CFL Mercury Concerns Exaggerated Compared to Dangers from Incandescents

January 28th, 2010

According to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the average compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) contains 4 milligrams (mg) of mercury. 5 mg is just enough to cover the tip of a ballpoint pen. Some products have reached as low as 1.5 mg. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) advises that in the event of bulb breakage, most of the mercury will remain bound to the lamp with the amount escaping estimated from 1.2 to 6.8 percent. This means if a CFL containing 4 mg of mercury is not recycled and breaks, 0.05–0.27 mg may be emitted.

As scary as that may sound, Craig DiLouie of Electrical Contractor Magazine reports that incandescent bulbs are actually substantially worse than CFLs when it comes to mercury emissions. DiLouie explains that coal-fired power plants produce about one-half of all electricity in the United States and are the largest source of human-caused mercury emissions in the country—more than 50 tons in 2006. A portion of these emissions are airborne, oxidized and water-soluble; some mercury ends up deposited in the United States, while the rest enters the global cycle (more than half the mercury deposited in the United States, for example, originates at Asian factories). Mercury released into the air is the main way it gets into water; eating contaminated fish is subsequently the main way humans become exposed.

And, incandescent lamps consume three to four times more energy than a CFL. Therefore incandescent bulbs cause more atmospheric mercury emissions at power plants that burn coal. DiLouie reports that a 75W incandescent operating over a period of 10,000 hours—the rated life of a competitive 18W CFL—will, therefore, generate an average 9.2 mg of atmospheric mercury emissions nationally, while the 18W CFL will generate 2.2 mg (plus possibly up to another 0.27 mg if the lamp is broken).

Accordingly, CFLs produce less mercury nationally. They also slash carbon emissions and provide substantial energy cost savings. DiLouie also reported that Yale University has demonstrated the same finding for states that don’t burn coal for power and mercury emitted during lamp production.

Additionally, manufacturers continuing to reduce the amount of mercury in their products, attention to lamp recycling is increasing and the EPA’s Clean Air Mercury Rule goes into final implementation in 2018 will contribute to substantial reductions in mercury emissions from coal-fired plant.

The Aelux team continuously monitors findings related to environmental safety and cost efficiency. Many are posted on the Aelux Energy Savings blog. Also feel free to contact us with any questions on these topics or any others.

Source: Electrical Contractor Magazine

Caveat Emptor! Understand the Products You’re Being Offered

January 26th, 2010

Start With A Professional Audit

It’s impossible to engineer a lighting retrofit solution without a comprehensive audit!

The adage ‘Garbage In, Garbage Out’ is applicable to every lighting retrofit. A good audit is much more than just counting fixtures, and should allow your lighting partner to simulate your facility based on an exhaustive collection of data. Any retrofit recommendation not based on a multi-faceted, detailed audit is highly suspect.

An inadequate audit not only fails to provide the greatest opportunity for energy savings—it can create added costs down the road in change orders and system modifications, increased maintenance and poor productivity.

A qualified and experienced auditor will:

  • recognize opportunities for controls and daylighting
  • understand light level requirements by task (as defined by IESNA)
  • and most importantly, should understand your objectives so that engineers can provide the right recommendations for you to choose from.

Contact any Aelux consultant or visit the Essential Retrofit Guidelines for more information.

DOE’s 2012 standards for general-service fluorescent lamps

December 2nd, 2009

On July 14, 2012 products with the lowest efficiency and lowest cost will be eliminated by the Department of Energy.  Products failing to achieve the new standards will be prohibited from manufacture in the United States. Here is a summary of the new lamp standards:

Lamp Correlated color temperature Energy conservation standard (lumens/W)
4-ft. (T8-T12) medium bi-pin >25W <4500K 89
>4500K and <7,000K 88
2-ft. (T8-T12) U-shaped >25W <4500K 84
>4500K and <7,000K 81
8-ft. (T8-T12) Slimline >52W <4500K 97
>4500K and <7,000K 93
8-ft. (T8-T12) HO <4500K 92
>4500K and <7,000K 88
4-ft. (T5) miniature bi-pin standard output >26W <4500K 86
>4500K and <7,000K 81
4-ft. (T5) miniature bi-pin HO >49W <4500K 76
>4500K and <7,000K 72

These lamp types will no longer be manufactured:

• Most 4-ft. linear full-wattage and energy-saving T12 lamps
• All 2-ft. full-wattage and energy-saving U-shaped T12 lamps
• All 75W F96T12 and 110W F96T12HO lamps
• Most 60W F96T12/ES and 95W F96T12/ES/HO lamps
• All 4-ft. T8 basic-grade 700/SP series lamps rated at 2,800 lumens
• Some 8-ft. T8 Slimline single-pin 700/SP series and 8-ft. T8 HO RDC-base lamps

Lighting Retrofits: Misconceptions

November 24th, 2009

Many obstacles can get in the way of projects designed to improve a facility’s energy efficiency. Topping this list of challenges are such issues as finances, product specification and calculating the return on investment (ROI). These issues might create legitimate concerns for maintenance and engineering managers and others involved in project planning, but they need not be deal breakers. In fact, they might not even be real obstacles. Organizations often make decisions based on uncertain or incomplete data, and diminish potential ROI.

Lighting retrofits epitomize this scenario. These projects can help facilities reduce energy use and create more efficient and aesthetically pleasing indoor environments, but only if planners base their decisions on accurate information. Companies often view lighting-upgrade projects as a revenue drain, when in fact they represent a positive cash flow that renews itself year after year. They tend to get focused on one solution, like a lamp and ballast retrofit, which limits the options and opportunities.

Aelux ensures that you will make an informed decision based on a comprehensive analysis including a proposal that clearly defines why a particular retrofit recommendation was made and a photometric analysis to substantiate the retrofit recommendation. Also expect to see what the energy and cost savings will be, and what rebate and tax incentives are available. Additional detail should include an explanation of tax benefits, fixture and component spec sheets, warranty information, environmental benefits and a transparent description of model inputs.

What Is A Lighting Retrofit?

November 19th, 2009

A lighting retrofit is when you replace components in the system with counterparts which make it use energy more efficiently. A lighting upgrade is any strategy that reduces the system’s energy use. Energy savings are realized over time and can be significant enough to not only pay for the new equipment, but produce a return on the investment.

Understanding Energy Consumption:

Utilities bill their customers in several ways including an energy use charge, demand charge, power factor charge, fuel adjustment charge and other charges. Here is a look at Energy Consumption:

Energy Consumption (kWh) = Input Watts (kW) x Time (hours operated in a given year)

To reduce energy consumption we can do two things. Reduce the input wattage or reduce the hours of operation. Input wattage can be reduced by replacing lamps and ballasts with more-energy-efficient counterparts or by removing lamps and ballasts. The hours of operation can be reduced by using sophisticated controls and other methods.

Recovery Act Announcement:

November 18th, 2009

Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced yesterday that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is awarding nearly $40 million in funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to Florida and Maine to support clean energy projects. Yesterday, Florida received $30,401,600 and Main got $9,593,500.

“This funding will allow states across the country to make major investments in energy solutions that will strengthen America’s economy and create jobs at the local level,” said Secretary Chu. “It will also promote some of the cheapest, cleanest, and most reliable energy technologies we have—energy efficiency and conservation—which can be deployed immediately. Local communities can now make strategic investments to help meet the nation’s long term clean energy and climate goals.”

Eligible projects include the development of an energy efficiency and conservation strategy, energy efficiency audits and retrofits, transportation programs, the creation of financial incentive programs for energy efficiency improvements, the development and implementation of advanced building codes and inspections, and the installation of renewable energy technologies on municipal buildings.

For a full list of awards to date, visit the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program Web site.

How Much Can YOU Save?

November 16th, 2009

Are you wondering how much your company can save by upgrading your lighting? Well now you can find out by simply filling out our Feasibilitiy Survey for FREE! Just answer a few quick questions about your facility and one of our team members will contact you in 1 business day with a customized response. Now you’ll be better informed about the potential savings your company can enjoy by upgrading to energy efficient lighting. Also see our Energy Savings Calculator for a quick assessment on how much money you can save and how much you can reduce your carbon footprint. If you have any other questions at all, please don’t hesitate to contact us under the resources tab.

A Safe Investment In A Tough Economy

November 12th, 2009

Many people are currently being cautious with their spending given the current state of our economy. However, a safe investment that everyone can afford is in CFLs or Compact Fluorescent Light bulbs. Making the switch from traditional light bulbs to CFLs will not only reduce your electric bill, but will also prevent greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change. In the average home, lighting accounts for about 20% of the electric bill. By switching to CFLs, your lights will be using 75% less energy than incandescent light bulbs. Since CFLs cost little upfront and last up to 10 times longer they provide a quick return on investment.

Think of it this way: If only 1 traditional light bulb was replaced by an ENERGY STAR CFL in every home in America, in only 1 year it would save enough energy to light more than 3 million homes and prevent greenhouse gas emissions equal to that of more than 800,000 cars. So why haven’t you made the switch yet?

Energy Efficiency Programs Are Expanding

November 11th, 2009

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has created incredible opportunities for energy savings. More and more areas of the country now have rebates available for commercial lighting upgrades. Organizations in 42 states currently have rebate programs available for energy efficiency lighting in commercial buildings.

Buildings in thousands of municipalities across the US are now eligible for lighting efficiency rebates from state organizations and local utilities. Programs like these provide customers with incentives to upgrade inefficient lighting systems to new energy efficient ones. The incentives range anywhere from $.50 per lamp to $450 per fixture and include lights such as T8 lamps, as well as LED exit signs, sensors and more.

American Households Reject Energy Efficient Lighting

November 10th, 2009

Countries all over the world are following in the footsteps of Europe’s inefficient lighting ban, while American consumers are voting with their wallets against efficient CFL lighting. Ironically, it’s costing them more money.

A decade-long marketing push saw CFLs finally gain a noticeable foothold in the marketplace, but the last two years have seen a remarkable slump in sales. Energy Star products manager Richard Karney said that national sales of the light bulbs have declined 25% from their peak in 2007, with sales in some regions such as Vermont and parts of Massachusetts declining 35-50%.

Unfamiliar design and toxic mercury components are two reasons why Americans continue to reject CFLs, but cost seems to be the primary deterrent. Rather than seeing CFL light bulbs as an energy-efficient lighting investment, US consumers view them as an added expense.

website design and development by Allgood Creative Media, LLC built using xhtml and css standards