Redbird LED tube lights removed from the Design Lighting Consortium's (DLC) Qualified Product List (QPL)

Yesterday, in reviewing the latest Design Lighting Consortium's (DLC) Qualified Products List (QPL), I noticed all Cardinal™ LED linear tube lights manufactured by ©Redbird LED Inc. were removed from the QPL. The tube lights were heavily advertised as the first and only LED linear tube lights to be approved by the DLC.
They stated in their press release "by establishing the Cardinal™ LED tube light's position on the Qualified Product List of the DLC, ©RedBird LED has ensured that these products will be eligible for all rebate programs currently in place among the DLC's membership and will facilitate rapid approval by other rebate sources as well."
Although, I do not know the specific reasons the products were removed from the QPL, consumers should be aware of the removal from the list to avoid the misconception that they will be able to receive a rebate from energy reduction programs utilizing the DLC's QPL for these particular products.
In addition ©Redbird LED Inc. recently recieved the IES 2012 progress report award for their Cardinal™ LED tube light as a significant achievement towards the art and science of lighting. One has to wonder what will happen with the award now that the product has been removed from the QPL.
Readers may remember my report published on September 21st, 2012 in which I questioned the only listing of LED linear tubes on the QPL stated below.

"During a more detailed review of the tube and components utilized within, reviewers found the reported lumen output to be questionable. For this reason a third party submitted this QPL approved lamp for testing to Lighting Sciences Inc., UL Verification Services. When the results from the testing report were reviewed, this lamp did not appear to meet the required 2,200 lumens either. It is unclear to me how this approved lamp appears on the QPL. Since the DLC does not perform it's own certified testing, it is possible that the the reported results were misinterpreted or in error. The third party has submitted the independent testing report to the DLC and are awaiting an answer regarding the discrepancy."

I commend the DLC for their prompt attention in reviewing this listing on the QPL. Having examined the Lighting Sciences report I am not surprised it was removed. I fully support the importance of having strict specifications that ensure only quality LED linear tube lights are certified by the DLC however, I think it is clear that the current methodology for evaluating LED linear tubes is not the most accurate way to measure the delivered light of a given LED lighting fixture and therefore achieve DLC certification.
While I am confident that leading LED manufacturers will soon achieve the required lumen output necessary for inclusion, the problem will be the delivered light will be too bright to utilize the approved product in many applications as well as force end users to purchase a higher wattage lamp than necessary if they want to obtain a rebate.
I have tested and reviewed numerous LED tube lights in a variety of fixtures and have found several tubes from leading manufacturers that provide equal or superior delivered light to the task area below while significantly reducing power consumption as compared to the existing fluorescent technologies. If an LED tube light is UL/ETL certified and can provide the necessary light levels as established by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) while meeting the warranty requirements I believe it should be considered for inclusion by the DLC.
It is my hope that the DLC will review the evaluation process currently in place and confer with LED industry experts to establish a better system for inclusion. I encourage all LED manufacturers, property owners and facility managers to discuss the evaluation process currently in place today.

Does the Design Lighting Consortium (DLC) discriminate against LED linear tubes?

For more than two years the Design Lighting Consortium (DLC) has represented itself as the premier resource for high quality, energy efficient, commercial lighting design and information. The Department of Energy (DOE) and State Public Utility Commission's have come to rely on them as a guide to determine eligible LED products for energy rebates via the Qualified Product List (QPL).

The DLC states on their website:

The DLC QPL members intend to ensure that only high-quality, high-performance, tested and verified LED products will be eligible for rebate participating programs. The qualified products list is a resource for program administrators, to help them decide which solid state lighting products to include in their energy efficiency promotions.
Therefore, the DLC QPL members are developing a list of qualifying products, for limited access, and for use in their individual sponsor energy efficiency programs. All of the members plan to use this list of eligible products to respond to customers or to direct them to products that meet their requirements.

In numerous rebate programs in New York, Connecticut and the Northeast, LED lighting products do not qualify for energy reduction rebates unless they appear on the QPL.

To the best of my knowledge the DLC is not an accreditation agency, nor is it recognized by the solid state lighting (SSL) industry as an authoritative source of information, and is not empowered to establish standards on the behalf of the SSL industry or the consumer. Furthermore the DLC is not a recognized testing authority for the SSL industry and/or it's products. In fact, the DLC performs zero testing of the products listed on the QPL.

This is disconcerting to me because the DLC is an organization formed and controlled by public utilities to benefit their own financial interests. It operates within the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP). It is clearly not in the best interest of the public utility companies to reduce power consumption as it is their primary revenue generator.

In my opinion the DLC fails to clearly disclose material facts about their organization, it's formation and how it internally creates it QPL. It promotes a false impression that others now mistakenly rely on which influences those empowered to distribute public funds for energy reduction projects and thereby directly causes interference in the promotion of true energy saving technologies.

How can commercial businesses expect to acquire these public funds as an incentive to substantially reduce power consumption if the managing organization of the QPL is the same organization that will substantially lose annual capital from the energy reduction.

I think most individuals will agree that utility companies do not really want a dramatic reduction in power consumption. Loss of profits for any business is not a good thing and most companies will do everything within their power to prevent losses and continue to make the largest profit possible.

Methodology for Evaluating LED Linear Tube Lighting

An excellent example of the apparent discrimination is evident with LED linear tube lighting. The DLC's specifications for linear replacement lamps were developed internally by it's member utility companies. In fact, the current specifications appear to be formulated to specifically deny any linear LED retrofit lamps currently on the market today from qualifying for the QPL.

First, in a closer examination of the criteria and the method of comparing linear LED lamps to existing fluorescent technologies, the DLC states that it has utilized in the development of it's linear LED replacement lamp specification we found them to be inconsistent with numerous DOE and other nationally recognized SSL industry publications.

The DLC currently requires a minimum light output measured in lumens for inclusion on the QPL. Technically speaking, the lumen is a standard unit that measures the total perceived power of a light source. In practice, lighting professionals, purchasers, and users often refer casually to a fixture’s “brightness.” This is not only inaccurate, but it can be misleading, especially where LED lighting fixtures are concerned.

For a number of reasons, lumen output is not the best measurement of an LED lighting fixture’s capabilities. In fact, evaluating an LED lighting fixture solely or primarily on the basis of its lumen output can underestimate or otherwise give a distorted picture of the fixture’s performance and suitability for a given task or application.

Instead of lumen output, the best and most relevant measurement for evaluating LED lighting fixtures and for making accurate comparisons with conventional lighting fixtures is delivered light.

The formal term for measurements of delivered light is illuminance. Roughly speaking, illuminance is the intensity of light falling on a surface area. If the area is measured in square feet, the unit of illuminance is footcandles (fc). If measured in square meters, the unit of illuminance is lux (lx).

Delivered light describes how much useful light a lighting fixture can deliver to a task area. Useful light is the portion of a lighting fixture’s light output that is effectively directed to a task area, discounting any wasted light. The task area can be any space or surface that requires illumination — an entrance hallway, a common office space with desktop computers, a kitchen countertop. Light can be wasted in a number of ways: It can be partially blocked or dispersed within the fixture housing, it can be emitted in a direction away from the task area, or it can be lost through filtering, lensing, fixture positioning, or any of a number of other factors relevant to a specific installation.

The Trouble with Lumens

• The way that lumen output is traditionally measured, reported, and interpreted poses a number of potential problems for evaluating and comparing LED lighting fixtures.
• Since complete and accurate definitions of lumens and related photometric terms can be technical and complex, they are often misunderstood. Without a good understanding of these terms, however, the unique properties of LED lighting sources cannot be clearly grasped.
• Lumens are an imperfect measurement of the perceived intensity of light sources, with known shortcomings. The specific spectral properties of LED light sources exaggerate these shortcomings, especially toward the blue end of the spectrum.
• LED lighting fixtures and conventional lighting fixtures are tested differently, and therefore some photometric data is reported differently. These differences must be taken into consideration in order to accurately compare conventional lighting fixtures and LED lighting fixtures.
• Because LED lighting is fundamentally directional and natively create white and colored light without filtering or additional lensing and shading, LED lighting typically waste much less light then their conventional counterparts, and deliver more of their total light output to a task or target area.
• An LED lighting fixture with lower rated lumens, therefore, may deliver the same or more useful light in a specific application than a comparable conventional lighting fixture with a higher rated lumen output.

Second, the DLC set it's specifications for the minimum light output for a four foot (4') LED tube light at 2,200 lumens in a bare lamp configuration. Of the over one hundred linear replacement lamps available on the market today, only one manufacturer qualified. During a more detailed review of the tube and components utilized within, reviewers found the reported lumen output to be questionable.

For this reason a third party submitted this QPL approved lamp for testing to Lighting Sciences Inc., UL Verification Services. When the results from the testing report were reviewed, this lamp did not appear to meet the required 2,200 lumens either. It is unclear to me how this approved lamp appears on the QPL. Since the DLC does not perform it's own certified testing, it is possible that the the reported results were misinterpreted or in error. The third party has submitted the independent testing report to the DLC and are awaiting an answer regarding the discrepancy.

Furthermore, I am not sure why the program administrators have the ability to dictate what light levels a business or property owner is required to use for a particular application. With the wide variety of current applications such as computer labs and offices, very often the lamp needed to produce the 2,200 lumens required for inclusion to the QPL is far too much light for a given task area. This required high light level will exclude many businesses from ever being able to take advantage of the current rebate programs.

If the LED linear tube light complies with the IES recognized lighting level standards, is UL listed for safety and provides the light level specified for the application while reducing energy consumption by 50% or more (far greater than fluorescent tubes), why then should it not be considered for inclusion on the QPL. My understanding of the energy rebate programs was that it was to serve as an incentive for businesses and property owners to reduce energy consumption within their building or facility. The way the program is currently structured, the business or property owner would have to use a much brighter LED tube light than needed if it wants to qualify for the current rebate programs.

This lack of approved LED linear replacement lamps on the QPL is confusing to me when there are numerous, quality LED linear replacement lamps that can reduce energy consumption by 50-70% (far greater than fluorescent lamps) and are being implemented across the country everyday. You only have to read LED lighting news for a few minutes to read about numerous commercial businesses that have replaced their inefficient fluorescent tube lighting with LED tubes and achieved a substantial reduction in power consumption as well a significant financial benefit.

Inefficient fluorescent tubes represent a huge percentage of the lighting in large commercial buildings in all major cities. I truly believe that if the rebates that were supposed to be available as incentives to assist companies with their efficiency programs were obtainable for LED linear tube replacements many more companies would adopt this energy efficient LED technology. Note: All energy customers pay into this public fund via the System Benefit Charge (SBC) for energy reduction on their monthly bill and should be able to take advantage of the rebate programs if they significantly reduce the power consumption at their facility.

In a recent draft from the DLC released on 9/18/2012, it states in regards to retrofit kits “While the DLC proposes to consider changes to the light output and distribution requirements to the fully-integrated luminaires, it does not propose changes to these requirements for retrofit kits. This is done with the belief that retrofit kits are, by nature, designed to go into existing housings, using an existing lighting design. Therefore, there is a belief that retrofit kit performance should continue to use the existing benchmarking of incumbent technologies.”

This is concerning to me because experts in the SSL industry agree that the current methodology used to evaluate incumbent technologies is not an accurate way to measure the delivered light of new directional LED lighting. This inaccuracy inhibits LED linear tube lights from being evaluated properly. The DLC should evaluate products using a method that is fair and accurate for the LED lighting not incumbent technologies (designed for fluorescent lamps. The comparison is simply not the same.

The denial of LED replacement tubes from the QPL is only hindering the much needed power reduction that all commercial businesses are faced with due to the continued pressure from from mandated reduction programs being implemented in an effort to be more oil independent and be a greener nation. Unless the methods and specifications are challenged, it is doubtful that the utility companies will voluntarily include the LED linear tube products that deserve a place on the QPL. I strongly encourage all property owners, facility managers and business owners to demand a more detailed explanation of the current measures and reasons for the exclusion of LED replacement lamps from the QPL. The rules and methods for evaluation are not likely to change without a collaborative effort among industry experts, manufacturers, distributors and end users.

By Scott Glidden

New York's Valhalla Station Reduces Lighting Energy Consumption By 75.9%

Westchester County's (DPW) Saves Thousands with Seesmart LED Lighting

New York's DPW Valhalla Station

The County of Westchester, New York - took advantage of new energy saving LED lighting technology by commissioning Tri-State LED Inc to replace their existing lighting fixtures at Valhalla Station with state-of-the-art Seesmart (SEST) LED tube lights and high bays.

The new energy efficient Seesmart LED tube lights will only consume 15 watts of electricity compared to the 35 watts of the orginal compact fluorescent tubes (CFL's) while providing a better quality of light.

The new LED high bays will only consume 100 watts of power as compared to the 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps they are replacing. The new LED lighting uses considerably less wattage and provided us with brighter working surfaces. "We are much happier to be working in a well lit environment", said the tradesmen, at the Valhalla facility

Comprehensive Lighting Energy Audit

As part of our standard pre-sales process Tri-State LED performed a comprehensive lighting audit and analysis of the station's lighting infrastructure including the existing lighting's power consumption, maintenance cost and many other detailed factors. TriState then uses proprietary energy auditing software to calculate the proposed cost and demand of the new LED lighting as compared to the existing lighting in the facility.

A detailed report of all aspects of the lighting project is then provided to the client in a clear decisive format. This detailed report allows the client to accurately see the financial and environmental benefits before proceeding. Clients can then make an informed decision if LED lighting is the right solution for them. Furthermore, TriState LED provides this service to their clients at NO COST or OBLIGATION.

After reviewing the report Westchester County, established that LED lighting had the most viable return on investment (ROI) and was the best technology that met DPW's goals. The lighting replacement at Valhalla Power Station at 35 Woods Road White Plains New York reduced their existing lighting energy consumption by 75.9% resulting in a savings of $17,634.49 annually. The County of Westchester expects to recieve a complete ROI in 16 months making it a sound business decision.

As a local company TriState LED is proud to have been an integral part of the entire process for the project, from specification to savings calculation. With its vast experience in LED lighting and comprehensive product catalog, TriState was not only able to improve the lighting conditions to an energy-efficient source but also helped to complete an environmentally friendly project. "It is our hope that other local government agencies will follow suit and take advantage of the energy reductions available by utilizing our quality Seesmart LED product line", said Bob Ostrander, a principal at Tri-State LED.

For more information about any of TriState LED's products and services, call 203-813-3791, view the company on the web at www.tristateled.com or visit our lighting showroom at 255 Mill Street in Greenwich Connecticut. (Get Directions)

It is a fairly well known fact that LED lighting can provide a significant energy reduction as well as financial savings for many commercial businesses across the nation but, recently a Fort Knox neighborhood has announced they will achieve a 90 percent energy reduction by replacing their existing residential lighting with NEW energy efficient LED light bulbs. The massive residential LED retrofit will replace more than 9,500 lamps with state of the art LED bulbs. Officials kicked off the massive lighting project with a lighting ceremony on September 5th. A recent press release states that the project will be completed in October 2012 and the Knox Hills neighborhood will be the largest residential LED retrofit-installed community in the world. In recent tests performed by Consumer Reports, they have announced that LED light bulbs have several advantages as compared to traditional incandescent and Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFL).

In recent years, the U.S. Army has been on a major effort to save energy at the Kentucky base that has been undergoing a major transformation. Read the Lane Report... In all, more than 9,500 LED bulbs will be put in, and will represent a 90-percent reduction in energy consumption versus conventional bulbs, with each bulb lasting approximately 22 years, according to a spokesman. The LED bulbs are also said to be somewhat more efficient that compact fluorescent bulbs and the contain no mercury. The Fort Knox project, which will reduce annual energy costs by $34,000, and more than $859,000 over the life of the LED bulbs, will conserve approximately 2.6 million kWh worth of light energy, the equivalent of planting 547 acres of trees. The LED lighting project will play an important role in the energy efficiency and sustainability program being implemented in the Fort Knox area. By Scott Glidden

Seesmart LED Lighting Strives To Increase US Manufacturing

Credit: Seesmart Technologies

Seesmart Technologies (SEST), a leading manufacturer of innovative high quality, energy efficient LED lighting solutions strives to increase it's production of LED lighting products in the United States. Frustrated by the additional expense and difficulties with slower shipping, Seesmart feels it is very important to have more control over the manufacturing process. Combined with their desire to create jobs for US citizens, the 15 year old company started building factories in Simi Valley, California, and Crystal Lake, Illinois. "When we do the numbers we're actually ahead manufacturing here instead of paying for air freight and dealing with the logistical issues that we're having in China," said Raymond Sjolseth, the company's president and co-founder.

According to an interview with CBS news, Seesmart has pursued grants and incentives from federal agencies that might assist companies like theirs, who manufacture energy-efficient technologies and believe that employing our own workers is a key component in improving our current economy. Even know they have not been able to cut through the red tape, they are still committed to bringing jobs home.

The company today makes 20 percent of its products in the United States, a number it aims to push to 75 percent by the end of next year. Successful completion of this goal could result in hundreds of new jobs for US employees.

With the continued success of large orders in numerous sectors of commercial business such as Pasadena College, SL Green Realty Corp., Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center,Zyloware Eyewear and Cambridge Security Seals increasing production in the US would certainly provide an obvious advantage for local clients. Most manufacturers have learned to operate factories with fewer workers. Many of these jobs consist of keeping high-cost, high-speed machines running smoothly, rather than assembling goods by hand. Many have found that wages are a less critical issue in choosing a adequate factory site. At Seesmart, shifting production from China to the United States is cutting logistics costs by about 30 percent as it no longer needs to fly merchandise across the Pacific. Products can also be made and shipped to customers more quickly, Sjolseth said. "The LED business involves a very compulsive buy, and many clients will not tolerate long lead times," he said. "So if you're not delivering in four to six weeks, it's not going to happen. You're going to lose the deal and they're going somewhere else."

Credit: SL Green Realty Corp.

Higher wages have not been a roadblock for the company because its automated factories mean that labor costs represent less than 2 percent of the cost to manufacture lighting.

With $11 million in revenue last year, Seesmart Technologies is a relatively small company, but it is one of many manufacturers of all sizes to increase production in the US.

Honda (HMC), General Electric (GE), Catepillar (CAT), NCR, Avago (AVGO) and Texas Instruments (TI) are among some, that are expanding production in the United States.

Honda's decision to further expand its Civic plant in Greenburg, Indiana., adding 500 workers and expanding capacity by 50,000 vehicles a year. The company laid out a big plans for North America this week. It has spent $1.6 billion at its North American factories in the past 18 months as it prepares to mark its 30th anniversary of making cars in the U.S. That officially happens on Nov. 1, the day in 1982 when the first Accord rolled of the line in Marysville, Ohio. (Read Story)

According to a recent article in USA Today - Faced with rising costs, General Electric is moving production of its new energy-efficient water heater halfway around the world from China to the US, bringing 400 jobs and a newly renovated factory.

CAT, which has announced nine new plants or expansion projects in the past year alone, said it has chosen to grow in the United States both to meet local demand and because it has been able to find a steady supply of workers able to run the advanced equipment that powers its plants.

NCR was similarly motivated by a more nuanced view of costs when it decided to move manufacturing of ATMs sold in the U.S. from China, India and Hungary to a new 260-employee plant in Columbus, Ga., last October.

AVGO is said to be planning to buy as much as $130 million in manufacturing equipment to expand in Fort Collins, Colorado. Previously, IHS iSuppli has reported that Avago makes a part for the iPhone 4S used to connect to multiple wireless networks. Meanwhile, TI is ramping up production at the chip factories in its home state. (Read Story)

One source claims that TI's power chip business gets large orders from Apple, which has contributed to "thousands of jobs" being created in the US. A number of these are said to be high-salaried jobs demanding engineering degrees, especially at a fab in Richardson, Texas.

After decades roaming the world in search of lower costs, U.S. manufacturers are finding that factories at home can compete with China, India, Mexico and other low-cost countries. Other costs such as higher transportation costs and wage inflation in China could drive more production back to the United States.

SL Green furthers commitment to energy efficiency with Seesmart LED lighting

SL Green Realty Corp. retrofits buildings with energy efficient Seesmart LED lighting LED lighting manufacturer Seesmart Technologies Inc. (SEST) announced today that it has been selected by SL Green Realty Corp. (SLG), New York City’s largest commercial property owner, to install it’s industry leading LED lighting products throughout 21 commercial office properties, as part of one of the nation’s largest LED lighting efficiency projects. SL Green is furthering their commitment to energy reduction and sustainability by replacing over 16,000 fluorescent, incandescent and halogen light bulbs with energy efficient Seesmart LED lighting solutions in 21 of their NYC properties. In March, SL Green installed 7,500 LED units within 16 suburban division (Reckson) buildings, totaling more than 2.5 million s/f in its Westchester & Fairfield County portfolios including 360 Hamilton Ave. and 140 Grand St. in White Plains; 200 & 500 Summit Lake Dr. in Valhalla; and 680/750 Washington Blvd. and Landmark Sq., in Stamford, Ct. Financial savings are estimated to be in excess of $630,000 annually while providing a superior quality of light and a significant improvement in the longevity and performance compared to their existing lighting. The project will also generate an additional $125,000 in labor and material savings. The combined annual savings will be in excess $745,000.

In a recent interview with Kenneth Ames, CEO of Seesmart Technologies Inc., he said, “Seesmart is pleased to support SL Green Realty Corp., to utilize our cutting edge LED lighting products to maximize energy efficiency and savings throughout its portfolio. The selection of Seesmart is a testament to the market leading efficiency, quality and service we provide to our customers”

Lighting represents approximately 25 to 30 percent of total energy cost in the commercial real estate industry. By implementing Seesmart LED lighting solutions, SLGreen will reduce energy costs by more than 50 percent and extend lamp life by as much as 10 times the average life of traditional lighting products equating to about 8 years.

Jay Black, sustainability Director at SL Green said, "LED equipment allows us to significantly impact life-cycle costs, affecting energy use and lamp life, 90% of lighting's life-cycle costs, will yield a project payback of only three years, providing $4.5 million in total life-cycle savings."

According to John Barnes, senior VP and senior director of Reckson, a division of SL Green, "Through our market-leading program, the LED retrofit is the latest example of how we are utilizing sustainability to improve our business. It saves both SL Green and our tenants money, reduces energy waste and contributes to our best in class experience."

With the latest massive LED lighting retrofit utilizing Seesmart LED lighting solutions I wanted to understand how a leader in sustainability with numerous citations for energy reduction determines the best energy efficient products and services from all the competitors emerging in the marketplace today.

In an effort to assist other commercial businesses faced with the task of reducing costly energy consumption I interviewed the leaders involved in this project including Jay Black, Sustainability Director at SL Green, Greg Hudson from Environmental Systems Corporation (ESC), a designer and contractor that provide due diligence consulting for energy-efficient installations, as well as Patricia Lee from CodeGreen, a leading efficiency company helping real estate and business owners develop and achieve their energy reduction and sustainability goals.

Greg Hudson from ESC said, “We put Seesmart's LED products through performance comparisons with other industry competitors to insure SL Green was using the best product for the job. Through all of our testing, Seesmart products outperformed the other manufacturers in light output, lower wattage use, as well as the return on investment (ROI). Seesmart has stayed ahead of the market in terms of technology adaptation and the continuing effort to offer competitive LED products."

As part of SL Green’s commitment to running a high performance and LEED certified building, CodeGreen was contracted to manage the LEED certification process and perform an ASHRAE Level II Energy Audit at 360 Hamilton Avenue. The energy analysis performed identified energy conservation measures totaling over 420,000 kwh of savings annually including lighting upgrades that could result in over 345,077 kwh saved annually. From the over 20 million sq. ft. of energy audits and retro-commissioning that CodeGreen has performed, efficient lighting has been a leading factor in optimizing energy use in a building. Seesmart worked with the building team to successfully upgrade lighting fixtures resulting in an increased Energy Star score and contributions to the LEED certification. Energy efficiency is an integral part of the LEED program and was essential in the successful achievement of LEED-EB Gold certification at 360 Hamilton.

Q&A with Jay Black:

Examiner: Why did you decide to install LED lighting into you buildings?

Jay Black: Due to the extreme energy efficiency and recent advances of LED lighting we felt it would serve as an excellent catalyst toward our sustainability goals. When implemented correctly, quality LED lighting provides a quick payback and ease of integration into our existing infrastructure. Our sustainability team consulted with leaders in energy efficiency and sustainability in our local area (CodeGreen, ECS) in an effort to thoroughly analyze all aspects of our current project and ascertain the complete benefits to our particular organization. After carefully reviewing all the attributing factors our team concluded that the industry leading LED lighting solutions from Seesmart were the right choice for us.

Examiner: Some say that LED technology is not here yet! How would you respond to that comment?

Jay Black: First I would like to start by saying all LED's are not created equal. There are many contributing factors you must address before choosing any LED lamp including light rendering, warranty period, company stability and many other measures. Our team performed a significant amount of research into current LED technology and have ascertained if you select a quality LED light such as Seesmart lighting we feel the technology is definitely here.

Examiner: How does LED lighting compare to other energy efficiency products such as solar and wind technologies?

Jay Black: LED lighting is definitely a leader in energy saving technology. When you carefully review other products such as solar and wind you will quickly see in regards to energy reduction and ease of integration, LED will provide a significantly better savings in a much quicker time frame while being much easier to implement into your existing infrastructure.

Examiner: There is speculation that the cost of LED lighting will go down in the next few years. Why did SL Green decide to move forward today?

Jay Black: We wanted to take advantage of available savings now. The ROI for our current project is about three years, which is an excellent payback! We are in the businesses of buying and selling buildings. Implementing upgrades, generates value creation for us which we can project outward. The lighting retrofit increases value to our buildings as well as providing cost savings. Additionally, one must look at lost opportunity cost. Even if the lamp cost does go down in three years, our lamps will already be paid off while our savings will continue for many more years. For us it did not make sense to wait and lose $745,000 in annual savings.

Examiner: In your savings analysis, what factors were considered in your report?

Jay Black: We reviewed all factors such as kWh savings, product cost and ROI as well as internal accounting aspects. All company's measures will be different so you must consider how LED lighting relates to your particular business and the programs you have currently have implemented.

Examiner: Why did SL Green select Seemart LED lighting opposed to other leading competitors in the industry?

Jay Black: There are many factors that must be considered when choosing a company and product for a project of this magnitude. The decision is more complex than just the initial cost of the light bulb. SL Green selected Seesmart Technologies to deliver significant cost savings. As a leading provider of LED lighting solutions, Seesmart delivers superior equipment, efficiency, longevity, exceptional warranty and outstanding service. A five year warranty will have little value if the company is not around to honor it. We reviewed several leading manufacturers, and found Seesmart Technologies' "incomparable qualities" provided us with the confidence to introduce this innovative technology throughout our portfolio.

Examiner: How has your experience been working with the Seesmart team?

Jay Black: I was very impressed with Ron Young and the entire team. From the beginning they were very accessible and worked diligently to accommodate the particular needs of our organization. They provided an excellent comfort level and professional expertise in all aspects of the project while respecting the input of our team. In addition, they tested numerous bulbs in a variety of locations to provide the best light output and design implementation for each individual application resulting in a look and feel we were very impressed with.

In Conclusion:

After speaking to Jay Black and his sustainability team, it is clear to me why SL Green Realty Corp. is a leader in the industry. Their professional staff has expertise in a variety of areas and works diligently with other leading efficiency experts to analyze all associated factors, targeting the specific areas throughout it's enormous portfolio which achieve the greatest benefit for their particular organization. By utilizing this comprehensive and strategic approach SL Green was able to maximize their overall financial savings while reducing lighting energy consumption by more than 50 percent.

Through it's huge array of industry leading LED lighting products, Seesmart was able to meet the diverse needs of SL Green by providing innovative solutions to the individual challenges SL Green presented throughout the entire project.

SL Green selected Seesmart based on all of the attributing factors, including superior products, efficiency, longevity, exceptional warranty and outstanding service and not just initial lamp cost. "The cooperative effort among all parties involved in this project significantly improved the overall outcome and I believe have made us a better company.," said Ron Young of Seesmart. Through professionalism and due diligence these leading companies strive for excellence in all that they do, resulting in a very smooth running project with little disruption in day to day business. Other commercial businesses could learn alot from their success in improving business and reducing cost through energy efficiency and sustainability.

LED Street Lighting Delivers Up To 85% Energy Savings In Global Trial

©Copyright Forbes.com - Author Justin Gerdes Results from a global trial of light-emitting diode (LED) street lights confirm that the fixtures can deliver electricity savings of up to 85% over incumbent technologies. The two-and-a-half-year pilot, called LightSavers, tested 533 LED lamps in 15 trials in 12 cities, including New York, London, Hong Kong, Toronto, and Sydney. Findings from the trials are presented in a report co-released by The Climate Group, electronics giant Philips, and HSBC earlier this month on the sidelines of the Rio+20 summit. The Climate Group launched LightSavers in 2009, supported by the HSBC Climate Partnership, with the goal to accelerate the market adoption of outdoor LED lighting and smart-lighting controls. Key findings from the report, Lighting the Clean Revolution: The Rise of LED Street Lighting and What it Means for Cities, include: . LEDs achieve the expected 50 to 70% energy savings, and reach up to 80% savings when coupled with smart controls. [Energy savings in the trials vary from 18% to 85%, with 20 out of 27 products achieving savings of 50% or more, and ten showing savings of 70% or more.] . Surveys in Kolkata, London, Sydney, and Toronto indicated that between 68% to 90% of respondents endorsed LEDs city-wide rollout. Benefits highlighted included improved safety and visibility. . LED lighting trialed lifespan ranges from 50,000 to 100,000 hours indicating a high return on investment. . The ‘catastrophic’ failure rate of LED products over 6,000 hours is around 1%, compared, for example, up to 10% for ceramic metal halide fixtures over a similar time period. . The Climate Group and Philips are calling for an international low carbon lighting standard to be created and implemented ensuring that citizens worldwide have access to energy efficient outdoor lighting.
	We conclude that LEDs are ready to be brought to scale in outdoor applications. The independent and verifi­able results from the LightSavers trials and accompanying public surveys give compelling evidence that many commercially-available, outdoor LED products offer high quality light, durability, and significant electricity savings in the range of 50 to 70%, wrote Climate Group CEO Mark Kenber in the report’s foreword. “High capital cost and a dearth of effective financing approaches continue to be barriers to market maturity. But these will diminish as investment flows into companies making quality products; as LED and smart control device prices continue to fall; and as innovations spread in project financing and procurement in cities like Birmingham, Guangzhou and Los Angeles.”
In California, to cite another example, support for LED street lights project financing has come from the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the U.S. Department of Energy. In January, I reported at this blog that 10 California cities, several of them quite small, had used funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to undertake LED street lighting retrofit projects. Since I published that post, the CEC has announced that about a dozen more California cities have launched LED street lighting retrofit projects courtesy of the same ARRA-funded Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program. So confident are the report partners in the potential of LED lighting they want LEDs to become the global lighting standard. “All new public lighting – both street lighting and in public buildings – should be LED by 2015, with the aim of all public lighting being LED by 2020,” said the Climate Group’s Kenber in a statement. The authors conclude: “LED outdoor luminaires have reached maturity in terms of their performance. City lighting managers from across the world have independently verified that LEDs can live up to their promise of exceptional perfor­mance, energy efficiency, and public approval, with indicators pointing towards stabilization in light output in many products after an initial period of volatility.”