single family residential led lighting demonstrations

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 [email protected]

Information contained in this document, such as web page addresses, are current at the time of

publication.

mailto:[email protected]

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.

https://www.epa.gov/energy/power-profiler

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/

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

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.

http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/patternbook/resources/hours_of_use.asp

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)


Lamp



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


#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17

Exterior Hallway (Entry) Ceiling Diffuser


#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17

Hallway Ceiling Diffuser


#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17

Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser 1


#HUI8011LL/BN2800 80 1690 99 50,000 17 1 17



#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)


(h/day)


(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


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.


26 17 0.7 1.2 0.0 0.7 238.0 6.2 4.0 2.1


26 17 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.6 201.7 5.2 3.4 1.8


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


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 #



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


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


#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00



#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00



#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00



#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00



#HUI8011LL/BN17.0 1 17 $69 $69.00 -$46.00


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


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


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


$0


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.


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



Circuit

Total Power


Lamp Quantity

per FixtureBrand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)



Efficacy (Lumens/

Watt)

Rated Life (Hours)

Power Demand (W)

per Lamp



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


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


Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser

2 43 86 1 86 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor module Acrich2


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


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


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


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


(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


Energy (kWh)

LED Demo, Annualized Energy

(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


1.8 0.6 2.8 1.7 630.1 54.2 10.7 43.5


0.3 0.3 0.9 0.4 163.6 4.7 1.0 3.8


0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 21.1 0.6 0.1 0.5


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


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


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


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



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


Price Ea. as of May 2017

Total for Convention

al Lamps and/or

Fixtures

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


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



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



17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50



17 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50


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


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


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



17 17.0 1 17.0 $45.00 $45.00 -$3.50


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


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




Answer: (No answer)

B-20



Answer: “Total package price equaled $1718.88, this was a $717.88 overage of homeowner’s

interior lighting budget.”



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.”



Answer: “16 man hours over the standard fixtures to LED fixture installation. Mostly associated

with kitchen under cabinet lighting.”



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.”



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



Answer: “No, pretty standard.”



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


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


$0


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


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


Lamp



Circuit


Lamp Qty per

FixtureBrand, Model # Correlated Color

Temperature (K)



Efficacy (lumens/

watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp



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


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


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


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


1 53 53 1 53 1


module HAL00715 93051402-2130 E

3000 90 1211 67.3Not

reported18.0 18.0 1 18

1620 408watts watts

No upgrade


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)


Annual Average Hours of Use

(h/day)



Energy (kWh)


Energy (kWh)


Notes


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


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


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


0.31 0.49 0.29 0.35 127.8 5.5 1.3 4.2


3.13 3.93 3.52 3.43 1251.6 100.1 12.5 87.6


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


0.10 0.21 0.32 0.18 66.7 3.5 1.2 2.3

607kWh Annually


C-12

C.6 Lighting Power Density


C.7 Pollution Avoided


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


same price the builder paid.


Fixture Type

Lamp quantity

per Fixture


Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit

Price as of May

2017

Total for conventi

onal lamps and/or fixtures

Lamp quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

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


Dining Room Table 202 100

Largest Bathroom Vanity

Vanity light only 690 400

All Fixtures On 720 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity


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




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.”



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.”



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.”



Answer: “Labor was about the same as for our regular lighting. No real difficult fixtures.”



Answer: “Fixture information was good and instructions came with fixtures.”

C-16



Answer: “Candle-base LED lamps for bedroom paddle fans were hard to find. Owner bought

them by mail.”



Answer: “All fixtures install the same as regular and fluorescent fixtures.”



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


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


$0


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.


D-2

D.2 Lighting Plans

D-3

D.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products


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



Circuit

Total Power Demand (W) on

Circuit

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)


Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (Lumens/

Watt)

Rated Life (Hours)


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

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


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



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


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


8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 17 2 34.0

2nd Largest Bedroom Ceiling Diffuser


8303000 80 800 94.1 18,000 8.5 25.5 1 25.5



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


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



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)



Annual Average Hours of Use

(h/day)


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


2.3 2.5 4.7 2.96 1079.33 70.2 20.5 49.6


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


2.3 1.5 4.5 2.69 980.17 156.8 27.4 129.4


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


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


4.3 2.4 3.1 3.51 1282.48 220.6 43.6 177.0


3.5 1.1 0.0 2.05 749.05 96.6 19.1 77.5


4.3 5.5 2.6 4.17 1520.40 130.8 25.8 104.9


0.4 4.6 1.7 1.79 655.11 42.6 6.2 36.4


0.0 0.0 0.0Monitoring device malfunctioned; also, CFL lamp no upgrade


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


D.7 Pollution Avoided



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.


RoomLamp

Quantity per

Fixture


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit


on Circuit


Total for Conventional

Lamps and/or

Fixtures

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #


Lamp



Circuit

Total Power



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


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


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


9.4 9.4 2 19 $18.00 $36.00 $30.80


1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart


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


9.4 9.4 1 9 $24.00 $24.00 $21.40


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


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


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


1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart


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


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


1 65 65.0 1 65 $2.60 $2.60 1Ecosmart


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;


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.


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


$0


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.


E-2

E.2 Lighting Plans

E-3

E.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products


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




Circuit


Lamp Quantity per Fixture

LED Brand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)

Color Rendering

Index (CRI)

Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (lumens/

watt)

Rated Life (hours)




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


Dining room Chandelier

6 20 120.0 1 120 6Incand



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


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



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


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)



Energy (kWh)


Energy (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


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


180 180 3 1095 197.1 197.1 0.0No LED upgrade; candelabra lamps did not have wattage marked on lamp, so assumed 20W




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


260 50 1.5 547.5 142.4 27.4 115.0




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


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


86 25 1 365 31.4 9.1 22.3


43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.5


129 39 1.5 547.5 70.6 21.5 49.2


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


E.7 Pollution Avoided


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.


Type of Light Fixture(s)

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


Price Ea. as

of May 2017

Total for conventional lamps and/or

fixtures

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

LED Brand, Model #



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


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


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


3 20 60 3 180 $1.50 $13.50 3Incand

Candelabra20 60 3 180 $1.50 $13.50 $0.00


6 20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 6Incand

Candelabra20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 $0.00


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


1 65 65 4 260 $2.60 $10.40 1Cree DRDL6-

0622700912.5 12.5 4 50 $18.00 $72.00 $61.60


6 20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 6Incand

Candelabra20 120 1 120 $1.50 $9.00 $0.00


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


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


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


3 43 129 1 129 $1.75 $5.25 4Satco KolourOne

S92089.8 39.2 1 39 $1.75 $7.00 $1.75


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;


Recommendations

Kitchen Counter Pendants Only 132


Kitchen Table Pendant Only 160 200

All Kitchen lights On 205

Kitchen Sink Pendants Only 132


Dining Room Table 202 100



All Fixtures On 720 Second Largest Bathroom Vanity


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




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.”



Answer: “The recommended recessed housings and trims were double the cost of our standard.”



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.”



Answer: “About the same.”



Answer: “Instructions provided were complete.”



Answer: “I did not try to acquire the recommended components due to cost.”

E-17



Answer: “No difference.”



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


$0


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.


F-2

F.2 Lighting Plans

F-3

F.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products


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


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit



Brand, Model #

Correlated Color Temper

ature (K)

Color Renderi

ng Index (CRI)

Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (lumens/watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


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


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


Ceiling Diffuser 1 53 53 1 53 1

Commercial Electric #HUI8011L

2800 80 1690 99.4 50,000 17 17.0 1 17


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


Energy (kWh)


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


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


53 17 1 365 19.3 6.2 13.1


43 11 1.5 547.5 23.5 6.0 17.5


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


F.7 Pollution Avoided


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


same price the builder paid.


Room Type of Light Fixture(s) Lamp Qty per Fixture

Power Demand (W)

per Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit


Total Lamp Qty per Fixture

Brand, Model #Power

Demand (W) per Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit


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


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


1 43 43 1 43 $37 $36.75 1Nutone ALN110L

9927152911 11.0 1 11 $99.00 $99.00 $62.25

2nd Largest


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




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.”



Answer: “We used standard recessed housings at no additional costs. The lamps were about

double the cost of standard lamps.”

F-13



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.”



Answer: “About the same.”



Answer: “Instructions provided were complete.”



Answer: “There wasn't any difficulty getting the lighting. LED is standard now.”






Answer: “There have not been any problems.”

F-14

F.11 Occupant Questionnaires – Average of Seven Temporary Employee Visitors

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


$0


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)


G-2

G.2 Lighting Plans

G-3

G.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products


below assumes standard and halogen incandescent base case.

Fixture TypeLamp Qty

per Fixture


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit


on Circuit


LED Brand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)


Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (Lumens/

watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

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


1 65 65 1 65 1Lithonia

6BPMW30K3000 93 600 58.5 50000 10.25 10.25 1 10


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



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


G-5

Figure G-2. Kitchen and Dining Area



G-6

Figure G-3. Living Room

Figure G-4. Study



Ceiling diffuser reflected in transom window

G-7

Figure G-5. Largest Bathroom


G-8

Figure G-6. Second Largest Bathroom


G-9

G.5 Energy Savings Results

Fixture Type Base Case Power (W)

LED Demo Power

(W)

Average Hours of

Use/day (Per Literature



Energy (kWh)


Energy (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


G.7 Pollution Avoided



G-11

G.8 Payback Period

The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar equipment, and is not necessarily



Base Case LED Demo

Room

Lamp quantit

y per Fixture

Power Demand (W)

per Lamp


Quantity

Fixtures On

Circuit

Total Power


Price as of May

2017

Total for convention

al lamps and/or fixtures

Lamp quantit

y per Fixture

LED Brand, Model #



Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power


Price ea. as of May

2017

Total for LED


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


1 65 65 1 60 $2.60 $2.60 1 Lithonia 6BPMW30K 10.25 10.25 1 10.25 $18 $18 $15.40


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;


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




Answer: (No answer)



Answer: “The lighting budget for the project was $1,600. The final cost for all lighting was

$1,834.”



G-13

Answer: “We did not keep track of individual fixture install times. The total time for all fixtures

was about 18 hours.”



Answer: “The total is the same for our other projects.”



Answer: “The specs were pretty clear.”



Answer: “The experience was about the same. Nothing was hard to get.”



Answer: “The fixtures were pretty much the same as what we usually install.”



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


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


$0


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.



H-2

H.2 Lighting Plans

H-3

H.3 Lighting Technology Comparison: Theoretical Base Case vs. Installed LED Products


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


Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)


Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (Lumens/

Watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

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


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


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


No upgrade

H-4

H.4 Site Photos

Figure H-1. Entry

H-5

Figure H-2. Kitchen


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)



Energy (kWh)


Energy (kWh)


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


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


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


172 38 1 365 62.8 13.9 48.9


106 34 1 365 38.7 12.4 26.3


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


53 17 1.5 547.5 29.0 9.3 19.7


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


H.7 Pollution Avoided



H-18

H.8 Payback Period

The price information below is based on May 2017 pricing for similar equipment, and is not necessarily


Lamp Quantity

per Fixture


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit



Total for LED Lamps

and/or Fixtures

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit

Total Power



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


1 65 65 8 520 $2.60 $20.80 1 SYL 73193 9 9.0 8 72 $18.00 $144.00 $123.20


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


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


4 43 172 1 172 $1.75 $7.00 4TCP

#LED10A199.5 38.0 1 38 $1.75 $7.00 $0.00


1 53 53 2 106 $12.00 $24.00 1Progress

P359017 17.0 2 34 $45.00 $90.00 $66.00


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


1 53 53 1 53 $12.00 $12.00 1Progress

P359017 17.0 1 17 $45.00 $45.00 $33.00


2 43 86 1 86 $1.75 $3.50 2TCP

#LED10A199.5 19.0 1 19 $1.75 $3.50 $0.00


1 72 72 1 72 $1.50 $1.50 1Incand; no

upgrade72 72.0 1 72 $1.50 $1.50 $0.00


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


H.9 Illuminance Measurement Results

Measured (lux;


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




Answer: (No answer)



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



Answer: “We did not itemize hours for the fixture installation. We allow 16 hours in our bid

price for total fixture install.”



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.”



Answer: “Instructions were clear.”



Answer: “No difference. Builder (Gerber) decided on fixtures based in lighting design. Fixtures

and bulbs were available.”






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

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


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.


Utility electric rate Central Hudson SC#1 ($0.131/kWh)21


$0


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.


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


Lamp


Qty Fixtures

On Circuit


on Circuit


Brand, Model #Correlated Color Temperature (K)



Efficacy (lumens/w

att)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


Qty Fixtures 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


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


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


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


1 100 100 1 100 1 Nutone AEN110L 3000 Ukn. Ukn. Ukn. Ukn. 11 11 1 11


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)



Annual Average Hours of Use/day


Pre-Retrofit

Annualized Energy

(kWh)

Post-Retrofit

Annualized Energy (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


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.


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.


4.28 3.76 7.94 5.1 1849.3 332.9 49.9 282.9


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.


7.36 6.18 7.98 7.2 2634.7 263.5 15.8 247.7


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


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


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


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.


1.94 1.98 1.9 708.3 70.8 7.8 63.0Calc uses only "shoulder" season due to logger failure


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


I-19

I.6 Lighting Power Density


I.7 Pollution Avoided



I.8 Payback Period


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



Circuit


on Circuit

Lamp quantity per

FixtureBrand, Model #

Power Demand (W)

per Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit


Total for LED


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


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


1Sylvania 4"

downlight 731939 9.0 6 72 $18 $108.00 $108.00


3 60 120 1 120 3Sylvania

LED9A19/dim/0/827

9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $5.25 $5.25


4 25 100 1 100 4 Meridian #13178 4 16.0 1 16 $6.75 $27.00 $27.00


1 100 100 1 100 2CREE (40W

equiv)9 18.0 1 18 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50


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


4 15 60 1 60 4EcoSmart A19 A460ST-Q1D

9 36.0 1 36 $1.75 $7.00 $7.00


3 13 39 1 39 1Utilitech

YGA03A41-A19-9W

9 9 1 9 $1.75 $1.75 $1.75


3 60,53,75 188 1 188 3Ecosmart G25

E320663ECS 25 40WE CW

6 18.0 1 18 $4.50 $13.50 $13.50


1 100 100 1 100 1 Nutone AEN110L 11 11.0 1 11 $99 $99.00 $99.00


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




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.”



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.”



Answer: “Everything was install in about 14 hours.”



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.”



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.”



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



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.”



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


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.




$0


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.


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


Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit

Lamp quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model # Correlated Color Temperature (K)



Efficacy (lumens/

watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

On Circuit



2 60 120.0 1 120 2TOPAZ

LA19/10/827/D462700 80 800 80.0 25,000 10 20.0 1 20.0


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


(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


1 10 10 1 10 1 GE LED 10LS/DL (no upgrade, already LED) 10 10.0 1.0 10.0


1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL, no upgrade (no upgrade, CFL) 14 14.0 1.0 14.0


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


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


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


1 40 40 1 40 1Unlabeled fixture with Seoul Semiconductor

module Acrich2Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. 17 17.0 1 17.0


1 14 14 1 14 1 CFL (no upgrade, already CFL) 14 14.0 1 14.0

Largest Bedroom Table Lamp 2


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


1797 594watts watts


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)



Energy (kWh)

Post-Retrofit, Annualized

Energy (kWh)



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"


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


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


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


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


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.


0.0 No upgrade, no monitoring, so excluded






2.5 912.5 355.9 60.2 295.7No monitoring; used literature for hours assumption


0.00 0.16 0.33 0.1 44.5 5.9 0.9 5.0


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


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


0.01 0.04 0.01 0.0 7.1 0.3 0.1 0.2


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


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


same price the home improvement contractor paid.

Fixture

Lamp Quantity

per Fixture

Brand, Model #Power

Demand (W) per Lamp



Circuit


on Circuit

Price ea. as of May

2017

Total for LED

Lamps and/or

Fixtures

Total Incremental

Price for LED

Products


2TOPAZ

LA19/10/827/D4610 20.0 1 20 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50


1Fixture was not

replaced35 35.0 1 35 $0.00


1Topaz

LR20/7/827/D-467.2 7.2 1 7 $5 $5.00 $5.00


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


1 GE LED 10LS/DL 10 10.0 1 10 $0.00


117OMNA21/LED/3

WAY/2717 17.0 1 17 $14 $14.00 $14.00


1 Sylvania BR30 11W 11 11.0 6 66 $5 $30.00 $30.00


1TOPAZ

LA19/10/827/D4610 10.0 2 20 $1.75 $3.50 $3.50


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


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).




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




Answer: “No.”



Answer: (See scan of invoice below; billed for $550 in materials. No information about

incremental material prices.)



Answer: (Invoice below shows $850 labor.)



Answer: “No Difference.”

This builder did not answer the remaining questions:







J-27



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.




$0


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)


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



Circuit


on Circuit

Lamp Qty per

FixtureBrand, Model #

Correlated Color

Temperature (K)

Color Rendering

Index (CRI)

Light Output

(lumens)

Efficacy (lumens/

watt)

Rated Life (hours)


Lamp


Quantity Fixtures

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


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 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


1 75 75 1 75 1 Hampton Bay DC016LEDA 4000 83 1400 56 50,000 25 25.0 1 25

Largest BR Downlights


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


1 75 75 1 75 1Hampton Bay

VFB25ACLED2 module VFRU-1000020862-04


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


1 60 60 2 120 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 2 20


1 75 75 1 75 1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 2700 83 815 81.5 30,000 10 10.0 1 10



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)



Energy (kWh)

Post-Retrofit,

Annualized Energy (kWh)


Notes

Entry Chandelier 0.2 0.2 89.7 20.2 0.9 19.3Only had one season of monitoring data (summer)


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


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


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.


1.4 0.8 1.1 1.1 414.0 31.1 6.6 24.4


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


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


0.6 0.9 0.4 0.6 224.9 27.0 4.5 22.5


0.4 1.5 0.0 0.5 199.9 15.0 2.0 13.0

741.6kWh Annually


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



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


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


Circuit


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


1 Cree A19P-40W-27K 6 3 $2.85 $8.56


1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 1 $1.75 $1.75


1 Cree A19P-60W-27K 10 2 $2.85 $5.70


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).




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




Answer: “Nope, I fully trusted the design, so I installed all the recommended fixtures.”



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.”



Answer: “Everything was installed in about six hours.”



Answer: “The labor is pretty much the same, what it takes more is cost of the components

overall.”



Answer: “All information was pretty clear, including the most complicated part which was

retrofitting an existing white tube fixture to LED.”

K-25



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.”



Answer: “Not really.”



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.”

single family residential led lighting demonstrations

Documents