Friday, July 20, 2012

Fluorescent vs. LED Lights

As school budgets and energy consumption continue to be hot topics; and the IgCC (see The Future of Building Green) is requiring both dimmable light fixtures and occupancy sensors, selecting the proper lamps for your school should be an important topic of discussion. The two biggest players in the game are Fluorescent and LED – both viable options, depending on your district’s goals.

Important characteristics that will apply to both lamp types are as follows:
Lumens – the amount of light emitted per second (light output)
Efficacy – is the factor of lumens per watt consumed
Color Rendering Index (CRI) – The measure of the ability of a light source to reproduce the colors of an object as compared to a natural light source; expressed on a scale of 0-100 with 100 being daylight. The available range is relatively the same (50-90) in both fluorescent & LED lamps so I won't compare them, but it's important to speak with your architect and electrical engineer about your expectations.
Color Temperature (CCT) – The numerical measurement of a light source’s color appearance, measured in degrees Kelvin. Think about fire, as it begins to burn, the flames are red & orange, but as it gets hotter, the flames turn blue & white. Lamps are the same, cooler temperatures are warmer in color and warmer temperatures are cooler in color. Similar to CRI, the available ranges are the same (2500K-6500K), you just need to discuss options and related costs with your architect.

Linear Fluorescent Lamps: The Contender
This is the MOST common lamp used in commercial and institutional buildings. This fact alone is what makes them so affordable - the technology is mature and the market stable. The basic construction of a linear fluorescent lamp is a glass tube coated on the inside with a phosphor, filled with a mixture of argon/krypton gases and a tiny amount of mercury. Light is produced when the phosphor coating is excited by the UV radiation from the electrode/mercury combination. It is very important to ensure lamps are disposed of properly because while the amount of mercury is small, as thousands of lamps end up in landfills the hazard increases. Please contact your city for proper hazardous waste disposal. Lamps are identified based on their shape and diameter – meaning if the Tube is 1” (8/8”), it is a T8. Standard sizes used in schools are T12s (although these are being phased out for inefficiency, older buildings may still have them), T8s and T5s. It is important to note that ALL fluorescent lamps require a ballast (a mini transformer) to provide voltage to start the lamp and regulate the electrical current during operation. T12s use electromagnetic ballasts and T8/T5s use electronic ballasts that are about 40% more efficient than electromagnetic. An energy conservation option for older buildings with tight budgets is to convert all T12 lamps to T8s; just be sure the fixtures and ballasts are compatible with the new lamps. An uncommonly known downfall of linear fluorescent lamps is their sensitivity to temperatures. Fluorescent lamps will not light up in extreme cold or hot temperatures because the mercury vapor pressure is dependent on the ambient operating temperature of the lamp (not room temperature, but the temp around the lamp itself in the fixture). The lamp life can also be affected by how often the light is turned on & off. Lamp life is based on a three-hour burn cycle, three-hours on and 20-minutes off. Operating lamps at a longer than three-hour burn cycle will increase lamp life (up to 36,000 hours); conversely, operating lamps on shorter burn cycles will reduce lamp life.


<><><><> <><><><> <><><><>
Image courtesy of US Dept. of Energy
Advantages:
Mature Technology = Low Cost
Low Cost per Lumen
Extensive Fixture Options
High Efficacy (30-110 lumens/watt)
Long Life (7,000-24,000 hours)

Disadvantages:
Requires a ballast
Added cost for dimmable ballast
Temperature Sensitivity
Lamp life affected by how often it's turned on/off
Must be disposed of properly (mercury & gas)
Delayed turn on - flicker

LED Lamps: The Challenger
Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), also known as Solid State Lighting (SSLs), are highly sought-after for their reduced energy consumption. Multiple LEDs can easily put out the same amount of light as fluorescent tube for a fraction of the wattage. An additional cost savings that we stumbled upon in a recent project was that while one electrical panel can typically support 25 linear fluorescent troffers (the 2x4 fixtures), the same panel could support 75 LED fixtures – that’s a significant initial savings in electrical equipment. That’s right, I said it: initial savings. Every time someone brings up LED lights their first reaction is, “I know they’re more energy efficient, but it costs SO much initially.” Initial costs are dropping slowly and there are some factors that are making the competition a little closer. I mentioned fewer electrical panels for the same # of fixtures. If you’re familiar with the new energy code (IECC), it has defined that any lights within daylight zones must have dimmable controls that are independent of the general area lighting. In order to make a fluorescent lamp dimmable, there is a major change in the ballast that increases the cost – almost equal to that of an LED which is inherently dimmable. Another thing people are concerned about is the color of LEDs. Long gone are the days of blue-tinted light, unless that’s what you want. In fact, LEDs are available in saturated colors (Red, Green, Blue, etc.) and various temperatures of white light – some achieving CRIs of 90+. The final benefit I’m going to discuss is the heat emitted from LED lamps. A typical linear fluorescent emits about 30 btu’s/hr while an LED only emits 3.4 btu’s/hr. This could translate into a minor adjustment to the cooling load for the building – something to discuss with your mechanical engineer.
Advantages
Image courtesy of US Dept. of Energy

High Efficacy (25-100 lumens/watt)
Long Life (35,000-50,000 hours)
Inherently dimmable
Reduced energy consumption (~1/2)
Mercury-Free
Less Heat Build-up (~ 1/10th)
Immediate On
 
Disadvantages
High initial cost
Directional nature – requires more lamps to get ambient light effect
Limited fixture options (troffers)

Resources:
U.S. Department of Energy - http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/utilities/fluorescent.html                                           http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/utilities/solidstateled.html

17 comments:

  1. I think that this new lighting technology is very good for use in new educational facilities. I feel that the advantages really outweigh the cons and that school would make up the initial costs in the long run.

    M Nelson (TSU)

    ReplyDelete
  2. The debate over LED versus fluorescent always teeters at cost. When comparing the upfront cost of one LED lamp to one fluorescent lamp, fluorescent wins. The cost of manufacturing LEDs is dropping. Also, when you consider volume discounts and the lifespan of LEDs, the scale leans the opposite direction.

    For now, there is no reason electrical contractors should not promote LED lamps. LED lamps can help building owners become eligible for government and utility company incentives. They help companies reach the desirable and highly marketable green status.

    A. Agunbiade (Tarleton State University)

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Challenger [LED Lamps] is definitely a long-term benefit for school districts due to its advantages noted in the blog. I especially liked the fact that LED Lamps are a sustainable element for educational facilities in their long life, reduced energy consumption, and mercury-free design. I did notice that your article stated LED Lamps disadvantage included the directional nature which required more lamps for an ambient light effect. I wonder if a combination of day lighting design in the school and LED Lamps would resolve the necessity for more lamps; thereby, possibly avoiding increased energy consumption.

    H. Ortiz (Tarleton State University)

    ReplyDelete
  4. The information regarding the electrical panels (being able to support up to 75 LED) is new to me and would really help the affordability of this option, especially in new builds. I think the concern is what to do with the older buildings. All of the electrical panels and fluorescent lights are already in place. Converting all the equipment, in addition to purchasing the LED bulbs would be a significant cost. I just hope to see the prices continue to drop on these LED bulbs so that maybe they could be a real option for the majority of older school buildings.

    Melissa Bryan, Tarleton State University

    ReplyDelete
  5. LED lights are energy efficient and according to Robert Lobitz, Engineer at KASA Capital, a standard incandescent bulb releases light at 10 percent efficiency, which means 90 percent of the energy it uses is purely heat. LED lights work at approximately 80 percent efficiency. LED lights help to conserve energy and cuts down on electricity bills as well.

    An advantage of using LED lighting in classrooms is the absence of mercury and other compounds that could harm students if the bulb breaks. Also, LED lighting will not shatter if it is dropped unlike fluorescent lighting.

    Studies have shown that LED lighting can help students to stay calm and focused during the school day. Unlike fluorescent lighting, LED bulbs do not cause a humming sound or flicker when they become old. LED lighting with white light is very similar to natural sunlight and aids students from eyestrain and fatigue.

    According to Optometrist Amy Farrall, fluorescent lighting can cause issues and difficulties on the eyes. Fluorescent lights tend to have more green and blue wavelengths than natural light which leads to glare and often headaches in the classroom.

    S. Lewis (TSU)

    ReplyDelete
  6. New lighting technology is another piece of puzzle to the "green" movement. Educational institutions must begin to think more economical, ethical and implement sustainable practices. In an article, "Five Questions to Answer About Sustainable School Lighting", in a survey of 30 green schools the overall building cost of a "green" school only account for 1-2 percent increase in cost versus a conventional school. The article and research also noted a 33% reduction in energy use and 32 % reduction in water use.
    Sustainable lighting (and implementation of energy efficient lighting, light bulbs, and control mechanisms) are a significant contributors to the 33% savings. The author Robert Davis also noted that lighting can account for over half of the electricity used by a school.
    Those with the responsibility must understand both short-term and long term costs and benefits. Choosing between fluorescent and LED could pend on the current and future usage of the spaces as well. Based on the research both differ in their capacities and assets.

    R. Hall

    Tarleton State

    ReplyDelete
  7. LED lighting can last 60,000 hours compared to 10,000 hours with the fluorescent lights. LED light bulbs use about half the wattage of fluorescent 6 watts versus 14, making LED’s about five times more energy efficient and are much more durable than fluorescent bulbs. The LED’s are useful in focused areas like reading areas and for accent lighting but are not as useful for large areas. The cost savings would need to be calculated over a period of time because the LED bulb would cost $21 compared to $3 for fluorescent. It would definitely have an impact on the budget to replace fluorescents with LED’s.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It would be interesting to see exactly how much a school district saves using the LED lighting compared to the fluorescent. Also a great study would be to check on if the lighting effects learning/test scores. I know that the lighting in our Elementary school was really dim until they changed all the lighting.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Melissa Bryan,

    I have the same concern about lighting for older buildings. The Dublin Junior High facility is almost 100 years old which I have mentioned a couple of times this semester, we have had major issues with trying to implement technology because of the wiring and how it is set up. We have spent a lot of money to try to update our building so that we can have technology capabilities.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am a huge fan of LED lights when you consider the amount of money saved long term. However, the upfront costs can often dissuade people from purchasing LED lights over fluorescents.

    Another consideration not commonly addressed, however, is the proper disposal method for LED lights. Although the amount of mercury contained within each one is small, the effects it can have are extremely hazardous if they are not properly disposed of or if someone comes into contact with the mercury from a broken bulb.

    CAndrew - Tarleton State

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am also a fan of LED lighting, and amd glad to see that my campus is making changes to the outdated lighting system we have had in the past. Occupancy sensor lights are being added to all classrooms, which should go a long way towards conserving paoer and saving money. I think this is a positive step towards cost cutting that our district sorely needs.

    ReplyDelete
  12. District with construction projects have a wonderful opportunity to make energy efficiency a priority. Even extensive renovation of older building can result in significant changes being made to better energy usage. In Graham ISD's recent renovation of our High School, the building was outfitted with lighting that has on/off sensors. In addition, in the areas that do use standard fluorescent lighting, we have tried to use the more efficient T5 bulbs. Two years ago we also added an Energy Director to our administrative staff. He oversees all aspects of energy efficiency for the district, and light usage is one of his top priorities. His work has saved the district thousands of dollars. It was a great investment.

    A. Stewart - Tarleton State University

    ReplyDelete
  13. When it comes down to it, cost is king in education construction projects. I think that green technology advocates should focus on price and efficiency in order to effectively market the technologies advantages over seemingly simpler and cheaper alternatives.

    M Nelson (TSU)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks for the good information! I was pleased to see that a district considering LED light options may benefit from both initial and long-term savings. The old adage of going green (right, wrong, or indifferent) is that going green will save in the long run, but will come with hefty initial costs. Saving now and then is a win-win for districts!

    Lindsay Morgan, TSU

    ReplyDelete
  15. LEDs, or light-emitting diodes, are a form of solid-state lighting that is extremely efficient and long-lasting.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The popularity of LED lighting is skyrocketing. Thank you for posting the pros and cons of both lighting.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete