ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN STREETLIGHTING

1
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN STREETLIGHTING TRANSPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE
Picture courtesy of www.wurli.com
2
CONTENTS

• ENERGY EFFICIENCY
• Street lighting
• Traffic signals
• Christmas lighting
• General outdoor lighting
• Parking meters
• PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

3
LIGHT POLLUTION
1908
1988
2002
Los Angeles
picture courtesy Optimon
4
LIGHT POLLUTION

• Not really dark during the night
• insects attracted by typical illuminants
• www.darksky.org

5
BASICS
Beamlm
Luminous intensitiycd
Luminositiylx lm/m²
Brightnesscd/m²
6
300 Lux
10.000 Lux
2.500 Lux
6.000 Lux
100.000 Lux
7
STREETLIGHTING

• Measures
• Operating hours
• Power
• Light source
• Fixture
• Control system

Erasmus-bridge, Rotterdam,picture courtesy FGL,
www.licht.de
8
Total cost
Total cost of a typical installation, 25 years
maintenance energy investment
after installation 85
Investment 15
9
Light sources

• Light bulb
• Flourescent tube
• Sodium high pressure
• Sodium low pressure
• Mercury high pressure
• Metal halide

picture courtesy Optimon
10
Luminaire, fixture

• Material of body
• reflector technology
• Sealing technology
• lamp simple to change

pictures courtesy Optimon
11
digital control system

• Individual lamp control
• Online failure dedection of all components
• 3 main elements
• Lamp module
• CPU in switchboard
• PC-software
• Data transfer via GSM

picture courtesy www.tekkto.com
12
Example- Graz

• electricity costs 1,1 Mio Euro
• 4200 operating hours
• reduction of 10 minutes a day -gt -1,5 energy
  costs
• replacement of 720 luminaires -gt - 530.000
  kWh per year or 58

picture courtesy www.energie-graz.at
13
TRAFFIC SIGNALS

• incandescent lamp 75W
• mass replacement 2x/year
• LED 10W
• replacement every two years
• reduction of electricity costs -50
• reduction of maintenance costs - 30

Picture courtesy www.royersignal.de
14
Example- Stockholm

• 530 signal control points
• investment 6 Mio Euro
• electricity savings -gt 471.000 Euro/ year
• maintenance savings -gt 243.000 Euro/ year

picture courtesy www.fet.uni-hannover.de
15
GENERAL OUTDOOR LIGHTING

• Promenades
• Buildings
• Sights
• Bicycle paths
• Sports fields

Picture courtesy FGL www.licht.de
16
Example- Solar lighting

• no grid interconnection necessary
• ideally suited for solitary applications
• always enough daylight to charge batteries
• Total cost 5.600 Euro
• Immediate saving 3.900 Euro (distance to grid
  150m)

Picture courtesy www.ecolights.at
17
CHRISTMAS LIGHTING

• LED lights offer significant energy savings
• investment costs are high
• life cycle costs to be calculated individually
• affects the expected traditional appearence
  -gt a matter of taste

Picture courtesy www.energie-graz.at
18
Example- Graz

• maintenance 130.000 Euro/ year
• energy consumption 93.000 kWh
• 400 operating hours
• reducing 2 hours/ day -gt -3.000 Euro
• public christmas tree with LEDs -gt -80 or
  2.200 kWh

Picture courtesy www.energie-graz.at
19
PARKING METERS

• Solar powered meters
• no grid interconnection necessary
• panels can be in total shadow
• operates with a 12 V battery
• typical consumption (100 tickets a day) -gt 2
  kWh/ year

Picture courtesy www.gesig.at
20
Example- Erlangen

• 70 solar powered parking meters
• connected to center via GSM
• savings result from eliminating the costs for
  grid interconnection

Picture courtesy www.versorgungsbetriebe.de
21
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

• Barriers
• Specific features
• Implementation
• Financing

22
Barriers

• Complex matter
• Little information
• Vast range of products
• Single measures without integral concept
• Many regulation, legal requirements
• Restricted funding possibilities

23
Implementation

• check of energy bills and maintenance costs
• survey of existing equipment
• Financial model
• Presentation of analysis to municipality
• Development of an integral long term concept
• Project planning and tendering
• Monitoring of savings
• Documentation

24
Financing

• dependent on monetary situation of the
  municipality
• different possibilities
• Cash settlement
• Leasing
• Contracting
• main argument is indebtedness of municipalities/
  Maastricht-criteria

25
Leasing

• No initial investment
• Quick cash by means of sale and lease back
• No contribution to Maastricht- limit
• Agreements are expensive
• Suited for bigger investments
• No outsourcing of maintenance, risk,
• No guaranteed savings

26
Third party financing

• No or little investment necessary
• Measures and installations are paid for by
  savings
• No contribution to Maastricht- limit
• Guaranteed savings
• Outsourcing of design, implementation,
  maintenance, risk
• suitable for projects with highly energy
  efficient measures

27
Thank you for your attention!
Picture courtesy www.energie-graz.at