Question

Given what you know about Life Cycle Assessment, discuss four factors for each project that might influence a company’s decision to invest in either.

Project 1: Library Lighting

Project 2: Parking lot PV, solar panels

Answer 1

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT:

Life-cycle assessment (L C A, also known as life-cycle analysis, Eco balance, and cradle-to-grave analysis) is a technique to assess environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a products life from raw material extraction through materials processing,manufacture,distribution,use , and repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling. Designers use this process to help critique their products. L C A s can help avoid a narrow outlook on environmental concerns by:

1) Compiling an inventory of relevant energy and material inputs and environmental releases

2)Evaluating the potential impacts associated with identified inputs and releases

3)Interpreting the results t help in making a more informed decision

The goal of L C A is to compare the full range of environmental effects assignable to products and services by quantifying all inputs and outputs of material flows and assessing how these material flows affect the environment.The information is used to improve processes ,support policy and provide a sound basis for informed decisions.

There are two main types of L C A. L C As seek to establish the burdens associated with the production and use of a product,or with a specific service process, at a point in time.Consequential L C As seek to identify the environmental consequences of a decision or a proposed change in a system under study,which means that market and economic implications of a decision may have to be taken into account.

L C I Methods

• Process L C A
• Economic input-output L C A
• Hybrid approach

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Inventory analysis is followed by impact assessment.This phase of L C A is aimed at evaluating the significance of potential environmental impacts based on the L CI flow results.Classical life cycle impact assessment consists of the following mandatory elements.

• selection of impact categories,category indicators and characterization models
• the classification stage where the inventory parameters are sorted and assigned to specific impact categories and
• impact measurement,where the categorized L CI flows are characterized, using one of many possible L CIA methodologies,into common equivalence units that are then summed to provide an overall impact category total.

LIBRARY LIGHTING

The two primary concerns of facility managers considering lighting upgrades typically are energy efficiency and upfront cost. Too often, those are the only concerns. Even with a short list of options, settling on a type of lighting and supplier can be a mind-numbing and time-consuming experience.

However, with three classes of high-bay lighting now widely available – light-emitting diodes (LED s), fluorescent tubes and high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps – it’s more likely than ever that managers will find a lighting solution that fits their budget, their energy strategy, and their workers’ needs.

To find the perfect solution, managers need to consider more than simply efficiency and upfront costs. For example, purchasing the least-expensive lighting option might not pay off if the light isn’t bright enough, causing productivity to suffer. Productivity losses can be hard to calculate, but they can easily rival the cost saved by buying cheaper fixtures. Purchasing decision-making should go beyond number-crunching to include discussions with plant floor managers and employees who will live and work under the new lights for years to come.

Efficiency is a big thing. But it's not the only thing

The two primary concerns of facility managers considering lighting upgrades typically are energy efficiency and upfront cost. Too often, those are the only concerns. Even with a short list of options, settling on a type of lighting and supplier can be a mind-numbing and time-consuming experience.

However, with three classes of high-bay lighting now widely available – light-emitting diodes (LED s), fluorescent tubes and high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps – it’s more likely than ever that managers will find a lighting solution that fits their budget, their energy strategy, and their workers’ needs.

To find the perfect solution, managers need to consider more than simply efficiency and upfront costs. For example, purchasing the least-expensive lighting option might not pay off if the light isn’t bright enough, causing productivity to suffer. Productivity losses can be hard to calculate, but they can easily rival the cost saved by buying cheaper fixtures. Purchasing decision-making should go beyond number-crunching to include discussions with plant floor managers and employees who will live and work under the new lights for years to come.

Grasping the true cost-effectiveness of each lighting solution requires awareness of maintenance costs, available rebates, heat load, output, and more. Many consider these factors secondary to the cost-versus-efficiency debate, but they affect the overall cost-effectiveness of the upgrade and should be major considerations in purchasing decisions for industrial facilities.

1. MAINTENANCE

For many industrial facilities, maintenance is a chief deciding factor on what type of lighting to install. The longer the bulbs and ballasts last in any fixture, the less manpower and equipment is required to keep them running properly. In large facilities, even more weight should be given to maintenance costs – maintaining adequate lighting levels in facilities with more than 200 fluorescent or metal fixtures can easily become a nearly full-time job for maintenance crews.

Swapping bulbs in fixtures over high-production lines can also cause work stoppages for which costs are hard to calculate; however, leaving burned-out bulbs in place until the end of a shift can cause a dip in output or faulty workmanship because of poor visibility.

2. HEAT LOAD

Everything that uses electricity creates heat, and lights are no exception – in fact, they can be the worst offenders in an industrial facility. H IDs, such as metals, generate the most heat – temperatures can rise to 350°F – which means 25 standard 400-watt metal fixtures produce about the same amount of heat as a 45,000 BTU gas-fired heater. By comparison, fluorescent produce about 150°F and LED s produce about 100°F.

Internal heat load generated by lighting can be a serious concern for industrial facilities that already experience comfort issues because of a lack of air conditioning. Costly refrigerant-based cooling at a typical 100,000- or 200,000-square-foot plant or warehouse with a 40-foot ceiling is impractical, so such facilities often use fans and ventilation to keep cool in the summer. Many managers don’t realize that their lights could potentially be making the situation worse – metal halides in particular can easily raise ground-level temperature by 3°F or more.

3. LENGTH OF STAY

Lighting is a long-term investment, so the length of time the purchaser plans to occupy the facility should factor into any purchasing decision. If return on investment is the primary concern for facility managers, then the amount of time the lights will continue functioning after the R O I is met is likely a close second.

Take the lumber company mentioned earlier: over the course of 10 years, LED s will save the facility about $210,000 in energy and maintenance costs – more than twice the upfront cost of the project. However, if the building owners had planned to move within five years, the facility would meet their R O I, but wouldn’t benefit from continued energy savings.

Companies using metal but planning to move within the next few years, might be better served by a lighting upgrade with a lower upfront cost, such as fluorescent. Even though fluorescent on average, use about 5% to 10% more energy than LED s and require far more maintenance, inexpensive fluorescent are still more energy-efficient than metal halides and can result in significant savings with a reasonable R O I.

4. ILLUMINATION AND PRODUCTIVITY

Productivity loss is difficult to express in dollars, but it’s generally accepted that low lighting levels can result in dreary employees and faulty workmanship, which is potentially unsafe. There’s serious science behind recommended foot candles – the measure of usable light in a space. The Illuminating Engineering Society recommends 20 to 50 foot candles for most industrial applications, and 100 to 500 for sight-sensitive tasks such as sewing, and inspecting.

Facilities can most easily reach recommended foot candle levels with LED s and metals. However, metals typically dim to half their original brightness within two years, whereas LED s maintain about 70 percent of their brightness for up to 17 years of 24-hour use. Because metal loss occurs steadily, it can be difficult to notice that foot candles have fallen below recommended levels. Regular testing is recommended.

Regardless of the type of fixture purchased, maintaining adequate lighting levels can contribute to increased productivity and fewer mistakes. It also reduces the human and financial costs of job-related

Solar panels

Many Solar installation companies promise many things about about how much output or savings you’ll get with different solar technologies.

The Run Down:

It’s a fact that the weather changes every day, and the earth’s position towards the sun changes throughout the year. That means that a solar panel at a fixed location may produce 50 W at noon in June and 100 W at noon in December.

Similarly, the same panel may produce 120 kWh per year in one geographic location and only 95 kWh in another.

In both situations, the production difference is largely because of differing amounts of sunlight. But other external factors like temperature, shading, weather, and soiling also affect the total energy a system can produce.

Solar Efficiency:

The central system factor for Performance.

Before getting into the external stuff, let’s take a moment to reinforce the importance of solar panel efficiency. This is pretty straightforward: The more efficient a solar panel is, the more electricity it can create from sunlight.

A solar panel with 18% efficiency converts more light to electricity than a solar panel with 12% efficiency. Nothing tricky about this solar fact.

• Consequently, high efficiency solar panels often offer the best economics because they will:
• Generate more electricity with fewer panels
• Require less space than lower efficiency solar panels
• Offer more long-term savings

When you’re looking for solar panels, you can expect to be quoted solar efficiencies ranging from 6% to 20%. as we mentioned in another solar bulletin, be sure that you compare solar panel efficiency rates and not solar cell efficiency rates.

By the way, you might want to ask about efficiency loss from initial break-in.

High quality Tier 1 solar panels will maintain their rated efficiency, but lesser quality solar panels may lose up to 3% of efficiency during their initial exposure to sunlight.

That’s almost as bad as all the value you lose in driving a new car off the lot. But in this case, this loss is totally avoidable.