P R O G R E S S R E P O R T - Illuminating Engineering Society

ENERGY ADVISOR
Willard L.Warren,
PE, LC, FIESNA
THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF
2005 became law in August after a
five-year legislative process that
ended in a compromise between the
House and Senate versions resulting
in an appropriation of $12.3 billion.
The editor of LD+A, Paul Tarricone,
asked me to devote this month’s column
to the Act and its possible
impact on the lighting industry and
energy conservation.
Act 1
There are only a few specific references
to lighting in the Act,but it does
heavily favor research and development
(R&D) of solid-state devices,
namely LEDs. In the years 2007 to
2009, $50 million is allocated in each
year for R&D in this area.“The DOE
is betting on accelerating the development
of solid state lighting because
it is highly likely that LEDs will yield
the greatest benefits in lighting energy
conservation in commercial, and
residential applications,” says Russell
P. Leslie, associate director of the
Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute.
Also in the law is a co-funding by
the Department of Energy (DOE) in
the various states’ R&D initiatives,
called the State Technical Advancement
Collaborative (STAC), where
the DOE has made a commitment to
the states to provide matching funds
for energy-saving programs that have
the promise of increasing energy conservation.Two
states, California, with
its California Energy Commission
(CEC), and New York, with the New
York State Energy Research and
Development Authority (NYSERDA),
have been the most active in this area,
but others like Vermont and an
alliance of states in the Pacific
Northwest have responded to the
requests for proposals from STAC.
Hopefully, STAC, with increased funding,
will encourage more states to
sponsor independent research.
Lighting though, is only one of the
many environmental issues that DOE
is concerned with.
Scene II, the Feds
The Energy Policy Act has some
regulatory provisions affecting lighting,
which for instance, require less
energy use in federal buildings. By the
year 2015, federal properties, including
congressional office buildings,
must reduce their energy use to 20
percent below the use in 2003, and
they must use Energy Star, or equivalent,
products.And, the Feds will allow
a shared savings program with private
companies (ESCOs) to finance these
improvements and encourage selfamortizing
retrofits.
All new federal buildings from now
on must be designed to use 30 percent
less energy than the
International Energy Conservation
Code (IECC) or the ANSI/ASH-
RAE/IESNA standard 90.1-2004.
After the year 2006, CFLs, traffic
lights and exit signs must conform
to Energy Star Standards, and after
2008, mercury vapor ballasts will be
phased out.
The DOE did not get a blank check
for $12.3 billion to spend as it wishes;
every expenditure must be budgeted
and the funds spent as indicated by
Congress.
There is no allocation for R&D
funds for research in “conventional
lighting” that has energy-saving
potential. There are studies ongoing
at some research facilities that examine
“human factors” in lighting and in
“core technologies,” such as improving
the efficiency of luminaires, visual
perception,more efficient street lighting,
lighting trespass, sky glare, etc., so
it is up to the states and other entities
to lobby the Congress to devote
specific funds to further those ends.
Unfortunately, the IESNA is forbidden
by its charter to engage in political
lobbying, and the R&D done by our
major luminaire and lamp manufacturers
is largely devoted to cutting
manufacturing costs to improve their
“bottom line.”
In the past, those “core technology”
issues and others, such as
research and establishing the standards
for limiting the glare from lighting
units (VCP), were funded by the
industry and utilities. Since the deregulation
of the generation of power,
the utilities have reduced their investment
in R&D in lighting and consolidation
in the lighting industry has
resulted in $5 billion conglomerates
who compete fiercely for market
share and show little interest in
As the cost of energy increases,
following the rapid rise in the cost
of fuel, some luminaire and
lamp and ballast manufacturers have
developed super-efficient products
that justify their increased cost by
virtue of their energy savings
investing, either individually or collectively,
in R&D in those “core technology”
areas.
The exception is in improvements
in luminaire efficiency and source efficacy.As
the cost of energy increases,
following the rapid rise in the cost of
fuel,some luminaire and lamp and ballast
manufacturers have developed
super-efficient products that justify
their increased cost by virtue of their
energy savings. This is analogous to
the hybrid cars that justify their higher
first cost with fuel savings, and
their use is being encouraged in the
new “Transportation Act of 2005”
with federal tax breaks and rebates. It
would certainly be welcome if the
Congress would encourage energy
savings in lighting by giving similar tax
breaks to those individuals and companies
that use lighting products and
controls that conserve energy.
Willard L. Warren, PE, LC, FIESNA is
the orincipal of Willard L. Warren
Associates, a consulting firm serving
industry, government and utility clients in
lighting and energy conservation.
10 www.iesna.org