St Street t Lighting Li hti Review R i City of Virginia Beach, Virginia PACE Collaborative Mechanical and Electrical Engineers Introduction PACE Collaborative,, P.C. was commissioned in November of 2012 to provide p a street lighting review within the context of the following engineering services: Evaluate replacement street lighting fixtures and technology with the goal of reducing energy and reducing cost of operations and maintenance. Measure power input and light output for a sample of lighting fixtures. Research the lighting marketplace to determine other sources that may contribute to reaching the above stated goals. g output p ((lumens), ), light g level ((footcandles), ), color Evaluate light temperature (degrees Kelvin), input power (amps, volts, watts), initial cost, maintenance costs. Interview City personnel and address issues issues, concerns concerns, and desires desires. Create a summary report to address findings. Prepare a brief PowerPoint presentation and present the findings. St Street t Lighting Li hti Review R i City of Virginia Beach, Virginia A few Facts … 48,277 Street Lighting Fixtures 3600 Lane Miles Managed by City $5.4 Million Per Year to DVP (ltg) $9 32 per fixture per month $9.32 LED’s Changing the Rules METHODOLOGY Evaluate current procedures Evaluate current costs and alternates Interview other Cities Interview the stakeholders; City City, DVP DVP, Mfrs, Mfrs Installing Contractors Consider alternate methods and costs 1. City y Owned and Maintained 2. City Owned, Contract Maintenance … for: A. Existing Streets B. New Construction Measured and Analyzed City Pilot Projects Research the Market … Technology, Technology Efficacy, Efficacy Pricing Street Lighting Review Q Questions ti Addressed Add d by b this thi Evaluation E l ti Consider … Sh ld the Should th City Cit take t k over ownership hi off street t t lighting? If so, what fixture should be the standard? Should the City have a street lighting manager? What does the City pay for street lighting now and are there ways to reduce the cost? Should the City install and own the street lighting at the Princess Anne Road Expansion Project? Pilot Projects j … Findings g Further research indicated that the LED fixtures that were used in the pilot projects j t are no llonger manufactured. f t d IIn fact, f t the th manufacturers f t that th t provided the fixtures for the pilot projects are now producing later model versions of each of the LED fixtures. LED lighting technology is a rapidly changing environment. Most notable in our observation of the pilot projects was the mix of color. Older high pressure sodium street lighting fixtures produced yellow light. N New LED fixtures fi t produced d d a very white hit lilight. ht Ob Observing i b both th lilighting hti outputs simultaneously enhances the favorability of the white and the unfavorable impact of the yellow. Pilot Projects j … Findings g All LED pilot project fixtures are outdated and no l longer available. il bl LED pilot projects were mixed with HPS street light fixtures. fixtures Visually unappealing mix of white and yellow light. Street Light g Fixtures Associated with this Project j The lighting fixtures currently illuminating the vast majority of streets th throughout h t th the city it are hi high h pressure sodium, di cobra b h head d shaped, h d and d are mounted to Dominion Virginia Power poles. This fixture is considered the “incumbent” HPS fixture. The incumbent HPS produces light at approximately 2,000K, very yellow. PACE Engineers reviewed numerous LED replacement technologies, including a Dominion Power provided LED, as well as other fixtures available il bl in i the th marketplace. k t l The Th associated i t d efficacy ffi (lumens (l per watt) tt) are compared herein. Compare Various Street Lighting Fixtures 1 DVP Incumbent Sodium 2 3 4 5 6 DVP LED Hi Efficiency LED Hadco RX2 Beta STR Dialight Power ((Watts)) 250.00 244.00 190.00 271.00 272.00 252.00 Lumen Output 20000.0 18100.0 18717.0 16944.0 13894.0 20250.0 Lumens Per Watt 80.0 74.2 98.5 62.5 51.1 80.4 Warranty (yrs) 0.0 5.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 n/a Lumens per Watt (Miles per gallon) What Others are Doing PACE Engineers g interviewed representatives p of other municipalities p to determine what they are doing in the arena of Street Lighting. It became evident that the majority of municipalities are hiring Dominion Virginia Power to provide and maintain their street lighting systems, and very few municipalities are even considering alternatives. Our interviews revealed that attempts were made in the past byy some municipalities to own and maintain lighting fixtures with limited success. In one case, a local municipality, using city maintenance staff, failed to keep pace with the fixture outages. It became obvious when the number of fixtures not working steadily increased. The City ultimately turned the fixtures over to Dominion Virginia Power for continued maintenance. In another case, the underground conductor installation was a source of frequent outages. When the City attempted to turn this i t ll ti over tto D installation Dominion i i P Power, th the P Power company refused f dd due tto th the complex nature of maintaining a concealed underground circuit that, perhaps, was not installed up to DVP standards. What Others are Doing Arlington: City successfully owns and maintains street lighting – Aesthetic choice Overhead O h d di distribution t ib ti iis nott practical ti l Richmond: DVP Provided Some City owned, with limited success No in-depth study conducted Loudoun County: County owns some street lighting City owns (some) parking lot lighting Chesapeake: DVP Provided City owned some previously, with limited success Will attempt City Owned LED’s LED s in upcoming projects Norfolk: DVP Provided, no changes forthcoming Issues of Ownership Th There are many issues i associated i t d with ith ownership hi off a complex l street t t lighting system that often are hidden within the confines of a company providing the service. Many of these issues have associated costs and require resources. resources Maintenance of a system of this magnitude will require resources including manpower and equipment as well as real estate for the storage of spare components. Subcontracting g the maintenance of the Street Lighting g g system y to p private sector contractors will minimize the impact on the internal resources of the City. The introduction of competition in this area will result in a cost reduction and a maintenance process that will appear to be very similar to that of the current arrangement with Dominion Virginia Power. Issues of Ownership City Owned & Maintained Street Lights: Staffing Equipment Real Estate … storage of spare poles and fixtures Metering M t i Complexities C l iti City Owned With Contracted Fixture Maintenance: Storage of spare parts at contractor location Contract Management Staffing St ffi and d Equipment E i t issues i resolved l d More Issues of Takeover Existing lighting fixtures, which are on existing Dominion Virginia Power poles with existing conductors would be very difficult to take over from Dominion Virginia Power. These fixtures are currently not metered. Revenue metering would have to be installed. installed This would o ld be a very er e expensive pensi e and comple complex process on an existing pole. Dominion Virginia Power fixtures have a remaining asset value and a twenty-year life. The value of the 48,277 fixtures throughout Virginia Beach is very high in the eyes of the current owner (DVP). For example, p assuming g each lighting g g fixture has an initial value of $500 and it is half-wayy through g its useful life of 20 years (currently valued at $250) x 48,277 fixtures = Total current asset value of $12.1 million. Purchasing the 48,277 fixtures throughout the city for a value of $12 million and then adding revenue meters to each fixture would be a cost prohibitive exercise and would not result in savings. The takeover of Ownership p from Dominion Virginia g Power to the City y of Virginia Beach of existing lighting fixtures would require SCC approval. This is a very time consuming and politically charged process. In summary summary, the potential of taking over existing fixtures does not appear to yield favorable results. Specific cost calculations are offered herein. Issues of Takeover It’s not Free Installation sta at o o of meter ete costs Remaining asset value cost SCC approval costs Steps p Towards City y Ownership p There are three scenarios which exist concerning the takeover of ownership of the street lighting infrastructure. A. There are existing fixtures mounted to existing utility poles, which currently have existing DVP power conductors. These fixtures are c rrentl not metered currently metered. B. There are existing fixtures mounted to existing DVP lighting poles with underground circuiting. There are no overhead power conductors on poles. These fixtures are not metered; however, the installation these p of a single meter at the head of this circuit would be possible. C. New roadway construction results in the installation of a new street lighting system. Conceivably, this new system could be installed and maintained by DVP, or could be installed and maintained by a private sector contractor. Cost evaluations of Scenarios A and B resulted in an extraordinarily long payback b k period. i d Thi This was d due iin llarge partt tto th the hi high h costt off th the assett value and to the high cost of the metering addition. With payback periods of 78 and 64 years respectively, the conclusions are obvious. The Costs Are … Existing g Utility y Poles with Power Lines This is an example of an existing Street Lighting fixture mounted to an existing pole which currently has existing DVP power conductors conductors. These fixtures are currently owned and maintained by DVP. These fixtures are currently not metered. The City is charged a Bundled Flat Rate per fixture per month by DVP DVP. The addition of revenue meters for each fixture would be required for t transfer f off ownership hi off these th fifixtures. t Thi This process would ld result lt in i one meter for each lighting fixture and would be complex and expensive. In many cases the cost of the revenue meter may exceed the cost of a single lighting fixture. A. Utility Pole With DVP Power Lines Transfer of Ownership p is Difficult Existing g Lighting g g Poles without Power Lines This is an example of an existing lighting fixture on a pole with no existing overhead power lines. lines Numerous fixtures are connected to a single circuit and are wired underground. It would be straight forward and somewhat inexpensive to add the necessary revenue metering to this scenario. The single circuit could be “intercepted” near its source and rerouted through a metering and control station. t ti This wiring arrangement results in a single meter for numerous lighting fixtures and therefore results in a lower initial cost. B. Lighting Pole Without DVP Power Lines Ownership is Achievable Alternate C … New Construction PACE Engineers evaluated the currently designed (but not yet installed) system of DVP lighting for the Princess Anne Road Extension IV (PA-4). Previously y a design g had been done by y the roadway y designer g that was based on conventional DVP High Pressure Sodium lighting fixtures. That original design was replaced with a design based on DVP’s currently available LED lighting fixtures. PACE Engineers created a third design layout based on the industry’s b t available best il bl LED roadway d lighting li hti fifixture. t The new layout using high efficiency LED’s matched the lighting level of 1 foot candle which was targeted in the first two layouts foot-candle layouts, and resulted in a significant reduction of lighting fixture quantities. C. New Roadway / Street New Construction Ownership is More Achievable Compare p High g Efficiency y LED to DVP LED Various average annual costs were estimated for a City Owned Street Lighting system on the PA-4 roadway project including the following factors. The calculations for these cost factors are included at the end of this document. Lamp Replacements: Most notably influencing this cost factor is the industry standard warranty, which in many cases is 10-years. The only remaining component of lamp replacement costs are labor and equipment for the first ten year period. (Note that this increases for years after the tenth year, however it remains less than the DVP installation). Lamp replacement is included in the Bundled Flat Rate by DVP. Energy Cost: One primary advantage of LED’s is the reduced energy required for illumination. The Energy cost is included in the Bundled Flat Rate by DVP. Knock Down Repair: or Replacement: The estimated quantity of pole knock downs is established by the National Highway System Asset Preservation Program. This is a very low number. Cut Circuit Repair: Construction projects require underground trenching for the installation of new wiring and piping. This activity sometimes results in lighting circuit cuts that require repair. Photo Cell and Contactor Repairs: Often times the weak link in the reliability of a Street lighting system is the photo cell. For the purposes of this study, an annual replacement of each photo cell and a four-year replacement of each contactor was utilized. Princess Anne Road Street Lighting Compare - As Designed vs. s Alternati Alternative e 1 2 (City owned) Dominion LED High Efficiency LED Average Light Level (FC) 1.0 1.0 Fixture Quantity y 262 182 $1,314,292 $1,197,485 Lamp Replacement Included $7,174 Energy Included $10,516 Knockdown Repair Included $2,818 UG Cut Circuit Repairs Included $1,065 Photocell Repairs Included $1,076 Contactor Repairs Included $930 $47,939 ** $23,580 Initial Cost Annual Operating Costs: Total Annual Costs ** This cost from DVP contract based on established Rate Schedule SSL ** Compare to Conventional HPS It is quite apparent that the use of the industry’s latest and best LED t h l technology coupled l d with ith th the competitive titi nature t off the th private i t sector t will ill result in a savings to the City for Street Lighting when compared to DVP’s current LED offering. But, how does this compare to the conventional High Pressure Sodium lighting fixture, those that produce that familiar yellow light that has been the predominant system for the last thirty-or-so years? Princess Anne Road Street Lighting Compare - As Designed vs. s Alternati Alternative e 1 2 (City owned) 3 Dominion LED High g Efficiency y LED Conventional Dominion Sodium Average Light Level (FC) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Fixture Quantity 262 182 257 $1,314,292 $1,197,485 $1,222,159 L Lamp Replacement R l t I l d d Included $7 174 $7,174 I l d d Included Energy Included $10,516 Included Knockdown Repair Included $2,818 Included UG Cut Circuit Repairs Included $1,065 Included Photocell Repairs Included $1,076 Included Contactor Repairs Included $930 Included Total Average Annual Costs $47,939 ** $23,580 $38,828 Initial Cost Average Annual Operating Costs: ** This cost from DVP contract based on established Rate Schedule SSL ** Reporting Process Currently, malfunctioning street lights are reported with 1 of 3 methods: (1) A call to the PWC Operations (757)3851470, (2) a call to DVP directly, or (3) a report through the online “Report a Problem Center” … http://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/public-works/report-a-problem/pages/default.aspx DVP then uses that information to perform repairs and billings. DVP bills the City monthly, giving credit for any lights that may have not been repaired promptly. The order of magnitude g of the monthly y bills is approx pp $450,000. , The order of magnitude g of any y credits that are included (due to fixtures that are not repaired promptly) is approx. $1,800. This vast range has been cause for concern among City personnel resulting in a question of validity. Does the credit fairly reflect lighting fixtures that are have not been repaired promptly? City Operations sends staff members out annually to travel the major roadways within the City to observe the functionality of the Street Lighting System. The resulting counts and quantities have historically fell in line with the credits in the DVP billings. This effort has reduced the cause for concern about the validity of the DVP accounting. It is the belief of City personnel that fixture outages within residential neighborhoods are quickly reported by the residents and therefore need no further monitoring. IIn some cases, City Cit P Police li officers ffi notify tif O Operations ti off lighting li hti pole l or fifixture t d damage b by submitting b itti an “A “Agency Referral Notice.” City Operations personnel have direct access to the DVP online database that tracks street lighting systems. DVP representatives indicate that the information contained within this database should put any questions to rest about the validity of the billings and credits. credits DVP re-negotiates rates for street lighting every four years. The current rates will remain in effect until 2014. The rates are negotiated through VEPGA, The Virginia Electric Purchasing Governmental Association. Previous DVP rate schedules did not include LED lighting as it is very new technology. The current rate for LED’s is the SSL (Solid State Lighting) rate schedule which has been approved by DVP in October of 2012 2012. Reporting Process Observe Lights Out DVP Database City PWC Ops Website Call DVP Bill City Accounting Virginia Vi i i Electric El t i Purchasing Governmental Association (VEPGA) Deducts $ Rates 4-Years DVP Police Form “A “Agency R Referral f lN Notice” ti ” The attached Police Form “Agency Referral Notice” is sometimes used by the City y Police Department p to communicate damaged g lighting g gp poles or fixtures. City Police Officers could perhaps be a valuable resource in monitoring the status of malfunctioning Street Lighting Systems. A Few Findings The Review process revealed numerous findings that, perhaps, could have b been d declared l d obvious. b i S Several, l h however, are quite it astounding. t di The vast amounts of dollars spent to illuminate the City roadways cause one to ponder. The understanding that these dollars are spent in a non-competitive environment should result in question at least and action at best. Lighting, like many other industries Lighting industries, is increasingly complex complex, extraordinarily important and warrants increased attention and resources. AF Few Findings Fi di … 1. $5.4 Million Annual Cost to provide Street Lighting in VaBeach 2. Higher Efficiency Lighting Fixtures exist … than DVP’s 3. There is a Fragmented standardization of Fixture Types 4. City ownership of NEW PROJECT Street lighting Can save money 5. City ownership of existing street lighting will not save money 6. Tracking and Reporting of DVP System is Vague 7. There is a Fragmented understanding of the procurement system 8. Dark Sky compliance is desirable among stakeholders 9. Color temperature 4000 - 4500 K is desirable among stakeholders Recommendations A well thought out city-wide standard for street lighting equipment would ensure that th t the th mostt currentt technology t h l and d mostt costt effective ff ti methods th d are employed to illuminate the City streets. City ownership of new roadway lighting systems, coupled with a private sector, competitively bid contract for the installation, service and maintenance of the system will result in significant savings to the City. A more comprehensive understanding of the current DVP tracking and billing methods as well as a deeper understanding of the capabilities of the existing DVP database would be good for the City. This may reveal potential areas to reduce costs. costs Create the position of a City lighting “Czar” to work toward the consolidation of the City lighting vision, to create and manage the standards t d d ffor lighting li hti system t components, t tto monitor it and d manage th the DVP relationship, to monitor and manage the lighting service and maintenance contracts, to keep abreast of lighting technology and to inform interested C departments off on-going updates in the industry. City R Recommendations d ti 1. Create a City-wide Lighting Standard 2. Consider Ownership of Street Lights on all new roadway projects a Contract for installation a. b. Contract for Maintenance 3. Improve the verification system of the DVP contract a. Improve the DVP reporting system b. Improving City use of the DVP database c. Solicit S li it the th help h l off Police P li to t reportt outages t 4 Consolidate the City-Wide 4. City Wide Lighting Vision Create a position of a Lighting “Czar” 5 Avoid the added expense of taking over existing 5. street lights Supporting Calculations The following appendix includes calculations as well as pertinent technical discussions from previous studies studies. Supporting Calculations March 2013 Supporting Calculations March 2013 Supporting Calculations March 2013 Supporting Calculations March 2013 Supporting Calculations March 2013 Technologies LED technology t h l is i relatively l ti l young. It's It' efficacy ffi continues ti to t increase i while most other lighting technologies have leveled off. The price for LED technology is decreasing as its efficacy increases. gy will continue to develop p and it will soon become the LED technology obvious choice. Note: This information and the accompanying graphic is from the “Pedestrian Site Lighting Review” by PACE for the City dated July, 2012. Efficacy of Light Sources Color: White vs vs. Yellow The Incumbent HPS fixture produces light that appears yellow. This light is at approximately 2000 degrees Kelvin ((K), ), quite q yellow. y The color temperature is a measurement of “whiteness” of a light source. It is expressed in “Degrees Kelvin” or “K”. The higher the “K” number, the whiter the light. The lower the color temperature, the more yellow the light appears. LED light g sources as well as select fluorescents and metal-halides p produce light g in much higher g color temperatures p ranging from 3000-K up to 5000-K. This light is very “white”. There is much discussion and research being done concerning the color of light and the associated “see-ability” in a luminous environment. It is rapidly becoming evident that occupants of a given luminous environment desire white light as opposed to yellow light, and that the perceived “see-ability” is much improved in the white light environment. Steps are being taken to quantify this perception with numerical ratios termed Scotopic / Photopic ratios, or S/P ratios. These numerical weighting ratios will permit white light environments to be less bright than yellow light environments, and yet be considered equal in terms of “see-ability”. For example, a white light environment at 1FootCandle may be visually equivalent to 2-Footcandles in a yellow light environment. One can only imagine the energy saving implications involved. Although this developing area offers much promise to the proponents of white light, it is important to note that both the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) as well as the Department of Energy (DOE) do not accept the use of numerical weighting ratios when comparing light color and insist that light level measurements be made using methods independent of color. Through discussions, interviews, and research it remains evident and obvious that white light is preferred. Note: This information and the accompanying graphic is from the “Pedestrian Site Lighting Review” by PACE Collaborative, P.C. July, 2012. White vs. Yellow Light g Spectral Weighting Scotopic / Photopic ratio IES and DOE Positions