View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Accelerating the Commercialization of Solid-State Lighting: Single Family Residential
LED Lighting Demonstrations
Prepared for:
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
Albany, NY
Ryan Moore Project Manager
Prepared by:
Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy, NY
Jennifer Brons Jeremy Snyder
Project Mangers
NYSERDA Report NYSERDA Contract 39666 June 2017
i
Notice This report was prepared by the Lighting Research Center in the course of performing work contracted for
and sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (hereafter
“NYSERDA”). The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect those of NYSERDA or the
State of New York, and reference to any specific product, service, process, or method does not constitute
an implied or expressed recommendation or endorsement of it. Further, NYSERDA, the State of New
York, and the contractor make no warranties or representations, expressed or implied, as to the fitness for
particular purpose or merchantability of any product, apparatus, or service, or the usefulness,
completeness, or accuracy of any processes, methods, or other information contained, described,
disclosed, or referred to in this report. NYSERDA, the State of New York, and the contractor make no
representation that the use of any product, apparatus, process, method, or other information will not
infringe privately owned rights and will assume no liability for any loss, injury, or damage resulting from,
or occurring in connection with, the use of information contained, described, disclosed, or referred to in
this report.
NYSERDA makes every effort to provide accurate information about copyright owners and related
matters in the reports we publish. Contractors are responsible for determining and satisfying copyright or
other use restrictions regarding the content of reports that they write, in compliance with NYSERDA’s
policies and federal law. If you are the copyright owner and believe a NYSERDA report has not properly
attributed your work to you or has used it without permission, please email print@nyserda.ny.gov
Information contained in this document, such as web page addresses, are current at the time of
publication.
ii
Abstract In support of the Residential Emerging Technologies and Accelerated Commercialization (ETAC)
initiative, the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (LRC) demonstrated the
effectiveness of solid-state light-emitting diode (LED) lighting in residences. The lighting consisted of
LED bulbs and fixtures, in both new and existing homes in New York State. At occupied sites,
monitoring devices measured the hours of use of the lighting. These data were used to assess energy and
cost savings compared to conventional lighting technology. Several sites were model homes, allowing
visitors to observe the LED lighting in person.
Keywords lighting; LED; solid-state lighting; energy savings; energy efficiency; lighting design; new construction;
retrofit; residential lighting; residential hours of use; LEDs in homes; residential lighting patterns;
residential lighting questionnaire; builder lighting questionnaire; residential light measurements;
residential lighting payback
iii
Table of Contents Notice ......................................................................................................................................... i
Abstract .................................................................................................................................... ii
Keywords .................................................................................................................................. ii
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ v
Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................vi
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ ES-1
1 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Site recruitment ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Lighting design and specification .................................................................................................. 3
1.2.1 New Construction Sites ......................................................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Retrofit Sites .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Measurement & Verification (M&V) ............................................................................................... 5 1.3.1 Occupant and Visitor Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 6 1.3.2 Builder Questionnaire ............................................................................................................ 7 1.3.3 Photometric Measurements .................................................................................................. 8 1.3.4 Hours-of-Use Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 9 1.3.5 As-Built Verification ............................................................................................................. 11
1.4 Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4.1 Power Demand .................................................................................................................... 11 1.4.2 Power Density ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.4.3 Energy Use Compared to Base Case ................................................................................. 12 1.4.4 Technical Characteristics .................................................................................................... 12 1.4.5 Environmental Impact ......................................................................................................... 13 1.4.6 Cost-Benefits (Payback Period) Methodology .................................................................... 13
2 Results ..............................................................................................................................15
2.1 Technical Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 15 2.2 Occupant Questionnaires ............................................................................................................ 15 2.3 Builder Questionnaires ................................................................................................................ 19 2.4 Photometric Measurements ........................................................................................................ 20 2.5 Hours-of-Use ............................................................................................................................... 23 2.6 Energy Savings ........................................................................................................................... 24 2.7 Payback Period ........................................................................................................................... 25
iv
2.8 Power Density ............................................................................................................................. 26 2.9 Avoided Pollution ........................................................................................................................ 27
3 Discussion ........................................................................................................................29
3.1 Technology Transfer Activities .................................................................................................... 30
4 References .......................................................................................................................31
5 Credits ..............................................................................................................................32
Appendix A: Albany, NY ....................................................................................................... A-1
Appendix B: Cazenovia, NY ................................................................................................. B-1
Appendix C: Penfield Webster, NY ...................................................................................... C-1
Appendix D: Saratoga Springs, NY ...................................................................................... D-1
Appendix E: Clarence, NY .................................................................................................... E-1
Appendix F: Hamburg, NY .................................................................................................... F-1
Appendix G: Penfield, NY ..................................................................................................... G-1
Appendix H: Pittsford, NY .................................................................................................... H-1
Appendix I: Poughkeepsie .................................................................................................... I-1
Appendix J. Syracuse, NY .................................................................................................... J-1
Appendix K: Woodstock, NY ................................................................................................ K-1
v
List of Figures Figure 1. Location of 11 sites in New York State ........................................................................ 3 Figure 2. Monitoring Devices Installed In/On Fixtures ...............................................................10 Figure 3. Questionnaire - Average All Rooms at Each House ...................................................18 Figure 4. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Kitchen and Dining Areas.........................21 Figure 5. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Living Room Areas...................................21 Figure 6. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Entries, Hallways, Home Offices, Laundry
Rooms ...........................................................................................................................22 Figure 7. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Bedrooms ................................................22 Figure 8. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Bathrooms ...............................................23 Figure 9. Average Daily Hours of Use, Expected vs. Measured ................................................23 Figure 10. Average Daily Hours of Use - Hallways ....................................................................24 Figure 11. Estimated Annual Lighting Energy Savings at Residential Demonstration Sites .......25 Figure 12. Payback Periods for New Construction Sites ...........................................................26 Figure 13. Payback Periods for New Construction Sites ...........................................................26 Figure 14. Lighting Power Densities for All Demonstration Sites ...............................................27 Figure 15. Lamp Life Rating Reported in Years, Assuming 3 Hours Per Day ............................30 Figure 13: Laundry ....................................................................................................................14 Figure 14: Basement Recreation Room ....................................................................................15
List of Tables Table 1. Eleven Sites Included in This Demonstration Project .................................................... 2 Table 2. Occupant Questionnaire ............................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Builder/Installer Questionnaire Sample ......................................................................... 8 Table 4. Photometric Measurement Locations ........................................................................... 9 Table 5. New Model Homes - Pollution Avoided ........................................................................27 Table 6. New Occupied Homes - Pollution Avoided ..................................................................28 Table 7. Retrofit Homes - Pollution Avoided ..............................................................................28
vi
Acronyms and Abbreviations ft feet ft2 square feet kg kilogram kWh kilowatt hours lbs. pounds LED light-emitting diode NYS New York State sq. ft. square feet W watts
ES-1
Executive Summary In support of the Residential Emerging Technologies and Accelerated Commercialization (ETAC)
initiative, the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (LRC) demonstrated the
effectiveness of solid-state light-emitting diode (LED) lighting in residences. The lighting consisted of
LED bulbs and dedicated LED fixtures, in both new and existing homes in New York State. The LED
products were available in 2014–2016 when the demonstrations took place in the 11 homes. Seven sites
used monitoring devices to measure how many hours the lights were used in occupied residences. These
data were used to assess energy and cost savings compared to conventional lighting technology.
This study estimated that use of LED technology resulted in an average energy savings of about 1,200
kWh annually at each of the houses compared with the existing lighting at retrofit sites and primarily
incandescent lamps at new construction sites. On average, the hours of lighting use in most room types
were similar to previous research findings. Payback periods were estimated to be from 0 to 6.2 years.
Installers commented that LED equipment costs more to purchase than conventional residential lighting,
but does not cost more to install. Although most LED products specified for the demonstration were
readily available through standard distribution channels, a few decorative light fixtures required specialty
lamp shapes, and thus had to be special ordered.
Occupants of the homes had favorable responses to the LED lighting, including the illuminance levels.
One site participated in a designer showcase tour; several visitors agreed they would be willing to pay
more for the LED lighting on display than the estimated incremental cost. Other sites were toured as
model homes in new housing developments.
1
1 Methodology In support of the Residential Emerging Technologies and Accelerated Commercialization (ETAC)
initiative, the LRC demonstrated the effectiveness of LED lighting in residences. The lighting consisted
of LED bulbs and dedicated LED fixtures, in both new and existing homes in New York State. The LED
products were available in 2014–2016 when the demonstrations took place. Several sites used monitoring
devices to measure how many hours the lights were used in occupied residences. These data were used to
assess energy savings compared to conventional lighting technology. Energy savings data were used to
estimate payback period and decreased pollution. The LRC conducted photometric measurements along
with surveys of occupants, visitors, builders, and contractors. Illuminance measurements were made at
predetermined locations in the residences.
1.1 Site recruitment
Starting in 2014, sub-contractor LaRoque Business Management Services identified builders interested in
participating in the demonstrations. The scope of work called for 10 sites to be included. Over the course
of the project, several sites withdrew prior to construction or implementation and new sites were added to
replace them. Sites that withdrew are not included in this report. An 11th site was included in case of an
additional withdrawal, to ensure that at least 10 sites were completed. Ultimately, the demonstrations took
place in 2014–2016 at 11 homes, as shown in Table 1.
The locations of these sites are shown in Figure 1. LaRoque made efforts to recruit sites in all areas of the
State where customers pay into the System benefits Charge (SBC). However, sites in New York City, the
Southern Tier, and the North Country either did not participate or withdrew prior to construction.
2
Table 1. Eleven Sites Included in This Demonstration Project
Site Type Region Address Company Demonstration Size (sq. ft.)
Detailed Appendix
New Construction,
Occupied
Capital Region
34 Morton Ave, Third Floor.
Albany, NY 12202
Albany Housing Authority 499 A
Syracuse-Area
1582 Delphi Rd. Cazenovia, NY
13035
Creekside General
Contracting/ Hamilton Building
Services
1,672 B
Rochester-Area
9 Armitale Luster Penfield/Webster,
NY 14526 Viola Homes 1,827 C
Capital Region
1 Cleveland Ave. Saratoga Springs,
NY 12866
Bonacio Construction 1,407 D
New Construction,
Model
Buffalo-Area 5984 Corinne Ln. Clarence, NY 14032
Natale Building Corp. 2,139 E
Buffalo-Area 5586 Cooper Ridge
Hamburg, NY 14075
Natale Building Corp. 1,370 F
Rochester-Area
5 Claireon Woods Dr.
Penfield, NY 14526 Metro Legacy 1,721 G
Rochester-Area
24 Aden Hill Pittsford, NY 14534
Gerber Homes & Additions 1,822 H
Retrofit, Occupied
Mid-Hudson 70 Peach Rd.
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Gaia Sharbel Energy
Contracting 1,378 I
Syracuse-Area
1111 W. High Terrace
Syracuse, NY 13219
Three Peaks Energy Corp 1,618 (estimated) J
Mid-Hudson 10 Forestwood Dr.
Woodstock, NY 12498
Gaia Sharbel Energy
Contracting 1,781 K
3
Figure 1. Location of 11 sites in New York State
(New construction shown in purple; retrofit homes shown in yellow.)
Builders and efficiency contractors were offered reimbursement of up to $1,400 for any additional
equipment and labor costs associated with participating in the project. Reimbursement was available after
all cooperative responsibilities were fulfilled (e.g., completion of post-installation surveys) and
documentation required by the LRC’s accounts-payable department were provided. At the time of this
report, compensation was requested by and paid to the participating efficiency contractors for all three
retrofit sites and one of the new construction sites. This indicates that these funds were not a motivating
factor for many builders.
1.2 Lighting design and specification
Up to 12 types of spaces, which typically have the greatest lighting energy use, were included in the
lighting design and measurements at each residence. These were the entry/foyer, kitchen, dining, living
room, family room/den, two largest bedrooms, two largest bathrooms, longest hallway, laundry, and
home office/study. Staircases, garages, storage and exterior areas, additional bathrooms, bedrooms, and
hallways were excluded.
4
1.2.1 New Construction Sites
Once site agreements were signed, each of the builders of new construction sites sent the LRC plans
showing the intended lighting installation. Most of the fixtures the builders intended to use did not include
specifications about lighting technology. Many were decorative fixtures with conventional screw-based
sockets, suitable for upgrade with LED lamps. Some areas of the homes also included utilitarian lighting
(e.g., recessed downlights, under-cabinet lighting, and simple ceiling-mounted diffusers) suitable for
upgrade to dedicated LED fixtures.
For each new construction site, the LRC created plans and specifications for LED upgrades in areas
included in the scope of work, using recommendations from the Lighting Patterns for Homes website1
where appropriate. At a few sites, the LRC offered “smart lighting” products such as ones connected by
Wi-Fi and controlled by a smart phone in the specifications, but none of the builders chose to include
such products.
At some sites, the LRC suggested optional features to improve lighting quality that the builder had not
considered. Examples include under-cabinet lighting, switching fireplace accent lighting separately from
other downlights, and installing occupancy sensors in laundry spaces.
The procedure outlined above allowed the LRC to recommend LED lighting that fit each builder’s or
homeowner’s preferred style and, therefore, more likely to be reproduced at other sites.
Builders and occupants can make use of the Lighting Patterns for Homes website,2 to install high-quality
and energy-efficient lighting, similar to what was demonstrated at this project.
1 http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/patternbook/ 2 ibid
5
In residential new construction in the State, the builder typically gives the homeowner an allowance to
choose decorative fixtures that meet their tastes. The builders often select utilitarian lighting such as
recessed downlighting and ceiling mounted diffusers. In some cases, the builders followed the LRC’s
recommendations for lighting technologies, even installing the exact products used in the LRC’s
examples. In other cases, homeowners chose fixtures that have exposed lamps (bulbs) as a decorative
feature, in which LED products were not installed.
1.2.2 Retrofit Sites
Once site agreements were signed, the home performance contractors sent the LRC documentation of the
existing lighting conditions at the three houses. The contractors provided diagrammatic plan drawings
with approximate lighting locations marked. Some also supplied photos to document existing lighting
conditions.
For each retrofit site, the LRC provided the performance contractor with recommended products to
upgrade the existing lighting. While these included mostly screw-based LED lamps, there were a few
locations where dedicated LED fixtures, such as ceiling mounted diffusers and recessed downlights, were
recommended. The LRC identified products with similar light output to existing technologies. The LRC
offered to include “smart lighting” products (such as ones that are connected by Wi-Fi and controlled by a
smart phone) in the specifications. One home performance contractor included “smart lighting” products
at one of the sites. (See “Poughkeepsie” retrofit site, Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting.)
This retrofit methodology was followed to demonstrate that homeowners and efficiency contractors can
cost-effectively upgrade most of the existing lighting in residences with commercially available LED
lamp products.
1.3 Measurement and Verification
The NYSERDA ETAC program required contractors to partner with a second group to perform
measurement and verification (M&V) activities. The LRC subcontracted with Taitem Engineering of
Ithaca, NY to perform these tasks, as described below.
As noted in Section 1.1, the LRC recruited an 11th site, which was beyond the scope of work with
Taitem. The LRC considered the Saratoga Springs house to be the 11th site and performed the M&V
work itself.
6
1.3.1 Occupant and Visitor Questionnaire
The LRC developed a questionnaire addressing key features of lighting quality, which is shown in Table
2. The questionnaire was phrased in the form of statements for occupants or visitors to agree or disagree
on a Likert-type scale. Visitors and retrofit homeowners answered additional questions relevant to their
experience. The questionnaire was approved by NYSERDA and provided to Taitem. Occupants of retrofit
and new construction sites, as well as paid visitors to a model home site, were asked to fill out the Likert
responses for each of the 12 rooms addressed in this project. In order to encourage greater participation by
decreasing the time needed to complete the questionnaire, volunteer visitors at another model home site
were asked to rate the residence as a whole.
Table 2. Occupant Questionnaire
Statements Responses
Lighting is too bright N/A Not applicable for this home
Lighting makes colors look good 2 Agree completely
Lighting causes unattractive shadows 1 Agree somewhat
Lights emit a humming sound 0 Neither agree or disagree
Light is directed where needed -1 Disagree Somewhat
Lighting makes people look good -2 Disagree Completely
Lighting flickers
Lighting is too dim
Lighting makes this space look good
Lighting looks warm in color
It is easy to see what I need to see
Lighting is comfortable
I like this lighting
(For sites evaluated by visitors) If you were in a position to replace and upgrade all the lighting in your
home, including fixtures and controls, how much extra would you be willing to spend to have this
lighting? (Circle one)
· $0 · $1–$499 · $500–$999 · $1,000–$1,999 · $2,000–$2,999 · $3,000–$5,000 · Other $_________________
7
(For sites evaluated by visitors) Did you especially like or dislike the lighting in any of the rooms, and
why?
(For all sites) Additional Comments:
Occupants of the three retrofit sites were asked to provide a Likert-scale response to the additional
statement: “I turn on the lights more often with this lighting than I did before the retrofit.” This was done
to verify that the hours-of-use measurements made after the retrofit were applicable to the period before
the retrofit, for the purpose of comparing before and after energy use.
Taitem Engineering administered the questionnaire to visitors or occupants at most of the sites that were
willing to complete the survey. There were some exceptions:
· As shown in Table 1, four new construction model homes were included in this project. At one model home (Penfield), the builder was unresponsive after the lighting was installed, so no questionnaires were completed despite frequent requests from the research team.
· A second model home (Clarence) sold before any visitor surveys were completed and the new owner was unresponsive to numerous requests to fill out a survey.
· At a third model home (Pittsford), LaRoque administered surveys during a designer showcase tour event, and obtained 13 responses.
· At an additional home (Saratoga Springs), the LRC administered the questionnaire.
Four sites were considered occupied new construction. After moving into their new homes, all four
homeowners completed the occupant survey.
Occupants at all three retrofit sites answered the questionnaire, both before and after the retrofit with LED
lighting, in all the relevant rooms.
1.3.2 Builder Questionnaire
The LRC developed a builder/installer questionnaire addressing key features of the specification and
installation process, labor and material costs, and maintenance. After approval from NYSERDA, Taitem
Engineering administered the questionnaire to the builders. As shown in Table 3, the questions were
phrased as a structured interview.
8
Table 3. Builder/Installer Questionnaire Sample
Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make you willing to install the recommended technology? What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed? How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please provide this information for each lighting component, if not possible just the total labor. How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why? Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of installation instructions unclear for any of the components? How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire? How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual experience? Were any components especially difficult to install? At the end of the hours-of-use six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
The new construction builders (or their electrical contractors) and the energy efficiency contractors
completed the installation surveys at nine of the 11 sites. Despite numerous requests and offers of
compensation, builder surveys were not obtained for the Saratoga Springs or the Penfield sites.
1.3.3 Photometric Measurements
Using a calibrated light meter3 on loan from the LRC, Taitem made illuminance measurements at up to 16
predesignated locations in each house, as shown in Table 4. Taitem performed the measurements at 10
sites and the LRC performed the measurements at the Saratoga Springs site.
3 Gigahertz Optik X91
9
Table 4. Photometric Measurement Locations
Location Where to Measure Vertical or Horizontal
Illuminance Kitchen counter Horizontally, the center of the longest section of counter where
food is prepared Horizontal
Kitchen table Center of table Horizontal Kitchen sink Center of sink, at counter height Horizontal Dining room table Center of table Horizontal Largest bathroom vanity
Horizontally, the center of the sink. Directly above front edge of sink. Five feet above the floor. Read illuminance that would fall on the face of a person standing at sink.
Vertical
Longest hallway On the floor in the center/middle of hallway. Horizontal Living room couch Horizontally, in the middle of the couch. Halfway from the back
cushion to the front edge of the couch. One foot above the surface of the cushion.
Horizontal
Living room fireplace mantle
Center of the mantle. On the wall one foot above the mantle. Read illuminance that would fall on framed artwork over the mantle.
Vertical
Family room / den couch
Horizontally, in the middle of the couch. Halfway from the back cushion to the front edge of the couch. One foot above the surface of the cushion.
Horizontal
Bed in largest bedroom Horizontally, the middle of the bed. Two feet from the head of the bed. On the surface of the bed.
Horizontal
Dresser in largest bedroom
Horizontally, the middle of the dresser. Front edge of the top of the dresser.
Horizontal
Bed in second-largest bedroom
Horizontally, the middle of the bed. Two feet from the head of the bed, on the surface of the bed.
Horizontal
Home office Center/middle of the top of the desk Horizontal Laundry room Center/middle of the top of the washing machine Horizontal Entry/foyer Center/middle of the foyer, on the floor Horizontal
All electric lighting was turned on during measurements, including plug-in fixtures. Window coverings
were closed for daytime measurements and repeated without the electric lighting on to remove the
contribution of daylight arithmetically. For the three retrofit sites, measurements were completed before
and after the retrofit.
1.3.4 Hours-of-Use Monitoring
Hours-of-use monitoring was completed at the seven occupied sites (four new construction and three
retrofit sites). Taitem performed the monitoring at six of these, and the LRC performed the monitoring at
the Saratoga Springs site. Model homes, which were unoccupied, were not monitored.
10
Site monitoring consisted of installing 10 to 20 battery powered light meters4 on or in light fixtures
(Figure 2), to determine when lights were used.
Figure 2. Monitoring Devices Installed In/On Fixtures
Monitoring took place during three seasons: winter, summer, and the intervening shoulder season and
devices were programmed to sample lighting conditions every five minutes. Light loggers were installed
in the 12 key rooms previously listed. Monitoring devices were installed in fixtures in such a manner that
measurement interference from daylight was minimized, achieved by orienting the device so it sensed
light mostly from the fixture. When multiple fixtures were operated from the same switch, one was
monitored to document all fixtures controlled by the switch. When plug-in fixtures were monitored, one
was used to represent the rest of the plug-in fixtures in the room.
After downloading the data, researchers used software5 to summarize the amount of time when lights
were on during the monitoring period. While LED products appear to provide light at a constant level, the
light is actually pulsing at a frequency faster than the human eye can see. However, the monitoring
devices sampled at such a high frequency that even when the lights were on, the data indicated some light
sources were flickering from high to low or on to off. The LRC reviewed all the monitoring data to
confirm that the spreadsheet formulas were adjusted to accurately calculate on-times.
4 Onset Corporation, HOBO pendant, model UA-002-64. 5 Downloading data: Onset Corporation “HOBOware” software. Cropping, summarizing on-times: Microsoft Excel.
11
1.3.5 As-Built Verification
At 10 of the 11 sites, Taitem compared the as-built installation with the LRC’s lighting plans and
specifications. In cases where a difference was found, Taitem noted the actual installed product. The LRC
performed this comparison at the Saratoga Springs site.
1.4 Analysis
The LRC performed an energy and cost analysis using the data received from Taitem.
1.4.1 Power Demand
The researchers recorded the quantity and model numbers of the lamps and/or fixtures for all the room
types in the scope of this project. At new construction sites, the base case was assumed to be
incandescent. Most of these lamps were assumed to be halogen incandescent because they are so
commonly available. For example, the traditional 60-watt incandescent general service lamp (bulb) is
now replaced with a 43-watt halogen incandescent lamp. A few lamp types, such as BR30 commonly
used in residential downlights, were assumed to be standard incandescent in the base case due to
availability. Power demand during the demonstration was compared to the power demand of conventional
baseline technologies with roughly equivalent lumen output, light distribution, and base (Edison,
candelabra, or pin base).
In some cases, the light output of the recommended LED lamp or luminaire was different (higher or
lower) than what was used before the retrofit. At the three retrofit sites, any LED lamps/fixtures actually
installed in the homes before the retrofit were used as the baseline. Some lamps were burned out before
the retrofit, while others are no longer available on the U.S. market (e.g., 60W conventional incandescent
bulbs), but were still in use at the houses.
12
1.4.2 Power Density
Lighting power density is measured in watts per square foot and an indicator of overall efficacy of
lighting systems, assuming that adequate light is provided. The LRC estimated room areas at the
demonstration sites by using builder-provided scaled architectural drawings to sum the approximate6 area
of all the rooms included in the demonstration. The LRC calculated power by summing the power
demand of the individual lamps and fixtures documented as described in Section 1.4.1. For each house,
power density was calculated by dividing the total power for all the key rooms by the total area (in square
feet) of all the key rooms. Lighting power density of the as-built LED demonstration was compared to the
power density with conventional technology.
1.4.3 Energy Use Compared to Base Case
Lighting energy use was estimated by multiplying manufacturer-reported power (watts) by the hours that
the light was operated. Data from the monitoring devices was used to estimate typical daily hours-of-use.
(As a hypothetical example, if monitoring for 10.0 days showed 50.7 hours-of-use, then typical daily
hours-of-use for the season would have been estimated as 5.07 hours per day.) Average daily hours-of-use
for a year was calculated as an average of winter daily hours-of-use, summer daily hours-of-use, and
twice the shoulder season daily hours-of-use. Subsequent average daily hours-of-use was multiplied by
365 days per year, multiplied by total power, and divided by 1000 watts per kilowatt, resulting in
kilowatt-hours per year.
For each house, estimated annual energy use with the demonstrated LED technologies was compared to
energy use with conventional baseline technologies.
1.4.4 Technical Characteristics
Using the as-built LED model numbers gathered on site, the LRC consulted manufacturers’ data to
compile a list of key technical characteristics of the LED demonstration sources. These features included
the rated correlated color temperature (CCT), color-rendering index (CRI), lumen output, life, and power
demand. Using the reported lumen output and power demand, the LRC calculated efficacy of each lamp
or fixture.
6 While exterior wall thickness was excluded from area calculations, some wall thicknesses were included within the house. Therefore, area calculations were approximate.
13
1.4.5 Environmental Impact
Using the lighting energy savings calculations previously described, the LRC consulted the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s website7 to calculate pollution emissions avoided by reducing energy
use. By entering the zip code of each site, selecting the appropriate electric utility, entering energy
savings, the avoided pollution is calculated. Pollution is listed as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and
carbon dioxide emissions. Zip codes for all 11 sites showed the same pollution rate information (pounds
avoided per kWh saved).
1.4.6 Cost-Benefits (Payback Period) Methodology
For this project, cost-benefits of LED lighting were defined as the simple payback period. There are
potential monetary (e.g., long-term cost of ownership) and non-monetary (enhancement of personal style,
amount of light, perception of safety, alertness, etc.) benefits to residential lighting not measured by this
calculation. The simple payback period was calculated by the sum of the incremental equipment costs for
the upgrade technology, divided by energy costs saved per year. Recurring costs such as relamping were
not taken into consideration in this cost approximation because no lamp replacements would be expected
during the payback period. Payback period is measured in the number of years required to repay the
investment of the LED upgrade.
Although builders were asked to provide information about the LED equipment costs, none kept detailed
records; therefore, they were unable to produce sufficient accurate data to enable cost-benefit
calculations. The LRC compiled a list of commonly demonstrated products and then consulted big-box
home improvement store websites (e.g., Home Depot, Lowes). Pricing estimates were for common LED
products available in May 2017; it is possible that builders spent a different amount (likely higher) on
LED lamps and fixtures early in this demonstration project (2014–2016) than estimated using this
method. For new construction, the incremental cost of the upgraded lighting equipment was calculated by
subtracting upgraded equipment cost from the cost of conventional lighting equipment. For retrofit sites,
the entire cost of the upgraded equipment was used.
7 https://www.epa.gov/energy/power-profiler. Consulted in May 2017.
14
For the new homes, labor costs were not included in the payback calculations. Builders indicated the labor
cost for installing the residential LED products was no greater than conventional residential lighting
technologies; thus, labor did not impact the payback period. For retrofit sites, cost of labor was included
in payback calculations—while professionals performed the retrofits at the site, many of the lighting
upgrades could be done by the homeowner.
Cost savings from energy efficiency measures were calculated using each home’s estimated annual
lighting energy reductions (kWh), multiplied by the calculated usage-dependent cost of electricity
charged by the utility at each home ($/kWh), providing an estimated annual cost savings ($/year). The
calculated usage-dependent utility rate comprises the delivery and supply charges that depend on how
much electricity was used, and it ranged from $0.093/kWh to $0.1305/kWh at the 11 sites. This differs
from than the rate provided on the building owners’ utility bills for two primary reasons:
1. It excludes the flat-rate basic service charge, which does not change based on usage. This was done to calculate the reduction in the utility bill from energy savings.
2. The cost of electricity varies over time, especially the ESRM and supply components of the cost.
The utility rates used in the calculations were an average of three values: the rate calculated by the LRC
from the utilities’ filings to the PSC, the rate reported by Taitem Engineering, and the rate reported by the
OpenEI utility rate database.8
The payback period, in years, was calculated by dividing incremental equipment cost for the energy-
saving lighting by the annual cost savings per year due to energy savings.
8 http://en.openei.org/apps/USURDB/
15
2 Results Detailed case studies for each of the 11 homes are shown in Appendices A through K. Each case study
includes site photos, lighting plans, detailed lists of installed lighting equipment, energy calculation
results, pollution-avoided, economic payback period, occupant or visitor questionnaire results, and builder
comments.
2.1 Technical Characteristics
Most of the installed LED products were the same as or very similar to the products the LRC specified.
Exceptions include:
· At the Poughkeepsie site, Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting selected several high color temperature LED lamps, which may not be acceptable to typical American homeowners. The homeowner/client requested high color temperature lamps for specific rooms.
· There were a few instances where a fixture with a lamp base type was installed (e.g., candelabra vs. Edison) that was different from what the LRC assumed.
· On rare occasions, the builder installed a completely different fixture type. For example, at the Saratoga Springs site, early lighting plans for the second largest bath showed a decorative wall sconce, but ended up being a dedicated LED recessed downlight.
· There were a few fixtures with exposed lamps (decorative pendants, chandeliers, vanity lights) with incandescent lamps instead of the recommended LED lamps. At one site, a designer ceiling fan could only use a specialty pin-based halogen incandescent lamp rather than LEDs because no suitable LED product was available. A few owners moved into their new houses with their own table lamps, still fitted with incandescent or CFL lamps.
2.2 Occupant Questionnaires
In general, the homeowners approved of their LED lighting. As shown in Figure 3 below, most occupants
of the new homes “agree somewhat” with the statement that the lighting makes the space look good.
Visitors to the two model home sites agreed with the statement slightly more emphatically (“Agree
completely”) than the new homeowners. The most enthusiastic responses came from the residents who
experienced the before and after effects of the retrofitted lighting.
16
Although the seven visitors who were paid to evaluate the lighting in the Hamburg model home site had
positive feedback on the questionnaire, a few people had specific lighting comments in some of the
rooms:
· Entry/Foyer: “Light bulb is visible” · Kitchen: “Has too much lighting fixtures, too much light” · Dining Room: “Very dim and dark shadows” · Hallway: “Unattractive shadows on the door” · Largest bedroom “Light too dim” · Largest bathroom “Need light in shower”
The volunteers visiting the designer showcase home (Pittsford) had mostly positive comments:
· “Love LED lighting.” · “Kitchen too bright. Seemed to obscure the color. Under (electric) light (kitchen) looked gray,
but when looking at wall near window with bright natural light, (it) looked green.” · “Especially liked it. I prefer less bright lighting.” · “I found the lighting preferable to that which I currently have.” · One visitor declined to participate in the questionnaire, but said they just redid their current
home with all LED and “It's the only way to go.” · One visitor said that he/she likes heat, so cool lighting not important · Visitor with LED bulbs in current home: “Lights take longer to come on.”
Several of the visitors to the Pittsford model home indicated that they would be willing to pay more for
the LED lighting on display than the estimated incremental cost.
Residents had mostly positive comments about LED lighting at new construction sites:
· “Overall I am very happy to have gone with LED lighting. I can tell the difference between the lighting in my house vs. traditional fixtures and am pleased that I have LED. I like it better.” (Owner, Saratoga Springs house)
· “I love that these lights are warm and cozy, just like an incandescent.”…“Our new electricity bills are around 1/3rd of what we were paying, with all these new LEDs and controls -- and that’s with our electric baseboards!”… “Builder did a poor job positioning lights. Many lights not symmetrical on ceiling or with each other.”…“Switches not placed where originally planned. (Some not at all).” (Owner, Cazenovia house)
17
Residents at the retrofit sites had especially positive comments, as they experienced improvement in
lighting quality:
· “The lighting upgrades are complete and make such a difference; thanks so much for your design recommendations!” … “The living room lights with the barrel shades, 100 watt bulbs and three-way remote switch really transformed the darkness and ease of use.” …“The under cabinet lighting really brings a new life to the kitchen.” … “It was a great exercise to understand how these basic upgrades are able to transform spaces so dramatically.” … “We had our usual family Sunday dinner last night and they all can’t believe the difference. Thanks so much!” (Owner, Syracuse retrofit house)
· “The Living Room used to be very dark, shadow room. Now is my kid's favorite room! Very bright, clear, I should say crystal clear space.” (Owner, Poughkeepsie retrofit house)
· “Our old lights were terrible, flickering, noisy, not dependable, and fragile. The quality of these lights are amazing. No guilt about them being on…. Thank you for having us!” (Owner, Poughkeepsie retrofit house)
· “I am enjoying the new lighting—needed to tweak a couple of areas, but all in all an appreciated improvement.” (Owner, Woodstock retrofit house)
One site featured “smart” lighting with color changing controlled by a smart phone app. The home
performance contractor at that site made extra effort to identify a suitable product and train his client how
to use the system. The homeowners report they greatly enjoy the color-changing features in select areas of
their house. “(Being) able to control them with the phone, now that is just great.” (Owner, Poughkeepsie
retrofit house)
Detailed feedback on a room-by-room and house-by-house basis can be found in the 11 case study
appendices.
18
Figure 3. Questionnaire - Average All Rooms at Each House
19
2.3 Builder Questionnaires
At most of the homes, the builders reported most LED fixtures cost more than conventional lighting, but
labor costs are equivalent. At one new construction site (Albany site), the cost of using LEDs was actually
slightly lower overall than conventional technologies, which had been planned to be mostly pin-based
fluorescent fixtures. At the Pittsford new construction site, the builder said dedicated-LED fixtures are
about the same cost as conventional ones, but LED lamps cost more than conventional technologies.
As indicated by the following comments on the installer questionnaires, most LED fixtures are readily
available in for purchase locally:
· “Fixtures were easy to obtain. Most came from Home Depot.” – Albany Housing Authority for Albany site
· The experience of purchasing the LED products was…“Standard, all fixtures spec’d were from Home Depot. This is a fairly common vendor for homeowners to utilize due to the visual displays clients can see in the storefront location.” – Creekside General Contracting/ Hamilton Building Services for Cazenovia site
However, two responses indicated that some LED products are not as readily available:
· “Candle-base LED lamps for bedroom paddle fans were hard to find. Owner bought them by mail.” – Viola Homes for Penfield site
· “We are located in a rural area, so anything a bit out of the ordinary would just require that we purchase those components online, which is not a big deal as long as the extra time is considered with the project.” – Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting for Woodstock and Poughkeepsie sites
The same home performance contractor expressed enthusiasm for LED capabilities, but noted increased
difficulty in selecting an appropriate LED replacement lamp:
· “With CFLs I just purchase the 60 bulb box which I bring to the job and just simply swap the bulbs; in this case I am searching for specific bulbs, color temperatures, etc. That took some homework to do.” – Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting for Woodstock and Poughkeepsie sites
20
The same home performance contractor went much further to improve the lighting than the builders of the
new construction. At the Poughkeepsie site, he added downlights in their living room, and provided color-
changing “smart” lighting. (Homeowner’s enthusiastic praise is shown in case study Appendix I.)
· “The program allows for a light bulb replacement simple one to one. In this case, the living room was not lighted very well, and so new fixtures were added to the ceiling, which increased the amount of labor. The end result was just worth it. I received many compliments for the work as they now use that space a lot more than ever before. I also spent some time figuring how the smart bulbs worked, and it took some time in configuring the app and explaining to them how it works.” – Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting for Woodstock and Poughkeepsie sites
2.4 Photometric Measurements
Using the builder’s lighting plans, the LRC recommended LED technologies that would match light
output at a lower power demand from the base case light sources (what the builder would typically install
in new construction and what had been installed at retrofit sites). The LRC did not model the homes in
computer software to predict light levels, nor redesign the layout and quantity of light fixtures to match
the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) recommended levels. Figure 4 through
Figure 8 show the light levels at these 11 houses were often similar to each other, and sometimes slightly
lower than those recommended by IESNA. In most spaces, homeowners did not agree that the rooms
were “too dim” after retrofit with LEDs.
21
Figure 4. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Kitchen and Dining Areas
Figure 5. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Living Room Areas
22
Figure 6. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Entries, Hallways, Home Offices, Laundry Rooms
Figure 7. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Bedrooms
23
Figure 8. Photometric Measurement Comparisons - Bathrooms
2.5 Hours-of-Use
Seven houses were occupied and had monitoring devices to measure when lights were on. Daily hours of
use were low (<1 hour/day) for peripheral layers of light (e.g., table lamp in an extra bedroom), but longer
(3+ hours/day) for the main light in the main rooms (e.g., recessed downlights or ceiling mounted
diffusers in the kitchen.). Overall, living rooms and dining rooms had shorter hours of use than expected
from a previous review of literature.9 A few room types (Living Room, Home Office, Hallway) the
standard deviation was greater than the mean, so the error bars extend below zero in Figure 9. Most of the
other room types had similar hours of use to expected, when averaged together.
Figure 9. Average Daily Hours of Use, Expected vs. Measured
9 http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/patternbook/resources/hours_of_use.asp
24
In hallways, houses ranged from very long to very short hours of use, resulting in higher averages than
expected. At the Albany site, the occupant left the light on in the hallway overnight a few times, resulting
in higher average hours of use than the other sites (Figure 10).
Figure 10. Average Daily Hours of Use - Hallways
2.6 Energy Savings
The LEDs used in the 11 homes saved an average of about 1,200 kWh annually (Figure 11) compared to
the base cases (mostly incandescent technologies). This represents a savings of 73% compared to the
conventional lighting that the builders were planning to use.
25
Figure 11. Estimated Annual Lighting Energy Savings at Residential Demonstration Sites
The Albany site had less energy savings than the rest of the sites because it had a fluorescent base case
and was a small unit (around 500 sq. feet) with less lighting equipment to generate savings.
2.7 Payback Period
The LRC estimated that incremental material cost for LEDs ranged from $0 to $730 at the new
construction sites. At retrofit sites, new lighting equipment was assumed to cost $335 to $590. Payback
periods ranged from 0 to 6.2 years for new construction (Figure 12). For retrofit sites, payback ranged
from 2.9 to 6.1 years (Figure 13), assuming material cost only. If a professional were hired to perform
retrofit work, labor costs10 would increase retrofit payback period to 6.9 to 14.4 years. At the Albany site,
the LED equipment cost the same or less than the conventional (pin-based CFL) lighting technology they
were expecting to use, so payback was instantaneous (0 years).
10 At the Syracuse retrofit site, the builder estimated $850 labor. At Woodstock and Poughkeepsie sites, the contractor provided an estimate of hours of labor. The LRC assumed a labor cost of $50/hour to perform this payback calculation.
26
Figure 12. Payback Periods for New Construction Sites
Figure 13. Payback Periods for New Construction Sites
2.8 Power Density
As shown in Figure 14, base case lighting was estimated to range from 0.6 to 1.7 W/ft2 for new
construction and from 0.8 to 1.4 W/ft2 for the retrofit sites. These LED demonstrations achieved much
lower lighting power densities, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6 W/ft2 for new construction and 0.2 to 0.4 W/ft2 for
the retrofit sites.
27
Figure 14. Lighting Power Densities for All Demonstration Sites
2.9 Avoided Pollution
Energy savings translate to pollution avoided. Pollution avoidance calculations for new model (vacant)
homes (Table 5) assume hours-of-use shown in the literature. For the occupied new homes (Table 6) and
retrofit homes (Table 7), hours-of-use and subsequent energy savings were based on monitoring data.
Table 5. New Model Homes - Pollution Avoided
Hamburg Clarence Penfield Pittsford SO2 - lbs 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.8 SO2 - kg 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 NOx - lbs 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.8 NOx - kg 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 CO2 - lbs 598.6 506.3 656.4 711.7 CO2 - kg 272 230 298 323
28
Table 6. New Occupied Homes - Pollution Avoided
Cazenovia PenfieldWebster Saratoga Albany SO2 - lbs 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.03 SO2 - kg 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.01 NOx - lbs 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.03 NOx - kg 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.01 CO2 - lbs 673.7 233.2 625.2 26.6 CO2 - kg 306 106 284 12
Table 7. Retrofit Homes - Pollution Avoided
Syracuse Woodstock Poughkeepsie SO2 - lbs 0.4 0.3 0.6 SO2 - kg 0.2 0.1 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.4 0.3 0.6 NOx - kg 0.2 0.1 0.3 CO2 - lbs 324.5 284.7 527.8 CO2 - kg 147 129 239
29
3 Discussion LEDs are well on their way to transform the residential lighting market in the State. The occupants are
pleased with the appearance of their houses with LED lighting. While the LED products may cost more
than conventional lighting technologies in some cases, lamp and fixture prices continue to drop and
conventional technologies are becoming less available. In these demonstrations, energy savings resulted
in payback periods from two to seven years. Payback periods would be shorter if the maintenance benefits
of not having to change incandescent lamps on an ongoing basis were monetized. With the high ceilings
that are the design trend in new residences, long-life sources such as LEDs offer convenience benefits as
well.
One site featured “smart” lighting, with color changing controlled by smart phone app. The home
performance contractor at that site made extra effort to identify a suitable product and train his client how
to use the system. The homeowners report they greatly enjoy the color-changing features in select areas of
their house.
Estimating how often residential lighting is actually used is important for estimating energy and cost
savings with upgrades such as LED. Lighting in living rooms and dining rooms tended to have shorter
hours of use than expected from the literature. However, it should be noted that the literature considered
the primary light in each room rather than all peripheral lights in the room. Hours of use in hallways were
longer than expected despite the wide range within the seven monitored sites. The occupant at the Albany
site left their hallway light on overnight, which increased the average for all the sites. For most of the
other types of rooms, average hours of lighting use were found to be similar to previous findings in the
literature.
There was a lot of variation in hours of use between sites, resulting in differing payback periods.
Typically, when lamp manufacturers label the “life” of their product, they assume three hours per day, to
translate to number of years (Figure 15). If actual usage is less than three hours per day, homeowners
could expect the lighting products to last longer than the estimates on the packages, but the payback
period will also be longer.
30
Figure 15. Lamp Life Rating Reported in Years, Assuming 3 Hours Per Day
3.1 Technology Transfer Activities
This project also includes technology transfer activities, which will disseminate the findings in this report.
In addition to the tours of the four model homes included in this project, outreach activities may include a
webinar, inclusion in other training programs, and outreach to trade associations.
31
4 References Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). 2011. The Lighting Handbook, 10th
Edition.
Leslie, R, Conway, K. (1996). Lighting Pattern Book for Homes. McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing, New York, NY.
Lighting Patterns for Homes website: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/patternbook/resources/hours_of_use.asp
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. (2011). Impact Evaluation.
NYSERDA CFL Expansion Program: Random Digit Dial and Onsite Survey Results.
U.S. Department of Energy. (2012). U.S. Lighting Market Characterization.
32
5 Credits Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute: Jennifer Brons, Kassandra Gonzales,
Dennis Guyon, Geoffrey Jones, Russ Leslie, Jeremy Snyder
Taitem Engineering: Florence Baveye, Beth Mielbrecht, Myron Walter
LaRoque Business Management Services, LLC: Philip LaRoque
Builders/Housing Authorities: Anne Borix, Larry LaDuca, Michael Millner, Laura Moody, Mike Quinlan, Dave Trojanski, Dan Viola
Home Performance Contractors: Luis Hernandez and Daniel S. Martini
Temporary Employment Agency (Buffalo/Hamburg site): Adecco
Thanks to Ryan Moore at NYSERDA for research guidance, to the builders and home improvement contractors for their participation, and to the occupants of the homes for hosting this research and providing feedback.
A-1
Appendix A: Albany, NY This site was considered to be occupied new construction for this study. (It was extensively remodeled,
which fits within NYSERDA’s new construction program.)
A.1 Site Demographics
Site address 34 Morton Ave, Third Floor Albany, NY 12202
Builder Albany Housing Authority
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage Early 1900s; gut-remodeled 2015
Building configuration Three-story row house, commercial space on ground floor, one apartment on second floor, and one on the third floor.
Market segment Low-Income Housing
Utility electric rates National Grid SC1 ($0.091/kWh) 11
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are textured white paint. All walls are light beige paint. Floors are refinished red oak with exception of off-white vinyl in bathroom.
11 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
A-2
A.2. Lighting Plan
A-3
A.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
Albany Housing Authority provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. These
plans indicated the base case lighting was fluorescent technology, so the power demand was much lower
than other sites. The researchers recorded the quantity and model numbers of the LED lamps and/or
fixtures for all the room types in the scope of this project.
RoomLamp
Quantity per
Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Base Case Total Power
Lamp Quantity per
FixtureLED Brand, Model #
Correlated Color Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output (lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/wa
tt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Demo Total Power
2 32 64 1 64 1Lithonia FMLL-9-
308404000 80 3100 89 50,000 35 1 35
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
Exterior Hallway (Entry) Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 1
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 2
2 13 26 1 26 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17
Largest Bath Fan/Light
2 18 36 1 36 1Panasonic FV-
08VKSEL22700 90 750 68 25000 11 1 11
Largest Bath Vanity
3 13 39 1 39 3Sylvania YGA03A37-
8.5W-D3000 80 800 94 25000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
Closet Linear 1 17 17 1 17 1Commercial Electric
541941113000 82 700 64 50,000 11 1 11
312 184.5watts watts
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
Kitchen Ceiling Dining room Ceiling Living room Ceiling Diffuser
A-4
A.4 Site Photos
Figure A-1. Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser (monitoring device indicated in red circle)
A-5
Figure A-2. Dining Room (monitoring device shown indicated in red circle)
Figure A.3. Living Room (monitoring device shown indicated in red circle)
A-6
Figure A-4. Hallway
Figure A-5. Largest Bedroom Diffusers (monitoring devices shown in red circles)
A-7
Figure A-6. Bathroom (monitoring devices shown in red circles)
A-8
Figure A-7. Closet Linear Strip (monitoring device circled in red)
A.5 Monitoring and Energy Savings Results
RoomTotal Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Average hours of use
(h/day)
Average hours of use
(h/day)
Average hours of use
(h/day)
Annual Average
hours of use (h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use
per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Notes
64 35 2.4 2.4 0.1 1.8 671.9 43.0 23.5 19.5
26 17 2.4 2.4 0.1 1.8 664.1 17.3 11.3 6.0
26 17 0.4 2.5 2.3 1.4 516.4 13.4 8.8 4.6
Exterior Hallway (Entry) Ceiling Diffuser
26 17 0.5 0.8 0.1 0.5 173.7 4.5 3.0 1.6
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
26 17 10.7 0.1 14.4 9.0 3276.1 85.2 55.7 29.5
Monitoring device only captured 7 integer full days of shoulder data. Light was commonly left on for several days in a row.
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 1
26 17 0.7 1.2 0.0 0.7 238.0 6.2 4.0 2.1
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 2
26 17 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.6 201.7 5.2 3.4 1.8
Largest Bath Fan/Light
36 11 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 18.4 0.7 0.2 0.5
Largest Bath Vanity
39 25.5 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.7 245.0 9.6 6.2 3.3
Closet Linear 17 11 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1 52.5 0.9 0.6 0.3
312 184.5 69.2watts watts kWh Annually
Base Case LED
Kitchen Ceiling Dining room Ceiling Living room Ceiling Diffuser
Summer Winter Shoulder
A-9
A.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 41% lower than the base case. As shown in the
main body of the report, the base case lighting power density would have been significantly lower than
most of the other houses because this site would have been mostly linear and compact fluorescent.
A.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.03 SO2 - kg 0.01
NOx - lbs 0.03 NOx - kg 0.01
CO2 - lbs 26.6 CO2 - kg 12
A-10
A.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not necessarily the
same price that Albany Housing Authority paid. For the base case prices, the LRC investigated pricing
when the initial design recommendations were made in 2015; the representative from Albany Housing
Authority confirmed the LED products cost less than what they would have used (Section A.10).
Incremental LED material cost ($) -$395.35 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.091 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 69.2 Savings ($) per year $6.28 Payback period (years) 0 (instantaneous)
Room
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price Ea. as of
May 2017
Total for Conventional Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as
of May 2017
Total for LED
Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Total Incrementa
l Price for LED
products
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
2 32 64 1 64 $258 $258 1Lithonia FMLL-9-
3084035.0 1 35 $69 $69.00 -$188.60
Dining room Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Living room Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 1
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 2
2 13 26 1 26 $115 $115 1Commercial Electric
#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00
Largest Bath Fan/Light
2 18 36 1 36 $37 $37 1Panasonic FV-
08VKSEL211.0 1 11 $99 $99.00 $62.25
Largest Bath Vanity
3 13 39 1 39 $2 $5 3Sylvania YGA03A37-
8.5W-D8.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Closet Linear
1 17 17 1 17 $23 $23 1Commercial Electric
5419411111.0 1 11 $30 $30.00 $7.00
-$395.35
LED Demo Base Case
A-11
A.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux;
daylight subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter (Between Stove and Fridge)
378 500
(Island Counter over Dishwasher) 233 Kitchen Table 243 200 Kitchen Sink 320 300
Dining Room Table n/a 100 Largest Bathroom Vanity 1030 400 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity N/A 400 Longest Hallway 115 30 Living Room Couch 91 30 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 96 150
Bed in Largest Bedroom (Both on) 128 200
(One fixture on) 101
Dresser in Largest Bedroom 82 50 Entry/Foyer 195 30
A.10 Builder (Albany Housing Authority) Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: (No Answer)
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “The type C and G fixtures (ceiling mounted diffusers) were around $30 each, which is
comparable or less than typical fixtures. Overall costs were what we would have installed.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “Approximately eight hours labor. Installer didn't itemize.”
A-12
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “Labor was the same as typical fixtures.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “Specifications and instructions were clear and easy to understand.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “Fixtures were easy to obtain. Most came from Home Depot.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “Installation was typical. Fixtures were all easy to install.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “We have not had any issues with the lights.”
A.11 Occupant Questionnaire
This occupant responded positively or neutrally to most of the positively worded questions. However, the
occupant had some slightly negative opinions about the light in the living room. The same fixture is used
throughout the apartment, so this response has more to do with the way the space is used, rather than the
features of the LED lighting.
A-13
This occupant responded negatively or neutrally to most of the negatively worded questions. However,
the occupant did “agree somewhat” with negatively worded statements about light in the living room,
dining room, and kitchen.
B-1
Appendix B: Cazenovia, NY This site was a new construction, occupied home.
B.1 Site Demographics
Site address 1582 Delphi Rd. Cazenovia, NY 13035
Builder Creekside General Contracting. Originally: Hamilton Building Services
Climate zone Climate Zone 6
Vintage 2015
Building configuration Building is a single-story residence with unfinished basement. Main floor has two car garage, open kitchen/breakfast nook, family room, master bedroom/bath/walk-in closet, two additional bedrooms, full bath, and laundry/mud room. Second floor has a loft (used as office space), and a "bonus room."
Market segment Median-Income Housing
Utility electric rates National Grid SC1 ($0.097/kWh)12
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. Doors and finish trim are white paint; kitchen cabinets are dark hardwood. Walls in breakfast nook, family room, and laundry are medium dark green paint. Walls in kitchen, bedrooms, and bathrooms are light beige paint. Floors in bedrooms are light brown carpet. Floors in all other rooms are medium brown engineered wood flooring.
12 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
B-2
B.2 Lighting Plans
B-3
B.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes the base case was incandescent. For the demonstration, a few task lights were lamped with
incandescent (shaded in beige) or CFL (shaded in blue) rather than with LED products.
RoomLamp
Quantity per Fixture
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Lamp Quantity
per FixtureBrand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output (lumens)
Efficacy (Lumens/
Watt)
Rated Life (Hours)
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Entry Foyer Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Entry Foyer Floor Lamp 2 125 2 (No upgrade)65W, 60W
125.0 1 125
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 5 325 1 Halo RL560WH-R 3000 83 600 63.8 50,000 9.4 9.4 5 47
Kitchen Undercabinets 1 20 20 16 320 1Commercial Electric 54196111 2x 12" (6W) + 4x 18" (8W)
3000 82 2700 61.4 50,000 44 44.0 1 44
Dining Nook Chandelier 6 43 258 1 258 6TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
2700 80 800 84.2 15,000 9.5 57.0 1 57
Dining Nook Downlights 1 65 65 4 260 1 Halo RL560WH-R 3000 83 600 63.8 50,000 9.4 9.4 4 37.6
Living Room Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 2TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
2700 80 800 84.2 15,000 9.5 19.0 1 19
Living Room Table Lamp 1 15 15 1 15 1Marathon Mini Decorative Twister CFL
15 15.0 1 15
Living Room Downlights 1 65 65 4 260 1 Halo RL560WH-R 3000 83 600 63.8 50,000 9.4 9.4 4 37.6
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Left
1 29 29 1 29 1CREE 6A19-04527OMB 2700K 450 Lumens
2700 83 460 76.7 30,000 6 6.0 1 6
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Right
1 29 29 1 29 1CREE 6A19-04527OMB 2700K 450 Lumens
2700 83 460 76.7 30,000 6 6.0 1 6
Largest Bath Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 1 Delta GBR80LED Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 11 11.0 1 11.0
Largest Bath Vanity
3 43 129 2 258 3 TCP L9AD027K 2700 80 800 84.2 15,000 9.5 28.5 2 57
Largest Bath Toilet Ceiling Diffuser
1 72 72 1 72 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 1 Halo RL560WH-R 3000 83 600 63.8 50,000 9.4 9.4 1 9.4
Bedroom 3 Ceiling Diffuser 1 72 72 1 72 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
Bedroom 3 Floor Lamp 1 40 40 1 40 1 (No upgrade) 40 40.0 1 40
Bedroom 2 Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1 Acrich2 Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight 1 43 43 1 43 1 Delta GBR80LED Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 11 11.0 1 11
2nd Largest Bath Vanity 3 43 129 1 129 3TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
2700 80 800 84.2 15,000 9.5 28.5 1 28.5
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 2 32 64 1 64 1Lithonia FMFL 30840 SATL BN
4000 83 2560 73.1 50,000 35 35.0 1 35
2,901 705watts watts
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
(no upgrade)
B-4
B.4 Site Photos
Figure B-1. Entry Foyer (monitoring device shown circled in red)
B-5
Figure B-2. Entry Floor Lamp (no monitoring and no LED upgrade)
B-6
Figure B-3. Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser, Downlights, and Undercabinet Lights
B-7
Figure B-4. Dining Chandelier (monitoring device circled in red)
B-8
Figure B-5. Living Room Ceiling Diffuser, Downlights, and Table Lamp
B-9
Figure B-6. Living Room Table Lamp (no LED upgrade; monitoring device circled in red)
B-10
Figure B-7. Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
B-11
Figure B-8. Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser and Table Lamps
B-12
Figure B-9. Largest Bathroom (monitoring devices shown in red)
B-13
Figure B-10. Bedroom 3 Ceiling Diffuser and Floor Lamp (note 40W incandescent lamp)
Figure B-11. Bedroom 2 Ceiling Diffuser
B-14
Figure B-12. Second Largest Bath, with Fanlight and Vanity Light
B-15
Figure B-13. Laundry Room Ceiling Diffuser
B-16
B.5 Energy Savings Results
RoomAverage Hours of
Use (h/day)
Average Hours of
Use (h/day)
Average Hours of
Use (h/day)
Annual Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized Energy
(kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Notes
Entry Foyer Ceiling Diffuser 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.2 76.3 6.6 1.3 5.3 More winter use than other seasons
Entry Foyer Floor LampNo LED lamp upgrade, no monitoring, so no energy savings
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser 0.0 0.0 4.2 1.0 380.0 32.7 6.5 26.2Not used as intensively as other circuits in the Kitchen
Kitchen Downlights 4.2 3.8 6.3 4.7 1697.6 551.7 79.8 471.9 Seems to be on almost continuously
Kitchen Undercabinets 5.3 4.0 2.9 4.4 1593.7 510.0 70.1 439.9 On frequently
Dining Nook Chandelier 1.0 0.8 1.7 1.1 403.5 104.1 23.0 81.1
Dining Nook Downlights 3.8 1.4 2.8 2.9 1069.9 278.2 40.2 237.9
Living Room Ceiling Diffuser 2.8 0.8 6.0 3.1 1134.8 97.6 21.6 76.0
Living Room Table Lamp 4.7 1.2 1.5 3.0 1100.0 16.5 16.5 0.0 No upgrade; owner kept using their CFLs
Living Room Downlights 1.0 0.1 1.2 0.8 301.2 78.3 11.3 67.0
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 58.6 5.0 1.0 4.0
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
1.8 0.6 2.8 1.7 630.1 54.2 10.7 43.5
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Left
0.3 0.3 0.9 0.4 163.6 4.7 1.0 3.8
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Right
0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 21.1 0.6 0.1 0.5
Largest Bath Fan/Light
0.9 0.5 0.6 0.7 258.3 11.1 2.8 8.3
Largest Bath Vanity
1.5 1.6 1.7 1.6 581.9 150.1 33.2 117.0
Largest Bath Toilet Ceiling Diffuser
1.5 1.6 1.7 1.6 581.9 41.9 9.9 32.0Circuit not monitored, so calculation assumes same hours of use as vanity light
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
0.9 0.5 0.7 0.7 264.0 11.4 2.5 8.9
Bedroom 3 Ceiling Diffuser 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 69.4 5.0 1.2 3.8
Bedroom 3 Floor Lamp 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.2 80.7 3.2 3.2 0.0Incandescent lamp was not upgraded, and was mostly off
Bedroom 2 Ceiling Diffuser 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.8 0.2 0.6
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight 0.2 1.2 1.5 0.8 294.0 12.6 3.2 9.4
2nd Largest Bath Vanity 1.2 1.9 2.7 1.7 636.1 82.1 18.1 63.9Mostly sporadic use, but once was left on for couple days
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 5.1 2.8 7.5 5.1 1859.6 119.0 65.1 53.9Used almost daily, sometimes for hours at a time
1754.9kWh Annually
Shoulder Summer Winter
B-17
B.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 76% lower than the base case.
B.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.7 SO2 - kg 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.8 NOx - kg 0.4 CO2 - lbs 673.7 CO2 - kg 306
B-18
B.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar equipment and is not necessarily
the same price the builder paid.
Room
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price Ea. as of May 2017
Total for Convention
al Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May
2017
Total for LED Lamps
and/or Fixtures
Total Incremental
Price for LED
products
Entry Foyer Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Entry Foyer Floor Lamp
125.0 2 (No upgrade) 125.0 1 125
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 5 325 $2.60 $13.00 1 Halo RL560WH-R 9.4 9.4 5 47.0 $18.00 $90.00 $77.00
Kitchen Undercabinets
1 20 20 16 320 $123 $122.68 1Commercial Electric 54196111 2x 12" (6W) + 4x 18" (8W)
44 44.0 3 $145.00 $435.00 $312.32
Dining Nook Chandelier
6 43 258 1 258 $1.75 $10.50 6TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
9.5 57.0 1 57.0 $1.75 $10.50 $0.00
Dining Nook Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1 Halo RL560WH-R 9.4 9.4 4 37.6 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60
Living Room Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
9.5 19.0 1 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Living Room Table Lamp
1 15 15 1 15 $0.00 1Marathon Mini Decorative Twister CFL
15 15.0 1 15 $0.00 $0.00
Living Room Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1 Halo RL560WH-R 9.4 9.4 4 37.6 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Left
1 29 29 1 29 $1.75 $1.75 1CREE 6A19-04527OMB 2700K 450 Lumens
6 6.0 1 6 $1.75 $1.75 $0.00
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp - Right
1 29 29 1 29 $1.75 $1.75 1CREE 6A19-04527OMB 2700K 450 Lumens
6 6.0 1 6 $1.75 $1.75 $0.00
Largest Bath Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 $37 $36.75 1 Delta GBR80LED 11 11.0 1 11.0 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25
Largest Bath Vanity
3 43 129 2 258 $1.75 $1.75 3 TCP L9AD027K 9.5 28.5 2 57.0 $1.75 $10.50 $8.75
Largest Bath Toilet Ceiling Diffuser
1 72 72 1 72 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17.0 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 $2 $1.75 1 Halo RL560WH-R 9.4 9.4 1 9.4 $18.00 $18.00 $16.25
Bedroom 3 Ceiling Diffuser
1 72 72 1 72 $49 $48.50 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2
17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
Bedroom 3 Floor Lamp
1 40 40 1 40 $0.00 1 (No upgrade) 40 40.0 1 40 $0.00 $0.00
Bedroom 2 Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1 Acrich2 17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight
1 43 43 1 43 $37 $36.75 1 Delta GBR80LED 11 11.0 1 11.0 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25
2nd Largest Bath Vanity
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $1.75 3TCP L9AD027K Model A19023, 2700K
9.5 28.5 1 28.5 $1.75 $5.25 $3.50
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
2 32 64 1 64 $39 $39.00 1Lithonia FMFL 30840 SATL BN
35 35.0 1 35 $129.00 $129.00 $90.00
$731.02
Base Case LED Demo
B-19
Incremental LED material cost ($) $731.02 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.097 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1754.9 Savings ($) per year $171.01 Payback period (years) 4.3
B.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux; daylight subtracted)
Notes IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter 195 500
Kitchen Table 254 No kitchen table; these measurements taken on floor 200
Kitchen Sink 222 300 Dining Room Table 242 100
Largest Bathroom Vanity 1300 400 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 929 400
Longest Hallway 152 Between bedrooms 2 and 3 30 Living Room Couch 157 30 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 63 150
Bed in Largest Bedroom 91 200 Dresser in Largest Bedroom 51 50 Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 92 200
Laundry Room 377 200 Entry/Foyer 102 30
Kitchen Counter 195 500
B.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: (No answer)
B-20
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “Total package price equaled $1718.88, this was a $717.88 overage of homeowner’s
interior lighting budget.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “42.5 man hours to install all light fixtures as specified per RPI’s provided layout. This
includes exterior fixtures which were not addressed in RPI drawings.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “16 man hours over the standard fixtures to LED fixture installation. Mostly associated
with kitchen under cabinet lighting.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “The only issue with any of the fixtures was the under cabinet lighting. RPI spec’d
fixtures that had a plug instead of a hard wired whip. I specifically asked why13 these were spec’d
and was informed they could also be hard wired. This was NOT the case. Also, I didn’t price it
accordingly to be disassembling the fixtures and rewiring them.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “Standard, all fixtures spec’d were from Home Depot. This is a fairly common vendor
for homeowners to utilize due to the visual displays clients can see in the storefront location.”
13 Indirect communication seems to have created a misunderstanding. The message that eventually came to the LRC did not emphasize the question of “why” these undercabinet lights were specified, but rather, sought permission to hardwire. In retrospect, it would have been easier for the builder to use a different product, or connect these undercabinet lights to switched outlets to the extent permissible by electric code.
B-21
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “No, pretty standard.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “None to date.”
B.11 Occupant Questionnaires
The new owner answered the questionnaire for the 11 rooms that pertain to the demonstration. Generally, the owner agreed with positively worded lighting statements. In some rooms, the owner was more neutral about making “people look good” or “colors look good.”
B-22
The occupant disagreed with most of the negatively worded questions. In the hallway, the occupant
“agreed somewhat” with the statement that the lighting is too bright.
Other owner comments:
· “Builder did a poor job positioning lights. Many lights not symmetrical on ceiling or with each other.”
· “Switches not placed where originally planned. (Some not at all).” · “I love that these lights are warm and cozy, just like an incandescent.” · “Our new electricity bills are around a third of what we were paying with all these new LEDs
and controls, and that’s with our electric baseboards!”
C-1
Appendix C: Penfield Webster, NY This site was a new construction, occupied home.
C.1 Site Demographics
Site address 9 Armetale Luster Webster, NY 14526
Builder Viola Homes
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2015
Building configuration Building is a two-story residence with partial basement. Main floor has a three car garage, open kitchen/morning room/great room (two-story), master bedroom/bath/walk-in closet, two additional bedrooms, full bath, laundry room, and entry foyer. Second floor (out of scope) has a loft and a "bonus room."
Market Segment Upper Median-Income Housing
Utility Electric Rates RG&E SC#1 ($0.109/kWh)14
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. Doors and finish trim are white paint; kitchen cabinets are dark cherry wood. All walls are medium brown or grey paint. Floors in kitchen, dining nook, and living room are dark hardwood. Bedrooms are off-white carpet. Laundry and bathroom floors are earth-tone tile.
(No exterior photo available)
14 Average of 3 rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
C-2
C.2 Lighting Plans
C-3
C.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes that the base case used halogen and standard incandescent lamp technology. The owner
chose a ceiling fan with a light fixture that was not able to be upgraded to LED due to unusual socket type
(shaded in beige below).
RoomLamp Qty
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Base Case Total Power
Lamp Qty per
FixtureBrand, Model # Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output (lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/
watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
LED Total Power
Entry Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 1
Progress fixture with Hubbell
module HAL00715 93051402-2130 E
3000 90 1211 67.3Not
reported18.0 18.0 1 18
Kitchen Pendants
3 45 135 1 135 3 TCP BR20 Unk. 80 600 75.0 25,000 8.0 24.0 1 24
Kitchen Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 1 Halo RL560 Unk. 83 646 88.5 50,000 7.3 7.3 4 29
Kitchen Undercabinets
3 20 60 1 60 3 No Brand marking Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 11.0 33.0 1 33
Dining Nook Track
4 25 100 1 100 1Hampton Bay KER42200LEDS
3000 92 1299 65.3 51,400 19.9 19.9 1 20
Living Room Ceiling Fan
2 43 86 1 86 2 TCP 10A19D30K 3000 80 825 82.5 25,000 10.0 20.0 1 20
Living Room Fireplace
5 43 215 1 215 5 TCP BR20 Unk. 80 600 75.0 25,000 8.0 40.0 1 40
Hall Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 1
Progress fixture with Hubbell
module HAL00715 93051402-2130 E
3000 90 1211 67.3 Unk. 18.0 18.0 1 18
Largest BR Ceiling Fan
1 100 100 1 100 1No Brand Name Integral Quartz
bulb100.0 100.0 1 100
Largest BR Closet
1 53 53 1 53 1Manufacturer not
labeled; driver LB013B/T
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 13.0 13.0 1 13
Largest BA Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 1 Lithonia 65BEMW 3000 93 690 68.3 35,000 10.1 10.1 1 10
Largest BA Vanity
3 40 120 1 120 3Clear Decorative
LEDUnk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 4.5 13.5 1 14
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 1Integral LED
Fan/LightUnk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 11.0 11.0 1 11
Bedroom 2 Ceiling Fan
2 40 80 1 80 2TCP
LED5E12B1127K2700 80 350 70.0 25,000 5.0 10.0 1 10
Bedroom 3 Ceiling Fan
2 40 80 1 80 2TCP
LED5E12B1127K2700 80 350 70.0 25,000 5.0 10.0 1 10
Half Bath Vanity
2 43 86 1 86 2 TCP 10A19D30K 3000 80 825 82.5 25,000 10.0 20.0 1 20
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 1
Progress fixture with Hubbell
module HAL00715 93051402-2130 E
3000 90 1211 67.3Not
reported18.0 18.0 1 18
1620 408watts watts
No upgrade
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
C-4
C.4 Site Photos
Figure C-1. Entry Ceiling Mounted Diffuser
Figure C-2. Kitchen
C-5
Figure C-3. Dining Nook Track
C-6
Figure C-4. Living Room
Figure C-5. Hall Ceiling Diffuser
C-7
Figure C-6. Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan (note incandescent type)
C-8
Figure C-7. Largest Bedroom Closet
Figure C-8. Largest Bathroom
C-9
Figure C-9. Second Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan
Figure C-10. Bedroom 3 Ceiling Fan
C-10
Figure C-11. Second Largest Bathroom
(No photos available for laundry)
C-11
C.5 Monitoring and Energy Savings Results
Room Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Annual Average Hours of Use
(h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Notes
Entry Ceiling Diffuser
0.09 0.19 0.14 0.13 46.8 2.5 0.8 1.6
Kitchen Pendants
0.63 0.70 2.16 1.03 376.8 50.9 9.0 41.8
Kitchen Downlights
0.63 0.70 2.16 1.03 376.8 98.0 11.0 87.0On same switch as pendants
Kitchen Undercabinets
4.19 5.94 6.83 5.29 1929.6 115.8 63.7 52.1
Dining Nook Track
0.55 0.43 1.45 0.75 272.4 27.2 5.4 21.8
Living Room Ceiling Fan
0.01 0.45 0.11 0.14 52.6 4.5 1.1 3.5
Living Room Fireplace
3.69 2.43 5.22 3.76 1372.1 295.0 54.9 240.1
Hall Ceiling Diffuser
0.06 0.07 0.15 0.08 30.2 1.6 0.5 1.1
Largest BR Ceiling Fan
0.02 0.01 0.11 0.04 13.8 1.4 1.4 0.0 No Upgrade
Largest BR Closet
0.38 0.41 0.53 0.43 155.9 8.3 2.0 6.2
Largest BA Downlight
0.07 0.21 0.10 0.11 40.9 1.8 0.4 1.3
Largest BA Vanity
0.82 0.92 0.86 0.85 311.4 37.4 4.2 33.2
Largest BA Fan/Light
0.31 0.49 0.29 0.35 127.8 5.5 1.3 4.2
Bedroom 2 Ceiling Fan
3.13 3.93 3.52 3.43 1251.6 100.1 12.5 87.6
Bedroom 3 Ceiling Fan
0.59 0.16 0.52 0.47 169.8 13.6 1.7 11.9
Half Bath Vanity
0.50 0.38 0.58 0.49 177.9 15.3 3.6 11.7
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
0.10 0.21 0.32 0.18 66.7 3.5 1.2 2.3
607kWh Annually
Summer Winter Shoulder
C-12
C.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 72% lower than the base case.
C.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.3 SO2 - kg 0.1 NOx - lbs 0.3 NOx - kg 0.1
CO2 - lbs 233.2 CO2 - kg 106
C-13
C.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not necessarily the
same price the builder paid.
Incremental LED material cost ($) $408.35 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.109 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 607.5 Savings ($) per year $66.26 Payback period (years) 6.2
Fixture Type
Lamp quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price as of May
2017
Total for conventi
onal lamps and/or fixtures
Lamp quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for LED
lamps and/or fixtures
Total Increme
ntal Price for
LED product
Entry Foyer
1 53.0 53.0 1 53.0 $2.00 $2.00 1Progress Hubbell
HAL0071518.0 18.0 1 18 $45.00 $45.00 $43.00
Kitchen 3 45.0 135.0 1 135.0 $3.67 $11.00 3 TCP BR20 8.0 24.0 1 24 $5.00 $15.00 $4.00
Kitchen downlgihts
1 65.0 65.0 4 260.0 $2.60 $10.40 1 Halo RL560 7.3 7.3 4 29 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60
Kitchen 3 20.0 60.0 1 60.0 $30.00 $90.00 3 No Brand marking 11.0 33.0 1 33 $30.00 $90.00 $0.00
Kitchen 4 25.0 100.0 1 100.0 $55.00 $55.00 1Hampton Bay
KER42200LEDS19.9 19.9 1 20 $119.00 $119.00 $64.00
Living room
2 43.0 86.0 1 86.0 $1.75 $3.50 2 TCP LED10A 10.0 20.0 1 20 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Living room
5 43.0 215.0 1 215.0 $1.75 $8.75 5 TCP BR20 8.0 40.0 1 40 $5.00 $25.00 $16.25
Side Entry Hall (nr.
1 53.0 53.0 1 53.0 $2.00 $2.00 1Progress Hubbell
HAL0071518.0 18.0 1 18 $45.00 $45.00 $43.00
Largest BR
1 100.0 100.0 1 100.0 $8.00 $8.00 1No Brand Name
Integral quartz lamp100.0 100.0 1 100 $8.00 $8.00 $0.00
Largest BR
1 53.0 53.0 1 53.0 $12.00 $12.00 1 LB013B/T 13.0 13.0 1 13 $30.00 $30.00 $18.00
Largest BA
1 43.0 43.0 1 43.0 $36.75 $36.75 1 Integral LED 11.0 11.0 1 11 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25
Largest BA
3 40.0 120.0 1 120.0 $1.50 $4.50 3 Clear Decorative LED 4.5 13.5 1 14 $6.75 $20.25 $15.75
Largest BA
1 43.0 43.0 1 43.0 $1.50 $1.50 1 Lithonia 65BEMW 10.1 10.1 1 10 $18.00 $18.00 $16.50
Bedroom 2
2 40.0 80.0 1 80.0 $1.50 $3.00 2 TCP LED5E12B1127K 5.0 10.0 1 10 $6.75 $13.50 $10.50
Bedroom 3
2 40.0 80.0 1 80.0 $1.50 $3.00 2 TCP LED5E12B1127K 5.0 10.0 1 10 $6.75 $13.50 $10.50
Half Bath 2 43.0 86.0 1 86.0 $1.75 $3.50 2 TCP 10A19D30K 10.0 20.0 1 20 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Laundry 1 53.0 53.0 1 53.0 $2.00 $2.00 1Progress Hubbell
HAL0071518.0 18.0 1 18 $45.00 $45.00 $43.00
$408.35
Base Case LED Demo
C-14
C.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux; daylight
subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter Pendants Only 132
500 Recessed Downlights Only 147 All Fixtures On 280
Kitchen Table Pendant Only 160 200
All Kitchen lights On 205
Kitchen Sink Pendants Only 132
300 Recessed Downlights Only 127 All Fixtures On 255
Dining Room Table 202 100
Largest Bathroom Vanity
Vanity light only 690 400
All Fixtures On 720 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity
Vanity light only 1470 400
All Fixtures On 1510 Longest Hallway 102 30
Living Room
Couch
Recessed Downlights Only 193
30 Sconces Only 15
All Fixtures On 207
Living Room Fireplace Mantle
Recessed Downlights Only 142 150 Sconces Only 15
All Fixtures On 158 Bed in Largest Bedroom
66 200
Dresser in Largest Bedroom
31 50
Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom
Ceiling fixture on 25 200 Recessed cans on 8
All Fixtures On 32 Home Office/Den 90 200
Laundry Room 201 200
Entry/Foyer 35 30
C-15
C.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “Owner chose fixtures. Master bedroom paddle fan and light has quartz incandescent
lamp and cannot be changed to LED. Bedrooms have paddle fans with screw-in LEDs.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “Owner was given materials budget of $1500 for lighting fixtures and personally
purchased them all. Total cost for all fixtures was about $350 over budget.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “We used 26 hours of labor to install all light fixtures. That time does not include install
of recessed housings during rough-in. Great Room paddle fan and hanging fixture took the
longest because of setting up staging to reach high ceiling. Owner installed undercabinet LEDs in
kitchen.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “Labor was about the same as for our regular lighting. No real difficult fixtures.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “Fixture information was good and instructions came with fixtures.”
C-16
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “Candle-base LED lamps for bedroom paddle fans were hard to find. Owner bought
them by mail.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “All fixtures install the same as regular and fluorescent fixtures.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “There are no issues with the lighting. Working good.”
C.11 Occupant Questionnaire
The occupant answered the questionnaire for the 10 rooms included in this research. Generally, the owner
agreed or was neutral about positively worded statements. The owner “disagreed somewhat” about color
rendering in the entry and largest bedroom. The occupant also “disagreed somewhat” about ease of seeing
in the largest bedroom; that room has the quartz halogen incandescent lamp in the ceiling fan. The
occupant “disagreed somewhat” about light being directed where needed in living room as well as about
making people look good in the dining room.
C-17
Entry, Largest Bedroom
Living Room
Largest Bedroom
Dining Room
Bathrooms
Dining Room, Living Room, Largest Bedroom
Dining Room, Largest Bedroom
C-18
The occupant was neutral or disagreed with negatively worded questions in most rooms. They “agreed
somewhat” that the lighting is too bright in both bathrooms, and too dim in the dining room, living room,
and largest bedroom. They agreed somewhat that the lighting causes unattractive shadows in the dining
room and largest bedroom.
It appears the owner had several concerns about the incandescent lighting (that they chose themselves) for
the ceiling fan in the largest bedroom. Also, the original plans for the house included track lighting over
the dining table. The purpose of track lighting is to cause both highlights and strong shadows, so it is not
surprising that the shadows were noticeable to the homeowner. Overall, the owner agreed that they like
the lighting in most of the rooms including dining room; they had a neutral response for the entry, laundry
room, and second-largest bedroom.
D-1
Appendix D: Saratoga Springs, NY This site was an occupied new home.
D.1 Site Demographics
Site address 1 Cleveland Ave. Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Builder Bonacio Construction
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2016
Building configuration Building is a two-story bungalow-type residence without basement. The ground floor has a two-car garage, open kitchen/dining/family room, master bedroom/bath/walk-in closet, home office, and laundry/mud room. The second floor has three bedrooms, two full baths, and an additional "den" seating area.
Market segment Upper Median-Income Housing
Utility electric rates National Grid SC1 ($0.098/kWh)15
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. Doors and finish trim are white paint. Walls are light grey paint. Kitchen cabinets are painted white. Floors in the kitchen and utility spaces are light grey wood. Floors in all other rooms are light grey carpet.
15 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
D-2
D.2 Lighting Plans
D-3
D.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes the base case was incandescent. For the demonstration, a few locations had lamps that
were not upgraded with LED products (shaded in beige in the table below). One location had a CFL that
was not upgraded with LED products (shaded in blue in the table below).
Fixture DescriptionLamp
Quantity per
Fixture
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on
Circuit
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (Lumens/
Watt)
Rated Life (Hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Chandelier 3 43 129.0 1 129 3Ecosmart BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4
candelabra lamps2700 80 500 66.7 25,000 7.5 22.5 1 22.5
Mudroom Ceiling Diffuser
3 43 129.0 1 129 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 3 28.5
Kitchen Pendants 4 43 172.0 1 172 4Ecosmart BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4
candelabra lamps2700 80 500 66.7 25,000 7.5 30.0 2 60.0
Kitchen Undercabinet 1 20 20.0 6 120 1 Commercial Electric 54195111 3000 82 500 62.5 50,000 8 8.0 2 16.0
Dining Chandelier 4 43 172.0 1 172 4Ecosmart BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4
candelabra lamps2700 80 500 66.7 25,000 7.5 30.0 1 30.0
Living Room Downlights
1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 2 19.0
Living Room Niche Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 1 9.5
Study Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 129.0 1 129 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
Hallway Downlights 1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 4 38.0
Largest Bedroom Chandelier
4 40 160.0 1 160 4 Philips 458687 Candlabra 2700 80 500 71.4 25000 7 28 1 28.0
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
1 100 100.0 1 100 1 Sylvania Incandescent (no upgrade) 100 100 1 100.0
Largest Bath Downlight 1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 1 9.5
Largest Bath Vanity 3 43 129.0 1 129 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 1 9.5
Largest Bath Toilet Fanlight
1 43 43.0 1 43 1 (Halogen Incandescent) (no upgrade) 650 15.1 Unk. 43 43 1 43.0
Largest Bedroom Closet
2 43 86.0 2 172 2Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 17 2 34.0
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
3 43 129.0 1 129 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
2nd Largest Bath Vanity
2 43 86.0 1 86 2Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 17.0 1 17.0
2nd Largest Bath Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V32700 Unk. 650 68.4 25,000 9.5 9.5 1 9.5
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight
1 13 13.0 1 13 1 Sylvania CF13EL/MINI (no upgrade) 2700 82 875 67.3 10,000 13 13.0 1 13.0
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
3 43 129.0 1 129 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-8.5W-D-
8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5
2267 614.5watts watts
Base Case Demo
D-4
D.4 Site Photos
Figure D-1. Entry Chandelier (Monitoring device shown in red circle)
D-5
Figure D-2. Mud Room (Monitoring device circled in red)
D-6
Figure D-3. Kitchen (Monitoring devices shown in red)
D-7
Figure D-4. Kitchen Undercabinet Lighting (Monitoring device shown in red)
Figure D-5. Dining Room
D-8
Figure D-6. Living Room Downlights (with pendant monitoring devices)
D-9
Figure D-7. Hallway
Figure D-8. Study (Monitoring device shown in red)
D-10
Figure D-9. Largest Bedroom
D-11
Figure D-10. Largest Bathroom Downlight
Figure D-11. Largest Bathroom Vanity (monitoring shown in red)
D-12
Figure D-12. Largest Bath Fanlight (monitoring in red)
D-13
Figure D-13. Largest Bedroom Closet (monitoring shown in red)
Figure D-14. Second Largest Bedroom (monitoring in red)
D-14
Figure D-15. Second Largest Bathroom (monitoring devices in red)
D-15
Figure D-16. Laundry
D-16
D.5 Energy Savings Results
Fixture Description Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Annual Average Hours of Use
(h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Pre-Retrofit, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Post-Retrofit, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh) Notes
Entry Chandelier 1.6 2.3 0.2 1.38 504.63 65.1 11.4 53.7
Mudroom Ceiling Diffuser
2.9 0.3 2.5 2.14 782.74 101.0 20.0 81.0
Kitchen Downlights 5.1 7.2 11.3 7.16 2613.87 169.9 74.5 95.4
Kitchen Pendants 4.4 5.7 3.2 4.39 1601.34 275.4 96.1 179.4
Kitchen Undercabinet 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.07 25.53 3.1 0.4 2.7
Dining Chandelier 4.1 1.5 5.4 3.78 1379.17 237.2 41.4 195.8
Living Room Downlights
2.3 2.5 4.7 2.96 1079.33 70.2 20.5 49.6
Living Room Niche Downlight
0.0 0.1 3.8 0.98 357.16 23.2 3.4 19.8
Study Ceiling Diffuser 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.13 47.26 6.1 1.2 4.9
Hallway Downlights 9.5 0.6 5.4 6.26 2283.56 148.4 86.8 61.7
Largest Bedroom Chandelier
2.3 1.5 4.5 2.69 980.17 156.8 27.4 129.4
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
0.0Incandescent lamp no upgrade; device mlfxn.
Largest Bath Downlight 2.7 1.8 1.3 2.13 776.76 50.5 7.4 43.1
Largest Bath Vanity 2.9 1.9 4.2 2.99 1091.51 140.8 27.8 113.0
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1.50 547.50 35.6 5.2 30.4Not monitored, so assumed 1.5 hours per day
Largest Bath Toilet Fanlight
2.3 1.6 1.5 1.89 690.94 29.7 29.7 0.0No lamp upgrade so no savings
Largest Bedroom Closet
4.3 2.4 3.1 3.51 1282.48 220.6 43.6 177.0
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
3.5 1.1 0.0 2.05 749.05 96.6 19.1 77.5
2nd Largest Bath Vanity
4.3 5.5 2.6 4.17 1520.40 130.8 25.8 104.9
2nd Largest Bath Downlight
0.4 4.6 1.7 1.79 655.11 42.6 6.2 36.4
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight
0.0 0.0 0.0Monitoring device malfunctioned; also, CFL lamp no upgrade
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
5.9 3.1 3.3 4.58 1671.88 215.7 42.6 173.0
1628.7kWh annually
Shoulder Summer Winter
D-17
D.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 73% lower than the base case.
D.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.7 SO2 - kg 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.7 NOx - kg 0.3 CO2 - lbs 625.2 CO2 - kg 284
D-18
D.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing, and is not necessarily the same price the
builder paid.
Incremental LED material cost ($) $327.50 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.098 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1628.7 Savings ($) per year $159.53 Payback period (years) 2.1
RoomLamp
Quantity per
Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for Conventional
Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for LED Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Total Incremental Price for LED
products
Entry Chandelier 3 60 180.0 1 180 $1.50 $4.50 3Ecosmart
BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4 candelabra lamps
7.5 22.5 1 23 $11.00 $33.00 $28.50
Mudroom Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 129.0 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65.0 3 195 $2.60 $7.80 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 3 28 $18.00 $54.00 $46.20
Kitchen Pendants 4 60 240.0 2 480 $1.50 $12.00 4Ecosmart
BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4 candelabra lamps
7.5 30.0 2 60 $11.00 $88.00 $76.00
Kitchen Undercabinet 1 20 20.0 6 120 $8 $46.00 1Commercial Electric
541951118 8.0 2 16 $32.00 $64.00 $18.00
Dining Chandelier 4 43 172.0 1 172 $4 $16.00 4Ecosmart
BPCFC/500/LED/ESM/4 candelabra lamps
7.5 30.0 1 30 $11.00 $44.00 $28.00
Living Room Downlights 1 65 65.0 2 130 $2.60 $5.20 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 2 19 $18.00 $36.00 $30.80
Living Room Niche Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 1 9 $18.00 $18.00 $15.40
Study Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 129.0 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Hallway Downlights 1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 1 9 $24.00 $24.00 $21.40
Largest Bedroom Chandelier
4 40 160.0 1 160 $4 $16.00 4 Philips 458687 Candlabra 7.5 30.0 1 30 $6.75 $27.00 $11.00
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
1 60 60.0 1 60 $0.00 1 Sylvania Incandescent 60 60.0 1 60 $0.00 $0.00
Largest Bath Downlight 1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 1 9 $18.00 $18.00 $15.40
Largest Bath Vanity 3 43 129.0 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 1 9 $18.00 $18.00 $15.40
Largest Bath Toilet Fanlight 1 43 43.0 1 43 $0.00 1 (Halogen Incandescent) 43 43.0 1 43 $0.00 $0.00
Largest Bedroom Closet 2 43 86.0 2 172 $1.75 $7.00 2Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 17.0 2 34 $1.75 $7.00 $0.00
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
3 43 129.0 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
2nd Largest Bath Vanity 2 43 86.0 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 17.0 1 17 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
2nd Largest Bath Downlight
1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart
ECS DN6 W27 E26 120 BX V3
9.4 9.4 1 9 $24.00 $24.00 $21.40
2nd Largest Bath Fanlight 1 60 60.0 1 60 $0.00 1Sylvania CF13EL/MINI (no
upgrade)13 13.0 1 13 $0.00 $0.00
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 129.0 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Utilitech Pro YGA03A37-
8.5W-D-8308.5 25.5 1 26 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
$327.50
Base Case LED Demo
D-19
D.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux;
daylight subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter, Undercabinet + Downlight
425 500
Downlight Only 178
Kitchen Table 94 200 Kitchen Sink, Island Pendants + Downlights
217 300
Pendants Only 105
Dining Room Table (see “Kitchen Table”) 100 Largest Bathroom Vanity 627 400 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 552 400 Longest Hallway 121 30 Living Room Couch 78 30
Living Room Fireplace Mantle 112 150 Family Room/Den Couch 242 100 Bed in Largest Bedroom 90 200 Dresser in Largest Bedroom Chandelier + Table Lamp
240 50
Chandelier Only 77
Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 45 200 Home Office 56 200 Laundry Room 63 200 Entry/Foyer 51 30
D.10 Builder Questionnaire (N/A)
The builder was not responsive to repeated requests to complete the questionnaire.
D.11 Occupant Questionnaire
For all 11 rooms the owner “agreed completely” that the lighting makes people and the space look good,
that it is easy to see, the lighting is comfortable, and that she likes the lighting. The owner “agreed
somewhat” that the lighting makes colors look good, and that light is directed where needed.
The owner gave a neutral response to the statement that the lighting looks warm in color. She elaborated,
“It is hard to determine how the colors make people look as I have monochromatic, contractor-grade
(surface colors) throughout the house right now. Once color is introduced it will be a fair assessment.”
D-20
The owner disagreed with four of the negatively worded statements (unattractive shadows, too dim, emit
humming, and flickers). For the “too bright” statement, the owner’s response was neutral for most rooms,
except for her bathroom, which she “agrees somewhat” is too bright.
The owner’s comments were very positive: “Overall I am very happy to have gone with LED lighting. I
can tell the difference between the lighting in my house vs. traditional fixtures and am pleased that I have
LED. I like it better."
Largest Bathroom
E-1
Appendix E: Clarence, NY This site was a new model home, unoccupied during the study. When sold, the new owner declined to
participate in the research.
E.1 Site Demographics
Site address 5984 Corinne Ln. Clarence, NY 14032
Builder Natale Building Corp.
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2016
Building configuration Building is a two-story single residence. Basement is an unfinished space. Ground floor has a two-car garage, side entry Hall, open Kitchen/Eating Area/Great Room, formal Dining Room, Entry Vestibule, Half Bath, and Den. Second floor has Master Bedroom and Bath, three additional Bedrooms, Full Bathroom, and Laundry.
Market segment Upper Median-Income Housing
Utility electric rates NYSEG SC1 ($0.096/kWh)16
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. All walls are painted in colors ranging from light/grey to medium dark taupe. Bathroom walls are light grey tile. Floors are medium dark hardwood with exception of light grey tiles in bathroom.
16 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
E-2
E.2 Lighting Plans
E-3
E.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes the base case was incandescent. For the demonstration, several decorative chandeliers
with candelabra sockets were not lamped with LED products (shaded in beige in the table). There was one
fixture type (Living Room Sconces) that did use LED candelabra-based lamps.
Fixture Lamp Quantity per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Base Case Total Power
Lamp Quantity per Fixture
LED Brand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering
Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/
watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Demo Total Power
Entry Chandelier
10 20 200.0 1 200 10Incand
Candelabra20 200 1 200
Entry Stairwell Chandelier
6 20 120.0 1 120 6Incand
Candelabra 20 120 1 120
Kitchen Table Pendant
4 29 116.0 1 116 4 Satco S9107 2700 80 450 64 25000 7 28 1 28
Kitchen Downlights
1 65 65.0 4 260 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 4 50
Kitchen Island Pendants
3 20 60.0 3 180 3Incand
Candelabra20 60 3 180
Dining room Chandelier
6 20 120.0 1 120 6Incand
Candelabra20 120 1 120
Living Room Downlights
1 65 65.0 6 390 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 6 75
Living room Sconces
2 40 80.0 2 160 2 Satco S8981 3000 80 310 62 25000 5 10 2 20
Home Office Den Semiflush Pendant
4 43 172.0 1 172 4Satco
KolourOne S9208
2700 80 810 83 25000 9.8 39.2 1 39
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
1 65 65.0 4 260 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 4 50
Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
6 20 120.0 1 120 6Incand
Candelabra20 120 1 120
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43.0 2 86 1
Green Creative
11PLHG4/8xx/DIR
Unk. 80 1000 90.91 40000 11 11 2 22
Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129.0 2 258 3Satco
KolourOne S9037
2700 80 810 77 25000 10.5 31.5 2 63
Largest BA Shower Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 1 13
2nd Largest BR Semiflush Pendant
2 43 86.0 1 86 2Satco
KolourOne S9208
2700 80 810 83 25000 9.8 19.6 1 20
2nd Largest BR Downlights
1 43 43 2 86 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 2 25
2nd Largest BA Fanlight
1 43 43.0 1 43 1
Green Creative
11PLHG4/8xx/DIR
Unk. 80 1000 90.91 40000 11 11 1 11
2nd Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129.0 1 129 4 Satco S9039 4000 80 870 89 25000 9.8 39.2 1 39
2nd Largest BA Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 1Cree DRDL6-
062270092700 90 625 50 35000 12.5 12.5 1 13
Laundry 3 43 129.0 1 129 3Satco
KolourOne S9208
2700 80 810 83 25000 9.8 29.4 1 29
watts watts1,2363,001
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
E-4
E.4 Site Photos
FigureE-1. Entry Chandelier
E-5
Figure E-2. Kitchen Table Pendant and Downlights
E-6
Figure E-3. Kitchen Island (note incandescent lamps)
E-7
Figure E-4. Dining Room Chandelier (note incandescent lamps)
E-8
Figure E-5. Living Room Downlights and Sconces
E-9
Figure E-6. Home Office Den Semiflush Pendant
E-10
Figure E-7. Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser (strong shadows indicate clear/incandescent lamp type)
Figure E-8. Largest Bathroom
E-11
Figure E-9. Second Largest Bedroom
Figure E-10. Second Largest Bathroom
Figure E-11. Laundry
E-12
E.5 Energy Savings Results
Fixture Base Case Total Power
Demo Total Power
Average Hours of Use/Day (Per
Literature)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Notes
Entry Chandelier
200 200 1.5 547.5 109.5 109.5 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W
Entry Stairwell Chandelier
120 120 1.5 547.5 65.7 65.7 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W
Kitchen Table Pendant
116 28 3 1095 127.0 30.7 96.4
Kitchen Downlights
260 50 3 1095 284.7 54.8 230.0
Kitchen Island Pendants
180 180 3 1095 197.1 197.1 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W
Dining room Chandelier
120 120 3 1095 131.4 131.4 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W
Living Room Downlights
390 75 3 1095 427.1 82.1 344.9
Living room Sconces
160 20 3 1095 175.2 21.9 153.3
Home Office Den Semiflush Pendant
172 39 2 730 62.8 28.6 34.2
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
260 50 1.5 547.5 142.4 27.4 115.0
Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
120 120 1 365 43.8 43.8 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W
Largest BA Fan/Light
86 22 1.5 547.5 47.1 12.0 35.0
Largest BA Vanity
258 63 1.5 547.5 141.3 32.2 109.1
Largest BA Shower Downlight
43 13 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.8 16.7
2nd Largest BR Semiflush Pendant
86 20 1 365 31.4 7.2 24.2
2nd Largest BR Downlights
86 25 1 365 31.4 9.1 22.3
2nd Largest BA Fanlight
43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.5
2nd Largest BA Vanity
129 39 1.5 547.5 70.6 21.5 49.2
2nd Largest BA Downlight
43 13 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.8 16.7
Laundry 129 29 1.5 547.5 70.6 16.1 54.5
1318.9watts watts kWh Annually
1,2363,001
E-13
E.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 58% lower than the base case.
E.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.6 SO2 - kg 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.6 NOx - kg 0.3
CO2 - lbs 506.3 CO2 - kg 230
E-14
E.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing, and is not necessarily the same price the
builder paid.
Incremental LED material cost ($) $352.96 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.096 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1318.9 Savings ($) per year $127.07 Payback period (years) 2.8
Type of Light Fixture(s)
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price Ea. as
of May 2017
Total for conventional lamps and/or
fixtures
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
LED Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price Ea. as of May
2017
Total for LED Lamps
and/or Fixtures
Total Incremental
Price for LED
products
Entry Chandelier 10 20 200 1 200 $1.50 $15.00 10Incand
Candelabra20 200 1 200 $1.50 $15.00 $0.00
Entry Stairwell Chandelier
6 20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 6Incand
Candelabra20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 $0.00
Kitchen Table Pendants
4 29 116 1 116 $2.00 $8.00 4 Satco S9107 7 28 1 28 $2.85 $11.41 $3.41
Kitchen Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 4 50 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60
Kitchen Island Pendants
3 20 60 3 180 $1.50 $13.50 3Incand
Candelabra20 60 3 180 $1.50 $13.50 $0.00
Dining room Chandelier
6 20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 6Incand
Candelabra20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 $0.00
Living Room Downlights
1 65 65 6 390 $2.60 $15.60 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 6 75 $18.00 $108.00 $92.40
Living room Sconces
2 40 80 2 160 $1.50 $6.00 2Satco S8981 310
lumens5 10 2 20 $6.75 $27.00 $21.00
Home Office Den Ceiling Diffuser
4 43 172 1 172 $1.75 $7.00 4KolourOne
S9208/2700K9.8 39.2 1 39 $1.75 $7.00 $0.00
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 4 50 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60
Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
6 20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 6Incand
Candelabra20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 $0.00
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43 2 86 $1.75 $3.50 1 Green Creative 11 11 2 22 $18.00 $36.00 $32.50
Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129 2 258 $1.75 $10.50 3KolourOne
S9208/2700K9.8 29.4 2 59 $1.75 $10.50 $0.00
Largest BA Shower Downlight
1 43 43 1 43 $1.75 $1.75 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 1 13 $18.00 $18.00 $16.25
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2KolourOne
S9208/2700K9.8 19.6 1 20 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
2nd Largest BR Downlights
1 65 65 2 130 $2.60 $5.20 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 2 25 $18.00 $36.00 $30.80
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 $1.75 $1.75 1 Green Creative 11 11 1 11 $18 $18.00 $16.25
2nd Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 4Satco KolourOne
S92089.8 39.2 1 39 $1.75 $7.00 $1.75
2nd Largest BA Downlight
1 65 65 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Cree DRDL6-
0622700912.5 12.5 1 13 $18.00 $18.00 $15.40
Laundry 3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3KolourOne
S9208/2700K9.8 29.4 1 29 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
$352.96
Base Case LED Demo
E-15
E.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux;
daylight subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter Pendants Only 132
500 Recessed Downlights Only 147 All Fixtures On 280
Kitchen Table Pendant Only 160 200
All Kitchen lights On 205
Kitchen Sink Pendants Only 132
300 Recessed Downlights Only 127 All Fixtures On 255
Dining Room Table 202 100
Largest Bathroom Vanity
Vanity light only 690 400
All Fixtures On 720 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity
Vanity light only 1470 400
All Fixtures On 1510 Longest Hallway 102 30
Living Room
Couch
Recessed Downlights Only 193
30 Sconces Only 15
All Fixtures On 207
Living Room Fireplace Mantle
Recessed Downlights Only 142 150 Sconces Only 15
All Fixtures On 158 Bed in Largest Bedroom
66 200
Dresser in Largest Bedroom
31 50
Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom
Ceiling fixture on 25 200 Recessed cans on 8
All Fixtures On 32 Home Office/Den 90 200
Laundry Room 201 200
Entry/Foyer 35 30
E-16
E.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “All light fixtures were provided by the general contractor (Natale); Hildreth
(electrician) provided recessed housings and trims only. We used our typical recessed housing
with our typical LED trim.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “The recommended recessed housings and trims were double the cost of our standard.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “Typical amount of labor was used to install all lighting components. I do not have a
total for lighting install labor. I would estimate 16-20 hours.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “About the same.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “Instructions provided were complete.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “I did not try to acquire the recommended components due to cost.”
E-17
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “No difference.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “There have not been any problems.”
E.11 Occupant Questionnaire (N/A)
This site was included in the study as a model (unoccupied) home. The home was sold before any visitor
surveys were completed, but the new owner declined to participate in the research. Therefore, no visitor
or occupant questionnaires were completed.
F-1
Appendix F: Hamburg, NY This site was a new model home unoccupied during the study.
F.1 Site Demographics
Site Address 5586 Cooper Ridge Hamburg, NY 14075
Builder Natale Building Corp.
Climate Zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2016
Building Configuration Building is a single story residence with full unfinished basement. Main floor has a two-car garage, open kitchen/dining room/family room/morning room, master bedroom and bath, laundry room, mudroom, full bathroom, and second bedroom.
Market Segment Median-IncomeHousing
Utility Electric Rates National Grid SC1 ($0.093/kWh)17
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. Doors and finish trim are white paint. All walls are medium beige paint. Floors in kitchen, family room, dining room and bathrooms are dark hardwood. Bedrooms are off-white carpet. Laundry floor is earth-tone tile. Mudroom floor is off-white tile.
17 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
F-2
F.2 Lighting Plans
F-3
F.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes standard and halogen incandescent base case. For decorative pendants with exposed
lamps, this builder was able to find specialized LED lamps with simulated filaments.
Type of Light Fixture(s)Fixture Name
Lamp Qty per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Base Case Total Power
Lamp Qty per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Correlated Color Temper
ature (K)
Color Renderi
ng Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
LED Total Power
Entry Foyer Decorative Pendant Ceiling
Pendant3 43 129 1 129 3
Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 27.0 1 27
Kitchen Island Decorative Pendants
Island Pendants 4 40 160 2 320 4
Elitco E12LED102
2700 80 300 75.0 15,000 4 16.0 2 32
Kitchen Downlights Downlights 1 65 65 3 195 1Osram LED9BR30
2700 80 650 72.2 11,000 9 9.0 3 27
Kitchen Sink Pendant Sink Pendant 1 43 43 1 43 1Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 9.0 1 9
Dining room Downlights Downlights 1 65 65 4 260 1Osram LED9BR30
2700 80 650 72.2 11,000 9 9.0 4 36
Morning Room (Den) Chandelier
Chandelier 4 40 160 1 160 4Elitco E12LED102
2700 80 300 75.0 15,000 4 16.0 1 16
Living Room Chandelier Chandelier 5 43 215 1 215 5Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 45.0 1 45
Hallway Downlights Downlights 1 65 65 3 195 1Osram LED9BR30
2700 80 650 72.2 11,000 9 9.0 3 27
Largest BR PendantCeiling Pendant 3 43 129 1 129 3
Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 27.0 1 27
Largest BR Walk-in Closet Ceiling Diffuser
Walk-in Closet Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 1 Progress P3590 3000 90 1067 62.8 60,000 17 17.0 1 17
Largest BA Fan/Light
Fan/Light 1 43 43 1 43 1Nutone Broan ALN110L 99271529
3000 80 800 72.7 Unk. 11 11.0 1 11
Largest BA Vanity Mirror
Vanity Mirror 3 43 129 2 258 3Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 27.0 2 54
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
Ceiling Diffuser 1 53 53 1 53 1
Commercial Electric #HUI8011L
2800 80 1690 99.4 50,000 17 17.0 1 17
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light
Fan/Light 1 43 43 1 43 1Nutone ALN110L 99271529
3000 80 800 72.7 Unk. 11 11.0 1 11
2nd Largest BA Vanity Mirror
Vanity Mirror 3 43 129 1 129 3Satco LED A19 9W S9378
2700 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 27.0 1 27
Laundry Ceiling DiffuserCeiling Diffuser 1 53 53 1 53 1 Commercial
Electric 2800 80 1690 99.4 50,000 17 17.0 1 17
400watts watts
LED Demo Power DemandBase Case Power Demand
2,278
F-4
F.4 Site Photos
Figure F-1. Entry Lighting
Figure F-2. Kitchen Lighting
F-5
Figure E-3. Dining Room (left foreground) and Morning Room (right rear)
Figure E-4. Living Room Chandelier
F-6
Figure E-5. Hallway Downlights and Lamp Type (Note: sconce at top of stairs is out of scope)
Figure E-6. Largest Bedroom (at right, screen capture from builder's website showing closet and bath)
F-7
Figure E-7. Largest Bathroom
Figure E-8. Second Largest Bedroom and Bathroom
F-8
Figure E-9. Laundry Ceiling Diffuser (image courtesy of builder's website)
F-9
F.5 Energy Savings Results
Type of Light Fixture(s) Base Case Total Power
LED Total Power
Average Hours of Use/day (Assumed)
Annualized Hours of Use
per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy
Savings (kWh)
Entry Foyer Decorative Pendant
129 27 1.5 547.5 70.6 14.8 55.8
Kitchen Island Decorative Pendants
320 32 3 1095 350.4 35.0 315.4
Kitchen Downlights 195 27 3 1095 213.5 29.6 184.0
Kitchen Sink Pendant 43 9 3 1095 47.1 9.9 37.2
Dining room Downlights 260 36 3 1095 284.7 39.4 245.3
Morning Room (Den) Chandelier
160 16 3 1095 175.2 17.5 157.7
Living Room Chandelier 215 45 3 1095 235.4 49.3 186.2
Hallway Downlights 195 27 1.5 547.5 106.8 14.8 92.0
Largest BR Pendant 129 27 1 365 47.1 9.9 37.2
Largest BR Walk-in Closet Ceiling Diffuser
53 17 1 365 19.3 6.2 13.1
Largest BA Fan/Light
43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.5
Largest BA Vanity Mirror
258 54 1.5 547.5 141.3 29.6 111.7
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
53 17 1 365 19.3 6.2 13.1
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light
43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.5
2nd Largest BA Vanity Mirror
129 27 1.5 547.5 70.6 14.8 55.8
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 53 17 1.5 547.5 29.0 9.3 19.7
400 1,559watts watts kWh, Annually
2,278
F-10
F.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 82% lower than the base case.
F.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.7 SO2 - kg 0.3
NOx - lbs 0.7 NOx - kg 0.3 CO2 - lbs 598.6 CO2 - kg 272
F-11
F.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not necessarily the
same price the builder paid.
Incremental LED material cost ($) $372.50 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.093 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1559.3 Savings ($) per year $145.55 Payback period (years) 2.6
Room Type of Light Fixture(s) Lamp Qty per Fixture
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total Lamp Qty per Fixture
Brand, Model #Power
Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total Total Incremental Price for LED products
Entry Foyer
Entry Foyer Decorative
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Satco LED A19
9W S93789 27.0 1 27 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Kitchen Kitchen Island Decorative
4 40 160 2 320 $1.50 $12.00 4 Elitco E12LED102 4 16.0 2 32 $14.00 $112.00 $100.00
Kitchen Kitchen Downlights
1 65 65 3 195 $2.60 $7.80 1 Osram LED9BR30 9 9.0 3 27 $5.00 $15.00 $7.20
Kitchen Kitchen Sink Pendant
1 43 43 1 43 $1.75 $1.75 1Satco LED A19
9W S93789 9.0 1 9 $1.75 $1.75 $0.00
Dining room
Dining room Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1 Osram LED9BR30 9.5 9.5 4 38 $5.00 $20.00 $9.60
Morning Room
Morning Room (Den)
4 40 160 1 160 $1.50 $6.00 4 Elitco E12LED102 4 16.0 1 16 $14.00 $56.00 $50.00
Living Room
Living Room Chandelier
5 43 215 1 215 $1.75 $8.75 5Satco LED A19
9W S93789 45.0 1 45 $1.75 $8.75 $0.00
Hallway (longest)
Hallway Downlights
1 65 65 3 195 $2.60 $7.80 1 Osram LED9BR30 9 9.0 3 27 $5.00 $15.00 $7.20
Largest BR
Largest BR Pendant
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Satco LED A19
9W S93789.5 28.5 1 29 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Largest BR
Largest BR Walk-in Closet
1 53 53 1 53 $12 $12.00 1 Progress P3590 17 17.0 1 17 $40.00 $40.00 $28.00
Largest BA
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 $37 $36.75 1Nutone ALN110L
9927152911 11.0 1 11 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25
Largest BA
Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129 2 258 $1.75 $10.50 3Satco LED A19
9W S93789 27.0 2 54 $1.75 $10.50 $0.00
2nd Largest
2nd Largest BR Ceiling
1 53 53 1 53 $12 $12.00 1Commercial
Electric17 17.0 1 17 $35.00 $35.00 $23.00
2nd Largest
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 $37 $36.75 1Nutone ALN110L
9927152911 11.0 1 11 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25
2nd Largest
2nd Largest BA Vanity Mirror
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3Satco LED A19
9W S93789 27.0 1 27 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Laundry Laundry Ceiling
1 53 53 1 53 $12 $12.00 1Commercial
Electric17 17.0 1 17 $35.00 $35.00 $23.00
$372.50
Base Case LED Demo
F-12
F.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux; daylight
subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter 281 500 Kitchen Table N/A 200 Kitchen Sink 74 300 Dining Room Table 115 100 Largest Bathroom Vanity 1,759 400
Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 1,360 400 Longest Hallway 120 30 Living Room Couch 56 30 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 82 150 Family Room/Den Couch N/A 100 Bed in Largest Bedroom 86 200
Dresser in Largest Bedroom 59 50 Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 172 200 Home Office N/A 200 Laundry Room 156 200 Entry/Foyer 189 30
F.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “Installed lighting as requested by the owner. We followed general recommendations
for LED fixtures. All light fixtures were provided by the builder (Natale); Hildreth (electrician)
provided recessed housings and trims for A base LED lamps.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “We used standard recessed housings at no additional costs. The lamps were about
double the cost of standard lamps.”
F-13
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “Typical amount of labor was used to install all lighting components. I do not have a
total for lighting install labor. I would estimate 16-20 hours.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “About the same.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “Instructions provided were complete.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “There wasn't any difficulty getting the lighting. LED is standard now.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “No difference.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “There have not been any problems.”
F-14
F.11 Occupant Questionnaires – Average of Seven Temporary Employee Visitors
F-15
F-16
F-17
F-18
Visitors appear to have been led through the home as a group; for a few of the rooms, the comments seem
to be duplicated by multiple visitors.
Comments
· Entry/Foyer: “Light bulb is visible.” · Kitchen: “Has too much lighting fixtures, too much light.” · Dining Room:
o “Very dim and dark shadows.” o “Too much shadow, not enough lighting.”
· Den: “Light switches are backwards.” · Hallway: “Unattractive shadows on the door.” · Largest bedroom “Light too dim.” · Largest bathroom
o “Seems a little dark for seated position.” o “Need light in shower.” o “No light in the shower. Will be nice if light is in shower.” o “Shower-no light-very dim.” o “Switches are backwards.”
· Second Largest Bedroom
o “No closet light.” o “Closet needs a light in it.” o “No light for closet.”
G-1
Appendix G: Penfield, NY This site was a new model home, unoccupied during the study. During the course of the study, the builder
stopped participating in the study, despite many requests from the research team, so some lighting
installations could not be verified and visitor surveys could not be obtained.
G.1 Site Demographics
Site Address 5 Claireon Woods Drive Penfield, NY 14526
Builder Metro Legacy
Climate Zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2015
Building Configuration Building is a two-story single family residence. Ground floor has a two car garage, laundry room, kitchen/dining room/great room (large area divided by ceiling beams), master bedroom and bath, half bath, and study. Second floor has two bedrooms, and full bathroom.
Market Segment Median- to Upper-Income Housing
Utility Electric Rates RG&E SC#1 ($0.109/kWh)18
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. All walls are light beige paint. Floors are medium dark hardwood with exception of light grey tiles in bathroom.
(Photo accessed from real estate multiple listing service)
18 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
G-2
G.2 Lighting Plans
G-3
G.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes standard and halogen incandescent base case.
Fixture TypeLamp Qty
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp Qty per Fixture
LED Brand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (Lumens/
watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Chandeliers 2 43 86 2 172 2 Elitco E12LED102 2700 80 300 75.0 15,000 4 8 2 16
Entry Closet 1 13 13 1 13 1Commercial
Electric 541941113000 82 700 63.6
Not listed
11 11 1 11
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 6 390 1Lithonia
6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50,000 10.25 10.25 6 62
Kitchen Island Pendants 1 43 43 3 129 1 Sylvania LED9A19 Unk. 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 9 3 27
Kitchen Closet 1 13 13 1 13 1Commercial
Electric 541941113000 82 700 63.6
Not listed
11 11 1 11
Dining room Chandelier 5 40 200 1 200 5 Elitco E12LED102 2700 80 300 75.0 15,000 4 20 1 20
Dining room Downlight 1 65 60 4 240 1Lithonia
6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50,000 10.25 10.25 4 41
Living room Downlights 1 65 65 4 260 1Lithonia
6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50,000 10.25 10.25 4 41
Study Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 180 1 180 3 Sylvania LED9A19/ Unk. 80 800 88.9 25,000 9 27 1 27
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1Good Earth FL1060-
(finish)-11LFO-G3086 91.4 1077 58.5
Not listed
18.4 18.4 1 18
Largest Bedroom Closet Ceiling Diffuser
2 32 64 1 64 1Good Earth FL1060-
(finish)-11LFO-G3086 91.4 1077 58.5
Not listed
18.4 18.4 1 18
Largest Bedroom Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 1Lithonia
6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50,000 10.25 10.25 4 41
Largest Bedroom Diffusers
1 43 43 1 43 1Lithonia
FMML78303000 80 642 62.9412 50,000 10.2 10.2 1 10
Largest Bath Closet 1 13 13 1 13 1Commercial
Electric 541941113000 82 700 63.6
Not listed
11 11 1 11
Largest Bath Fan/Light 1 43 43 2 86 1Nutone Broan
ALN110L 992715293000 80 800 72.7 Unk. 11 11 2 22
Largest Bath Vanity 2 40 80 2 160 2 Sylvania LED9A19/ Unk. 80 800 88.9 25000 9 18 2 36
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 65 65 1 65 1Lithonia
6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50000 10.25 10.25 1 10
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 1Good Earth FL1060-
(finish)-14LFO-G3086 91.4 1678 61.9
Not listed
27.1 27.1 1 27
2nd Largest Bedroom Closet
1 13 13 1 13 1Commercial
Electric 541941113000 82 700 63.6
Not listed
11 11 1 11
2nd Largest Bath Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 43 1Nutone Broan
ALN110L 992715293000 80 800 72.7 Unk. 11 11 1 11
2nd Largest Bath Vanity 2 40 80 1 80 2 Sylvania LED9A19/ Unk. 80 800 88.9 25000 9 18 1 18
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 86 1Good Earth FL1060-
(finish)-14LFO-G3086 91.4 1678 61.9
Not listed
27.1 27.1 1 27
2,262 517watts watts
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
G-4
It should be noted that after Taitem Engineering performed their site evaluation, there is evidence that
more lighting was added; real estate listing photos (section G.4 below) show that cove lighting was added
in the living room and kitchen, and undercabinet lighting was added in the kitchen. The research team
was unable to access the site again to verify because the builder ceased communication with the research
team. Therefore, for purposes of energy calculation, the LRC assumed that only the products confirmed
by Taitem Engineering were installed.
G.4 Site Photos
Taitem Engineering did not provide the photos for this site; the photos shown in this report were accessed
from real estate multiple listing service.
Figure G-1. Entry
Image from: www.zillow.com
Image from: www.zillow.com
G-5
Figure G-2. Kitchen and Dining Area
Image from: www.zillow.com
Image from: www.zillow.com
G-6
Figure G-3. Living Room
Figure G-4. Study
Image from: www.zillow.com
Image from: www.zillow.com
Ceiling diffuser reflected in transom window
G-7
Figure G-5. Largest Bathroom
Image from: www.zillow.com
G-8
Figure G-6. Second Largest Bathroom
Image from: www.zillow.com
G-9
G.5 Energy Savings Results
Fixture Type Base Case Power (W)
LED Demo Power
(W)
Average Hours of
Use/day (Per Literature
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Entry Chandeliers 172 16 1.5 547.5 94.2 8.8 85.4Entry Closet 13 11 1 365 4.7 4.0 0.7Kitchen Downlights 390 62 3 1095 427.1 67.3 359.7Kitchen Island Pendants 129 27 3 1095 141.3 29.6 111.7Kitchen Closet 13 11 1 365 4.7 4.0 0.7Dining room Chandelier 200 20 3 1095 219.0 21.9 197.1Dining room Downlight 240 41 3 1095 262.8 44.9 217.9Living room Downlights 260 41 3 1095 284.7 44.9 239.8Study Ceiling Diffuser 180 27 2 730 131.4 19.7 111.7Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 86 18 1.5 547.5 47.1 10.1 37.0Largest Bedroom Closet Ceiling 64 18 1 365 23.4 6.7 16.6Largest Bedroom Downlights 260 41 1 365 94.9 15.0 79.9Largest Bedroom Diffusers 43 10 1 365 15.7 3.7 12.0Largest Bath Closet 13 11 1 365 4.7 4.0 0.7Largest Bath Fan/Light 86 22 1.5 547.5 47.1 12.0 35.0Largest Bath Vanity 160 36 1.5 547.5 87.6 19.7 67.9Largest Bath Shower Downlight 65 10 1.5 547.5 35.6 5.6 30.02nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 86 27 1 365 31.4 9.9 21.52nd Largest Bedroom Closet 13 11 1 365 4.7 4.0 0.72nd Largest Bath Fan/Light 43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.52nd Largest Bath Vanity 80 18 1.5 547.5 43.8 9.9 33.9Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 86 27 1.5 547.5 47.1 14.8 32.2
2,262 517 1709.9watts watts kWh Annually
G-10
G.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 75% lower than the base case.
G.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.7 SO2 - kg 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.8 NOx - kg 0.3 CO2 - lbs 656.4 CO2 - kg 298
G-11
G.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar equipment, and is not necessarily
the same price the builder paid.
Incremental LED material cost ($) $638.70 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.109 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1709.9 Savings ($) per year $186.60 Payback period (years) 3.4
Base Case LED Demo
Room
Lamp quantit
y per Fixture
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity
Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price as of May
2017
Total for convention
al lamps and/or fixtures
Lamp quantit
y per Fixture
LED Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May
2017
Total for LED
lamps and/or fixtures
Total Incremental
Price for LED
products
Entry Chandeliers 2 43 86 2 240 $1.75 $7.00 2 Elitco E12LED102 4 8 2 16 $2 $7 $0.00
Entry Closet 1 13 13 1 13 $22 $22.00 1Commercial Electric
5419411111 11 1 11 $50 $50 $28.00
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 6 65 $2.60 $15.60 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 6 61.5 $18 $108 $92.40Kitchen Island Pendants
1 43 43 3 129 $1.75 $5.25 1 Sylvania LED9A19/ 9 9 3 27 $1.75 $5 $0.00
Kitchen Closet 1 13 13 1 13 $22 $22.00 1Commercial Electric
5419411111 11 1 11 $0 $0 -$22.00
Dining room Chandelier 5 40 200 1 300 $1.50 $7.50 5 Elitco E12LED102 4 20 1 20 $11.00 $55 $47.50
Dining room Downlight 1 65 65 4 240 $2.60 $10.40 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 4 41 $18 $72 $61.60
Living room Downlights 1 65 65 4 244 $2.60 $10.40 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 4 41 $18 $72 $61.60
Study Ceiling Diffuser 3 43 129 1 180 $1.75 $5.25 3 Sylvania LED9A19/ 9 27 1 27 $1.75 $5 $0.00
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 120 $48.50 $48.50 1Good Earth FL1060-*-
11LFO-G18.4 18.4 1 18.4 $69.00 $69 $20.50
Largest Bedroom Closet Ceiling Diffusers
2 32 64 1 64 $48.50 $97.00 1Good Earth FL1060-*-
11LFO-G18.4 18.4 1 18.4 $69.00 $69 -$28.00
Largest Bedroom Downlights
1 65 65 4 240 $2.60 $10.40 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 4 41 $18.00 $72 $61.60
Largest Bedroom Diffusers
1 43 43 1 60 $1.75 $1.75 1 Lithonia FMML7830 9.3 9.3 1 9.3 30 $30 $28.25
Largest Bath Closet 1 13 13 1 13 $22 $22.00 1Commercial Electric
5419411111 11 1 11 $0 $0 -$22.00
Largest Bath Fan/Light 1 43 43 2 120 $36.75 $73.50 1 Nutone 11 11 2 22 99 $198 $124.50
Largest Bath Vanity 2 40 80 2 160 $2.35 $9.40 2 Sylvania LED9A19/ 9 18 2 36 $1.75 $7 -$2.40
Largest Bath Shower Downlight
1 65 65 1 60 $2.60 $2.60 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 1 10.25 $18 $18 $15.40
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 120 $1.75 $3.50 1Good Earth FL1060-*-
14LFO-G27.1 27.1 1 27.1 $69.00 $69 $65.50
2nd Largest Bedroom Closet
1 13 13 1 13 $22 $22.00 1Commercial Electric
5419411111 11 1 11 $0 $0 -$22.00
2nd Largest Bath Fan/Light
1 43 43 1 60 $36.75 $36.75 1 Nutone 11 11 1 11 99 $99 $62.25
2nd Largest Bath Vanity 2 40 80 1 80 $1.50 $3.00 2 Sylvania LED9A19/ 9 18 1 18 $1.75 $4 $0.50
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser 2 43 86 1 120 $1.75 $3.50 1Good Earth FL1060-*-
14LFO-G27.1 27.1 1 27.1 $69.00 $69 $65.50
$638.70
G-12
G.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux;
daylight subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter (left of stove) 420 500
Kitchen Counter (Island) 206 Kitchen Sink 200 300 Dining Room Table 420 100
Largest Bathroom Vanity 580 400 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 560 400 Longest Hallway 135 30 Living Room Couch 121 30 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 82 150 Bed in Largest Bedroom 81 200
Dresser in Largest Bedroom 85 50 Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 84 200 Home Office 110 200 Laundry Room 193 200 Entry/Foyer 47 30
G.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: (No answer)
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “The lighting budget for the project was $1,600. The final cost for all lighting was
$1,834.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
G-13
Answer: “We did not keep track of individual fixture install times. The total time for all fixtures
was about 18 hours.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “The total is the same for our other projects.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “The specs were pretty clear.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “The experience was about the same. Nothing was hard to get.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “The fixtures were pretty much the same as what we usually install.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “We have replaced two of the Sylvania 9W bulbs. Supplier gave us new replacements at
no cost.”
G.11 Visitor Questionnaires (N/A)
Per previous correspondence with NYSERDA, visitor questionnaires were not available at this site.
H-1
Appendix H: Pittsford, NY This site was a new unoccupied model home.
H.1 Site Demographics
Site address 24 Aden Hill Pittsford, NY 14534
Builder Gerber Homes & Additions
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage 2016
Building configuration Building is a single story residence with full basement. Main floor has a two-car garage, open kitchen/breakfast/great room, master bedroom and bath, two additional bedrooms, full bathroom, laundry. Basement is largely unfinished, with a finished bath and recreation room.
Market segment Median-IncomeHousing
Utility electric rates RG&E SC#1 ($0.109/kWh)19
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. Doors and finish trim are white paint. All walls are light grey paint. Floors in kitchen/breakfast/great room, and laundry are dark hardwood. Bedrooms are light grey carpet. Bathroom floors are a light grey tile.
Image from: www.zillow.com
19 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
H-2
H.2 Lighting Plans
H-3
H.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products
The builder provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types. The power information
below assumes standard and halogen incandescent base case. In the second largest bathroom, a fan/light
using an incandescent lamp (shaded in beige) so was not an upgrade.
FixtureLamp
Quantity per
Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (Lumens/
Watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Chandelier 3 43 129 1 129 3TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 28.5 1 29
Kitchen Pendant 1 43 43 3 129 1TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 9.5 3 29
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 3 195 1 SYL 73193 2700 82 600 66.7 50000 9 9.0 3 27Kitchen Pantry Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 1Progress
P35903000 90 1211 71.2 60000 17 17.0 1 17
Dining Room Chandelier 5 43 215 1 215 5TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 47.5 1 48
Living Room Fireplace Accent 1 65 65 1 65 1 SYL 73193 2700 82 600 66.7 50000 9 9.0 1 9
Living Room Downlights 1 65 65 8 520 1 SYL 73193 2700 82 600 66.7 50000 9 9.0 8 72
Home Office (Spare Bedroom) Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 2TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 19.0 1 19
Hallway East Ceiling Diffusers 1 53 53 2 106 1 Progress P3590
3000 90 1211 71.2 60000 17 17.0 2 34
Hallway West Semiflush Diffuser
3 43 129 1 129 3 TCP #LED10A19D0
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 28.5 1 29
Hallway Sconce 1 43 60 2 120 1TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 9.5 2 19
Rec Room Downlights 1 65 65 2 130 1 SYL 73193 2700 82 600 66.7 50000 9 9.0 2 27
Rec Room Sconces 1 43 60 2 120 1TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 9.5 2 19
Rec Room Ceiling Diffuser 1 53 53 1 53 1Progress
P35903000 90 1211 71.2 60000 17 17.0 1 17
Largest BR Chandelier
4 43 172 1 172 4TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 38.0 1 38
Largest BR Closet Ceiling Diffusers
1 53 53 2 106 1Progress
P35903000 90 1211 71.2 60000 17 17.0 2 34
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 72 72 1 72 1Nutone
AERN1103000 80 800 72.7 Unk. 11 11.0 1 11
Largest BA Vanity
2 43 86 2 172 2TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 19.0 2 38
Largest BA Ceiling Diffuser Toilet
1 53 53 1 53 1Progress
P35903000 90 1211 71.2 60000 17 17.0 1 17
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 2TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 19.0 1 19
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light 1 72 72 1 72 1Incandescent,
no upgrade72 72.0 1 72
2nd Largest BA Vanity 3 43 129 1 129 3TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
2700 80 825 86.8 25000 9.5 28.5 1 29
Laundry 2 43 86 1 86 1Lithonia
FMSATL 163000 83 1220 50.8 50000 24 24.0 1 29
2998 679watts watts
Base Case Power Demand LED Demo Power Demand
No upgrade
H-4
H.4 Site Photos
Figure H-1. Entry
H-5
Figure H-2. Kitchen
Image from: www.zillow.com
H-6
Figure H-3. Dining Room
.zillow.com
H-7
Figure H-4. Living Room
H-8
Figure H-5. Home Office (Spare Bedroom)
Figure H-6. West Hallway
H-9
Figure H-7. East Hallway
H-10
Figure H-8. Largest Bedroom
Figure H-9. Master Closet
H-11
Figure H-10. Largest Bathroom
H-12
Figure H-11. Second Largest Bedroom
H-13
Figure H-12. Second Largest Bathroom
H-14
Figure 16: Laundry
H-15
Figure 17: Basement Recreation Room
H-16
H.5 Energy Savings Results
Fixture Base Case Power
LED Demo Power
Average Hours of
Use/Day (per Literature)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Base Case, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
LED Demo, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh) Notes
Entry Chandelier 129 29 1.5 547.5 70.6 15.6 55.0
Kitchen Pendant 129 29 3 1095 141.3 31.2 110.0
Kitchen Downlights 195 27 3 1095 213.5 29.6 184.0Kitchen Pantry Ceiling Diffuser
53 17 3 1095 58.0 18.6 39.4
Dining Room Chandelier 215 48 3 1095 235.4 52.0 183.4
Living Room Fireplace Accent 65 9 3 1095 71.2 9.9 61.3
Living Room Downlights 520 72 3 1095 569.4 78.8 490.6
Home Office (Spare Bedroom) Ceiling Diffuser
86 19 2 730 62.8 13.9 48.9
Hallway East Ceiling Diffusers 106 34 1.5 547.5 58.0 18.6 39.4
Hallway West Semiflush Diffuser
129 29 1.5 547.5 70.6 15.6 55.0
Hallway Sconce 120 19 1.5 547.5 65.7 10.4 55.3
Rec Room Downlights 130 27 2.5 912.5 118.6 24.6 94.0
Rec Room Sconces 120 19 2.5 912.5 109.5 17.3 92.2
Rec Room Ceiling Diffuser 53 17 2.5 912.5 48.4 15.5 32.9
Largest BR Chandelier
172 38 1 365 62.8 13.9 48.9
Largest BR Closet Ceiling Diffusers
106 34 1 365 38.7 12.4 26.3
Largest BA Fan/Light
72 11 1.5 547.5 39.4 6.0 33.4
Largest BA Vanity
172 38 1.5 547.5 94.2 20.8 73.4
Largest BA Ceiling Diffuser Toilet
53 17 1.5 547.5 29.0 9.3 19.7
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
86 19 1 365 31.4 6.9 24.5
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light 72 72 1.5 547.5 39.4 39.4 0.0No lighting upgrade
2nd Largest BA Vanity 129 29 1.5 547.5 70.6 15.6 55.0
Laundry 86 29 1.5 547.5 47.1 15.6 31.5
2998 679 1854watts watts kWh Annually
H-17
H.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 78% lower than the base case.
H.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.8 SO2 - kg 0.4 NOx - lbs 0.8 NOx - kg 0.4 CO2 - lbs 711.7 CO2 - kg 323
H-18
H.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar equipment, and is not necessarily
the same price the builder paid.
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for LED Lamps
and/or Fixtures
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power
Demand (W) on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for LED Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Total Incremental Price for LED
products
Entry Chandelier 3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3TCP
#LED10A199.5 28.5 1 29 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Kitchen Pendant 1 43 43 3 129 $1.75 $5.25 1TCP
#LED10A199.5 9.5 3 29 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Kitchen Downlights 1 65 65 3 195 $2.60 $7.80 1 SYL 73193 9 9.0 3 27 $18.00 $54.00 $46.20
Kitchen Pantry Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 $12.00 $12.00 1Progress
P359017 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 $33.00
Dining Room Chandelier
5 43 215 1 215 $1.75 $8.75 5TCP
#LED10A199.5 47.5 1 48 $1.75 $8.75 $0.00
Living Room Fireplace Accent
1 65 65 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1 SYL 73193 9 9.0 1 9 $18.00 $18.00 $15.40
Living Room Downlights
1 65 65 8 520 $2.60 $20.80 1 SYL 73193 9 9.0 8 72 $18.00 $144.00 $123.20
Home Office (Spare Bedroom) Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2TCP
#LED10A199.5 19.0 1 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Hallway East Ceiling Diffusers
1 53 53 2 106 $12.00 $24.00 1Progress
P359017 17.0 2 34 $45.00 $90.00 $66.00
Hallway West Semiflush Diffuser
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
9.5 9.5 1 10 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Hallway Sconce 1 43 43 2 86 $1.75 $3.50 1TCP
#LED10A199.5 9.5 2 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Rec Room Downlights
1 65 65 2 130 $2.60 $5.20 1 SYL 73193 9 9.0 2 27 $18.00 $36.00 $30.80
Rec Room Sconces 1 43 60 2 120 $1.75 $3.50 1TCP
#LED10A19D0D27K
9.5 9.5 2 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
Rec Room Ceiling Diffuser
1 53 53 1 53 $12.00 $12.00 1Progress
P359017 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 $33.00
Largest BR Chandelier
4 43 172 1 172 $1.75 $7.00 4TCP
#LED10A199.5 38.0 1 38 $1.75 $7.00 $0.00
Largest BR Closet Ceiling Diffusers
1 53 53 2 106 $12.00 $24.00 1Progress
P359017 17.0 2 34 $45.00 $90.00 $66.00
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 72 72 1 72 $36.50 $36.50 1Nutone
AERN11011 11.0 1 11 $99.00 $99.00 $62.50
Largest BA Vanity
2 43 86 2 172 $1.75 $7.00 2TCP
#LED10A199.5 19.0 2 38 $1.75 $7.00 $0.00
Largest BA Ceiling Diffuser Toilet
1 53 53 1 53 $12.00 $12.00 1Progress
P359017 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 $33.00
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Diffuser
2 43 86 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2TCP
#LED10A199.5 19.0 1 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00
2nd Largest BA Fan/Light
1 72 72 1 72 $1.50 $1.50 1Incand; no
upgrade72 72.0 1 72 $1.50 $1.50 $0.00
2nd Largest BA Vanity
3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 3TCP
#LED10A199.5 28.5 1 29 $1.75 $5.25 $0.00
Laundry 2 43 86 1 86 $49 $48.50 1Lithonia FMSATL
24 24.0 1 29 $69.00 $69.00 $20.50
Base Case LED Demo
$529.60
H-19
Incremental LED material cost ($) $529.60 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.109 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1854.0 Savings ($) per year $202.32 Payback period (years) 2.6
H.9 Illuminance Measurement Results
Measured (lux;
daylight subtracted) IESNA
Recommendations
Kitchen Counter 220 500 Kitchen Table (see “Dining”) 200 Kitchen Sink 222 300 Dining Room Table 136 100 Largest Bathroom Vanity 870 400
Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 940 400 Longest Hallway 45 30 Living Room Couch 62 30 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 88 150 Bed in Largest Bedroom 58 200 Dresser in Largest Bedroom 46 50
Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 38 200 Laundry Room 156 200 Entry/Foyer 50 30
H.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: (No answer)
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “The cost of the fixtures with the built-in LED’s were very close or the same as the
standard fixtures that we usually install. The cost difference was in the LED bulbs compared to regular
bulbs. The LED bulbs were on average $7 each, the same CFL bulb is $2.50.”
H-20
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “We did not itemize hours for the fixture installation. We allow 16 hours in our bid
price for total fixture install.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “The cost to install the LED is the same as the typical. Most fixtures were the same as
what we usually put in. It took no longer to install a screw in LED bulb than a CFL bulb.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “Instructions were clear.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “No difference. Builder (Gerber) decided on fixtures based in lighting design. Fixtures
and bulbs were available.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “No difference.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “We have not had any call backs because lights aren’t working.”
H-21
H.11 Visitor Questionnaires
LaRoque administered the visitor questionnaire to 12 visitors on the July 2016 “Homearama” designer
showcase.20
Figure H-15. Homearama Visitors in July 2016 (image from Gerber Homes and Additions website)
Visitors responded to each lighting statement once for the whole house. Some visitors answered an
additional question about how much they would be willing to spend to have this type of lighting in their
house.
For positively worded statements, most visitors said that they “agree somewhat” or “agree completely”
(Figure 16). For the statement about lighting comfort, half of the visitors had a neutral response, and the
other half were positive.
20 https://rochesterhomebuilders.com/2016-homearama/ http://www.gerberhomes.com/2016-home-a-rama-home
H-22
Figure H-16. Questionnaire Results, Positively Worded Questions
Most of the visitors disagreed with negatively worded statements such as the lighting is “too bright,” “too
dim,” “causes unattractive shadows,” “emits a humming sound,” and “flickers” (Figure 17).
Figure H-17. Questionnaire Results, Negatively Worded Questions
H-23
Eight of the visitors estimated how much they would be willing to spend for the lighting demonstrated at
this house (Figure 18). Many of these responses are in fact greater than what the LRC estimated is the
incremental price for the LED lighting ($530, per section H.8)
Figure H-18. Amount Visitors Would Pay for This Lighting
Visitor comments were mostly positive. A few already use LED lighting in their homes:
· “Love LED lighting.” · “Kitchen too bright. Seemed to obscure the color. Under (electric) light (kitchen) looked gray,
but when looking at wall near window with bright natural light, (it) looked green.” · “Especially liked it. I prefer less bright lighting.” · “I found the lighting preferable to that which I currently have.” · One visitor declined to participate in the questionnaire, but said they just redid their current
home with all LED and “It's the only way to go.” · One visitor said that he/she likes heat, so cool lighting not important. · Visitor said they do use same LED bulbs in current home. General opinion: lights take longer to
come on.
I-1
Appendix I: Poughkeepsie This site was a remodeled, occupied home.
I.1 Site Demographics
Site address 70 Peach Rd. Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Builder Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage Early 1960s
Building configuration Building is a two-story, raised-ranch residence. Ground floor (basement) has a two car garage, laundry room, and corridor/stairs to the main entry. Main floor has three bedrooms, two baths, living room, kitchen, and dining room. Main entry is half flight below main floor.
Market segment Median-IncomeHousing
Utility electric rate Central Hudson SC#1 ($0.131/kWh)21
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are off-white paint. Living room, kitchen, and dining room walls are painted in medium to medium dark paint (red, peach, grey). Bedroom, and bathroom walls are painted off-white. Floors in the living room and dining room are red oak with area rugs. Kitchen and bathrooms have off-white vinyl flooring. Entry vestibule has grey ceramic tile. Bedrooms have light colored carpet.
21 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
I-2
I.2 Lighting Plans
I-3
I.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Base Case vs. LED Products
The home performance contractor provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types.
The actual lamp types and power demand before the retrofit are compared to the LED sources after the
retrofit.
Lamp Qty per
Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Qty Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp Qty per Fixture
Brand, Model #Correlated Color Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output (lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/w
att)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Qty Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Chandelier 5 13 65 1 65 5 Sylvania LED 6B13C 2700 82 350 58.3 15,000 6 30 1 30
Entry Table Lamp 1 60 60 1 60 1Sylvania Lightify
73824(variable) N/A 800 88.9 20,000 9 9 1 9
Downstairs Foyer Ceiling Diffuser
1 100 100 1 100 1Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/8272700 Ukn. 800 88.9 15,000 9 9 1 9
Kitchen Decorative Pendant
240, 53
93 1 93 2Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/8272700 Ukn. 800 88.9 15,000 9 18 1 18
Kitchen Sink Recessed
1 100 100 1 100 1CREE BA19-
08027OMF-12DE26-3M100
2700 83 815 74.1 30,000 11 11 1 11
Dining Chandelier 3 13 39 1 39 3Sylvania Lightify
73824(variable) N/A 800 88.9 20,000 9 27 1 27
Living Room Floor Lamp
4 13 52 1 52 4 TCP RLDCT5W50 5000 Ukn. 400 80.0 25,000 5 20 1 20
Living Room Recessed Downlights
None; downlights are entirely new 1Sylvania 4"
downlight 731932700 82 600 66.7 35,000 9 9 6 54
Hallway (longest) Ceiling Diffuser
3 60 180 1 180 3Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/8272700 Ukn. 800 88.9 15,000 9 27 1 27
Largest BR Ceiling Fan
4 25 100 1 100 4 Meridian #13178 3000 70 27 3.9 15,000 7 28 1 28
Largest BR Table Lamp
1 100 100 1 100 1 CREE (40W equiv) 5000 80 450 75.0 5,000 6 6 1 6
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 100 100 1 100 1CREE BA21-160500MF
5000 Ukn. 1600 88.9 25,000 18 18 1 18
Largest BA Vanity
5 60 300 1 300 5Ecosmart FG-02572
5000 83 500 83.3 25,000 6 30 1 30
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Fan
4 15 60 1 60 4EcoSmart A19 A460ST-Q1D
5000 82 450 69.2 25,000 6.5 26 1 26
2nd Largest BR Table Lamp
3 13 39 1 39 1Utilitech YGA03A41-
A19-9W3000 Ukn. 750 83.3 5,000 9 9 1 9
2nd Largest BA Vanity
3 60, 53,75
188 1 188 3 Ecosmart G25 E320663
5000 83 350 77.8 25,000 4.5 13.5 1 13.5
2nd Largest BA Fanlight
1 100 100 1 100 1 Nutone AEN110L 3000 Ukn. Ukn. Ukn. Ukn. 11 11 1 11
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 100 100 1 100 1Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/8272700 Ukn. 800 88.9 15,000 9 9 1 9
1776 356watts watts
Post-Retrofit Power DemandPre-Retrofit Power Demand
I-4
I.4 Site Photos
Figure I-1. Entry Chandelier and Task Light Before Retrofit
I-5
Figure I-2. Entry After Retrofit (note monitoring device in situ, circled in red)
I-6
Figure I-3. Downstairs Foyer Ceiling Diffuser After Retrofit (note monitoring device circled in red)
Figure I-4. Kitchen Decorative Pendant Before Retrofit
I-7
Figure I-5. Kitchen Pendant After Retrofit (note monitoring device circled in red)
Figure I-6. Kitchen Sink Recessed Light (Before retrofit, upper left only; monitoring device circled in red)
I-8
Figure I-7. Dining Chandelier Before Retrofit
I-9
Figure I-8. Dining Chandelier After Retrofit (monitoring device circled in red)
Figure I-9. Living Room, Before Retrofit (upper) and After Retrofit (Center and Lower)
(Third lamp removed for examination in this photo)
I-10
Figure I-10. Longest Hallway, After Retrofit (monitoring device shown circled in red)
I-11
Figure I-11. Largest Bedroom, After Retrofit
I-12
Figure I-12. Largest Bathroom Before Retrofit
I-13
Figure I-13. Largest Bath, After Retrofit
I-14
Figure I-14. Second Largest Bedroom, Before Retrofit
Figure I-15. Second Largest Bedroom, After Retrofit
I-15
Figure I-16. Second Largest Bathroom, Before Retrofit
I-16
Figure I-17. Second Largest Bathroom, After Retrofit (monitoring device shown in red circle)
I-17
Figure I-18. Laundry, After Retrofit (monitoring device shown in red circle)
I-18
I.5 Monitoring and Energy Savings Results
It should be noted this homeowner commented that they use their new living room more often now than
they did before the retrofit because they love their new lighting so much (Section I.11). Therefore, in
some spaces, it is possible that the hours of use before retrofit may have been shorter than estimated
above. If the homeowners are using new lights more after retrofit, their annual energy savings would be
lower than shown here.
Average Hours of use (h/day)
Average Hours of use (h/day)
Average Hours of use (h/day)
Annual Average Hours of Use/day
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Pre-Retrofit
Annualized Energy
(kWh)
Post-Retrofit
Annualized Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
NotesEntry Chandelier 1.54 0.35 2.13 1.4 508.0 33.0 15.2 17.8
Entry Table Lamp 3.44 4.43 0.63 3.0 1088.5 65.3 9.8 55.5
Downstairs Foyer Ceiling Diffuser
4.03 2.75 3.26 3.5 1283.4 128.3 11.6 116.8
Kitchen Decorative Pendant
9.18 8.09 9.25 8.9 3257.3 302.9 58.6 244.3
Kitchen Sink Recessed
2.43 0.64 3.52 2.3 823.4 82.3 9.1 73.3
Dining Chandelier 2.44 1.87 2.96 2.4 885.0 34.5 23.9 10.6Living Room Floor Lamp
0.80 0.70 2.89 1.3 473.6 24.6 9.5 15.2Circuit not monitored, so assumed same hours of use as downlights in this room.
Living Room Recessed Downlights
0.80 0.70 2.89 1.3 473.6 0.0 25.6 -25.6
Though negative savings (because no downlights existed before), the homeowner loves these new downlights. Big improvement to their quality of life.
Hallway (longest) Ceiling Diffuser
4.28 3.76 7.94 5.1 1849.3 332.9 49.9 282.9
Largest BR Ceiling Fan
0.00 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0This circuit was never used; replacement reportedly only emits 27 lumens vs. ~1600 for the base case.
Largest BR Table Lamp
7.36 6.18 7.98 7.2 2634.7 263.5 15.8 247.7
Largest BA Fan/Light
1.19 1.33 1.10 1.2 440.0 44.0 7.9 36.1
Largest BA Vanity
0.31 0.43 0.3 114.4 34.3 3.4 30.9Calc uses only "shoulder" season due to logger failure
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Fan
0.23 0.35 0.44 0.3 113.0 6.8 2.9 3.8Previously 15W CFL's, so these LEDs probably have lower light output
2nd Largest BR Table Lamp
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.4 0.01 0.00 0.01Changed from broken/dangerous task light with 3 sockets to a new table lamp with 1
2nd Largest BA Vanity
1.94 1.9 708.3 133.2 9.6 123.6 Circuit not monitored, so assumed same hours of use as fanlight in this bathroom.
2nd Largest BA Fanlight
1.94 1.98 1.9 708.3 70.8 7.8 63.0Calc uses only "shoulder" season due to logger failure
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
0.96 4.63 2.95 2.4 867.2 86.7 7.8 78.9Part of the savings is a lower lumen output lamp
1,375kWh Annually
Summer Winter Shoulder
I-19
I.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 71% lower than the base case.
I.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.6 SO2 - kg 0.3 NOx - lbs 0.6 NOx - kg 0.3 CO2 - lbs 527.8 CO2 - kg 239
I.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not necessarily the
same price the builder paid. Payback period estimates show material-only pricing, as well as labor and
material costs; at this site, new recessed downlights in the living room comprised much of the labor
estimate, and would not have been suitable for a homeowner to perform themselves. Trouble-shooting
and training for “smart lighting” also contributed to the labor estimate.
I-20
LED Material Costs Only Labor22 & Material Costs
Incremental cost ($) $529.26 $1,229.26 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.131 $0.131 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 1374.8 1374.8 Savings ($) per year $179.43 $179.43 Payback period (years) 2.9 6.9
22 Labor estimate: contractor estimated 14 hours of labor at this site. LRC assumed labor costs approximately $50/hour, thus $700 for labor at this site.
Lamp quantity per
Fixture
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp quantity per
FixtureBrand, Model #
Power Demand (W)
per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total for LED
lamps and/or fixtures
Total Increme
ntal Price for
LED Entry Chandelier
5 13 65.0 1 65 5Sylvania LED
6B13C6 30.0 1 30 $2.85 $14.26 $14.26
Entry Table Lamp
1 60 60.0 1 60 1Sylvania Lightify
738249 9.0 1 9 $1.75 $1.75 $1.75
Downstairs Foyer Ceiling
1 100 100 1 100 2Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/827
9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50
Kitchen Decorative
2 40, 53 93 1 93 2Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/827
9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50
Kitchen Sink Recessed
1 100 100 1 100 1CREE BA19-08027OMF-
12DE26 3M10011 11.0 1 11 $6.00 $6.00 $6.00
Dining Chandelier
3 13 39 1 39 3Sylvania Lightify
738249.5 28.5 1 29 $105 $105.00 $105.00
Living Room Floor Lamp
4 13 52 1 52 4 TCP RLDCT5W50 5 20.0 1 20 $1.75 $7.00 $7.00
Living Room Recessed Downlights
1Sylvania 4"
downlight 731939 9.0 6 72 $18 $108.00 $108.00
Hallway (longest) Ceiling Diffuser
3 60 120 1 120 3Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/827
9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $5.25 $5.25
Largest BR Ceiling Fan
4 25 100 1 100 4 Meridian #13178 4 16.0 1 16 $6.75 $27.00 $27.00
Largest BR Table Lamp
1 100 100 1 100 2CREE (40W
equiv)9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 100 100 1 100 1CREE BA21-160500MF
11 11.0 1 11 $99 $99.00 $99.00
Largest BA Vanity
5 60 300 1 300 5Ecosmart FG-02572
6 30.0 1 30 $5 $22.50 $22.50
2nd Largest BR Ceiling Fan
4 15 60 1 60 4EcoSmart A19 A460ST-Q1D
9 36.0 1 36 $1.75 $7.00 $7.00
2nd Largest BR Table Lamp
3 13 39 1 39 1Utilitech
YGA03A41-A19-9W
9 9 1 9 $1.75 $1.75 $1.75
2nd Largest BA Vanity
3 60,53,75 188 1 188 3Ecosmart G25
E320663ECS 25 40WE CW
6 18.0 1 18 $4.50 $13.50 $13.50
2nd Largest BA Fanlight
1 100 100 1 100 1 Nutone AEN110L 11 11.0 1 11 $99 $99.00 $99.00
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 100 100 1 100 1Sylvania
LED9A19/dim/0/827
9 9.0 1 9 $1.75 $1.75 $1.75
$529.26
Pre-Retrofit Power Demand Post-Retrofit Power Demand
I-21
I.9 Illuminance Measurement Results (in units of lux; electric light only)
In most spaces, the retrofit LED lamps provided similar light output to before the retrofit. The living
room, however, had increased light levels, due the addition of new recessed downlights. The occupants
commented how much they enjoy their new downlights in the living room. (See section I.11)
Measured Before Retrofit
Measured After Retrofit
IESNA Recommendations
Kitchen Counter 36.5 42 500
Kitchen Table 56.2 64.3 200
Kitchen Sink 46.5 52 300
Dining Room Table 95.5 105.5 100
Largest Bathroom Vanity 390 443 400
Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 365 402 400
Longest Hallway 50.7 87.5 30
Living Room Couch 48 118 30
Living Room Fireplace Mantle 4.1 37.5 150
Bed in Largest Bedroom 27.9 34.3 200
Dresser in Largest Bedroom 7.5 12.6 50
Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 63 76.4 200
Laundry Room 73 82 200
Entry/Foyer 21 35.7 30
I.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “I trusted the performance specifications. The brand was changed because of issues
deciding the frequency of the bulb and I came across these new bulbs that you can change color
on demand allowing them to have the best of both worlds.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
I-22
Answer: “I typically install CFLs because they are energy efficient and cheap, which is helpful
specially when there is a budget to get other energy saving measures, like insulation, or sealing,
etc. I was not aware there were so many options with LEDs so if cost is not an issue, LEDs are a
better choice. On this upgrade, even the simple light bulb switch, the LEDs are much more
expensive.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “Everything was install in about 14 hours.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “The program allows for a light bulb replacement simple one to one. In this case, the
living room was not lighted very well, and so new fixtures were added to the ceiling which
increased the amount of labor. The end results were worth it, I received many compliments for
the work as they now use that space a lot more than ever before. I also spent some time figuring
how the smart bulbs worked, and it took some time in configuring the app and explaining to them
how it works.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “I was totally unsure about the smart bulbs since that is a whole new technology which
includes a Wi-Fi bridge that controls them, each bulb has to be paired to the system.”
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “With CFLs I just purchase the 60-bulb box, which I bring to the job and just simple
swap the bulbs, in this case I am searching for specific bulbs, color temperatures, etc. That took
some homework to do.”
I-23
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “The living room installation was difficult because it required wiring on a new install,
the smart bulbs require some research on how to get them to work.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “None, so far all lighting components are working properly.”
I.11 Occupant Questionnaire Before and After Retrofit
Occupant responses were considerably more positive after the retrofit:
I-24
Occupant comment regarding “warm color light” question:
“We wanted ‘Daylight’ color in common spaces and since we have 5 kids in the house, to us, 5K bright light is helpful for reading, looking, playing board games, etc. In the kitchen and dining room we now have bulbs that we can change the color with our phones, and that is amazing because we can now have a "warm" dinner time by just modifying the color... now that is AMAZING!”
Occupant responses to negatively worded questions were considerably more negative after the retrofit:
I-25
The owner uses the living room, bedrooms, and longest hallway more after the retrofit:
General comments, after retrofit:
"The second largest room impact is the Living Room. It used to be very dark, shadow room. Now is my kid's favorite room! Very bright, clear, I should say crystal clear space." "The third impact was that our old lights were terrible, flickering, noisy, not dependable, and fragile. The quality of this lights are amazing. No guilt about them being on and been able to control them with the phone, now that is just great. Thank you for having us!"
J-1
Appendix J. Syracuse, NY This site was a remodeled occupied home.
J.1 Site Demographics
Site address 1111 W. High Terrace Syracuse, NY 13219
Builder Three Peaks Energy Corp
Climate zone Climate Zone 5
Vintage Early 1960s
Building configuration Two-story residence with a finished basement. Main floor has a one-car garage, kitchen, dining room, living room, laundry, half bath. Second floor has a master bedroom and bath, two additional bedrooms, a full bathroom, and an office.
Market segment Median-IncomeHousing
Utility electric rate Central Hudson SC#1 ($0.097/kWh)23
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
All ceilings are off-white paint. All walls are off-white paint (light grey, light brown, light yellow, light green). Floors are generally light hardwood, dining and living room have light grey area rug, and bathrooms have off-white vinyl tile. Kitchen has medium colored wood cabinets with light brown countertop. Family room has medium knotty pine paneling with light beige floor tile.
23 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
J-2
J.2 Lighting Plans
J-3
J.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Base Case vs. LED Products
The home performance contractor provided sketches indicating base case light fixture quantities. Taitem
Engineering confirmed lamp and fixture types on site. As shown below, the actual lamp types and power
demand before the retrofit are compared to the LED sources after the retrofit. It should be noted that
several circuits had already been upgraded to LEDs before the demonstration began (shaded in blue in the
table below).
Lamp quantity
per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model # Correlated Color Temperature (K)
Color Rendering Index (CRI)
Light Output (lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/
watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Ceiling Diffuser
2 60 120.0 1 120 2TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 20.0 1 20.0
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
1 35 35 1 35 1 Existing (no upgrade, already LED) 35.0
Kitchen Sink Pendant
1 40 40 1 40 1 Topaz LR20/7/827/D-46 2700 80 525 72.9 25,000 7.2 7.2 1 7.2
Kitchen Undercabinets
(None before retrofit) 0 1Utilitech UC1061-WH1-
18LF0-U3000 95 643 64.3 50,000 10 10.0 5 50.0
Dining Ceiling Fan
5 6 30 1 30 5Osram 6W 2700K
YX1448 450 lm(no upgrade, already LEDs) 6 30.0 1 30.0
Living Room Table Lamp 1
1 10 10 1 10 1 GE LED 10LS/DL (no upgrade, already LED) 10 10.0 1 10.0
Living Room Floor Lamp 1
1 100 100 1 100 117OMNA21/LED/3WAY/
273000 80 1600 94.1 25,000 17 17.0 1.00 17.0
Living Room Table Lamp 2
1 10 10 1 10 1 GE LED 10LS/DL (no upgrade, already LED) 10 10.0 1.0 10.0
Living Room Table Lamp 3
1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL, no upgrade (no upgrade, CFL) 14 14.0 1.0 14.0
Living Room Floor Lamp 2
1 20 20 1 20 1 CFL OttLite SL206 (no upgrade, CFL) 20 20.0 1.0 20.0
Basement Den Downlights
1 65 65 6 390 1 Sylvania BR30 11W Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 11.0 11.0 6.0 66.0
Largest Bathroom Vanity
1 Varies 132 2 132 1TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 10.0 2 20.0
Largest Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
1 25 25 1 25 1 Existing (no upgrade, already LED) 25 25.0 1 25.0
Laundry Downlight
1 65 65 1 65 1 ACUITY FMML Unk. 80 642 62.9 50,000 10.2 10.2 1 10.2
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 25 25 1 25 1 Existing (no upgrade, already LED) 25.0
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan
3-4 Varies 140 1 140 4TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 40.0 1 40.0
Largest Bedroom Closet
1 40 40 1 40 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor
module Acrich2Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17.0
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL (no upgrade, already CFL) 14 14.0 1 14.0
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp 2
1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL (no upgrade, already CFL) 14 14.0 1 14.0
2nd Largest Bathroom Vanity
6 40 240 1 240 6EcoSmart ECS25 40WE
W27 LP FR 1202700 80 350 77.8 25,000 4.5 27.0 1 27.0
2nd Largest Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
1 60 60 1 60 1TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 10.0 1 10.0
Hallway 1 17 17 2 34 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor
module Acrich2Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 2 34.0
Home Office 1 25 25 1 25 1 Existing (no upgrade, already LED) 25 25.0 1 25.0
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan
4 50 200 1 200 4TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 40.0 1 40.0
2nd Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL (no upgrade, already CFL) 14 14.0 1 14.0
1797 594watts watts
Post-Retrofit Power DemandPre-Retrofit Power Demand
J-4
J.4 Site Photos
Figure J-1. Entry Ceiling Diffuser, Before (left) and After Retrofit (right)
J-5
Figure J-2. Kitchen, Before Retrofit (cabinets had been pre-wired for lighting, but none were installed before retrofit)
J-6
Figure J-3. Kitchen, After Retrofit
J-7
Figure J-4. Dining Ceiling Fan (Note: Lamps upgraded to LEDs before retrofit)
J-8
Figure J-5. Living Room, Before Retrofit (note pre-existing LED lamp type)
J-9
Figure J-6. Living Room, After Retrofit
J-10
Figure J-7. Basement Den, Before Retrofit (no photos available after retrofit)
J-11
Figure J-8. Ground Floor (Largest) Bathroom, Before Retrofit (ceiling diffuser upgraded before retrofit)
J-12
Figure J-9. Ground Floor Bathroom, After Retrofit (monitoring device on ceiling diffuser shown in red circle)
J-13
Figure J-10. Ground Floor Bathroom, After Retrofit (monitoring device on vanity light shown in red circle)
J-14
Figure J-11. Laundry Before (upper) and After Retrofit (lower)
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser (previously upgraded to LED)
Laundry Downligh
(Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser)
Laundry Downlight
Laundry Downlight
J-15
Figure J-12. Largest Bedroom (note pre-existing CFLs)
J-16
Figure J-13. Largest Bedroom Closet, Before Retrofit
J-17
Figure J-14. 2nd Largest Bath, Before Retrofit
J-18
Figure J-15. 2nd Largest Bathroom, After Retrofit
J-19
Figure J-16. Hallway Fixtures (Upgraded prior to study)
J-20
Figure J-17. Home Office Ceiling Diffuser (Upgraded prior to study)
J-21
Figure J-18. Second Largest Bedroom, Before Retrofit (detail images after retrofit not available)
J-22
J.5 Monitoring and Energy Savings Results
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use (h/day)
Average Hours of Use
(h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Pre-Retrofit, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Post-Retrofit, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh) Notes
Entry Ceiling Diffuser
0.01 0.13 0.66 0.2 73.9 8.9 1.5 7.4
Taitem claimed 60W A-lamp was the "before" case; in the future won't be avail. Device failed in November, so LRC used October-November as "Winter"
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
8.23 10.12 9.79 9.1 3319.4 116.2 116.2 0.0Homeowner already had integrated LED diffuser here, so no upgrade
Kitchen Sink Pendant
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Light appears to have been off the entire time
Kitchen Undercabinets
3.0 1095.0 0.0 54.8 -54.8No undercabs installed before retrofit, so negative savings; monitoring device went missing so assumed 3 hours/day per literature
Dining Ceiling Fan 4.33 2.46 6.95 4.5 1649.4 49.5 49.5 0.0Homeowner had already fitted sockets with LEDs, so no lamp upgrade
Living Room Table Lamp 1
6.63 4.98 7.93 6.5 2388.3 23.9 23.9 0.0
Homeowner had already fitted socket with LEDs, so no lamp upgrade.Monitoring location had lots of daylight so difficult to distinguish daylight from electric light
Living Room Floor Lamp 1
5.45 2.68 6.47 5.0 1829.5 182.9 31.1 151.83-way lamp, but assumed full output whenever on. Similar "on" output within and between seasons.
Living Room Table Lamp 2
0.0 No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded
Living Room Table Lamp 3
0.0 No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded
Living Room Floor Lamp 2
0.0 No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded
Basement Den Downlights
2.5 912.5 355.9 60.2 295.7No monitoring; used literature for hours assumption
Largest Bathroom Vanity
0.00 0.16 0.33 0.1 44.5 5.9 0.9 5.0
Largest Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
2.77 3.91 2.69 3.0 1108.5 27.7 27.7 0.0
Homeowner had already upgraded to LED fixture, so no upgrade for this project.Data show flickering; taken at face value, but it could have been longer hours of use due to flickering more than the datalogger can measure.
Laundry Downlight 0.17 0.00 0.21 0.1 50.7 3.3 0.5 2.8
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
Not monitored because not upgraded, owner already had LED
Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan
2.18 1.05 2.25 1.9 699.4 97.9 28.0 69.9
Largest Bedroom Closet
0.01 0.04 0.01 0.0 7.1 0.3 0.1 0.2
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
0.01 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Homeowner already had a CFL, so no LED upgrade. Logger stopped functioning 9/11/16, so only have Summer season
Largest Bedroom Table Lamp 2
No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded
2nd Largest Bathroom Vanity
2.61 2.74 4.87 3.2 1171.7 281.2 31.6 249.6
2nd Largest Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
3.92 4.35 0.91 3.3 1194.8 71.7 11.9 59.7Logger stopped functioning in late winter so "winter" monitoring runs from 10/2-11/8
Hallway 1.76 0.34 2.73 1.6 602.0 20.5 20.5 0.0Homeowner had already installed LED fixture, so no upgrade for this project
Home Office 3.12 2.60 4.05 3.2 1175.7 29.4 29.4 0.0Homeowner had already installed LED fixture, so no upgrade for this project
2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Fan
0.53 0.71 2.20 1.0 362.6 72.5 14.5 58.0
2nd Largest Bedroom Table Lamp
No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded
845.3kWh annually
Winter Shoulder Summer
J-23
J.6 Lighting Power Density
Scaled plan drawings were not available for this house, so the LRC consulted the previous real estate
listing for the total square footage of the house excluding garage (1,618 sq.ft.). Actual demonstration area
may have been greater (due to inclusion of basement den) or less than this estimate (due to exclusion of
an extra bedroom and the stairs). Assuming the real estate listing is accurate, the LED installation had a
lighting power density of 0.3 W/ft2, which is about 69% lower than the base case.
J.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.4 SO2 - kg 0.2
NOx - lbs 0.4 NOx - kg 0.2
CO2 - lbs 324.5 CO2 - kg 147
J-24
J.8 Payback Period
The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not necessarily the
same price the home improvement contractor paid.
Fixture
Lamp Quantity
per Fixture
Brand, Model #Power
Demand (W) per Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Price ea. as of May
2017
Total for LED
Lamps and/or
Fixtures
Total Incremental
Price for LED
Products
Entry Ceiling Diffuser
2TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D4610 20.0 1 20 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
1Fixture was not
replaced35 35.0 1 35 $0.00
Kitchen Sink Pendant
1Topaz
LR20/7/827/D-467.2 7.2 1 7 $5 $5.00 $5.00
Kitchen Undercabinets
1Utilitech
(Presumably 18")10 10.0 5 50 $32 $160.00 $160.00
Dining Ceiling Fan 5 Osram 6 30.0 1 30 $0.00
Living Room Table Lamp 1
1 GE LED 10LS/DL 10 10.0 1 10 $0.00
Living Room Floor Lamp 1
117OMNA21/LED/3
WAY/2717 17.0 1 17 $14 $14.00 $14.00
Basement Den Downlights
1 Sylvania BR30 11W 11 11.0 6 66 $5 $30.00 $30.00
Largest Bathroom Vanity
1TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D4610 10.0 2 20 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50
Largest Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
1 Existing 25 25.0 1 25 $0.00
Back Door/Laundry Downlight
1 ACUITY FMML 7 7.0 1 7 $18 $18.00 $18.00
Master Bedroom Ceiling Fan
4TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D4610 40.0 1 40 $2 $7.00 $7.00
Master Bedroom Closet Light
1 ACRICH2 17 17.0 1 17 $45 $45.00 $45.00
Master Bedroom Table Lamp 1
1 CFL 14 14.0 1 14 $0.00
Master Bedroom Table Lamp 2
1 CFL 14 14.0 1 14 $0.00
2nd Bathroom Vanity
6ECS25 40WE W27
LP FR 1204.5 27.0 1 27 $7 $40.50 $40.50
2nd Bathroom Ceiling Diffuser
1TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D4610 10.0 1 10 $2 $1.75 $1.75
Hallway 1 ACRICH2 17 17.0 2 34 $0.00Home Office 1 Existing 25 25.0 1 25 $0.002nd Largest BR (Grandkids room)
4TOPAZ
LA19/10/827/D4610 40.0 1 40 $2 $7.00 $7.00
$335.25
Post-Retrofit
J-25
LED Material Costs Only Labor24 & Material Costs
Incremental cost ($) $335.25 $1,185.25 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.097 $0.097 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 845.3 845.3 Savings ($) per year $82.37 $82.37 Payback period (years) 4.1 14.4
J.9 Illuminance Measurement Results (in units of lux; electric light only)
In most spaces, the retrofit LED technologies provided similar light output to before the retrofit. It should
be noted that many of the spaces below had contribution from fixtures that were not changed during the
retrofit phase (shaded in blue).
Measured Before Retrofit
Measured After Retrofit
IESNA Recommendations
Kitchen Counter 276 355 300 Kitchen Table 463 480 100 Kitchen Sink 157 225 400 Dining Room Table 164 240 400 Largest Bathroom Vanity 582 496 30 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 102 208 30 Longest Hallway 96 133 150 Living Room Couch 75 117 100 Living Room Fireplace Mantle 26 42 200 Basement Den Couch N/A 71 50 Bed in Largest Bedroom 61 70 200 Dresser in Largest Bedroom 22 34 200 Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom 99 121 200 Home Office 218 320 30 Laundry Room 366 380 300 Entry/Foyer 61 83 100
24 Labor estimate, per contractor at this site: $850; see section J.10.
J-26
J.10 Builder Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “No.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: (See scan of invoice below; billed for $550 in materials. No information about
incremental material prices.)
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: (Invoice below shows $850 labor.)
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “No Difference.”
This builder did not answer the remaining questions:
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
J-27
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
J-28
J.11 Occupant Questionnaire Before and After Retrofit
The occupant answered the questionnaire for 11 rooms before retrofit, and 12 rooms after retrofit (adding
the basement den). Occupant responses were considerably more positive after the retrofit, despite the fact
that many lighting upgrades were done before this research. The occupant “agreed completely” with most
of the positively worded questions. For the statement about colors looking good, the occupant indicated
“agree somewhat” for all rooms.
J-29
Occupant responses to negatively worded questions were considerably more negative after the retrofit.
The occupant “agreed somewhat” that the basement den is now too bright as a result of the retrofit with
LED lamps.
The owner uses lighting more often in all 12 rooms after the retrofit:
Basement Den
J-30
Before retrofit, the owner commented that he had a few goals with the retrofit:
"Undercabinet lighting ready." "Trying to improve comfort while reducing shadows."
The owner had many positive comments after retrofit:
"All lighting works well!” “The lighting upgrades are complete and make such a difference; thanks so much for your design recommendations!” “The living room lights with the barrel shades, 100 watt bulbs and three-way remote switch really transformed the darkness and ease of use.” “The under cabinet lighting really brings a new life to the kitchen.” “It was a great exercise to understand how these basic upgrades are able to transform spaces so dramatically.” “We had our usual family Sunday dinner last night and they all can’t believe the difference. Thanks so much!”
K-1
Appendix K: Woodstock, NY This site was an occupied remodeled home.
K.1 Site Demographics
Site address 10 Forestwood Dr. Woodstock, NY 12498
Builder Gaia Sharbel Energy Contracting
Climate zone Climate Zone
Vintage Early 1960s
Building configuration Building is a two-story, raised ranch residence. Ground floor (basement) has a two car garage, laundry room, activity room (with exterior sliding glass doors) and corridor/stairs to the main entry. Main floor has three bedrooms, two baths, office, living room, kitchen, dining room, and den/family room. Main entry is half flight below main floor.
Market segment Median-IncomeHousing
Utility electric rate Central Hudson SC#1 ($0.131/kWh)25
Incentives received for the lighting equipment or installation
$0
Visible characteristics of wall, floor and ceiling surfaces in key rooms (i.e., color of carpet, walls, etc.)
Ceilings are white paint. All walls are off-white paint. Floors are dark hardwood with exception of off-white vinyl in bathrooms. Living room, family room, and second bedroom have light-colored throw rugs.
(Image accessed from Google Street View)
25 Average of three rates, as described in methodology in main body of report.
K-2
K.2 Lighting Plans
K-3
K.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Base Case vs. LED Products
The home performance contractor provided plans indicating base case light fixture quantities and types.
The actual lamp types and power demand before the retrofit are compared to the LED sources after the
retrofit.
Lamp Qty per Fixture
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Total Power Demand (W)
on Circuit
Lamp Qty per
FixtureBrand, Model #
Correlated Color
Temperature (K)
Color Rendering
Index (CRI)
Light Output
(lumens)
Efficacy (lumens/
watt)
Rated Life (hours)
Power Demand (W) per
Lamp
Power Demand (W) per Fixture
Quantity Fixtures
On Circuit
Total Power Demand (W) on Circuit
Entry Chandelier 9 25 225 1 225 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
2 34 68 1 68 1Retrofit module: Rem Phos RPT-LEDCR-2200LM-3000K
3000 85 2100 116.67Not
reported18 18.0 1 18
Kitchen Downlights
1 65 65 5 325 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 Unk. 93 600 58.537 50,000 10.25 10.25 5 51.25
Dining Chandelier 5 40 200 1 200 9 Philips 427765 2700 85 180 51.429 25,000 3.5 31.5 1 32
Dining Table Lamp
1 60 60 1 60 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 2700 83 450 75.0 30,000 6 6.0 1 6
Living Room Downlights
1 75 75 2 150 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 Unk. 93 600 58.537 50,000 10.25 10.3 2 20.5
Living Room Art Light
3 25 75 1 75 3 Euri ED12-1100 3000 80 225 72.581 25,000 3.1 9.3 1 9.3
Living Room Table Lamps
1 60 60 3 180 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 2700 83 450 75.0 30,000 6 6.0 3 18
Living Room Sconces
1 60 60 3 180 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 2700 83 450 75.0 30,000 6 6.0 3 18
Den Downlights
1 65 65 4 260 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 Unk. 93 600 58.537 50,000 10.25 10.3 4 41
Den Table Lamp
1 60 60 1 60 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10
Home Office Task Light
1 15 15 1 15 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
1 75 75 1 75 1 Hampton Bay DC016LEDA 4000 83 1400 56 50,000 25 25.0 1 25
Largest BR Downlights
1 75 75 2 150 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 Unk. 93 600 58.537 50,000 10.25 10.3 2 20.5
Largest BR Table Lamps
1 60 60 2 120 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 2 20
Largest BA Fan/Light
1 75 75 1 75 1Hampton Bay
VFB25ACLED2 module VFRU-1000020862-04
Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 16 16.0 1 16
2nd Largest BR Table Lamps
1 60 60 3 180 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 2700 83 450 75.0 30,000 6 6.0 3 18
2nd Largest BACeiling Diffuser
1 60 60 1 60 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10
2nd Largest BA Vanity
1 60 60 2 120 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 2 20
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 75 75 1 75 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10
2,653 383watts watts
Post-Retrofit Power DemandPre-Retrofit Power Demand
K-4
K.4 Site Photos
Figure K-1. Entry Chandelier Before Retrofit (Note: this chandelier was moved to the dining room during the retrofit phase)
Figure K-2. Entry Decorative Pendant After Retrofit (monitoring device circled in red; note completely different decorative pendant with different lamp type)
K-5
Figure K-3. Kitchen, Before Retrofit
K-6
Figure K4. itchen After Retrofit (monitoring device circled in red)
K-7
Figure K-5. Dining Room, Before Retrofit (note: chandelier will be replaced during retrofit)
Figure K-6. Dining Chandelier, After Retrofit (moved from Entry; monitoring device shown in red)
K-8
Figure K-7. Dining Room Table Lamp Before (upper) and After Retrofit (lower; note monitoring device)
K-9
Figure K-8. Living Room Before Retrofit (Downlights, Art Light, Table Lamp, and Sconce)
K-10
Figure K-9. Living Room Fixtures During Monitoring, After Retrofit (Downlights, Art Light, Table Lamp, and Sconce)
K-11
Figure K-10. Family Den Before Retrofit (Downlight, Table Lamp)
K-12
Figure K-11. Family Den After Retrofit, During Monitoring (Downlight, Table Lamp)
K-13
Figure K-12. Home Office Task Light (monitoring device circled in red)
K-14
Figure K-13. Hallway Before (upper) and After Retrofit (lower, with monitoring device)
K-15
Figure K-14. Largest Bedroom Downlights and Table Lamp, Before (upper) and After Retrofit (lower, with monitoring device)
K-16
Figure K-15. Largest Bathroom Fan/Light Before (upper) and After Retrofit (lower, with monitoring device)
K-17
Figure K-16. Second Largest Bedroom Table Lamps (Assumed 1 bulb in left fixture and 2 bulbs in right fixture)
K-18
Figure K-17 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity and Ceiling Diffuser
K-19
Figure K-18. Laundry (monitoring shown in red)
K-20
K.5 Monitoring and Energy Savings Results
Average Hours of Use
(h/day)
Average Hours of
Use (h/day)
Average Hours of
Use (h/day)
Annual Average
Hours of Use (h/day)
Annualized Hours of Use per Circuit
Pre-Retrofit, Annualized
Energy (kWh)
Post-Retrofit,
Annualized Energy (kWh)
Annual Energy Savings (kWh)
Notes
Entry Chandelier 0.2 0.2 89.7 20.2 0.9 19.3Only had one season of monitoring data (summer)
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser
0.04 0.002 0.00 0.019 6.9 0.5 0.1 0.3Circuit was not used in winter, but calc includes all seasons
Kitchen Downlights
4.3 3.6 4.0 4.0 1469.5 477.6 75.3 402.3In the "before" case, Taitem wrote 60W for BR lamp, but those are typically 65W, so LRC changed calculation
Dining Chandelier 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 108.7 21.7 3.4 18.3 Off most of the time
Dining Table Lamp
0.2 0.0 0.2 90.5 5.4 0.5 4.9
No summer data, so LRC used only shoulder data; part of the energy savings was due to lower lumen output after retrofit
Living Room Downlights
0.1 0.004 0.3 0.1 51.4 7.7 1.1 6.7In the "before" case, Taitem wrote 60W in calculator, but 75W in notes; LRC changed to 75W
Living Room Art Light
0.0 1.2 0.7 0.5 170.7 12.8 1.6 11.2Light was left on all day one day. Most of the time off.
Living Room Table Lamps
0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.2 1.1 0.1 1.0
Most of the time the monitored table lamp was off; part of the energy savings was due to lower lumen output after retrofit. One lamp represents 3 in room
Living Room Sconces
1.4 0.6 1.7 1.3 473.6 85.2 8.5 76.7Used for several hours at a time; part of the energy savings was due to lower lumen output after retrofit
Den Downlights
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 28.3 7.4 1.2 6.2
Used only Winter and Summer data; device fell during shoulder season; In the "before" case, Taitem wrote 60W for BR lamp, but those are typically 65W; LRC corrected
Den Table Lamp
0.0 0.1 0.8 0.2 86.6 5.2 0.9 4.3
Home Office Task Light
0.4 3.2 1.1 1.2 454.8 6.8 4.5 2.3 Occasional long hours of use
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser
0.5 0.4 1.9 0.8 297.9 22.3 7.4 14.9
Largest BR Downlights
1.1 1.6 1.3 487.0 73.1 10.0 63.1No Shoulder data available due to device fall/fail; this represents average of Winter and Summer
Largest BR Table Lamps
0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 94.2 11.3 1.9 9.4 One lamp monitored for 2 lamps in room.
Largest BA Fan/Light
1.4 0.8 1.1 1.1 414.0 31.1 6.6 24.4
2nd Largest BR Table Lamps
0.0 1.6 0.3 0.5 182.2 32.8 3.3 29.5One lamp monitored for 3 lamps in room. Part of the savings was due to lower light output after retrofit
2nd Largest BACeiling Diffuser
0.6 0.9 0.4 0.6 224.9 13.5 2.2 11.2Not monitored separately because on same circuit as vanity mirror
2nd Largest BA Vanity
0.6 0.9 0.4 0.6 224.9 27.0 4.5 22.5
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
0.4 1.5 0.0 0.5 199.9 15.0 2.0 13.0
741.6kWh Annually
Summer Winter Shoulder
K-21
K.6 Lighting Power Density
The LED installation had a lighting power density about 85% lower than what the homeowner was using
before the retrofit.
K.7 Pollution Avoided
The energy saved with this lighting upgrade translates to reduced annual pollution emissions:
SO2 - lbs 0.3 SO2 - kg 0.1 NOx - lbs 0.3 NOx - kg 0.1 CO2 - lbs 284.7 CO2 - kg 129
K.8 Payback Period
The incremental cost estimate below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar products, and is not
necessarily the same price the home improvement contractor paid.
K-22
LED Material Costs Only Labor26 & Material Costs
Incremental cost ($) $590.47 $890.47 Utility rate ($/kWh) $0.131 $0.131 Annual energy savings (per above, kWh) 741.6 741.6 Savings ($) per year $96.78 $96.78 Payback period (years) 6.1 9.2
26 Labor estimate: contractor estimated 6 hours of labor at this site. LRC assumed labor costs approximately $50/hour, thus $300 for labor at this site.
FixtureLamp Qty
per Fixture Brand, Model #Power Demand (W) per Lamp
Quantity Fixtures On
Circuit
Price ea. as of May 2017
Total Incremental Price for LED products
Entry Chandelier 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $1.75 $1.75
Kitchen Ceiling Diffuser 1Rem Phos RPT-LEDCR-2200LM-
3000K18 1 $69.00 $69.00
Kitchen Downlights 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 10.25 5 $18.00 $90.00
Dining Chandelier 9 Phillips 427765 3.5 1 $6.75 $60.75
Dining Table Lamp 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 6 1 $2.85 $2.85
Living Room Downlights 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 10.25 2 $18.00 $36.00
Living Room Art Light 3 Euri ED12-1100 3.1 1 $11.00 $33.00
Living Room Table Lamps 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 6 3 $2.85 $8.56
Living Room Sconce 1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 6 3 $2.85 $8.56
Den Downlights 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 10.25 4 $18.00 $72.00
Den Table Lamp 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $1.75 $1.75
Home Office Task Light 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $1.75 $1.75
Hallway Ceiling Diffuser 1 Hampton Bay DC016LEDA 25 1 $45.00 $45.00
Largest BR Downlights 1 Lithonia 6BPMW-LED-M6 10.25 2 $18.00 $36.00
Largest BR Table Lamps 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 2 $1.75 $3.50
Largest BA Fan/Light 1 Hampton Bay VFB25ACLED2 16 1 $99.00 $99.00
2nd Largest BR Table Lamps
1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 6 3 $2.85 $8.56
2nd Largest BACeiling Diffuser
1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $1.75 $1.75
2nd Largest BA Vanity
1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 2 $2.85 $5.70
Laundry Ceiling Diffuser
1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $5.00 $5.00
$590.47
K-23
K.9 Illuminance Measurement Results (in units of lux; electric light only)
In most spaces, the retrofit LED lamps provided the same or higher light output than before the retrofit.
Measurements in a few of the spaces below remained lower than IESNA recommendations after retrofit;
the owner slightly agreed that the dining room and den was too dim after retrofit (Section K.11).
Measured Before Retrofit
Measured After Retrofit
IESNA Recommendations
Kitchen Counter – Downlights On 138 240 500 2x2 Ceiling Diffuser On 207 248
All on 387 488 Kitchen Sink – Downlights On 108 59
300 2x2 Ceiling Diffuser On 43 156 All on 141 192 Dining Room Table 41 75 100 Largest Bathroom Vanity 16 49 400 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity 282 420 400 Longest Hallway 14 24 30 Living Room Couch 33 31 30 Den Couch 120 136 100 Bed in Largest Bedroom – Downlights On
40 64 200 Table Lamp On 34 44
All On 83 109 Dresser in Largest Bedroom – Downlights On
60 51 50 Table Lamp On 81 74
All On 123 118 Bed in Second-Largest Bedroom – Table Lamp On
36 75 200 Floor Lamp On 7 23
All On 48 97 Laundry Room 50 55 200 Entry/Foyer 27 22 30
K-24
K.10 Contractor Questionnaire
Question 1: Did you disregard any of the recommended fixtures, lamp (bulb) types, or controls? For
each, please describe your reasoning. For each, what other information could have been provided to make
you willing to install the recommended technology?
Answer: “Nope, I fully trusted the design, so I installed all the recommended fixtures.”
Question 2: What price was paid for each component of the lighting? How does this price differ from
what you would have paid for the component you would typically have installed?
Answer: “The cost is greater, since LED are still more expensive than CFLs, plus there is always
a greater discount when you get CFLs on bulk. I think the extra cost was about 30% of my normal
CFL installation, but since LED seems to have better quality control (CFLs would occasionally
stop working before the end of the year which requires me to go and replace them), so
considering that, it is worth the extra expense, beside the fact that LED has a much better quality
of light.”
Question 3: How much labor, in person-hours, was needed to install the lighting? If possible, please
provide this information for each lighting component; if not possible, just the total labor.
Answer: “Everything was installed in about six hours.”
Question 4: How does this compare with the labor it would have taken to install the typical lighting? Was
the difference in labor especially different for any particular lighting component? If so, why?
Answer: “The labor is pretty much the same, what it takes more is cost of the components
overall.”
Question 5: Were you unsure of using any of the lighting components? Were the specifications of
installation instructions unclear for any of the components?
Answer: “All information was pretty clear, including the most complicated part which was
retrofitting an existing white tube fixture to LED.”
K-25
Question 6: How did the experience of purchasing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to acquire?
Answer: “We are located in a rural area, so anything a bit out of the ordinary would just require
that we purchase those components online, which is not a big deal as long as the extra time is
considered with the project.”
Question 7: How did the experience of installing the lighting components differ from your usual
experience? Were any components especially difficult to install?
Answer: “Not really.”
Question 8: At the end of the hours-of-use, six-month monitoring period, have you experienced any
unforeseen maintenance issues? How were they resolved?
Answer: “None, so far all lighting components are working properly.”
K-26
K.11 Occupant Questionnaire Before and After Retrofit
Occupant responses were considerably more positive after the retrofit:
For half of the rooms, the occupant had a neutral response to the statement that the lighting makes the
colors look good. In one room (laundry), the occupant had a neutral response to the statement that the
lighting is directed where needed.
Half the rooms: Entry, Hallway, Dining Room, Den, Largest Bathroom, and Laundry Room
Laundry Room
K-27
Occupant responses to negatively worded questions were generally more negative after the retrofit:
Before the retrofit, the owner agreed that lighting was “too dim” in both bathrooms and bedrooms and in
the hallway, laundry room, living room, and den. After retrofit, the owner still “agreed somewhat” that
the den was too dim, but overall, most rooms improved in terms of the light output question. Despite the
fact that the chandelier was moved to the dining room, the owner “agreed somewhat” that the dining room
was too dim. Since the response in the dining room was neutral before the retrofit, the amount of light
was not improved in the dining room as a result of the retrofit. However, it should be noted that light
measurements were in fact higher after the retrofit (41 lux before; 75 lux after retrofit).
K-28
Before the retrofit, the owner “agreed slightly” that the lighting was “too bright” in the Entry/Foyer; after
retrofit, it was noted as an improvement as the response in the entry was “disagree completely.” However,
the owner now “agrees slightly” that the largest bathroom is too bright, despite the fact that the retrofit
replaced the only source of light in the room (ceiling fan/light).
Before the retrofit, the owner “agreed slightly” that the lighting “causes unattractive shadows” in the
second-largest bedroom and the den; after the retrofit, all rooms were considered neutral, thus were
improved.
The owner does not use any of the rooms more frequently after the retrofit:
General comments, after retrofit:
"I am enjoying the new lighting—have needed to tweak a couple of areas, but all in all an appreciated improvement." “NYSERDA should do their utmost to keep and treat Luis Hernandez well. He is the best contractor—skilled, passionate, responsible, and super good to work with.”
Recommended