Energized Spring Newsletter

+ NAVFAC + Net

Zero Renewable Energy Assessment

+ CFAY

Reduces Energy Demand

+ Techval + Top

Spring

SW Power Purchase Agreement

Demonstrates Lighting Systems

10 Energy Saving Measures

+ New

Energy Policy

+ NAVFAC

12 [1] [3] [5] [6] [9] [10]

ESC Wins CPI Competition [11]

https://energy.navy.mil A resource for improving energy efficiency at Navy and Marine Corps installations

Message from CAPT Hamilton In his State of the Union address, President Obama announced that the Department of Defense is committed to deploying clean, renewable energy as a matter of energy independence and national security. In response to this commitment, the Department of the Navy (DoN) will purchase or facilitate the production of one gigawatt (1 GW) of renewable energy from available technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal, ocean energy, and waste-to-energy. Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, has directed the establishment of a 1 GW Task Force.

The Task Force will focus on large-scale projects that use existing third-party financing mechanisms such as power purchase agreements (PPAs), enhanced use leases (EULs), and energy saving performance contracts (ESPCs).

Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment, the Honorable Jackalyne Pfannenstiel speaks at groundbreaking ceremony for NAWS China Lake solar array power plant.

NAVFAC Southwest Power Purchase Agreement

Navy’s Largest Solar Energy Project to Date

By Roberta Bucher, Calvin Kawamura, and David Powell

N

aval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest (NAVFAC SW) recently broke ground on a 13.8 megawatt (MW) solar array power plant at Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake, located in California’s Mojave Desert. The project, covering 118 acres of land, is touted as the service’s single largest solar energy project and one of the largest in the federal government.

The power plant will be built using a power purchase agreement (PPA); where a private company funds and develops the plant on Navy owned land. In return, the Navy has agreed to purchase power from the plant below the local utility’s rate for 20 years. The project, the first solar 20-year PPA the federal government has entered into, is estimated to provide energy cost avoidance for the Navy of $13 million over the life of the contract.

Jackalyne Pfannenstiel, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment, stated, “This is the largest solar project in the Navy. It demonstrates tangible progress towards national energy independence and reaching the Department of the Navy’s energy goals.”

Under the terms of the PPA, the 31,680 solar panel array will be built, operated, maintained and owned by SunPower and third-party investor MetLife. NAWS China Lake set a goal of producing 10,000 megawatt hours (MWH) of renewable energy by 2015; this PPA project will generate more than 7,000 MWH – well over half way to meeting their goal. [continued on p. 2 ]

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

This issue of +Energized contains several articles that show the progress already being made toward the 1 GW goal: Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest recently broke ground on a 13.8 megawatt solar array power plant at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake. The plant will be built using a PPA. A second article outlines the net zero renewable energy assessment process conducted

by Naval Facilities Engineering Command to prioritize installations for net zero. The net zero analysis process can help inform the Task Force of renewable energy projects that will contribute to the 1 GW goal. The article on Secretary Mabus’ new energy policy, SECNAV Instruction 4101.3, outlines policy measures that will also promote the 1 GW goal.

Consider attending the GovEnergy 15th annual workshop and trade show (www.govenergy.com) August 19-22, 2012 in St. Louis, Mo. This forum will assemble leading experts in policy, technology, and energy operations to address federal energy management and encourage application of best practices, products, and services relating to energy efficiency, renewable energy, and water efficiency within the federal sector.

I urge each of you to actively engage with the 1 GW goal, one of the largest commitments to clean, renewable energy in history!

CAPT S. Keith Hamilton, CEC, USN, P.E. Deputy Commander for Operations and Energy Officer, Naval Facilities Engineering Command

NAVFAC PPA [continued from p. 1] Why A Power Purchase Agreement?

PPAs do not require any up front capital from the Department of the Navy (DoN). DoN provides the land, and the third party contractor constructs, owns and operates the generation plant. The PPA must show an economic benefit to the DoN for the term of the contract. In the case of this project, the requirement is for the cost of electricity to be less than the current cost of power purchased by NAWS China Lake.

The installation must provide favorable conditions for the PPA project to be feasible and attractive to funding institutions. NAWS China Lake provides: A particularly good location - the 118 acres of land needed for the new solar array are easily provided by China Lake, the Navy’s largest installation by land area.

An excellent climate for a profitable outcome - the Mojave Desert location provides an abundance of sunshine year round.

A location free from mission impact – photovoltaic (PV) technology in the particular location does not impact the NAWS mission.

How Third Party Ownership Benefits the DoN PPAs are structured such that a third party financial institution, in partnership with the renewable energy developer, takes advantage of federal tax incentives (or grants), accelerated depreciation, state renewable energy incentives (such as the California Solar Initiative), renewable energy credits, and other financing benefits to offer the DoN low cost power. All of these financial benefits (except in most cases, state incentives) are not available to the federal entities if the DoN were to own and operate the system itself. Authority was given to the Department of Defense (DOD) through 10 U.S.C 2922a, Contracts for Energy or Fuel for Military Installations, to enter into contracts for the purchase of power for periods of up to 30 years.

First shovelfuls are tossed out during ceremonial ground breaking for NAWS China Lake’s solar array power plant under a Power Purchase Agreement.

delegated authority only allows for utility service contracts for periods not exceeding ten years. Therefore, FAR Part 41 is limited to the day to day business of utility service agreements, such as the ones NAWS China Lake has with local utility companies.

For the longer term agreement sought between NAWS China Lake and SunPower, the PPA allowed under 10 U.S.C 2922a was the best execution vehicle. Many discussions took place over a period of 18 months, which included counsel and acquisition management to negotiate terms and conditions that satisfy both government and private financing requirements.

Beyond the legal and acquisition challenges, PPAs also face issues typical to any large development on a military installation; operational and land use impacts, meeting National Environmental Policy Act regulations, The ability to sign agreements over a longer term (20 years for the NAWS and coordination with local utilities.

China Lake project) provides greater incentives for private companies to invest in developing renewable power technologies with a guarantee Since approval of the PPA relied on the use of the 2922a legislation, the of a market for the power produced. Both the Navy and private industry PPA contract saw heavy scrutiny by the offices of the Deputy Assistant benefit, making the PPA one of the most effective ways the federal Secretary of the Navy (Energy) (DASN (E)) and Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment) (DUSD (I&E)). government can invest in alternative energy.

Lessons Learned Timeframe to Award and Approve the PPA The NAVFAC SW solar multiple award contract (MAC) was awarded in 1. The Navy Energy community, at all levels, learned exactly what is expected from each level of approval for a 2922a package. The major February 2010. Subsequently, three task orders were awarded, including approval levels for a Navy installation PPA per 10 USC 2922a are: the one for China Lake. After the terms and conditions of the PPA were Installation Commanding Officer finalized, the process of approving the PPA depended upon the chain of approvals required for the legislative authority being utilized, 10 USC Navy Region Southwest/Commander, Navy Installations Command 2922a. The final approval by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) NAVFAC Headquarters was received in September 2011, at which point the PPA was awarded.

DASN(E) Challenges Faced Issuing the Navy’s First Solar Energy PPA DUSD(I&E) Capt. Clifford Maurer, NAVFAC SW Commanding Officer, stated, “We face 2. Cooperation and coordination at all levels, including federal, state, a global energy challenge, which is for us a national strategic imperative local and commercial is essential to a successful PPA. that we solve. There was an extraordinary level of effort that went into market research, industry partnering, preparing complicated acquisition 3. Given the right conditions, a PPA can provide a great cost benefit to Navy renewable energy projects. documentation, navigating complicated regulations and incentives, and doing technical analysis.”

Way Ahead for Other Projects The government’s difficulties aligning its acquisition requirements to The NAWS China Lake PPA was one of three task orders awarded through industry terms and conditions for a commercial PPA created some initial the Solar MAC at NAVFAC SW. The remaining task orders were awarded challenges. Many of the financing elements that allow commercial PPAs to Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center 29 Palms and Marine Corps to work are not conducive to government acquisition requirements. Logistics Base Barstow that will be under construction soon. Only one Likewise, many of the clauses in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) other 2922a PPA has been executed; the Marine Corps Air Station Part 41 - Acquisition of Utility Services: 41.103 are not readily acceptable Miramar Landfill Gas PPA. to third party financing arrangements. For example, statutory and

[continued on p. 3]

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

2

NAVFAC PPA [continued from p. 2] There are currently three additional Navy bases and two Marine Corps bases interested in PPAs in the Southwest Region, and requests for proposals are being developed by the NAVFAC SW Renewable Program Office. The approval process will be streamlined based on the knowledge gained from awarding several PPAs to delegate the authority to Secretary of the Navy from OSD.

then a PPA may be the best option for your project. Installations should contact the appropriate office for renewable energy projects in their region if they have the available land area for this type of project (roughly ten acres per MW of power produced using PV technology), and they are located in a good solar resource area.

As stated in the 2011 Energy Project Management Guide, “Each PPA involves providing a contractor access to DoN land to develop energy When Installations Should Consider a PPA If you are contemplating an energy generation project and do not want production facilities which DoN would then purchase… The benefits to to own the new generation equipment, and/or funding is unavailable, these projects include the ability to develop and execute immediately versus having to wait for congressional appropriations. Since the developer will own and operate all the constructed facilities, you will not have operation and maintenance responsibilities. There is little risk of performance, since DoN only agrees to purchase the energy generated by the developer; if no energy is produced, you owe no payment to the developer. Drawbacks are that this type of contract may require longer lead times to execute, and can be relatively complex or specialized.”

NAWS China Lake’s PPA solar array will provide increased energy independence and reliable, emission-free solar power to the installation.

The project helps achieve the goal of the Navy’s energy initiative, laid out by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus in 2009, which is to achieve 50 percent of the Navy’s shore-based energy requirements produced by alternative sources by the year 2020.

For more information about the NAWS China Lake PPA, contact: harold. powell@navy.mil or calvin.kawamura@navy.mil.

26% of the Piers (posts that support the solar arrays) have been installed.

Net Zero Renewable Energy Assessment Process

By Kathi Jones

I

n October of 2009 Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) Ray Mabus announced five energy goals (see +Energized Fall 2009). One of the five goals is: DoN will produce at least half of its shore-based installations’ energy requirements from alternative sources (including solar, wind, ocean and geothermal sources) by 2020. Additionally, 50% of the shore installations will be net zero energy consumers by 2020.

Opportunities (REO) analysis to analyze all CNIC installations for net zero feasibility. REO is an optimization modeling process that identifies the renewable energy opportunities at each site, and optimizes the mix and size of each, along with the cost and incentives, to identify the projects with positive economics for possible development.

The next phase will be for NAFVAC ESC and NREL to validate the model results by working with the NAVFAC Field Engineering Commands and installations to determine which theoretical opportunities have a high level of potential to move forward. Site assessments will be performed to validate data and assumptions, and will identify potential opportunities for further development. This includes identifying space/ land availability, mission compatibility, environmental compatibility, and a host of other site specific concerns. Findings obtained during the site visits will be used to fine tune the original model output and Commander, Navy Installations Command (CNIC) requested that improve cost projections. Costs for renewable project development at Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) take the lead on the high potential sites will be used to inform future Program Objective identifying a process to ensure that Navy installations comply with the Memorandum cycles.

SECNAV Instruction. A two-phased strategy was developed to prioritize This net zero assessment process is a high visibility effort that is expected installations for net zero. to help lay the groundwork for developing a plan and strategy to meet For the first phase, NAVFAC Engineering Service Center (ESC) developed the SECNAV goals. Analyzing an installation for net zero energy potential a scope of work with the Department of Energy (DOE) National provides a disciplined process to identify a renewable energy strategy Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to perform a Renewable Energy tailored to the needs of specific military installations. The ability for a SECNAV Instruction 4101.3, dated 3 Feb 2012, defines a Net Zero Installation as: “A DON Installation which, over the course of a fiscal year, matches or exceeds the electrical energy it consumes ashore with electrical energy generated from alternative or renewable energy sources. The alternative fuel generated electrical energy may be: 1) generated on the installation; or 2) generated off the installation but purchased for and consumed on the installation.”

[continued on p. 4]

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

3

NET ZERO [continued from p. 3] Navy installation to become a net zero energy installation will depend on many factors and will vary between installations.

the project is no longer feasible, project development resources can be reallocated to other projects.

The assessments will focus on identifying realistic projects that have a high probability of implementation. Successful implementation of energy projects at an installation will require a dynamic and collaborative approach, including a project team to resolve obstacles and implement the recommended projects. As projects are implemented, the net zero energy assessment presents a benchmark by which to measure progress in reducing energy demand and increasing energy self-sufficiency by relying on local renewable resources.

As the process continues, installations can expect contact and support from the teams performing the site assessments. While moving forward with cost effective renewable energy projects is considered important, identified projects must not conflict or hinder the Navy’s mission. Involvement, support and cooperation from the installation are vital to identifying the opportunities for development, as well as clearly identifying constraints that may negate developing a particular technology. Regardless of whether net zero is achievable at an installation, renewable energy opportunities will be identified for each installation to pursue where economical.

Energy conservation and efficiency investments are usually the most economical first step to achieving net zero. The Navy is continuing to improve energy efficiency first, thus lowering the overall energy load.

By reducing consumption, the impact of existing and future renewable sources is also increased.

Completion of the REO studies at all 70 CNIC installations is anticipated in summer 2012. In February, NAVFAC ESC received results from10 installations that underwent an REO analysis. These first 10 installations were selected because of their high energy costs, renewable energy potential, and/or available financial incentives. Site assessments will begin in March for the installation sites showing good potential and positive economics.

The 10 installations to receive the initial assessments are: Naval Air Facility El Centro, Calif.

Naval Air Station Fallon, Nev. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Naval Base Guam Naval Air Station Key West, Fla. Naval Submarine Base New London, Conn.

Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii Pacific Missile Range Facility, Hawaii Naval Station Rota, Spain Naval Base San Diego, Calif.

The installations were evaluated to determine the optimum mix of the following renewables: wind; solar photovoltaic, thermal and hot water; biomass; solar ventilation preheating; and day-lighting, with geothermal added for the installations that have potential. Waste-to-energy and landfill gas will be added to future assessments.

In some cases, the Navy may have opportunities to meet net zero through the development of a single large project as accomplished by Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake, Calif. and Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) Portsmouth, Va. (see inset). However, it is likely that at many installations, a multi-faceted approach will be necessary. This will require a wide array of renewable technologies involving multiple projects at a large number of facilities to meet net zero goals.

The renewable energy screening is an early step in the project development process. As Michael Callahan, Senior Project Engineer at NREL states: “Similar to peeling away layers of an onion, a project team must uncover many layers of information before turning a project idea into an actual project.” One goal of the REO process is to quickly prioritize potential projects, effectively allocate scarce project development resources, and begin to evaluate the projects that have the greatest potential. Once a project team uncovers a layer of information indicating

In his State of the Union address, President Obama announced that the Department of Defense (DoD) would make an unprecedented commitment to deploying clean, renewable energy, with the Navy purchasing enough clean energy to power a quarter million homes. Pursuant to this directive, the Department of the Navy (DoN) will purchase or facilitate the production of one gigawatt (GW) of renewable energy from available technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal, ocean energy, and waste-to-energy.

Secretary Mabus has directed the establishment of a 1 GW Task Force to assess and select renewable energy projects that will achieve the 1 GW goal. Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Energy, Installations and Environment)(ASN(EI&E)) Jackalyne Pfannenstiel will chair the Task Force which will focus on large-scale projects that use existing third-party financing mechanisms such as power purchase agreements (PPAs), enhanced use leases (EULs), and energy saving performance contracts (ESPCs). Opportunities identified through the net zero analysis process might help inform the task force of potential renewable energy projects that may help in achieving the 1 GW goal.

Currently, the Navy has two net-zero installations: NAWS China Lake, Calif. and NNSY, Portsmouth, Va. Both of these installations met the net zero criteria through the development of a single large project and are examples of the types of projects that could be forwarded to the task force. NAWS China Lake achieved net zero from the 270 megawatt (MW) Coso Geothermal Plant, constructed as a result of a public-private venture and built on Navy land. NNSY achieved net zero from a 40 MW waste to energy plant.

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

4

Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka Reduces Energy Demand By 25 Percent

Critical energy management in the aftermath of disasters in Japan

By Thomas Bawden

T

he March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami in northeast Japan caused widespread devastation. Permanent destruction of many powergenerating facilities left Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) and other public utility companies without sufficient electricity generating capacity to satisfy typical demand on the Japanese grid. In the TEPCO area alone, which includes the Tokyo metro area, there was a shortage of more than 8,500 megawatts of electrical generation capacity.

To avoid rolling power blackouts, TEPCO asked major customers to reduce their peak electrical demand by 25 percent relative to their peak summer 2010 demand. During the summer of 2011, the Japanese government mandated a minimum weekday reduction of 15 percent of peak demand between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m., with fines of one million yen (about $13,000) per instance exceeding this demand level. U.S. Forces Japan directed affected installations to comply.

Following an analysis of 2010 electrical demand data, the Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka (CFAY) Energy Team developed a detailed Electric Peak Demand Reduction Plan with three tiers of increasingly stringent measures.

The plan was developed in coordination with the principal CFAY electricity users to ensure functionality of the measures and to mitigate significant impact to CFAY’s mission supporting the 7th Fleet.

The Energy Team set a goal to reduce peak demand by 25 percent, providing a buffer should estimates of potential demand savings be inaccurate. The plan also allowed time to implement additional emergency demand reduction measures that would not be instantaneous. These measures provided a stronger guarantee of reducing peak electrical demand by at least the mandated 15 percent, and demonstrated CFAY’s commitment to their host nation during its continued difficult rebuilding period.

CFAY started with a two-strike count against them in the planning stages of the reduction plan: (1) CFAY’s cogeneration plant generates a substantial portion of the electricity used on base, and this plant operated throughout the summer of 2010. Therefore, the electricity output from the cogeneration plant was included in the electrical demand baseline of 2010. If the cogeneration plant had gone offline during the summer of 2010, CFAY would have instantly exceeded the 15 percent 2011 reduction goal without implementing other reduction measures; (2) CFAY’s mission is to support the 7th Fleet, resulting in specific uncontrollable operational requirements, which impose a large electrical demand. The Energy Team was limited by these constraints and worked diligently to design a plan that considered all possibilities for electrical demand reduction without impairing the CFAY mission.

STEPS TAKEN BY CFAY TO REDUCE PEAK ELECTRICITY DEMAND IN HOMES AND WORKSPACES Do your part to help avoid summertime blackouts!!

1. Do not run your washer, dryer or dishwasher between 09:00 and 20:00 on weekdays. (Weekends during the day is fine.)

2. Use specific task lighting (rather than lighting a whole room), or use natural daylight when possible. This saves power, and using fewer lights means less heat is generated in your home or work space.

3. Run your A/C only at the Navy mandated set point: 78 F (25.5 C) or warmer temps for self-controlled units which have thermostats. If this feels insufficient, using a fan to circulate air will help you feel cooler.

4. Close all drapes or blinds on any sun-facing exposures to conserve the cooler air in your home and work space. Your A/C unit will not need to work so hard, consuming more electricity.

5. Close doors to any rooms in your quarters or space that you rarely use. Do not waste electricity cooling a space that you aren’t using.

6. When leaving your quarters, turn off all lights and appliances. Turn A/C to higher temperature setting of 84 F (29 C) when you leave the house.

7. Open windows at night and during early morning, or any time outside air is cooler than inside - let nature help you cool your space for free!

8. Try not to operate too many large electrical appliances at the same time. Peak demand is the highest total amount of power we use at the same time.

9. Turn your computer and monitor OFF when leaving your work space, or at home when not in use. (Chief Information Officer can turn your ONE-Net computer on remotely to run any security patches at night when needed, provided that you shut down from the Windows Menu - do not use the button on your computer for hard shut off.)

10. Unplug mobile phone chargers and appliances when not in use. Even if turned off, any items that are plugged in will consume electricity - we refer to these as phantom loads. (Any appliances with a remote control, such as televisions, game players, stereos, etc. consume extra power, without you noticing.)

11. Make sure your freezer is defrosted. (Frosted-up freezers require more energy to operate.)

12. Clean grime and dust from the coils on the back of your refrigerator - this will allow your refrigerator to operate more efficiently, using less electricity.

13. Have a summer BBQ! Cooking inside with your electric stove or oven uses a lot of electricity, and it creates extra heat inside your house!

14. Let leftovers cool on your counter before placing them in the refrigerator or freezer. Your refrigerator will need to work harder if you put away food that is still hot.

15. Thaw frozen food before cooking to save energy.

The 15 measures in the Demand Reduction Plan included limiting appliance usage to non-peak hours, setting higher air temperatures to reduce air conditioning usage, turning off appliances and computers when not in use, and increasing efficiency of appliances. Additional measures included significant delamping of fixtures to take advantage The Electric Peak Demand Reduction Plan focused on 15 simple steps of natural daylight, securing all outside fountains, display signs, and all base personnel could take to reduce their energy use and alter display case lighting, and securing all but one elevator in buildings daily activities to achieve the CFAY goal (see side bar). The program’s with multiple elevators. Public Works shifted pumping operations message and measures were communicated to all hands through to night hours and shifted or limited incinerator plant operations to multiple channels, including meetings with the network of energy adapt to times of heightened electrical demand. Air conditioning was representatives from each CFAY tenant command asking them to secured at schools in the afternoons following summer school classes, take the message back to their commands, the CFAY base newspaper, and summer school staff adjusted their schedules to contribute to the Facebook site, website, display posters, TV information channel, and the demand reduction. U.S. Naval Hospital Yokosuka shifted appointments Department of the Navy’s energy mascot BRITE, at a spring fair for the to use equipment with large electrical demand outside peak demand public. The Energy Team also filmed promotional TV spots featuring BRITE which aired on the American Forces Network. [continued on p. 6] NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

5

YOKOSUKA [continued from p. 5] hours. Other commands pursued similar electrical demand reduction, Although part of the Energy Team contingency planning, CFAY did not illustrating the key to the Demand Reduction Plan was coordination of need to implement rolling blackouts of non-mission critical electrical feeders to remain below the 15 percent peak demand reduction efforts between Public Works and all tenant commands. mandate. The remarkable 10 percent higher reduction than mandated Impressive results towards lowering energy consumption were attained is due to the efforts of each and every member of the CFAY community. by individual contributions through the energy awareness campaign and the separate peak demand reduction measures by Public Works CFAY will revisit the peak demand reduction program during summer and commands across CFAY. The TEPCO area as a whole achieved a 20.4 2012, as similar shortages in the Japanese electrical grid are expected. percent peak demand reduction in July and 21.9 percent in August. The challenging reconstruction process means there will not be a full CFAY maintained a peak demand reduction of 25 percent all return to the prior level of electrical generation capacity available summer. Credit for this truly remarkable performance goes to everyone to eastern Japan. Because of their successful program, CFAY will be at CFAY who responded to the call for action and pitched in to do their prepared if they are required to achieve future mandated demand part. Every small measure, taking advantage of natural daylight in work reduction targets. The 15 reduction steps will likely still apply and be spaces and homes to reduce electrical lighting, monitoring thermostats expanded upon if necessary. CFAY is proudly doing their part to help and electrical usage to avoid waste, avoiding use of appliances during their host nation during reconstruction following the tragic natural peak hours, and diligently turning off computer monitors and appliances disasters of March 2011. when not in use produced substantial reduction of electricity demand. For further information, contact: Thomas Bawden, Energy Manager, Community participation played the largest single role in CFAY’s Yokosuka Naval Base Thomas.Bawden@fe.navy.mil. successful summer peak Demand Reduction Plan.

Techval Demonstrates Induction and LED Lighting Systems

By Cindy Chen

H

igh-intensity discharge lighting, primarily high-pressure sodium (HPS) lighting, is the most prevalent outdoor lighting technology used at Navy facilities. HPS lighting is recognizable by its amber hue. Although HPS lighting has been an effective outdoor lighting technology, new white light technologies such as induction and light emitting diode (LED) lighting offer the potential to reduce energy and improve illumination.The Navy Technology Validation (Techval) Program recently completed five demonstration projects to assess and evaluate induction and LED lighting technologies and their cost effectiveness in outdoor lighting applications.

Demonstration locations were chosen at five exterior parking areas on the Naval Base Ventura County (NBVC) located in Port Hueneme, Calif., and Naval Station Pearl Harbor (NSPH) located on the island of Oahu near Honolulu, Hawaii. Using the existing HPS lighting systems, Techval measured the power and illumination performance to establish the baseline. Techval then installed the new lighting technologies at each facility. Post-installation measurements were recorded for power, power quality, and illumination performance of the new lighting technologies.

The demonstrations enabled the Navy not only to compare the new technologies to the baseline/HPS lighting, but also to compare the two new technologies against each other. Table 1 summarizes the results of the demonstration projects.

The cost effectiveness of induction and LED lighting is dependent on various factors including the initial costs, local utility rates, and annual operating hours. To assist facility managers to assess the technology, Techval offers guidelines and answers to the most frequently asked questions below:

Photo of an Induction Lamp (courtesy of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).

traditional fluorescent lighting) is used to excite the mercury vapor. A ballast is used to drive the electromagnet. Induction lamps are available in round, rectangular, and oval shaped forms. The units used in the demonstrations are rectangular lamps with external inductors.

LED is a semiconductor-diode that emits light. It consists of a chip of semiconducting material treated to create a structure called a p-n (positive-negative) junction. When connected to a power source, current flows from the p-side (anode) to the n-side (cathode). Charge-carriers (electrons and electron holes) flow into the junction from electrodes.

When an electron meets a hole, it falls into a lower energy level, and releases energy in the form of a photon (light). The specific wavelength or color emitted by the LED depends on the materials used to make the diode. LED requires more specific current and precise thermal heat management than conventional light sources. A driver is used, much as a ballast, to provide the precise current to the LED. LED is typically integrated with the fixture and heat sink (thermal management system).

How does it save energy? Energy is saved because LED lighting is more effective at delivering light where it is required (illumination). As a result, fewer watts are required to achieve the footcandle requirements.

In general, induction lighting can provide improved light quality with the same power requirements as HPS. LED, on the other hand, provides What is the technology? Induction lamps, a form of electrodeless an improved light quality with lower power requirements than HPS. lamps, operate using the same principle as fluorescent lamp technology.

Since LED and induction lighting is a higher quality, whiter light, the Mercury vapor inside the lamp is excited to produce short-wave lighting levels can be dimmed and still deliver the same or better visual ultraviolet light, which then excites phosphors on the lamp surface performance and provide additional energy savings. to produce visible light. The difference is that an induction lamp does not use electrodes; rather electromagnet induction provided by a Induction lamps, like fluorescent lamps, are linear light sources. Half of high frequency power generator (similar to a ballast used to power the lamp’s light output goes into the fixture and needs to be redirected, [continued on p. 7] NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

6

TECHVAL DEMO [continued from p. 6] Table 1. Summary of Demonstration Results NBVC NAVFAC ESC Bldg 1100 Parking Lighting Technology

NBVC Commissary Parking

NBVC NEX Parking

NSPH Parking Lot A

NSPH Dormitory Complex Parking

HPS

LED

HPS

Induction

HPS

LED

HPS

Induction

HPS

LED

Total number of luminaires

23

19

17

17

14

14

20

20

34

34

Number of light poles

12

12

13

13

9

9

13

13

24

24

Rated lamp power, Watts

400

156

400

250

400

207

400

250

150

104

10.88

2.81

7.77

4.74

5.81

2.88

8.54

5.44

5.01

3.42

Measured illumination, lux (Min)

1.2

1.0

5.8

1.7

2.9

3.5

7.9

5.4

1.2

3.9

Measured illumination, lux (Avg)

43.6

8.8

21.9

14.3

28.6

13.3

66.2

37.5

10.8

12.4

Uniformity ratio, Min to Max

335:1

38.2:1

67.9:1

20.8:1

42.0:1

7.2:1

24.7:1

25.5:1

33.4:1

4.9:1

Total measured power, kW

Reduction in measured power, %

74.2%

39.0%

50.4%

36.3%

31.7%

Change in minimum illumination

-16.7%

-70.7%

+20.7%

-31.6% †

+225% ‡

Operation*, hours per year

1,046

1,046

4,015

4,015

4,015

4,015

4,380

4,380

3,832

3,832

Annual energy consumed, kWh/yr

11,968

3,091

31,197

19,031

23,327

11,563

37,405

23,827

19,198

13,105

Annual energy reduction, kWh/yr

8,437

12,166

11,764

13,578

6,093

Annual energy cost avoidance**, $/yr

$1,012

$1,560

$1,412

$2,851

$1,280

3.1

4.4

4.3

12.3

5.5

$49,808

$14,369

$36,746

$30,343

$88,072

49.2

9.2

26

10.6

68.8

CO2 reduced per year††, tons/yr Installed cost Simple payback, years

* Operating hours based on timer control set points † The design intent was to reduce the overall illumination level ‡ The design intent was to increase the overall illumination level ** Electric energy cost = $0.21/kWh (NSPH) and = $0.12/kWh (NBVC). Reference: FY2007 Energy Management Reports †† Source: eGRID2007, version 1.1, United States Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/egrid/index.html

which is increasingly difficult as a light source moves away from a true point source. For induction lamps, good reflector design is needed to light an area without wasting lumens.

As conventional lamps emit light in all directions and create hot spots directly under luminaires, approximately 20 percent to 50 percent of the total light output of the lamp can be lost. The light emitted from LEDs is highly directional, reducing the need for reflectors and diffusers that can trap light and cause output loss. Well-designed LED luminaires can deliver light more efficiently to the intended location.

Where should the Navy apply the technology? Outdoor area lighting appears to be a promising application for induction and LED technologies. These technologies can also be used for roadway and indoor high-bay lighting. Due to the current higher cost of LED technology, induction lighting may be a more suitable replacement for conventional HPS lighting where white light is preferred, especially as replace-on-failure.

While not specifically tested in these demonstrations, anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that cold weather can increase the light output and extend the lamp life of the LED technology; whereas, cold

weather may decrease light output for the induction technology. In addition, hot weather may decrease the life of LED lighting and have less effect on induction lighting. Your LED supplier should be able to tell you how much the specific LED lifespan may be reduced. It should be pointed out however, that unless the light is left on during the heat of the day, the effect of heat on the LED light should be minimal during cooler nighttime temperatures. Although high temperatures may not affect the lifespan of the induction light itself, it may adversely affect the electronics used for the power generator.

How much does it cost and how much does it save? One of the major barriers to LED luminaire is the initial cost, which tends to be several times higher than conventional high-intensity discharge lighting. Induction luminaires costs are somewhat higher than HPS. Additionally, LED luminaires are currently designed as integrated components. This means that upon end of life, the entire unit must be replaced. Induction lamps, however, can be replaced separately from the other components.

While induction and LED lighting performance varied among demonstration sites, the energy reduction potential (as shown in Table 1) ranged from 30 percent to 70 percent over the current HPS system. It

[continued on p. 8]

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

7

TECHVAL DEMO [continued from p. 7] is important to note that in two of the demonstration locations (NBVC Commissary and NSPH Parking Lot A), the energy cost avoidance came at the expense of reduced illumination. As mentioned previously, even though the photopic light levels were reduced, visual performance actually increased due to better quality light provided by the LED and induction light fixtures.

What are the maintenance issues? Both induction and LED technologies report low maintenance and long life. Induction lamp providers report lamp life from 50,000 to 100,000 hours. However, the lamp power generators can be expected to fail before the induction lamp. In addition, lumen output of both LED and induction lamps are subject to lamp lumen depreciation, which can be significant over the long lamp life. For induction lighting, output is typically reduced by about 30 percent after 60,000 hours and about 45 percent after 100,000 hours. LED is considered to be at the end of its life when output is reduced by 30 percent. As a comparison, HPS typically lasts 16,000 to 24,000 hours depending on size, manufacturer, etc., and output is reduced by about 12 percent after 12,000 hours and 25 percent after 24,000 hours. While not necessarily a problem, these maintenance issues need to be anticipated in the design process.

Before

After

Lighting at NBVC Commissary parking area before and after induction lighting installation.

The disadvantages of induction technology include higher equipment cost than HPS. Induction lighting does not appear to provide clear power reduction potential compared to HPS on the basis of power (wattage) required to achieve minimum design standard illumination (footcandles). Because the lamp is larger than conventional lighting technologies, optical control for lumen distribution is more difficult.

Care is required in equipment selection and design to obtain desired uniformity ratios.

The advantages of LED technology in outdoor lighting applications include whiter light and longer lamp life (expectations of 50,000 hours).

However, the technology is too new for true lamp life to be validated.

Based on the current state of LED technology, it is possible to achieve 50 percent reduction in power and energy while maintaining or improving illumination levels. LEDs offer improved optical control, which results in improved quality of light, improved uniformity ratios, and reduced waste in light. LEDs are mercury free. However, at end of life, LED equipment should be treated as electronic waste requiring recycling. LEDs are more durable, resulting in less lamp breakage.

The technical standard for lamp life for the two technologies is different.

For induction lamps, lamp life is defined as the time at which 50 percent of a group of lamps have failed. It should therefore be noted that due to both lumen depreciation and lamp failure, the total lumen output for the system may be as little as 27.5 percent of initial output after 100,000 hours. By contrast, HPS may be as little as 37.5 percent of initial output after 24,000 hours. In the case of LED technology, lamp life is defined as the time when lumen output has degraded to a point that is no longer The main disadvantage of LED technology is high equipment costs. considered optimal - typically 70 percent of initial lumen output.

Because the LED is integrated into the luminaire, replacement requires The LED industry currently reports life of 35,000 to 50,000 hours, the entire luminaire be changed. Lighting replacements will require or more. LED life is very much dependent on chip quality and heat engineering design based on luminaire selection and placement. Due management and, unfortunately, there is a broad range of quality being to longer lamp life, lumen depreciation will be the reason to change sold on the market today. As the LED technology is evolving, Techval lamps rather than lamp burn out. At end of life, LED equipment will likely currently recommends that the life of the warranty be used as the be treated as electronic waste requiring recycling. expected technology life. While both induction and LED technologies offer longer lamp lives, particularly in comparison to HPS, it is important The longer lamp life of both LED and induction lighting technologies to remember that luminaire maintenance to reduce light loss factors is can provide significant reductions in maintenance costs, especially when used at high mounting heights that require special equipment to still important to maintain light output and proper illumination. access the fixtures.

Is the technology mature? LED technology is a new and emerging technology that is still evolving. Most LED luminaire providers are What are the recommendations? The Navy should continue to considered young businesses which are sometimes interpreted as a demonstrate different types of LED luminaires in outdoor lighting source of risk and concern by some installations. On the other hand, applications (parking, roadway, etc.) to expand the understanding of induction technology is fairly mature. Induction lamps and luminaires different LED products and different price points. are available from a variety of manufacturers.

LED technology shows notable promise for outdoor lighting applications What are the advantages and disadvantages of the technology? The but the technology is still in a state of rapid evolution with high initial advantages of induction technology in outdoor lighting applications costs. Costs will come down as equipment production increases. The include whiter light and longer lamp life (50,000 to 100,000 hours vs. Navy could speed up this process by developing a limited specification 24,000 hours for HPS). Power generator life for induction lighting is and standardizing the selection and procurement process for select products. The standardization of equipment specifications would allow estimated at 60,000 hours. manufacturers to invest in the higher production of a limited number of products, thus reducing the unit cost.

Close up view of the new LED luminaires atop an existing light pole.

In addition to the Techval demonstrations, exterior LED lighting has been implemented in other Navy installations, including Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Naval Base San Diego, and Naval Base Ventura County. The LED lighting in Naval Base San Diego has an estimated 6-year payback period based on both energy and maintenance savings.

As more Navy installations continue to adopt new lighting technologies, the cost and effectiveness of the technology are expected to improve.

For more information on Techval, visit https://energy.navy.mil or contact Paul.Kistler@navy.mil.

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

8

Top 10 Energy Saving Measures

are usually used for smaller facilities where more sophisticated controls are not as cost-effective.

4

By Rhonda Stewart

R

ecent audit results indicate nearly 80 percent of identified savings are from 10 energy saving measures. In fiscal years 2009 through 2012, Commander, Navy Installations Command has funded Navy wide energy audits to ensure meeting the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act auditing goal. These audit results are an important aid for installations developing energy efficiency projects. A review of more than 600 cost-effective energy project recommendations from completed audits provides guidelines for finding the most energy savings.

Projects were considered cost-effective when the simple payback, which is the time it takes to recoup the investment cost of the project from reduced energy bills, is within the economic life of the equipment.

The economic life for building systems is 10 years for control systems, 15 years for lighting, steam and condensate systems, and 20 years for other systems.

Table 1 shows the Top 10 measures, the percent of energy savings each measure contributes to the total energy savings of all projects identified, and the Regions for which projects of this type were identified. Audit results for the Southwest, Europe, Southwest Asia, and Africa Regions were not available for this analysis.

1

The top energy saver Navy wide, retro-commissioning, makes sure that building systems work correctly. Your energy management system (EMS) is programmed to limit the amount of unconditioned fresh air coming into the building based on weather and occupancy.

If the damper linkage that modifies the airflow is broken, there is no control and energy savings are impacted. Retrocommissioning shows an average simple payback of three years, and makes up more than one quarter of the total energy savings identified in the audits.

2

EMS (also commonly known as direct digital control) projects involve installing, expanding or upgrading energy management systems, which control things such as temperature setpoints and runtime schedules of various systems.

3

Temperature setback can fall into categories 1 or 2 when EMSs are installed or recommended for installation. Temperature setbacks can also be accomplished with lower tech methods such as programmable thermostats, which often include time clock functions. These systems

Table 1. Top 10 Energy Saving Measures from Navy Wide Energy Audits Measure

% of total energy savings

Regions included

Retro-commissioning

26.8

ML, MW, NW, SE, Wash.

Energy Management System

16.9

ML, NW, SE, Wash.

Temperature Setback

8.3

FE, Hawaii, Guam

Boiler Replacement

6.9

SE, Wash.

Chiller Replacement

5.7

FE, SE, Wash.

Insulate Roofs, Walls, Attics

3.4

SE, Wash.

HVAC Controls Upgrades

3.2

MW

Fluorescent Lighting Upgrades

2.5

ML, MW, NW, SE, Wash.

High Efficiency DX Heat Pumps

2.3

SE

Solar Hot Water

2.2

Guam, Hawaii, SE

Total

78.2

Boiler replacements came in high on the list of energy saving measures largely due to oversized central plant boilers located at an installation in the Southeast. This shows that you can’t make generalizations about best regions in which to apply a particular technology, and need to survey all facilities with high energy use for energy saving measures.

5 6

Chiller replacements were found to provide significant energy savings opportunties in the Far East, Southeast and Washington Regions.

Insulation is generally cost-effective for conditioned spaces when there is currently little or no insulation; the roof, wall or attic is easily accessible; and extensive finish work won’t be required to make a surface such as a wall look presentable for an office environment.

7

Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning controls upgrades represent a single project at a large base that already has an EMS. This project adds control strategies for chilled water temperature reset, condenser water reset, discharge air temperature reset, night purge, optimum stop/start, or supply air static reset for the numerous variable air volume air distribution systems.

8

Most Navy fluorescent lighting systems have been upgraded in recent years, because lighting projects tend to show the best paybacks. The gains that can be made by moving to the next generation of technology advances are not as significant as the gains that brought fluorescent lighting systems to where they are today. Additionally, the cost of fluorescent lamps is up sharply due to a cost increase in rare earth elements used in their manufacture. Watch for light-emitting diode lighting systems to show up as cost-effective projects in the future, especially in niche applications such as exterior lighting. Note that lighting projects save electricity, which costs about three times more per British thermal unit than fossil fuels, since most electricity is made from fossil fuels. Lighting projects often save less energy than thermal projects with the same simple payback.

9 10

Numerous facilities in the Southeast use older direct expansion heat pumps for cooling and heating. The survey results indicate that many of these units can be cost-effectively upgraded to high efficiency units.

Projects that install solar thermal systems to heat water were found to provide significant cost-effective energy savings in Hawaii, Marianas and Southeast.

The lowest cost, fastest payback measures are the same measures that the Navy Utility and Energy Cost-Saving Tiger Team found time and again and have been the “low-hanging fruit” since the early days of energy management: temperature setback, delamping light fixtures, pipe insulation, low-flow showerheads, and attic insulation. Additional low-cost recommendations were highlighted in the reports without economic analysis, such as shutting off lights and computers when not needed. Significant reductions require considering all cost-effective upgrades, and using efficient integrated design methods for new construction and major renovations.

The Top 10 list of energy saving measures resulting from an analysis of survey results is intended to show an overview of technologies and strategies worth investigating. Various factors contribute to the viability of the energy saving measures in differing applications. Utility rates vary from one location to the next. Weather conditions will impact the viability of most measures on the Top 10 list. Different audit teams may have applied different assumptions, yielding different results. The audit reports are available for download at: https://navyenergy.navfac.navy.mil/projects/energy_surveys/energy_ surveys.html.

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

9

New Energy Policy

Use non-tactical vehicles for official business only Limit vehicle idling to severe circumstances

By Rhonda Stewart Reduce total vehicle miles traveled Meet vehicle minimum utilization requirements SECNAV INSTRUCTION 4101.3 On Feb. 3, 2012, the Honorable Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy, issued Employ performance monitoring SECNAV Instruction 4101.3,“Department of the Navy Energy Program for The memorandum also provided guidance on building to LEED Gold Security and Independence Roles and Responsibilities.” The instruction standards. This section is impacted by new legislation, the NDAA of 2012. assigns Department-wide responsibilities for the administration and The policy memorandum is available at: https://portal.navfac.navy.mil/ management of Department of the Navy (DoN) energy programs. portal/page/portal/eo/ref/navgov_tab The instruction outlines policy measures, including: minimizing energy consumption, applying alternative energy solutions, developing a National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 DoN strategic energy plan, evaluating energy in procurement actions, On Dec. 31, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the NDAA of 2012 into fostering partnerships, energy training for DoN civilian and military law. The Act includes several energy provisions. Highlights include: personnel, and developing and reviewing metrics.

Sec 2822 Consideration of Energy Security The instruction additionally outlines energy responsibilities at the Services are to provide favorable consideration for energy security Secretariat level, and provides guidelines for the Chief of Naval (provide power directly to a military facility or into the installation Operations and Commandant of the Marine Corps to carry out policies and directives developed under the instruction.

The instruction is available at: http://doni.daps.dla.mil/Directives/04000%20Logistical%20Support%20 and%20Services/04-100%20Material%20Resources%20Storage%20 and%20Management/4101.3.pdf Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Energy) Policy Memorandum On Dec. 1, 2011, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy Mr. Tom Hicks, issued a policy memorandum to request plans and budgets, and provide guidance, to help installations meet the Secretary’s shore energy goals: Increase alternative energy use ashore; by 2020, at least 50% of shorebased energy requirements will corne from alternative sources; 50% of DoN installations will be net zero Reduce Non-tactical Petroleum Use; by 2015 DoN will reduce petroleum use in the nontactical fleet by 50% Build to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards The memorandum states that installations should place a priority on implementing an energy efficiency program. The reduced energy consumption resulting from energy efficiency will facilitate meeting alternative energy, net zero, and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals.

The memorandum includes policy on ownership of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs). For example, it is DoN’s policy that ownership or retirement of RECs is not required to receive credit towards National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) or the Secretary’s renewable/net zero energy goals, and purchasing of RECs not associated with on-base projects is not recommended.

The memorandum includes guidance on ownership of power producing facilities, stating that it is the intent of DoN not to become a power producer, and that multi-mega-watt power projects should normally be owned and operated by third party contractors. The memorandum states that benefits of reduced reliance on the power grid, reduced dependence on foreign energy sources, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions should be included in life cycle economics of renewable energy projects.

Additionally, the memorandum provides guidance for reducing non-tactical petroleum use in the following areas: Use alternative fuel 100 percent of the time in alternative fuel vehicles Continue to right size the non-tactical fleet

[continued on p. 11]

Energy Terms Defined SECNAV Instruction 4101.3 provides definitions for key energy terms:

Alternative Energy Energy derived from non-fossil fuel sources, which may include renewable energy sources (see the instruction for examples) and nuclear energy.

Alternative Fuels Fuels derived from a material other than a conventional fossil fuel.

Examples of an alternative fuel include: advanced bio-fuels, bioalcohol, chemically stored electricity, hydrogen, non-fossil methane, sustainably produced electricity or biomass derived fuel.

Net Zero Installation A DoN installation which, over the course of a fiscal year, matches or exceeds the electrical energy it consumes ashore with electrical energy generated from alternative or renewable energy sources.

The alternative energy may be (1) generated on the installation, or (2) generated off the installation but purchased for and consumed on the installation. The DASN (Energy) policy memo additionally says that the following electrical loads will not be included in the net zero calculation: shore power to ships, simulators and transmitters, private parties such as banks and restaurants, portable construction trailers, non-DOD governmental facilities, and thermal energy consumption.

Operational Energy The energy required for training, moving and sustaining military forces and weapons platforms for military operations. The term includes energy used by tactical power systems and generators and weapons platforms.

Shore Energy Shore energy includes energy development, production, acquisition, utilization, distribution and management relating to Navy and Marine Corps installations.

Smart Grid Smart grid shall have the meaning prescribed in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, section 1301. See https://navy energy.navfac.navy.mil/publications/LEGISLATION/110_houseamnd_hr6. pdf page 761 for the characteristics that collectively define a smart grid.

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

10

NEW ENERGY POLICY [continued from p. 10] electrical distribution system) in the design and development of Sec 2929 Training of Defense Energy Managers DOD shall establish a training policy for DOD energy managers and renewable projects. report to Congress within 180 days of details of policy.

Services are to notify the Office of the Secretary of Defense, who will notify Congress regarding any agreement that excludes pursuit of Sec 2830 Prohibition on Use of Funds for LEED Gold or Platinum Certification energy security on the grounds of being cost prohibitive.

No funds for Fiscal Year 2012 may be obligated or expended for achieving Sec 2827 Capture and Track Metered Data LEED gold or platinum certification. The Secretary of Defense may waive Information generated by installation energy meters shall be captured this limitation if the Secretary submits a notification (containing a cost and tracked. benefit analysis) to congressional defense committees at least 30 days before obligation of funds to achieve LEED gold or platinum certification.

Sec 2828 Metering of Navy Piers Meter Navy piers so that energy consumption of naval vessels while “Exception: LEED gold or platinum certifications shall be permitted, and not in port can be accurately measured and captured and steps taken to require a waiver and notification under this subsection, if achieving such certification imposes no additional cost to the Department of Defense.” improve the efficient use of energy by naval vessels while in port.

NAVFAC ESC Scores a Win in DoN CPI Project Competition

By Paul Kistler

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Engineering Service Center (NAVFAC ESC) recently won the DoN Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) Project competition for the Navy in the “Best Example of Energy Savings” category. Project awards were selected by DoN CPI experts from over 50 submissions in five award categories. Information/ data in the submission write-up and the Continuous Performance Improvement Management System were used to rank the projects.

The winning NAVFAC ESC “Just in Time Lighting” project was conducted by the Navy’s Technology Validation Program to test the efficacy of workstation specific lighting. This project allowed personnel to adjust their work space lighting levels for optimum individual comfort.

[See Spring 2011 +Energized article - Techval Gives the Green Light to Workstation Specific Lighting].

An independently controllable lighting system was installed at individual workstations. Using a hand-held remote control device,

Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NAVFAC ESC) Commanding Officer:

Brant D. Pickrell, CAPT, CEC, USN

Editorial Staff:

Darrell Waller, Public Affairs Office

occupants can set and adjust light levels according to individual preferences. Before and after surveys showed that 30% of respondents did not like the existing lighting, but only 7% expressed dissatisfaction with the new lighting system.

The “Just in Time Lighting” project saw a lighting energy cost avoidance of about $1,879, or 64% a year. Additional imminent improvements should show a total reduction/cost avoidance of 75% or $2,195. These savings were measured by using data loggers to take power level measurements on the lighting circuits in 15 minute intervals for a period of two weeks.

Initial studies depict that assuming workstation specific lighting could be deployed in 50% of Navy office spaces and would result in 50% savings in those spaces, the resulting savings could be more than 500,000 MWh/year for a cost avoidance of more than $50M a year.

+Energized is a publication of NAVFAC ESC. Contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Department of Defense, the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command and NAVFAC ESC, nor do references to products or services constitute an endorsement. Trademarks, service marks, or other means of identification remain the property of the respective owner.

Please send all story ideas, articles and photographic submissions to NAVFAC ESC contractor, BMT, at the e-mail listed below. Photographic digital images should include captions and be of acceptable print

resolution to ensure print quality. Submissions should include authorship, rank/ title, postal address, phone number, and e-mail address.

Please send all story ideas, articles, and photographic submissions to: e-mail: jvandall@dandp.com voice: (703) 920-7070, ext. 250

Newsletter Contributors:

Roberta Bucher, Thomas Bawden, Cindy Chen, Mike Hicks, Kathi Jones, Calvin Kawamura, Paul Kistler, David Powell, Rhonda Stewart, and Jeff Vandall.

NAVY & MARINE CORPS +ENERGIZED SPRING 2012

11