skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Economics and lighting level recommendations

Abstract

The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America develops light level recommendations for tasks where visual performance is important. The 1959 and 1972 recommendations for illumination levels were based on the principle of delivering a fixed level of performance as predicted by the visual performance models of the time. This same principle is being considered for future revisions to the recommendations. There is currently no explicit method for determining whether a given fixed performance level is in any sense optimal or best. Visual performance increases with lighting levels, but so do economic and environmental costs. These costs lessen the economic benefits of the improved visual performance. A formal method for including these factors in light level recommendations is to restate the problem in terms of net benefits (benefits minus costs). The resulting equations have well defined optima versus light level, and thus give an explicit estimate of what the best lighting levels are in terms of current visual performance models, and current economic conditions. A simple net-benefit procedure is described, and sample calculations are shown for two current visual performance models. Fixed performance levels do not provide economically optimal recommendations with either model. There are also differences between models, but theymore » are less significant than the large differences between the principles of fixed performance levels and economic optimization.« less

Authors:
;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab., CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE; USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
OSTI Identifier:
6215014
Report Number(s):
LBL-32130
ON: DE93015237
DOE Contract Number:
AC03-76SF00098
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION; ILLUMINANCE; LIGHTING SYSTEMS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PRODUCTIVITY; RECOMMENDATIONS; WORKING CONDITIONS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ENERGY SYSTEMS; 320107* - Energy Conservation, Consumption, & Utilization- Building Systems- (1987-)

Citation Formats

Clear, R., and Berman, S. Economics and lighting level recommendations. United States: N. p., 1992. Web. doi:10.2172/6215014.
Copy to clipboard
Clear, R., & Berman, S. Economics and lighting level recommendations. United States. doi:10.2172/6215014.
Copy to clipboard
Clear, R., and Berman, S. Wed . "Economics and lighting level recommendations". United States. doi:10.2172/6215014. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6215014.
Copy to clipboard
@article{osti_6215014,
title = {Economics and lighting level recommendations},
author = {Clear, R. and Berman, S.},
abstractNote = {The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America develops light level recommendations for tasks where visual performance is important. The 1959 and 1972 recommendations for illumination levels were based on the principle of delivering a fixed level of performance as predicted by the visual performance models of the time. This same principle is being considered for future revisions to the recommendations. There is currently no explicit method for determining whether a given fixed performance level is in any sense optimal or best. Visual performance increases with lighting levels, but so do economic and environmental costs. These costs lessen the economic benefits of the improved visual performance. A formal method for including these factors in light level recommendations is to restate the problem in terms of net benefits (benefits minus costs). The resulting equations have well defined optima versus light level, and thus give an explicit estimate of what the best lighting levels are in terms of current visual performance models, and current economic conditions. A simple net-benefit procedure is described, and sample calculations are shown for two current visual performance models. Fixed performance levels do not provide economically optimal recommendations with either model. There are also differences between models, but they are less significant than the large differences between the principles of fixed performance levels and economic optimization.},
doi = {10.2172/6215014},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Apr 01 00:00:00 EST 1992},
month = {Wed Apr 01 00:00:00 EST 1992}
}
Copy to clipboard
Technical Report:
View Technical Report (1.48 MB)
DOI:  10.2172/6215014
Save / Share:
Export Metadata
Save to My Library
You must Sign In or Create an Account in order to save documents to your library.

  • ;
    The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America develops light level recommendations for tasks where visual performance is important. The 1959 and 1972 recommendations for illumination levels were based on the principle of delivering a fixed level of performance as predicted by the visual performance models of the time. This same principle is being considered for future revisions to the recommendations. There is currently no explicit method for determining whether a given fixed performance level is in any sense optimal or best. Visual performance increases with lighting levels, but so do economic and environmental costs. These costs lessen the economic benefitsmore » of the improved visual performance. A formal method for including these factors in light level recommendations is to restate the problem in terms of net benefits (benefits minus costs). The resulting equations have well defined optima versus light level, and thus give an explicit estimate of what the best lighting levels are in terms of current visual performance models, and current economic conditions. A simple net-benefit procedure is described, and sample calculations are shown for two current visual performance models. Fixed performance levels do not provide economically optimal recommendations with either model. There are also differences between models, but they are less significant than the large differences between the principles of fixed performance levels and economic optimization.« less

  • ; ; ; ...
    superior lighting services to low income people in off-grid areas of developing countries, many of whom currently rely on fuel based lighting sources such as kerosene. If this potential is to be achieved in the near term, however, manufacturers must produce off-grid lighting products that are inexpensive, perform well, and meet the needs of potential end users. At present, relatively few products meet all three of these goals. In this article, we report results from a detailed study of lighting use by micro-enterprises in two small towns in Kenya's Rift Valley Province. The work included a survey about lighting usemore » by 50 small businesses, careful measurements of kerosene lighting use patterns and associated costs for 23 of these businesses, and a subsequent field trial in which 14 of the 23 businesses purchased and used low cost LED lamps over a number of months.« less

  • The Energy Policy and Conservation Act established a grant program under which the Federal Energy Administration would formulate guidelines and procedures for states to receive the financial and technical assistance needed to develop and implement energy-conservation plans. To qualify for funding, a state must demonstrate that its plan will result in savings of 5% of projected 1980 energy consumption by 1980. At a minimum, each state plan must contain five specific conservation measures. One of those measures is the implementation of lighting-efficiency standards in public buildings. To assist the state of New York in its efforts to determine the most-efficient,more » cost-effective means of enforcing lighting standards in existing public buildings, Resource Planning Associates, Inc. investigated various enforcement procedures; conclusions, supported by the methodology and data, are provided in this report. (MCW)« less

  • Specific recommendations are made to improve the lighting quality and energy efficiency of the lighting system at the Social Security Administration Frank Hagel Building in Richmond, CA. The main recommendation is to replace the recessed fluorescent lighting system in the general office area with indirect lighting. Indirect lighting will improve lighting quality, will provide an energy efficient solution and will be about the same cost as the direct lighting system originally proposed.

  • The Energy Conservation for New Buildings Act of 1976, as amended, 42 USC Section 6831 et. seq. requires the US Department of Energy to issue energy conservation standards for the design of new commercial and residential buildings. The standards will be mandatory only for the design of new federal buildings, and will serve as voluntary guidelines for the design of new nonfederal buildings. This report documents the development and testing of a set of recommendations that will serve as the basis for the Congressionally-mandated conservation standard for new commercial buildings. The recommendations have been developed and tested over the pastmore » 18 months by a multidisciplinary project team. The report has been issued in four volumes consisting of 40 separate publications. This book (Appendix C to Volume II) presents documentation on the resarch conducted in support of Section 4 of the recommendations, Illumination Systems. The documentation consists of a textual description of the process and analyses, summary results from those analyses, and a few samples of specific individual research results.« less