Abstract
Due to increased concern about overall energy costs and the appearance of efficient and inexpensive lighting system alternatives, factories and plants with high-intensity discharge (HID) lighting are forced to consider retrofit with more modern, energy-efficient lighting. The decision is complicated from an economic perspective, and there is a lack of information readily available on the topic. This study provides an analysis of the replacement by retrofit of common probe-start metal halide and high-pressure sodium industrial lighting systems. Retrofit options considered include the more recent pulse-start metal halide lamps and a range of T5 high output and T8 fluorescent lamp configurations. Recent data on lighting system pricing, labor and energy costs, and time required for tasks are reported. The results generated include savings, payback period, and net present value for many retrofit options, as well as the change in energy consumption, carbon footprint, and lumen output for each retrofit. Effects of varying rate of return and daily duration of operation are considered. Based on change in lumen output, payback period, net present value, and comparison of lighting quality, one or two options are recommended from the overall retrofit options considered. A fluorescent retrofit is recommended for each of the HID initial scenarios considered. The payback period is no more than 3 years in any recommended case. The focus of this study is on the potential energy and cost savings, and some proposed solutions may, or may not, be acceptable due to lack of illuminance uniformity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- HID:
-
High-intensity discharge
- HPS:
-
High pressure sodium
- LCC:
-
Life cycle cost
- MH:
-
Metal halide
- T5HO:
-
T5 high output
- TVM:
-
Time value of money
- A :
-
General annual cost (dollars)
- A B,i :
-
Annual cost of an expenditure of the base case (dollars)
- A E :
-
Annual electricity expenditure (dollars)
- A eq :
-
Equivalent annual cost of a non-annual expenditure (dollars)
- A R,i :
-
Annual cost of an expenditure of the retrofit case (dollars)
- BE:
-
Ballast efficiency (unitless)
- BF:
-
Ballast factor (unitless)
- C :
-
Capital cost of a retrofit (cost of fixture and installation) (dollars)
- C year :
-
Carbon footprint per year (kilograms of CO2 per year)
- E :
-
Price of electricity (dollars per kilowatt hour)
- E year :
-
Energy usage per year (kilowatt hour per year)
- i :
-
Rate of return on investment (unitless)
- n :
-
Time period considered (years)
- N B/F :
-
Number of bulbs per fixture (unitless)
- N F :
-
Number of fixtures (unitless)
- SPP:
-
Payback period based on simple, non-TVM analysis (years)
- DPP:
-
Payback period based on TVM analysis (years)
- P :
-
General one-time cost (dollars)
- P ex :
-
Per-occurrence cost of an expenditure (dollars)
- S SP :
-
Annual savings based on simple, non-TVM analysis (dollars)
- S TVM :
-
Annual savings based on TVM analysis (dollars)
- T hr/yr :
-
Hours of lamp operation per year (hour per year)
- W B :
-
Wattage per bulb (Watts)
References
Charles, J., & Lounsbury, F. (1915). Engineering economics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Cheung, S. L., Lam, T., Li, D., & Wong, S. L. (2009). An analysis of energy-efficient light fittings and lighting controls. Applied Energy, 87, 558–567.
Chiang, J. H. (2010). Rsmeans electrical cost data 2010. Kingston, MA: Reed Construction Data.
Chletsis, A., Pilavachi, P., & Nikolaidis, Y. (2009). Economic evaluation of energy saving measures in a common type of Greek building. Applied Energy, 86(12), 2550–2559. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.029.
Clinton, M. B. (2008). A fundamental study on current industrial lighting systems and analyses of retrofit options. MS thesis, The University of Alabama.
Eley, C., Tolen, T. M., Benya, J. R., Rubinstein, F. & Verderber, R. (1993). Advanced lighting guidelines: 1993. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, California Energy Commission, and Electric Power Research Institute: San Francisco, CA.
Energy Information Administration (EIA), (2004). Electricity retail price fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/fact_sheets/retailprice.html
Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2011, May). U.S. states: Alabama data. Retrieved from http://www.eia.gov/state/state-energy-profiles-data.cfm?sid=AL
Hong, E., Conroy, L. A., & Scholand, M. J. (2005, September 30). U.S. lighting market characterization, volume II: Energy efficient lighting technology options. Retrieved from http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/ee_lighting_vol2.pdf
Lam, J., & Li, D. (2002). An investigation of daylighting performance and energy saving in a daylit corridor. Energy and Buildings, 35, 365–373.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). (2002). American national standard for lamp ballasts—definitions for fluorescent lamps and ballasts. Englewood, CO: Information Handling Services/Global Engineering Documents.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), The Association of Electrical and Medical Imaging Equipment Manufacturers (2006). T5 and T5HO fluorescent lamps, high-bay: fluorescent vs. metal. Retrieved from www.lightingtaxdeduction.org
NLPIP at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. (2011). Lighting answers. Retrieved from http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightingAnswers/lat5/pc1.asp
Tyler, M. (2009). National electrical estimator 2010. Carlsbad, CA: Craftsman Book.
US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. (2004). Energy efficiency program for commercial and industrial equipment (EE-DET-03-001). Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/pdfs/hid_energy_savings_report.pdf
US EPA, Clean Markets Division. (2007). egrid2010 version 1.1 year 2007 summary tables. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/egridzips/eGRID2010V1_1_year07_SummaryTables.pdf
Acknowledgments
This work was partially supported by the US Dept of Energy Industrial Assessment Center program. The authors gratefully acknowledge their support. The extensive remarks of the reviewers are appreciated and have contributed to significant improvement of the final manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Preston, D.J., Woodbury, K.A. Cost–benefit analysis of retrofit of high-intensity discharge factory lighting with energy-saving alternatives. Energy Efficiency 6, 255–269 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9179-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9179-1