MR-6: Energy Efficiency

Post by JeraleeA Aug 11th, 2010
at 10:36 pm

For JesseVH (NPS JVH), your comment here appears to be intended for internal purposes at NPS but we are glad to know you find some of the referenced information helpful.

Post by JeraleeA Aug 11th, 2010
at 10:33 pm

For BobH (NPS BH), you are correct, but this credit is intended to recognize only systematic efficiency gains at this time. This is why it focuses on the fixtures required to achieve these gains only.

While we agree that reducing actual number of lights required or not having lights at all is certainly “energy effective," the standard of practice becomes more fuzzy and difficult to define (especially with regard to safety concerns which vary significantly between projects). An efficiency standard for the fixture itself (e.g. Energystar) is straightforward and meets the stated intent for reducing operational energy needs. Beyond the fixture, it is rather difficult to quantify meaningfully so that projects that reduce lighting needs by reducing number of lights or eliminating them can be compared to each other somehow.

However, this is a good idea for a custom credit (or a potential significant adjustment to this credit) and is currently pending additional research. We are looking into this idea of reducing lighting needs (without jeopardizing safety) with a handful of case studies through Western Federal Lands and the Oregon DOT. Note that if luminaires are reduced, it also reduces the need for raw materials to make those fixtures, and also likely reduces costs associated with the project (so long as safety is not compromised).

If you have suggestions regarding this, please let us know. Otherwise, we welcome you to take a look at the custom credit option and submit your own.

Post by JeraleeA Aug 11th, 2010
at 10:17 pm

For TreffA (NPS WTA) - Thank you for your comment, but it appears your note is supposed to be posted on another credit. However, we are not exactly sure which one. If you could kindly repost your comment where you think it belongs, we can address it appropriately under that heading.

Post by JanB Aug 11th, 2010
at 3:29 pm

MR-6
The NPS should certainly be meeting or exceeding (time of project) lighting efficiency standards. This should be common practice. There is some helpful reference material here that might be utilized for our purposes.
NPS-JVH

Post by JanB Aug 11th, 2010
at 3:29 pm

MR-6
This does not give scoring credit to projects that reduce the existing lighting, or intentionally does not include any lighting.
Projects that reduce the amount of existing lighting significantly (say, 75%) should be awarded the 5 point points, regardless whether the remaining lights are yet Energy Star compliant.
NPS-BH

Post by JanB Aug 11th, 2010
at 3:29 pm

MR-6
Is “Drying” considered to be an improved engineering property?

NPS-WTA