slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Street Light Conversion City of North Bay PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Street Light Conversion City of North Bay

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 35

Street Light Conversion City of North Bay - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Street Light Conversion City of North Bay. 25 Jan 2013. City’s Conservation & Green Plan. In 2008 City of North Bay established 5 Year Green Targets to reduce energy consumption from the 2007 baseline Targets: Electricity consumption by 5% / year Natural Gas used by 3% / year

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Street Light Conversion City of North Bay' - chad

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Street Light Conversion

City of North Bay

25 Jan 2013

city s conservation green plan
City’s Conservation & Green Plan

In 2008 City of North Bay established 5 Year Green Targets to reduce energy consumption from the 2007 baseline


Electricity consumption by 5% / year

Natural Gas used by 3% / year

Fuels consumed by 5% / year

energy conservation
Energy Conservation

Analysis of Annual Electricity Consumption by the City consistently identifies street lights as the 2nd or 3rd largest user

In 2010 Street Lights consumed 3.32 Million kW



System owned by the City & maintained by North Bay Hydro (LDC)

High Pressure Sodium (HPS) fixtures are utilized in the system

City of North Bay pays the LDC based on the hourly electricity price plus the Global Adjustment on the drawn wattage of the fixtures (light bulb and ballast) plus the distribution costs as determined by the LDC (& approved by the OEB)

Rates for street lights are approved by Ontario Energy Board

City funds the system through Municipal Tax Collection

Street lights in older section of the system do not meet ESA standards for street lighting

why change street lights
Why Change Street Lights


HPS Street Lights are at the end of their useful life


Increasing operational costs

Increasing maintenance costs

Capital budget and life cycle financial consideration


Reduce Electricity Consumption



why change street lights drivers continued
Why Change Street Lights (Drivers Continued)


The project supports the Goals and Objectives of sustainability and the Green Initiatives of the City of North Bay because it involves the replacement of old street lights with luminaires that:

Are more energy efficient than the current HPS fixtures;

Produce better quality of light (white light versus yellow light);

Have a lower carbon footprint with consideration of the manufacturing process, longer life and the recycling capability;

Lower maintenance costs

Upgrade the street light system to meet ESA requirements City wide

moving the project forward
Moving the Project Forward


Internal Research

Pilot Projects and Sampling

Initiation, completion, and evaluation of Engineering Study

Technology Decision

Development of RFP


Evaluation of submitted RFP(s)

Field Test of winning proposal

RFP for Installation

Rebuild system to meet new requirements


internal research
Internal Research

Investigation of various technologies

Survey of other communities

Discussions with various suppliers and distributors

Discussions and evaluation with LDC

Establishment of over arching objectives

Discussions with light experts

colour rendering
Colour Rendering

Improved night visualization of objects

pilot field tests

Induction, LED’s, Retrofits

Over 40 different lights were tested

Initial results favoured Induction Lighting but there were concerns with the uniformity of the light distribution

While the Pilot Field Tests were underway

Technology of LED’s was improving while costs were decreasing

Applying Moore’s Law from solid state technology and the computing industry the effectiveness of light output of LED’s was improving dramatically while cost was dropping quickly

At this point the City concluded that a more detailed analysis of technology, short listing of qualified suppliers and financial modeling was necessary to ensure the optimum results

engineering study
Engineering Study

Initiation, Completion, and Evaluation of Engineering Study which included the following key factors

Utilisation of the current system (pole spans and fixture heights and road configurations)

Life span

Adequacy of light (intensity & distribution) criteria as per ANSI/IESNA RP-8-00

Quality of light and colour

Energy consumption

Initial Capital and Maintenance Costs through life of the fixtures

Retrofit compatibility

Recycling & environmentally sensitive by-products

product evaluation criteria
Product Evaluation Criteria

Technology Decision

Engineering study concluded that LED’s offered the optimum solution for the City considering the established infrastructure system of pole spacing, fixture heights and roadway design.

LED’s met RP-8-00 requirements for all representative cases.

LED’s offered a better estimated life cycle cost

development of rfp
Development of RFP

Critical Considerations:

Product Suitability and Technical

Product Light Performance

Experience and Warranty


Deliverables and Environmental

product evaluation criteria1
Product Evaluation Criteria

Developed 5 over arching criteria for evaluation

Product Suitability and Technical

Product Light Performance

Experience and Warranty


Deliverables and Environmental

product evaluation criteria2
Product Evaluation Criteria

Product Suitability and Technical Compliance

product evaluation criteria3
Product Evaluation Criteria

Product Light Performance

product evaluation criteria4
Product Evaluation Criteria

Experience and Warranty

product evaluation criteria5
Product Evaluation Criteria

Financial Evaluation

Capital Cost

Life Cycle Costs

Annual Electricity Costs based on 2011 electricity rates

Estimated Maintenance Costs over 5, 10 and 15 years

Estimated Life Expectancy based on suppliers information and municipalities limited experiences (conservative estimates for replacement)


Estimated financial implications of environmental impacts

product evaluation criteria7
Product Evaluation Criteria

Deliverables and Environmental

field test
Field Test

Residential Roadway

LED Fixtures HPS Fixtures

led street light project

Lesson’s Learned

Utilize experts early in the project to optimize fixture evaluation processes

Pre-qualification of fixtures and suppliers reduces overall cost of the project

If capital available complete the project as quickly as possible to realize the electricity consumption savings sooner and realize economies of scale.

Utilize installers with proven experience and resources committed to completing the project in a timely fashion to reduce administrative/supervisory costs

led street light project1

Predominant Street Type HPS Fixure LED Fixture

ID Watts* ID Watts**

Residential / Urban 70 96 65 73

Collector Streets 150 185 90 102

Arterial Streets 200 241 105 119

Arterial Special 250 300 130 147

* Watts Includes fixture plus ballast in the case of HPS Fixtures

** Watts Includes fixture plus driver in the case of LED Fixtures

led street light project2

Predominant Street Type HPS Fixure LED Fixture

ID No. of Fixtures ID No. of Fixtures

(Watts) (Watts)

Residential / Urban 70 3650 65 3650

Collector Streets 150 1125 90 1125

Arterial Streets 200 700 105 692

Arterial Special 250 92 130 100

Total 5567 5567

led street light project3

In Summary:

Estimated Total Costs $ 2,800,000

Start Date October 17, 2011

Completion Date April 30, 2013

Reduction in Connected kW 37%

Projected Annualized Savings $ 225,000 /year based on 2011 costs

$ 281,000/year based on 2013 costs

Expected Payback 13 years based on 2011 costs

OPA Incentives Approximately $60,000

Funding City’s Capital Budget $3 MM over 2 yrs.