in the New Year to bring more inspiration to your work? How can you draw from the incredible advances in building technology that CIRS demonstrates to significantly improve the performance of the buildings you manage? Talk amongst yourselves.

Energy managers have it tough. They are expected to deliver significant reductions in energy use across multiple locations, often with relatively small operating budgets. Since most municipalities and leading businesses have greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, it’s critical to their public reputation that their energy managers achieve success. But with aging infrastructure and constrained resources, what’s an energy manager to do?

I caught up with one of the most successful leaders in this field, Trevor Billy from the City of Coquitlam, BC. Trevor’s an unassuming and socially astute guy, the kind of person who is modest to a fault about his work and quick to notice my designer shoes. Trevor’s story is a good one because it offers insight into what other municipalities across Canada can be doing to dramatically cut their energy consumption, raise awareness about climate change issues, and reduce operating costs at the same time.

Population trends in Coquitlam are indicative of changes in the region. Greater Vancouver is one of the most rapidly growing areas in Canada, and Coquitlam is among the fastest growing municipalities with the population increasing by over 21% between 1986 and 1991, and again from 1991 to 1996. A further increase of 10.9% occurred between 1996 and 2001. Lots of people want to call Coquitlam home, and this is putting pressure on City staff like Trevor to address energy consumption in a meaningful way.

Trevor is a trained engineer and loves quantitative data. He is responsible for 130 municipal buildings and focuses his attention on the 20 responsible for 80% of the City’s total energy consumption. There are approximately 1600 staff working at municipal buildings across the community. What’s interesting is his approach to dealing with those top 20 buildings. Trevor prioritized social marketing projects “by accident” after a small pilot project with one building resulted in 10% energy reduction within one year – without any financial investments. He realized that behaviour change strategies aren’t “soft and fuzzy,” they have real numbers associated with them and significant dollar values attached to those savings.

About one year ago, the City of Coquitlam launched an energy conservation program using public events at municipal locations to build awareness of the City’s corporate climate change goals. The messaging was really about what individuals can do to support their community’s energy reduction commitments – inspiring, accessible, high level information that avoided any mention of kilowatt hours or other technical language. At the same time, Trevor implemented a framework for social marketing projects developed by BC Hydro which shifted the general awareness into specific behaviour targets. Trevor didn’t have a background in the social science of behaviour change, but instead relied on the resources and support from the local power authority. He says he is surprised that more energy managers don’t do the same.

“It’s almost irresponsible to ask for a couple million dollars from the City to install a new boiler before asking people to tune up their work stations,” said Trevor. Indeed.

Despite his success, the reaction from staff across the City has been mixed. About 20% were already aware of how they can save energy in their daily activities and were excited to see leadership from the City. The majority, 60%, needed more convincing but could be brought along and were generally supportive. And then there were the naysayers, those 20% social outliers who think energy conservation is inconvenient and resist change. Trevor says that at this stage, after one year of engaging, fun, and rewarding social marketing campaigns featuring new themes each month, the laggards are “getting outted” and are responding to social pressures from their colleagues to get power smart.

I asked Trevor why more energy managers aren’t focusing their attention on changing behaviour. “There is a technical focus and misperception that soft, fuzzy social programs aren’t worthy of their time.” The City of Coquitlam is effectively shattering the myth that behaviour change isn’t quantifiable, with consistently significant energy savings.

Another barrier is time. If you’re serious about reducing energy consumption in your business or municipality, you need to refocus your expertise on social marketing programs and away from data administration. Learn more about how Energy Advantage can save 10% of your time and give you the support you need to excel.

Conservation resources aren’t limited to BC municipal energy managers; a quick search online resulted tools and incentives for both public organizations and private companies in BC, Alberta and Ontario. What are you waiting for?

This short e-book describes the key elements in implementing and managing an energy and environmental management program

I came across a recent article discussing the question: is the current system of certifications, standards and labels evolving in ways that improve product design, help companies and consumers make more sustainable purchasing decisions and lead to better overall policy?

Many believe that the needle is moving in a big way, but it is not always easy to see this progress amongst the ongoing proliferation of ‘green’ standards, eco-labels and outright greenwashing in the marketplace. The article outlined three key points about green certifications, standards and labels.

• We need to stop looking to regulation to ensure a sustainable future. Voluntary action must be encouraged. But companies considering voluntary action want reasonable assurance that they are on a level playing field in relation to their competition and that they will be rewarded in the marketplace for taking positive steps. Standards, labels and certifications can help companies by both providing understanding of what they must do to achieve a certain level of desired performance, and providing tools to help them communicate those achievements in a way that will generate business value.
• Let the good ones evolve. Good eco-labels are underpinned by good standards which develop over time. Typically, proprietary and consortia standards are the first to emerge when a new market requirement emerges; such as the desire to rate the sustainable attributes of a building (LEED), or to define carbon neutrality (The CarbonNeutral Protocol). These standards are typically created by small groups with deep knowledge of the technical details of the new market requirement. Proprietary and consortia standards that withstand the test of time evolve and, eventually, are either underpinned by, or become, voluntary consensus standards developed using a formal multi-stakeholder process.
• Don’t expect perfection. No standard is born perfect or ever attains perfection. The best standards, be they proprietary, consortia or voluntary consensus, are open, transparent (no black box!) and have a governance system that requires constant review and updating. The eco-labels and certifications that survive and thrive during the current proliferation will be those that are underpinned by rigorous processes and are designed in a way that clearly communicates what has been accomplished.

Evidence does exist that standards are beginning to make progress, and one need only look to the ongoing evolution and extraordinary success of the United States Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED Green Building Rating System to demonstrate that.

With over 40,000 certified and registered projects all over the world in under ten years, the USGBC has achieved one of its primary stated goals – “to transform the built environment marketplace”. Today, thanks to LEED, environmental attribute based competition is fierce throughout the built environment value chain and some architectural firms have essentially ‘forgotten’ how to design non-LEED buildings. Furthermore, the US government and many municipalities in the US now require that all public buildings be built to the LEED standard. To be sure, greenwashing does occur in this sector, but with much less frequency now that green building specifiers are more knowledgeable and are asking better, more informed, questions. The power of influence has also spurred the development of several LEED- compatible product sector specific standards for carpet, furniture, textiles and other products. Solid evidence that the needle is moving!

In the end, the importance of a well informed populous cannot be overstated. Sustainability, in all its dimensions, is an incredibly complex topic that defies measurement by one standard set of criteria. Done well, standards, labels and certifications are tools that can help consumers and businesses make better, more sustainable, decisions. Continued ‘movement of the needle’ will be dependent on both being well informed and engaged.

This short e-book describes what a building simulation is, its benefits and available energy incentives in Ontario.

To view this presentation in PDF format click here.

An energy audit is the key to a systematic approach to decision-making in the area of energy management. The primary function of an energy audit is to identify all of the energy streams in a facility in order to balance total energy input with energy use. The four main objectives of an energy audit are as follows:

• To establish an energy consumption baseline;
• To quantify energy usage according to its discrete functions;
• To benchmark with similar facilities under similar weather conditions; and
• To identify existing energy cost reduction opportunities.

Energy audits vary in depth, depending on the potential at a specific site for energy and cost reductions and the project parameters set by the client. As per ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) standards there are three types of audits, outlined below.

ASHRAE Level 1 – Walk-Through Analysis/Preliminary Audit
The Level 1 audit alternatively is called a simple audit, screening audit or walk-through audit and is the most basic. It involves minimal interviews with site operating personnel, a brief review of facility utility bills and other operating data, and a walk-through of the facility, all geared toward the identification of glaring areas of energy waste or inefficiency. The data compiled is then used for the preliminary energy use analysis and a report detailing low-cost/no-cost measures and potential capital improvements for further study. Typically, a Level 1 audit will only uncover major problem areas. Corrective measures are briefly described, and quick estimates of implementation costs, potential operating cost savings, and simple payback periods are provided. This level of detail, while not sufficient for reaching a final decision on implementing proposed measures, is adequate to prioritize energy efficiency projects and to assess the need for a more detailed audit.

ASHRAE Level 2 – Energy Survey and Analysis
A Level 2 audit includes the preliminary ASHRAE Level 1 analysis, but also includes more detailed energy calculations and financial analysis of proposed energy efficiency measures. The financial analysis or Life Cycle Cost Analysis provides the facility owner with comprehensive understanding of the financial benefits of implementing specific energy efficiency measures. Utility bills are collected for a 24 to 36 month period to allow the auditor to evaluate the facility’s energy/demand rate structures and energy usage profiles. This type of audit identifies all energy conservation measures appropriate for the facility given its operating parameters. A detailed financial analysis is performed for each measure based on implementation cost estimates, site-specific operating cost savings, and the customer’s investment criteria. Sufficient detail is provided to justify project implementation.

ASHRAE Level 3 – Detailed Analysis of Capital Intensive Modifications
This level of engineering analysis focuses on the potential capital-intensive projects identified in the Level 2 analysis and involves more detailed field data gathering as well as a more rigorous engineering analysis. It provides detailed project cost and savings calculations with the high level of confidence required for major capital investment decisions. This audit alternatively is called a comprehensive audit, detailed audit, or technical analysis audit. It expands on the Level 2 audit by providing a dynamic model of energy use characteristics of both the existing facility and all energy conservation measures identified. The building model is calibrated using actual utility data to provide a realistic baseline against which to compute operating savings for proposed measures. Extensive attention is given to understanding not only the operating characteristics of all energy consuming systems, but also the situations that cause load profile variations on both an annual and a daily basis. Existing utility data is supplemented with sub-metering of major energy consuming systems and monitoring of system operating characteristics.

The table below summarizes each level.

Before beginning an energy audit for a building or portfolio of buildings, a preliminary energy use analysis must be carried out. This analysis requires access to energy and natural gas consumption and cost data for the last 24-36 months. The purpose of this analysis is to compare the Energy Usage Index (EUI) of each building with the national average and to identify both high and low energy performers. Once the analysis is completed a recommendation is made as to which buildings should be audited first and the type of audits to be carried out.

Completing an energy audit of a facility provides an organization with customized energy conservation measures designed to ensure significant energy savings as well as CO2 emissions reductions.

This short e-book will describe what a energy benchmark is and the elements involved in undergoing a benchmark initiative.

In today’s difficult market environment business decisions are being weighed more carefully than ever. Typical project valuation indicators such as ROI and simple payback times are no longer good enough. Savings from energy efficiency projects can be lost in the fog of obfuscating external factors. The focus is now on reducing carbon footprints and, by direct relationship, energy consumption. Too many high level executives can’t rationalize what 100,000 kilowatt hours of savings means to them and their business. In this context, it has become extremely useful to model energy consumption in terms of each firm’s unique key performance indicators.

If you are a restaurant it may be the number of meals you serve, if you are a retirement home it may be the number beds you have occupied, if you are an industrial manufacturer it is the number of widgets you make; establishing an energy cost-per-output is the first step in the process and is unique to every business model. Typically organizations expend vast resources to measure the cost of their inputs per unit of output yet ignore energy, a fundamental input into any business process output unless you’re output is giving advice such as a psychologist, even then, giving advice in the dark is disturbing, you’ve got to keep the lights on.

Defining your energy costs of production is an essential step to understanding how energy affects your productivity and profit margin. The most important action is to generate a baseline of energy cost-per-KPI. Once you know that you are using 40 kWh of electricity per widget you can effectively compare your energy efficiency across time in a way that is meaningful to every member of the organization. Too often energy expenditure is considered by a select few operational employees. Expressing energy in a metric everyone can understand aligns the interests of the entire organization and can act as a measuring stick for different business units. Doing this allows you to track the effect each business unit is having on the company-wide energy cost-per-KPI and reward performance accordingly. Eventually, once most business are measuring energy cost and consumption as a function of production levels these key metrics will provide important benchmarking applications to measure comparative performance among competitors as well. This, of course, depends upon impending energy and environment disclosure requirements.

A considerable benefit of expressing energy consumption in terms of KPI’s is the identification of major energy cost drivers. Developing an energy management plan is not overly useful if you don’t know what is driving your energy costs and what level of impact they have on your final output. By finding out which of your business processes have the highest cost per KPI you can then focus on improving the energy efficiency of those processes. In many cases the processes that can have the most impact are often the last to be considered if the cost-per-KPI data has not pointed you in the right direction.

Any business that wants to stay profitable must grow. Forecasting the costs associated with growth has long been a terribly inconsistent and difficult task to perform. In respect to energy costs this can be especially complex if costs-per-KPI have not been evaluated. With an energy cost-per-KPI metric the forecasting of future energy costs becomes a simpler exercise. The cost-per-KPI function can easily be reversed to determine what energy costs would be for varying levels of output. Production levels can then be forecasted and a sensitivity analysis can be performed to estimate the future cost of energy with various production levels. Similarly, a consumption-per-KPI calculation can be reversed to determine energy consumption requirements for certain levels of production; this will come in handy when planning energy infrastructure during facility expansion. At this point it helps to classify which energy costs are variable and which are fixed. It may be helpful to go so far as to determine variable-cost-per-KPI and fixed-cost-per-KPI functions separately. This information will also aid your organization while developing hedging strategies to reduce exposure. The forecasts can be used to determine how much energy will be required and, as a result, how large purchasing deals must be to guarantee adequate energy at a reliable price point in the future.

The evaluation of energy efficiency projects can also be made clearer through the use of cost-per-KPI metrics. ROI’s and simple paybacks do not tell the whole story. It can often be beneficial to examine how each measure may impact the cost-per-KPI metric. In this way the business impact of energy reduction projects can be evaluated next to labour-related and financing measures which are typically measured against your key performance indicators already. Measuring against KPI’s can also clarify the interrelationship between projects implemented concurrently. Typically, deriving the impact that a single project has on costs or consumption is impossible when multiple projects have been implemented at the same time. Measuring against KPI’s and drilling these values down to business units or cost centers help to clarify the impact each measure has on the company’s overall performance.

All companies may see value in diffusing energy related information in terms the entire organization can understand, however implementing this process requires a great deal of focus on gathering and maintaining effective and up to date datasets. Measurements against KPI’s are only as good as the data that is being used. Developing and implementing a comprehensive data plan focusing on accuracy is fundamental to effective measurement. The best KPI’s are leading indicators; keeping this information up to date is essential and crucial for effective reporting.

Using a cost-per-KPI metric will increase the clarity and effectiveness of communications throughout the business units of your company. When everyone can see the impact energy costs have on their business process they align themselves to manage the impact their individual business unit has on the company as a whole. The use of consumption-per-KPI metrics are invaluable when forecasting future energy requirements and developing hedging strategies. Cost-per-KPI metrics can be used as performance indicators themselves and can be used to compare the viability of energy projects as well as the performance of business units.

The old adage says “you can’t manage what you don’t measure”. Expressing energy as a per-KPI metric ensures that a firm is not only measuring the impact energy has on its operations, but that it is being measured in a meaningful way to all the firm’s stakeholders and decision makers.

Improving energy efficiency in your buildings is a cost effective way of controlling rising energy costs for your organization. However, major energy efficiency improvements can be capital intensive and resource consuming. Energy incentive programs have been designed to help offset these high costs and help to further reduce energy-related greenhouse gases (GHGs).

There is a wealth of incentive programs, each with different eligibility restrictions and financial benefits. The difficult part is becoming familiar with incentives options, understanding eligibility requirements, and handling the approval process. New incentive programs are constantly being introduced as older programs are eliminated. Remaining abreast of these changes requires a significant investment of time. Generally, a good rule of thumb is not to design your operating strategies around a specific incentive program. Rather, it is important to first address your internal needs and then to take advantage of the incentives that best align with your long term goals.

The main challenge in qualifying for any program is to speak the language of the incentive provider. Familiarity and effective communication are required to make the best possible use of the flexibility of the application process, and having someone experienced with the particular program to assist you is of great benefit. Often it is not worth the intellectual capital to learn the terms and conditions of a program for a single application.

Energy Incentive Programs

There are a number of energy incentive programs available across Canada, which typically is divided into the following categories:

• Assessments;
• Retrofits;
• Renewable Power; and
• Solar, Water and Air Heating Systems.

Once the incentive category is defined, you should evaluate which type of energy incentives to apply to, which includes:

• Discount/Coupon;
• Grant;
• Loan;
• No/Low Interest Loan;
• Rate Reduction;
• Rebate; Subsidy; and
• Tax Incentive.

It is also important to remember that energy incentive programs are sector specific, which includes:

• Residential;
• Multi-Residential;
• Business and Commercial;
• Institutional, Commercial & Industrial (ICI); and
• Low Income.

Examples of Energy Incentive Programs in Canada

New Brunswick
Energy incentive programs are available through the New Brunswick Energy Efficiency and Conservation Agency to assist existing commercial building owners and operators in making their buildings more energy efficient.

Nova Scotia
Programs are offered by Nova Scotia Power and Heritage Gas. Nova Scotia Power offers a rebate on the installation cost of a solar water heating system for residential or commercial buildings. Through The Natural Gas Equipment Program, Heritage Gas uses financial incentives to encourage the conversion to natural gas of existing space and water heating equipment, as well as laundry, cooking and processing equipment.

Quebec
Energy incentives are available through Hydro Quebec, Gaz Metro, and Gazifère for a wide range of energy saving practices such as boiler upgrades; more efficient lighting, motor, monitoring and tracking; and provide funding for studies on ways to reduce energy consumption.

Manitoba
Many different energy incentive programs are available through Manitoba Hydro that cover building envelopes; lighting; boiler systems; commercial kitchen appliances; monitoring and tracking; assessments; and geothermal power.

British Columbia
Energy incentive programs are offered through BC Hydro, Terasen, and Fortis BC, and cover lighting; motors; monitoring and tracking; and boilers.

Ontario
There are 63 energy incentive programs currently available in Ontario, with 33 different sponsors including The Government of Ontario, Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), Enbridge, and Union Gas.

Whether you’re looking to implement a total energy management program or short term energy efficiency strategies, evaluating and understanding what energy incentives are available is of great value.

One of the most exciting and frustrating professions today is lighting design. Exciting because so many changes are occurring on so many fronts, especially light sources, and frustrating for exactly the same reason.

The level of lighting education in North America is woefully inadequate. This has lead to a very low level of comprehension of lighting technology in the general population, but also a dangerously low level of comprehension in decision makers. There are only seven schools in North America (one in Canada) that meet the requirements of the Education Committee of the International Association of Lighting Designers for lighting curriculum. This inevitably leads to poor lighting decisions and inefficient lighting design in all sectors.

This article looks at the present state of the art for lighting and some cautious predictions for the future.

Definitions:
The measurement that really matters with light sources is efficacy, measured in lumens per Watt (lm/W), that is the amount of light emitted from the source per Watt of electrical energy. It is critical to consider the system lm/W including the drivers and ballasts required to operate the light source properly. So a typical T8 fluorescent system used in commercial buildings has an efficacy of about 90 lm/W.

Another critical factor is Lamp Lumen Depreciation (LLD). LLD is the percent of lumen depreciation at a specific point during the lamp’s rated life, usually 40%. The light output will decrease as light source components age. The T8 fluorescent system in a commercial building has an LLD rating of 0.95. This means that at 40% of rated life, the lamp has lost 5% of its initial output.

Rated life is another important aspect, since this has so much impact on maintenance costs. Rated life is a difficult metric since the technologies vary. Incandescent lamps do not experience significant lumen depreciation, but since their life is relatively short, 2,000 hours for typical lamps, maintenance costs are very high. Induction lamps have poor lumen depreciation, about 0.65, but their rated life is 100,000 hours, so the depreciation is measured at 40,000 hours. That is 4.5 years if they are left on continuously. Lamp manufacturers rate the lamp life at the number of hours when one half of a group of lamps have expired. The lamp mortality is a curve, so the lamp failures do not occur in a linear progression.

	Incandescent Light Sources: 10-12 lm/W Insignificant LLD 750-5,000 hours The incandescent lamp is not significantly different from the product introduced by Thomas Edison in the 1880s. Nevertheless, it is still the most common lamp for the residential and hospitality sectors. The most important aspect of this light source today is what is going to replace it.
	T8 Fluorescent Light Sources: 90-100 lm/W 0.95 LLD 20,000-36,000 hours The fluorescent light sources represent the most common light source in most interiors, especially the commercial and institutional sectors. Some combinations of lamps and ballasts can exceed the magic 100 lm/W barrier, which is excellent performance.
	T5 Fluorescent Light Sources: 70-90 lm/W 0.95 LLD 20,000-25,000 hours The T5 fluorescent light sources, particularly the High Output versions, are commonly used as a replacement for Metal Halide high bay luminaires in the industrial sector. There are performance issues with these lamps that are related to the bulb wall temperature and specifiers are advised to confirm that the environmental conditions are suitable.
	Metal Halide Light Sources: 60-90 lm/W 0.7 LLD 10,000-20,000 hours The Metal Halide lamps are used extensively for interior lighting in big box retail and industrial high bay applications. The LLD and significant colour shift during life are problems for maintenance.
	Metal Halide Light Sources with Electronic Ballasts: 80-100 lm/W 0.95 LLD 0,000-30,000 hours The latest electronic ballast technology for Metal Halide lamps addresses many of the issues with this type of lamp. Most significant is the reduction in LLD, but colour stability is also improved, restrike time is shorter, and lamp life can be doubled.
	High Pressure Sodium Light Sources: Over 100 lm/W 0.85-0.90 LLD 16,000-30,000 hours HPS lamps are used extensively for roadway and parking lot applications. The poor colour performance of these lamps limits functionality. Electronic ballasts improve performance, but not to the extent as with Metal Halide lamps.
	Induction Light Sources: 60-80 lm/W 0.7 LLD 50,000-100,000 hours Induction light sources offer dramatic improvements in lamp life, although the efficacy is not impressive. Where access problems favour a long life source, then Induction might be a good choice. Induction lamps are very large, so there are some aesthetic issues with the luminaire appearance.
	LED Light Sources: 30-60 lm/W 0.7 LLD 50,000-? Hours LED light sources are presently touted as the ‘future of lighting’ and this may well be the case. The U.S. Department of Energy has predicted efficacies of 160 lm/W by 2025. For the present, applications are limited to specialty items such as signage, and colour effect lighting.

Applications Notes:
For the commercial and institutional sector, generally considered office lighting, linear T8 fluorescent lighting appears to be the best option at present. These technologies, when combined with occupancy controls and daylight harvesting controls, can provide excellent quality and energy efficient lighting.

For the big box retail and industrial sectors, especially those with existing Metal Halide systems, upgrading to electronic ballasts may be the most cost effective option. Since the electronic ballasts are compatible with digital controls, retrofit costs and energy savings are optimized. In some situations, it may be prudent to compare the life cycle costs of these systems with high bay fluorescent systems, but there are increased labour costs when switching from an existing pendant mounted luminaire to a larger fixture requiring multiple mounting points.

For indoor parking garages, Metal Halide lamps with electronic ballasts offer excellent performance and system pay-back. It is generally preferred to use Metal Halide systems in these unheated spaces since the performance of fluorescent sources is compromised in cold weather.

There are many applications, such as Atrium spaces, where the aesthetic of a large fluorescent fixture would not be acceptable. In this instance, Metal Halide lamps with electronic ballasts are the clear choice.

Coming Soon:
Some jurisdictions have already set dates for banning the use of incandescent lamps; this is somewhat premature, if politically expedient, since there is no direct replacement. The intent of the legislation is to enforce the use of screw-in compact fluorescent lamps. While these are certainly more energy efficient, typically 60 lm/W, the colour is not as good, the diffuse nature of the light has a very different effect, and most lamps cannot be dimmed. A much larger problem is the fact that, unlike incandescent lamps, all arc source lamps including compact fluorescent contain trace elements of Mercury. In the next few years, there will be a direct replacement for the incandescent lamp with great colour, long life, excellent efficacy and dimmability.

All fluorescent lamps will improve in the next 5-10 years due to research in optimizing the phosphor to maximize performance. Further improvements in the electronic fluorescent ballasts, especially in regard to integrated controls technologies, will occur within 5 years.

Electronic ballasts for HID lamps will become the de facto standard in the next 5-10 years; the US Department of Energy is considering legislation to eliminate the core and coil ballasts. More manufacturers in that market will lead to further innovations, especially in regard to controls integration.

Metal Halide lamps will benefit from phosphor improvements. White light LEDs are improving all the time, and we will see significant improvements in efficacy and LLD over the next 5-15 years.