In October last year CarbonetiX started an independent evaluation of LED lights as a substitute for fluorescent lighting. LEDs, standing for light-emitting diodes, have previously been commonly used for other purposes such as for low energy indicator lights on household equipment, but have not yet been widely used for general commercial lighting.

The evaluation is being undertaken by CarbonetiX in partnership with the Sustainability Fund, managed by Sustainability Victoria, and with the support of Frankston City Council. Eight months on and the trial is now nearing conclusion.

176 fluorescent tubes were replaced with solid state LED lamps in the Mahogany Neighbourhood Community Centre in the City of Frankston.  Users of the facility were surveyed before and after the upgrade and noted either no change or an improvement in the lighting. An illumination assessment showed that illumination levels after the upgrade were around the same as before. Yet power consumption has dropped from over 40 watts per lamp down to 18 watts.

The trial has involved firstly a desk-top evaluation of LED products, then selection of lamps from those six manufacturers who appeared to have the best products. These were then tested by CarbonetiX for light output and power consumption. The best performing lamp was then sent to a NATA (National Association of Testing Authorities) certified laboratory for photometric testing.

It was disappointing to have the only Australian lamp fail during our in-house testing. However the overall testing result was  surprisingly good: the useful light provided by the best lamp in a standard office troffer was similar to that of a used halo-phosphor tube, whereas our earlier program of testing indicated the LEDs were just not bright enough to be used as a fluorescent substitute.

This means that where a building is currently lit by halo-phosphor lamps, which are still quite common fluorescent tubes, and where the illumination levels exceed those specified in AS1680, that the best LED tube could be used as a fluorescent substitute. 

Another concern was the reliability of the product. Barney Mezey, our energy auditor who ran with the project, was concerned about the headache that failure of the lamps would cause. Fortunately all of the lamps are still working three months after they were installed. Obviously this is nowhere near long enough to establish whether or not the lamps will operate for 50,000 hours or not as claimed by the manufacturer. But it is a good start..

LEDs are still expensive, with CarbonetiX estimating a twelve year return on investment. But this trial indicates that if the technology continues to evolve and prices drop that LEDs could help halve the use the energy used by lighting in commercial buildings.

A couple of months ago Barney wrote a post on this blog about plasma lighting - a form of cold cathode fluorescent lighting. They aren’t yet on the market, but I’ve managed to get hold of a couple. I’ve just installed these lights in my house, next to a window, above each end of a sofa often used for reading at night. So how have the plasma lights performed?

Considering that they only use 8 watts of power - as compared to the 55 to 65 watts used by a 50 watt halogen downlight - they have performed well. They are cheaper than the very high performance LEDs, but produce around the same amount of light. They start up quickly - unlike many CFLs. And if I wanted, I could have put them on a dimming circuit - unlike LEDs which generally aren’t designed for dimming. They are fully sealed, so there is no air movement through the fitting into the ceiling cavity. The light colour is acceptable, although it’s perhaps slightly too blue for my liking (I’ve installed cool white lamps). But the light colour is still much more comfortable than the harsh light of a 5000K daylight compact fluoro.

There is still a significant disadvantage, as compared with a 50 watt halogen though, which is the light output. When the white curtains in the window next to the lights are closed there is just enough light to read comfortably for long periods. But when the curtains are open at night the loss of reflection from the curtains is just enough to make the light not quite bright enough for me personally. I’d like it if they were a bit brighter. The lights are mounted roughly 2.2m above the floor, directly above each end of the sofa.

I reckon that the plasma downlight is better than an LED downlight for general lighting. Certainly we haven’t had the reliability problems or failures with the few that we have tested in the office and now at my home that we have had with LEDs. We’ve spent a small fortune buying expensive LED downlights only to see them fail shortly after install. For rooms such as toilets and bathrooms, where you want full brightness within a few seconds, the plasma lights are probably a better option to a compact fluoro, and may better handle frequent switching. I look forward to plasma lights coming onto the market, as they can make a valuable contribution to reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gaas emissions.

We are all familiar with the concept of the traditional skylight or solar tube that directs sunshine through a duct or a flexible tube from the roof to a ceiling. This is an easy way to get natural daylight into a room but it is dependent on tube length and on a direct route between the roof top and the ceiling. There is another way known as ‘fiber optic solar lighting technology’.

Parans , the Swedish company behind the ‘sunlight in a cable’ concept, believes that it is possible to have sunlight in every single room of an indoor environment - even underground. The principle of the Parans’ system is simple; first the sunlight is collected by panels outdoors then it is transported through fiber optic cables into carefully designed luminaires located anywhere within a building including between floors.

The system consists of a light-collecting panel called a SkyPort that’s made up of a layer of movable and a fixed layer of lenses that track the movement of the sun through stepping motors controlled via a microcomputer. These can be mounted on a roof, facade or the ground just like other solar collecting devices; however glare shields may be used to throw direct sunlight onto its surface if the orientation is not quite perfect. The SunWire, consisting of a bunch of optical cables, then guides the sunlight indoors with minimum light loss. Very high quality light can be transported for up to 15-20 metres without major losses since the decrease of intensity for visible light is only 4.6% per metre.

The Björk luminaires are designed to give a spectacular sunlight experience both as strong light beams and as ambient light. The luminaires are made from thin sheets of semi-transparent acrylic. The feeling of natural light is immediate. The light intensity under one of these luminaires can be as high as 4000 lux when 100 000 lux outdoors (based on seven metres of fiber optic cable). UV and IR radiation are naturally blocked out by the Parans system making it the perfect solution for environments where these must be avoided. It is possible to ‘switch off‘ the system in case the darkening of a room is necessary for presentations etc.

While the Parans system works perfectly well in reasonable daylight conditions it is necessary to use artificial lighting during overcast days or when the hours of daylight diminish in winter. To counteract this there is a hybrid luminaire that incorporates T5 lighting technology, which dims automatically according to how much natural light is emitted.

However, the main focus of the system is to harness as much sunlight as possible before needing any artificial lighting thus reducing energy costs and most importantly greenhouse emissions. The only power the Parans system uses is 0.9W for the motorised panels and the microprocessor. Using the Parans lighting system can lower energy costs by 20-25% annually and probably around the same percentage of GHG emissions (based on brown coal emissions).

(Ref: www.parans.com and www.skydome.com.au)

Black Saturday 7 February 2009: Melbourne’s temperature reached 46.4 degrees (116.5 deg F), fanned by strong hot winds 400 bushfires across the state killed over 170 people and destroyed 700 homes. And the dams supplying the state with water are at record lows.

If letters to the editor in the newspaper are any indication, many people are making the link between the terrible events of 7 February and climate change.

Fifteen years ago – on 21 March 1994 in Rio de Janeiro the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) came into existence. This document states that “The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures.”

Australia’s parliament ratified the convention in 1992 – before it came into force. The USA ratified it in 1992. China ratified it in 1993. 192 countries around the world have ratified the UNFCCC.

Yet fifteen years on global carbon emissions have ballooned. Clearly the parties have NOT undertaken precautionary measures to prevent of minimise the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects.

Based on my understanding of climate change science had there been concerted action to take precautionary measures fifteen years ago Victoria may have still experienced Black Saturday, although perhaps it might not have been quite as bad. This is because of the tremendous inertia in climatic systems. I’d be happy to stand corrected on this by someone suitably qualified.

However if we had managed to cut global carbon emissions from 1994 on I believe that the likely 50 degree temperatures that I have a feeling Victoria may be experiencing in the next twenty or thirty years probably could have been avoided. And that we may well have in our vocabulary then a complete set of Black days – a Black Sunday, a Black Monday, a Black Tuesday, a Black Wednesday, a Black Thursday, a Black Saturday and a Black Sunday.

Unfortunately based on what I read of the science of climate change this full suite of Black days could now well be locked in because of the great inertia of our climatic systems. However if we do manage to greatly cut emissions now we may avoid even worse weather.

Why, in 2009, are atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases still on the rise? I believe primarily because of fear of the economic costs that may arise if resources were put into cutting carbon pollution. Fear fanned by fossil fuel dependent industries.

Yet ever since former World Bank chief economist Nicolas Stern published the Stern Review of Climate Change in 2006 its been credibly shown that the future economic consequences of inaction far outweigh the economic costs of acting now to prevent dangerous climate change.

Whoever you are that is reading this – if you are shocked by the events of Black Saturday -  let me put it to you that you should consider cutting your carbon emissions to lessen the number of future black Tuesdays. Don’t just say this is the government’s problem and leave it at that. You see most governments around the world are not doing enough to drive the sorts of carbon cuts we need. The Australian federal government is an example of this – the 5% carbon reduction target by 2020 is laughable given what the science is saying.

So it is up to all of us to do something – both at home and also at work. Don’t just bitch and moan about how the government isn’t doing enough. Do something yourself. Take whatever assistance you can get from your government - but don’t stop at that - go beyond that. People of the world – unite to cut our carbon emissions – hopefully our government’s will one day start to genuinely lead instead of just continuing to play the prisoner’s dilemma.  (That is saying they recognise there is a problem, but aren’t willing to act unless other countries act because acting alone would be bad for the economy and that acting along wouldn’t reduce carbon emissions sufficiently to actually make much of a difference). And if you live in Victoria, make a fire plan.

And let me also suggest that choosing to act may not be of that much economic cost now, that in fact if you are particularly wasteful in your use of fossil fuel sourced energy that you may still be in front financially by cutting your carbon pollution - even after you’ve spend some of your savings to buy 100% greenpower.  And that choosing to act now may well be of great benefit to you and your family in the future.

At home get a smaller car. Then substitute a drive with a phone call, a walk or a cycle. Switch off stuff not in use - at the wall. Insulate. Get rid of those horribly wasteful halogen downlights.

At work do an energy audit, or get one done, and act on it. Delamp. Optimise your cooling and heating. Turn off stuff not in use - at the wall. Get energy efficient computers and equipment.

At home and work buy 100% certified green power, or get solar panels (make sure you aren’t selling the carbon savings in exchange for a discount from the supplier).

Climate change demands a vigorous, positive response - the more of us who do this, the greater the likelihood of climate stability in the future.

Controlled Plasma (CP) lighting technology is the latest of a number of emerging innovative lighting technologies that inadvertently help reduce GHG emission through energy efficiency. In fact its Melbourne inventor Graeme Huon (formerly and acoustics engineer) asserted that “If we were to replace 75 % of lights in homes with these globes in the next five years, we could save building one new power station”.

Cold cathode fluorescent lighting (or CCFL) has been around for a few years in the form of inductive lighting. However, what sets CP globes aside from the rest is that it is the first of its kind to be able to be used in homes as well as for commercial applications due to its affordability and design.

What is a CP globe? Graeme Huon explains: “It is a light source that utilises three existing filament-free light technologies; neon, cold cathode and high intensity discharge along with a new type of controller to regulate the way it works. That way you get flicker-free light and cool running temperatures. It only uses 5 watts, is dimmable and has a lifespan of 20 000 hours”. These together with good colour rendition and with very good light flux levels make it a real alternative to LED lamps and actually surpass CFL lamps in many ways.

To further simplify matters the GU10 globe is incorporated into a downlight fitting (similar in appearance to many existing 50 watt halogen fittings) and is fully sealed to keep out insulation, bugs and heat. This creative downlight is also so versatile that the same fitting can be used as a gimbal or flush type fitting or one can remove the globe with the controller and simply insert it into an existing downlight luminaire. It is fully compatible with existing wiring and comes in two versions; with a plug-in lead or as a quick connect system to be used by electricians. Due to their tri-phosphor coating they are available in warm white and cool white but in the future there may even be ‘party light colours’.

But are they a direct replacement for 50 watt halogen downlights? Well not quite. CP lights do have very good lux levels but they have a different directivity of light. CP lights don’t have a bright spot like halogens so they are not directly suited to long throw or spotlight applications. However, they are a possible alternative in some cases as long as one is aware that they provide slightly less but more uniform light. This means that for the same given area you will have to use more CP lights than you would use halogen downlights but since they only consume 5 watts each this is not a problem.

LED technology is developing at a rapid rate with better-brighter light levels and possible dimming capabilities in the near future. Nevertheless they are unable to match the low wattage for the same amount of light or the colour temperatures of CP lights. LED lights also run at a higher temperatures so large heat sinks need to be fitted to cool them. This doesn’t mean that LEDs are worse or can’t compare to the quality of CPs. It is more of a case of the LEDs being suitable for different applications and commercial use due to their own design features and price.

As for the CFL alternatives, they still use up to 11 watts and produce less light. Finally the cost of a CP unit cannot be matched by any of these two. They are rumoured to sell for under $60 per unit, which is less than half of an equivalent LED fitting and probably the same as a non-dimmable CFL fitting with lamp. CP light fittings will be distributed under the Kambrook name and are designed and produced by CP Envirotech.

(References: G Magazine April 2008; Green Lighting in Electrical Connections December 2008).