Book Review: Death of a lightbulb, John Otten (2012)

May 16, 2012 by Leave a comment

Otten, John. (2012) Death of a light bulb. Blue Ocean Publishing. (ISBN 978-1-907527-08-1)

This book examines electric light, not simply as a technological invention but as the creation of a worldwide industry which has transformed the quality of life for millions of people. The humble domestic light bulb has long been an icon for inventiveness and inspiration. It well deserved this recognition when its impact on civilization in the last century is considered. Much has been written about the early struggles to find suitable materials for filaments and machinery capable of creating a high quality vacuum. Electric light was highly desirable and a great improvement over the flickering and odorous alternatives. It directly led to public electricity generation and distribution. It is difficult for those living in the Western World today to imagine life without electricity.

To meet the demand required investment and speculation on an amazing scale together with mass production of the lamps. It is this story about creating industrial empires and the lengths then taken to protect their profits and assets. Competition and co-operation existed side by side with all the weapons of modern business. These included controlling ownership by shareholders, webs of intermediary companies, and legal contests. The application of patents provided protection and the opportunity to control market penetration. Global transport and distribution had not been fully developed so to reach distant markets could mean agreements with companies considered as direct competito rs nearer to home. Cartels could influence supply and retail pricing. Many of these actions would be considered dubious today with calls for greater transparency and level playing fields.

This story has not been documented for many years and John Otten has provided an insight into the complex web of a modern, highly successful industry. His extensive research into areas not always well documented is to be commended and is augmented by his long career within the lamp making industry. Previous work was written around the first half of twentieth century and information regarding the second half of twentieth century makes a valuable addition to lighting history.

The title makes reference to the final twist in the story. Most products follow a conventional life cycle with sales rising to a peak and slowly going into decline. With many modern devices this life cycle can be a very short period of just a few years, but the light bulb appeared to be almost everlasting. It did not fade away but has been virtually executed by European legislation banning its production and sale. This policy has also been accepted by other countries around the world but is not yet universal with the United States, New Zealand and Canada still fighting in some quarters for its survival. This final phase is still being acted out and the full story behind it may not appear for some time but in the meanwhile the life of the lamp making industry is a worthy model to study of how to turn a simple idea into a life changing experience for millions of people.

Filed under Electricity, Energy, Lighting, Performance, Technology Tagged with ,

Are designers keeping up?

April 13, 2012 by 1 Comment

BS EN 12464-1, Light and Lighting, Part 1 indoor workplaces, was first published in 2002. It included a schedule of recommended minimum task illuminances for a range of industrial, institutional and commercial applications. These values were similar to those previously in the Society of Light and Lighting Code. Originally the SLL values were ‘general’ illumination for the complete floor area thus enabling equipment and workers to be positioned anywhere in the space. A convenience when electricity was cheap.

However the BS specifically refers to ‘task’ illumination, normally only a small part of the gross floor area. The rest of the room would require less illuminance and thus considerable capital and operating cost savings can be made. But where are the task areas? Often the client has no idea when the lighting design is carried out. The designer then has to revert to ‘general‘ illumination to guarantee adequate lighting of the task. However the client will pay for the over lighting of the ‘non-task’ areas.

This problem of insufficient information is compounded by the changes included in the revision to BS EN 12464-1 last year. Introduced for the first time is the requirement for mean cylindrical illuminance in the space to provide good visual communication and recognition of objects. This should be no less than 50 lux, and for areas where good visual communication is important like offices, meeting and teaching areas not less than 150 lux. Although the concept of cylindrical illumination is not new it has not been widely considered for the routine lighting of workplaces.

How do many existing lighting schemes meet these new requirements? Very few published photographs of interiors include a full complement of ‘workers’ so there is little subjective evidence of how modern lighting affects the appearance of the human face. Accurate measurement could be a problem. Added to this is the same problem outlined above, the lack of occupational information of the space.

The Standard only considers the requirements of ‘workers’ so places where customers or visitors dominate lighting requirement need to be considered separately.

Filed under Building Management, Building services, Cost efficiency, Customer Satisfaction, Design, Electricity, Energy, Lighting, Occupant Satisfaction Tagged with , , ,

Part L and the Green Police

March 30, 2012 by 1 Comment

It seems like just yesterday I was absorbing the 2010 incarnation of Part L. Now 2013 is creeping up on us fast, and the consultation will be closed 4 weeks from today. The plans for zero carbon homes in 2016 and non-dwellings in 2019 are ambitious, and rightly so. But what happens after 2019? It’ll be years before there are enough zero-carbon buildings to really make a dent in UK emissions. In the meantime there are thousands of inefficient buildings that won’t get touched by Part L, because no building work is being done on them. The ever-expanding list of actions that triggers consequential improvements may help – for example making works such as boiler and window replacements trigger further improvements. But there is a danger this will just discourage building owners from doing such works in the first place, or encourage them to hide their activities from the green police.

We need to come up with new ways of bringing the existing building stock up-to-scratch, that don’t involve waiting until someone decides to do some building work. Building MOTs? Mandatory follow-through of recommendations from EPCs, DECs and air conditioning inspections? Fines for excessive energy use? I don’t have all the answers, but what I am pretty sure of is that energy prices are going to keep rising as fossil fuels get scarcer and the world’s population gets bigger. Give it another few years, and businesses won’t need legislation pushing them to manage their energy use better, they’ll have to do it to survive.

Filed under Assessment, Building Management, Building Regs, Building Regulations, Building services, Energy, Government Tagged with , ,

Smart Grid Impact on Intelligent Buildings

March 1, 2012 by 2 Comments

BSRIA WMI has just completed a major research study for the Continental Automated Buildings Association (CABA); an international industry association based in North America, dedicated to the advancement of intelligent homes and intelligent buildings technologies. The study was sponsored by 29 CABA member companies which included a broad mix of disciplines, from building management systems providers to electricity utilities.

What are Smart Grids?

The study, entitled “Smart Grid Impact on Intelligent Buildings” estimates that the North American smart grid non-residential marketplace was worth approximately $6.6 billion in 2011 and should reach $8 billion by 2013.

The smart grid will be an advanced power grid that adds and integrates many varieties of digital computing and communication technologies and services to the power-delivery infrastructure. It will allow bi-directional flows of energy, for example from renewable energy sources, and two-way communication and control capabilities.

The Smart Grid Framework

Benefits

The smart grid will benefit utilities in a multitude of ways, most importantly helping them to flatten the demand curve, which will result in increased grid stability and reliability, but also to help reduce the need for expensive standby generating capacity. At the same time, it will empower end-customers, allowing them to save on energy costs and buy at optimal times of the day when prices are lower.

The study found that the fastest growing components of the smart grid market are grid applications, followed by demand response and peak load management, building energy management systems, and smart meters. Whilst only a small proportion of building management systems are ready to be connected to the smart grid today, the study noted that smart grid development will become a major driver for the development and deployment of more intelligent building technologies.

The Future

The study emphasizes the need for innovative solutions to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of power generation, transmission and consumption capacity. Intelligent buildings are prime examples of innovative technology that will aid in the deployment of new smart grid infrastructure.

More utilities are now modernizing their infrastructure to make their grids “smart” in order to improve the efficiency, reliability, economics and sustainability of the electricity services delivered to both residential and non-residential building owners. The research found that there is a direct correlation between having a smart grid and attracting more customers and that in time, it will be this that helps to enhance the overall attractiveness of an area for business.

The study is currently under embargo but will be available for purchase by any interested companies from June 2012.

Filed under Assessment, Building Management, Communication Technology, Energy, Intelligent Buildings, North America, Performance, Power Grid, Smart Grid, Technology Tagged with , , ,

BREEAM – What’s your opinion?

February 15, 2012 by 2 Comments

BSRIA recently held an event as part of our Building Environmental Assessment Network to discuss opinions on BREEAM.  This is always a hot topic with lots of views, and this event was no different.

For those new to the world of environmental assessment, BREEAM (the BRE Environmental Assessment Method) is a criteria based assessment of the sustainability of a building.  Developed by the BRE in 1990, it is now the UK’s most used environmental assessment method, and is often a requirement of planning.  More details can be found at www.breeam.org.

The aim of the event was to see if the 2011 changes were sitting well with the industry or needed changing.  It was also a chance to give BRE feedback directly for future changes, or problems that have been encountered.

Particular issues raised were:

  • The transparency of some of the calculation methods
  • Getting feedback or answers to queries from BRE
  • Issues with the energy credits in the 2011 version, especially when dealing with CHP units. 
  • Some refrigeration related credits appear impossible to get

Questions raised in the presentations were:

  • Is the value of each credit appropriate?
  • Is the industry ready for all the changes made in 2011?
  • Is the qualification route for assessors and BREEAM APs appropriate?
  • Is there need for more information for the industry?

The presentations given on the day are available from: http://www.bsria.co.uk/services/membership/networks/building-assessment-network/

So do you have an opinion on BREEAM?  What works well and what needs some adjustment?  Of particular interest would be your experience of the latest version of BREEAM, i.e. 2011.

Filed under Assessment, BREEAM, Campaign, Construction, Energy, Environment, Performance, Sustainability Tagged with ,

Room temperature measurement

January 12, 2012 by Leave a comment

Measuring temperature in a room is one of the things we do most often as building services engineers.  It seems straightforward, but is it really as simple as it appears?

Specifications often state that a certain temperature must be maintained in a building, but what does this mean? Designers need to know what they are designing for. Contractors need to know where to put the sensors. Commissioning engineers need to know how to confirm the building meets the specification and last, but not least the occupants need to be satisfied and comfortable.

I would like to know what you think and what you do for temperature measurement….

  • Do you measure air temperature, radiant temperature, environmental temperature or something else?
  • What height do you measure it?
  • Where in the room? At desks or in the centre?
  • At the worst spot, the best spot or the average?
  • How long do you measure for?
  • Should you take the average over time, the lowest or the highest?
  • How long should you leave the system to warm up or cool down?
  • What do you use to measure temperature; liquid in glass bulb, thermistor, thermocouple or infrared?
  • How is your thermometer or temperature sensor calibrated and how often?
  • Should we really be specifying temperature at all?  It is often occupant comfort that matters most.

This might lead to a Best Practice Guide or a series of guides because we could also look at other measurements for building services such as water temperature, humidity and air flow. You can feedback using the form below or by commenting on this post.

Filed under Construction, Energy, Occupant Satisfaction, Performance, Sustainability Tagged with , , , , , ,

Post Occupancy Evaluation – The challenges of a ‘greener’ future

December 9, 2011 by 1 Comment

I joined BSRIA as a Graduate Engineer in January 2011. Prior to this I was studying for my PhD in the School of Civil Engineering at the University of Leeds.

An Appraisal of the performance of a ‘green’ office building

A summary of my research is given below:

The challenges of a ‘greener’ future are now a responsibility for everyone. This is particularly so for the built environment, where sustainable building design is no longer an innovative option but more of a legislative must. Unfortunately significant differences are often found between the design and measured performance of buildings, with many factors contributing towards these discrepancies.

The research work investigated, using Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) techniques, the credibility gap between design and measured performance of a partially occupied ‘green’ office building selected as the case study. The results found that the measured energy consumption was over three times the design estimates, and the performance compared poorly against good practice benchmarks for similar buildings. The study’s POE also revealed inefficient control settings, high out-of-hours energy consumption and ineffective building management.

This study went beyond a typical POE as it also includes investigations into how the occupancy variations, and the management strategies applied under these conditions, can impact on building energy performance through the use of simulation modelling techniques (IES<VE>). This is an area where very little research had previously been carried out. At the 50% occupancy levels found at the time the research was conducted, potential annual savings of over £30,000 in utility bills and 60% in energy consumption were estimated if more effective management and control was implemented.

Social-related aspects of building performance are also investigated. Occupant satisfaction and comfort surveys were conducted and the results were compared to previous findings. The perceived comfort and satisfaction with temperature was the most disappointing finding from the survey, however overall the building was comparable to the average benchmarks, but did not perform well when compared to other ‘green’ office buildings.

The study revealed the potential for the building to be fine-tuned to perform more efficiently than was at the time of the study, however there must be suitable, skilled Facility Management to ensure this is delivered.

For more information on Post Occupancy Evaluation/ Building Performance Evaluation…..

Filed under BPE, Building Performance Evaluation, Energy, Occupant Satisfaction, Performance, POE, Post Occupancy Evaluation Tagged with , , ,

Are Compact Fluorescent Lamps welcome in your home?

November 2, 2011 by 2 Comments

Fluorescent lamp technology is certainly not new and when linear lamps became available after the Second World War their advantages were rapidly recognised by both industry and commerce so that by the 1970s fluorescent lighting had become a standard method of interior lighting for most buildings.

It therefore seemed reasonable that Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) introduced in the 1980s would be equally well accepted in the home by domestic consumers. However home users were not immediately impressed by the long-term savings, and were deterred by the high initial costs. Indifferent or poor colour rendering, physical incompatibility, mercury hazards, unfulfilled marketing claims and slow warm up were perceived as disadvantages.

 The arguments for and against CFLs became polarised and European governments decided to tip the scales by “banning” domestic filament lamps. Retailers meanwhile adopted “loss leader” pricing of CFLs and the popular national press reacted with health scares from mercury and ultraviolet radiation. The consequence was consumer confusion. However the argument has shifted with rising energy costs having a significant impact on domestic budgets and technological progress has addressed to some extent the earlier quality issues.

 There is now the opportunity to make a more rational judgement. Most information has been biased one way or the other. However there is now an independent and thorough assessment of CFLs that factually examines many of the issues and is well worth reading:

“An examination into the use of CFLs in the domestic environment”. James Thomas Duff (2011) has been published in the new CIBSE SDAR Journal for September. 

 No single lamp type can solve all lighting problems. The choice should be determined by the particular activities and thus the lighting needs of the occupants, rather than the architecture or design of the dwelling. Many building services operate in part to preserve the fabric and environment whereas lighting is only required when the space is occupied. As soon as it is vacated the lighting can, and should be switched off. Lighting is for the people, and the home is where personal character prevails. The choice is yours but hopefully it can now be based on sound facts rather than scare-mongering or “prohibition”.

Filed under Cost efficiency, Customer Satisfaction, Electricity, Energy, Lighting, Performance, Technology Tagged with ,

Taking lighting to task

September 1, 2011 by Leave a comment

For many years the conventional method of interior lighting for workplaces was by ‘general illumination’. As lighting was not expensive to purchase, install or operate, the principle was to provide illumination over the whole floor area with a high degree of uniformity. This enabled plants or furniture to be subsequently positioned anywhere in the space and easily moved without recourse to changing the lighting array.

Council House 2 - Offices. Spot the five sources of light....

 However for the past decade UK lighting codes and standards have recommended not ‘general’ but ‘task’ lighting. The significance of this change has either been ignored or gone largely un-noticed as the illumination values were basically the same. The new concept recognised that the main critical visual task is only carried out over a small part of the total floor area. The rest of the space is used for circulation, storage, filing and similar activities all of which are less demanding in terms of illumination. Lighting the whole area to the highest illumination required can use about a third more energy than matching the illumination to the different activities.

Energy costs are continuing to rise and therefore providing the right amount of light only where it is needed is beneficial both economically and environmentally. Also variation in illumination can make the space visually more interesting than overall uniformity. Normally the reason for still providing ‘general’ illumination is because the building is a speculative development and there is no client to determine the furniture layout, or simply that the layout has not been decided yet. I think potential tenants need to be aware that for lighting to be visually efficient the equipment should be electrically efficient and the lighting design should suit the activities across the space. Providing light where and when it is not needed is inefficient regardless of lumens per watt performance of the luminaires.  

Recommended illumination levels in the past were based upon the need to determine detail in the visual task, together with the amount of contrast critical nature of the work and the importance of colour discrimination. Recently there have been massive changes to how we read the written word with print on paper largely being replaced by self-illuminated screens of computers, tablets, telephones, information signs, cash registers, etc. At the same time there has been the move towards ‘hot desking’. No longer does a space have a constant lighting need. The visual task performed at any point will depend upon the occupant at any one time. Does this mean we should revert to general illumination?

Or does the lighting of our buildings require a fundamental rethink so it is more appropriate to today’s sometimes conflicting needs of energy conservation, use of electronic media devices and flexible occupancy of spaces?   Modern lamps have long lives and therefore lighting is only infrequently changed. Installations over twenty years old are not uncommon, a time span when most other electrical equipment will have been replaced several times. 

Filed under Building Regs, Cost efficiency, Energy, Lighting, Sustainability Tagged with

Sustainable Housing – defining zero carbon

June 1, 2011 by 2 Comments

In the last budget on 23rd March, the UK government, quite discretely, changed the definition of zero carbon.  The 2011 budget changed the requirements from having to balance all the regulated loads plus an allowance for cooking and appliances, to simply balancing the emissions from the regulated loads only.  In essence this is just the heating, hot water and lighting loads.   There appears to be a split in opinion on this issue, with some for the change arguing that it is a more realistic target for the construction industry to meet, while the other camp argue that the new definition isn’t really zero carbon.

I have been involved in a project that has just completed the construction of a Code 6 vicarage.  Level 6 of the code for sustainable homes requires the building to meet “zero carbon”.  The new definition is effectively the requirement for Code 5 in the 2009 version of the Code for sustainable homes on the dwelling emission front.  With the old definition, there was no way out of producing a small power station for a house.  In the vicarage the south facing roof was covered in around 8 kWp of photovoltaic panels. The cost of these panels still significant, even with the feed-in-tariffs it is going to put a lot of people off the thought of installing them, and even thinking about going for Code 6.

2016 is still the target date for all new homes to be zero carbon, and built to Code 6 standards.  The pressure to meet this target is probably behind the change in the definition of zero carbon.  With this new definition, it is feasible to build a dwelling with minimal generating capacity, and so reducing the cost.  I’m sure the Passivhaus approach will come more into the frame – a more fabric first approach.  Reducing heat loss (or gain for summer months) simply makes sense.

Even with the definition of zero carbon changing, making it cheaper to build to Code 6, it will still be difficult.  Whether using the Passivhaus approach or not, the correct site is even more important than ever.  The Code for Sustainable Homes includes other issues, not just energy, that needs to be taken into account.  Things like ecology, cycle storage, water use and the lifetime homes standards have rarely stopped a house from being built in the past, but this may happen once Code 6 becomes the mandatory standard.

Filed under Energy, Sustainability, Zero Carbon Tagged with

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.