U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Office – Information Resources
Text-Alternative Version: Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium Kickoff
Below is the text-alternative version of the Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium Kickoff webcast, held May 6, 2010.
Terry Shoemaker: Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Terry Shoemaker with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and I'd like to welcome you to today's webcast, Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium Kickoff Meeting. This is brought to you by the U.S. Department of Energy's Solid-State Lighting Program.
Today's webcast represents the first official meeting of the MSLC. The focus will be describing the Consortium, its purpose and means of operation and benefits to members. Some initial products of the Consortium will be described.
Following today's webcast, interested qualified parties will be able to sign up for the Consortium membership. The webcast will be presented by Edward Smalley, Director of the Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium and Manager of the Street Lighting Engineering, Seattle City Light, and Bruce Kinzey, GATEWAY Demonstration Program Manager and Senior Research Engineer at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Introductions to today's webcast will be provided by Mr. Jim Brodrick, Program Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, Emerging Technologies Program.
Go ahead, Jim.
Jim Brodrick: Thank you, Terry; and welcome, everyone, to our first webcast. Let's take a quick look at the need for a Consortium. There are many actions going on out in the market, call them drivers, that are really increasing the interest for LED outdoor lighting solutions. One of the areas that is moving is energy efficiency, directionality, durability, and long life. All these things are very valuable in the street lighting and outdoor area lighting things, and we also have the opportunity to bring in some lighting sources that have a good green image, efficiency and then after the useful life, there's less nasties there in the system.
In addition, DOE has been active in the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grants, and this past year there was a rather large amount of money placed from the Recovery Act into topics that include the street lighting area. All these things are sort of swirling around us creating a lot of interest, and DOE is doing some testing and also the cities themselves are testing LED lighting, but there still is a lot of unfamiliarity out there. People are interested, but they're not exactly sure what to do and where to go, those kinds of questions. So the Consortium is actually going to help people come up the learning curve quite quickly. We're looking to get a library of fueled experience and hard data and all the members will benefit from this information, so now's the time to learn and then make wiser choices.
So let me introduce Ed Smalley, the Director of the Consortium, also employee of Seattle City Light. Ed, can you take it from here?
Ed Smalley: You bet. Thank you very much, Jim, and also thank you and welcome to those of you joining us. It's a great pleasure on my part to be a member of this great organization that we're about to really develop here and from the number of folks who have already applied to be members, well over 250 at this point, it looks like this is a much needed organization and also something that we all can put to great use. So while you're staring at your screen, take a look to the upper part of your screen and you'll notice how many folks have actually joined us today, and we're hoping that many of these folks are going to be able to, like you, take advantage of the tools that this organization's going to provide.
So before we get started, I wanted to really give an overview of what we're going to be talking about today in this webcast and some of the items that we're going to be discussing are some details about the Consortium, its mission, its goals, how the organization is structured, how membership is structured and eligibility for membership, as well as how the executive committee will be structured and the roles and responsibilities of that group as well and, in addition, we'll be talking and discussing about subcommittees and how subcommittees can really help be a driving force in accomplishing the many different tasks that we'd like to get accomplished as a Consortium.
So next we'll be looking at why join the organization, why join the Consortium. Many different organizations have many different reasons for needing information and so we'll be discussing that as well. Following that, we'll discuss tangible tools you can use. And again, we'll be utilizing these different subcommittees to discuss this, and performance standards is one of the tasks that will be tackled. The guidelines for LED street light applications will be covered there, testing and modeling of the different demonstrations, performance matrices, how we can get the best out of them, and then we'll move into demonstrations and fixture selection. Then we'll discuss details on use of GATEWAY programs, as well as questions-and-answers to follow. So these are the many things that we'll be covering.
But before we get too deep into that, let's turn it over to Bruce Kinzey, who will help us understand how the GATEWAY program will work interactively with the Consortium. Bruce.
Bruce Kinzey: Thanks, Ed. First let me also extend my welcome to everyone on this inaugural webcast of the Municipal Street Lighting Consortium. We hope this proves very useful for everyone involved.
Right off the bat, I want to clarify the relationship between the Consortium and the Department of Energy. The Consortium is intended to be semiautonomous in that, while there are certain stipulations associated with its use, it's intended to be a users group that identifies its own projects and priorities and essentially manages itself. DOE brings quite a bit to the table in support of the Consortium, including analysis and evaluation of products and future demonstrations, information resources, such as requested presentations and materials on topics of interest and support for communication needs like this webcast. But this is a users group that'll largely be defining and developing its own directions and investigations and thus everyone is expected to bring something to the table in a sense that you can expect to get out of this what you are willing to put into it. The Consortium is intended to be a very proactive kind of organization among its members.
I should note here that the Consortium isn't intended to try convince anyone to use LEDs that aren't already interested in them. A number of organizations already have money perhaps from stimulus packaging funding or for somewhere else that they're looking to spend on replacing a portion of their lighting systems with LEDs, or they may just want to learn more about the technology, and that's what the Consortium is here for, as Jim said, to bring people up the learning curve as rapidly as possible. Along these lines, the Consortium will not be providing funding to purchase luminaires nor for their installation. Funding may have been provided separately through the Energy Efficiency Block Grants or other sources for these purposes, but those are separate vehicles. The Consortium will not be providing this funding.
Solid-state lighting technology is still relatively new and there's a lot to be learned about it and a lot of factors to consider in making a decision to go ahead with an installation. What DOE hopes to do in supporting the Consortium is to enable folks to gain the ability to make an informed decision along these lines, understanding the facts and different considerations and being able to distinguish good performing products from not so good performing products and so on. Particularly given the continuing price premium on LED products, such decisions shouldn't be based on unrealistic expectations or on unsubstantiated rumors of their performance or characteristics, but on the facts, at least as far as we understand them today.
We're all on this learning curve together and can expect to continue learning things through at least the next few years as products continue to improve, new capabilities are developed, and field experience is gained. No one has all the answers at this point, and that includes DOE.
Okay, let me turn the floor back over to Ed.
Ed Smalley: Well thank you very much, Bruce. We appreciate that overview, and we also look very much forward to the participation with the DOE programs and especially GATEWAY.
So next, I wanted to talk a little bit about the Consortium in general. As Bruce had pointed out, the Consortium is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy and administrated by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. However, the drivers of this organization will be those voluntary organizations that participate - the municipalities, the utilities, and other owners. So what this group is going to bring to the table is an additional resource on solid-state street lighting and associated solid-state technology. This is what the Consortium really is all about, it's about those of you out there that are trying to make this technology work and how to bring to each of us the tools that we need to get this done.
Next I want to talk about the mission of the organization. It's really to get us all educated and how to identify products that are right for the application. In some cases a fixture may work well, but in other cases we'll find that it doesn't work as well. So we really talk about application. We really want to be able to talk about application. For instance, take a look at this picture here. This is one of the early photos of an installation in Seattle that we used, and you'll notice some very distinctively good qualities about what's happening in this photo. Take a look at the pickup truck in the lower right-hand corner, for example. And the other thing that's happening, you look above and you'll see two luminaire heads, but many spots of light on the pavement. So you really don't see the light source itself, so there's some good qualities. And another quality that may not appear good to some is the fact that we have some pretty good cutoff here. Well as we move forward, we want to compare that to the original photo, which was the high pressure sodium, and in this photo, we'll notice that we have some pretty good distribution going on, but you can see all the light sources as you look down the street and for many, the first thing that was noted was the color renditions. So those are two interesting examples, so now when we move back to the original slide, you can once again see the differences in quality. So while there were some improvements here, we did not necessarily produce an effective demonstration.
So in the final photo, however, you'll see that we have made some improvements in distribution. We've extended the distribution pattern so that we do not have blotchy spots on the roadway, and we've made some solid improvement. So that's really what we're talking about when we're talking about helping folks understand products that work from products that are just not appropriate to the application.
So next in our mission, we'll talk about providing national organizational structure to the process of evaluating LED street lighting technologies meant for public streets and other public areas. It's really important that as we move forward, we get organized and that we provide tools to everyone.
Then we want to really focus on how we're going to communicate our findings and how we're going to communicate with each other on a one-on-one basis across the country, so this is really important, and we want to get these answers out to folks so that they can understand what's going on.
So what are our goals? What are we really trying to accomplish on a grassroots level? Well first of all, we want to reduce the needless duplication of efforts among members, and those efforts are financially, those efforts are with time and energy. We want to see if we can reduce that number of needless attempts to make it right. Next we want to look at reducing the risk of making large scale mistakes among our members. People in different parts of the country are experimenting with the same picture over and over again and in some cases going out and actually purchasing pictures only to find that it's not exactly what they needed to do. We want to be able to bring the end users up to speed as quickly as possible and in their ability to identify good products and proper applications. And next, one of our goals is to reach out to members with limited budgets. So whether you have 800 street lights in your system or 800,000 street lights, one of the primary goals is to help everyone come up to the same level of education and have access to the same amount of resources as other organizations. And finally, we want to provide information in a timely way. So while we will be doing demonstrations in different parts of the country, we will be providing opportunities to communicate even prior to a final report being published. We know that we want to make sure that our final reports are as accurate as possible, but we want to be able to set up informational exchanges prior to that so that folks can really see what's going on, not necessarily in a real time, but as close to real time as possible with that.
So how are we going to get that accomplished? How are we going to accomplish those tasks in our mission? What is our strategy? Well first of all, once again, sharing information regularly and publishing results, refining and using common methodologies. As we talked about earlier, we'll be working hand-in-hand with the GATEWAY program to make sure we can do that in a sufficient manner. Coordinating product reviews and demonstration projects through regional teams and subcommittees. Team evaluations of reviews and demonstrations. And then we want to publish, publish, publish the results. We want to make sure that everyone is onboard with what's going on and has access to the information. And so when you look at a number of these bullets, how are we going to accomplish these tasks? It really requires involvement from the members.
Next I want to talk about organizational structure. How is the Consortium organized? Well it's administered by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. We talked about that earlier. I will be the Director and responsible for day-to-day operations of the different activities and the different meetings and setting up and organizing. However, I'm going to be looking to many of you members out there to help provide me with information and feedback so that we can really meet the needs of those involved. We will have an executive committee. We'll solicit from among primary members, and we'll talk a little bit more about that later. Subcommittees, while we have identified the need for a couple of specific subcommittees at this time, we know there may be more, and so once again we'll be reaching out to primary and advisory members to help us get those established and suited with the right people who can help us get those jobs done the most effectively. We'll also have host sites and other supports provided by member organizations. Again, when we talk about organizational structure, it really involves each and every member out there to help with their participation in getting this done so that we have met all of our needs.
I'd like to talk a little bit now about membership and eligibility. We have spoken about primary members and how they are really the core group, the target audience, if you will, of this organization. We want to reach out to interested cities, power providers, and other owners, stakeholders, and this group, this primary members group will be the driving force of what gets done. These are the ones who are stakeholders. These are the ones who are going to be spending I'm going to say upwards of 75 to 80% of the dollars spent in these endeavors over the next five to ten years. But not to be left out are our advisory members. We really know that there are some experts out there that can lend well to the topic. They can bring a lot of good information to bear on many of the subjects that we'll be undertaking and so we're going to be looking to these research facilities and governmental allegiances that are out there that are currently helping some of us today get our business done on a day-to-day basis, so we want to reach out to these organizations to make sure that they're included and that we can have some of their input so that we can make informed decisions. And not to be left out, we will have other participants. Those other participants are going to be coming from many different areas that we deal with on a regular basis. Some of these will be consultants. Some of these will be manufacturers. There are some who have made great strides in the industry, and we want to tap into their knowledge, their experience so that, once again, we can bring some additional resources to the greater Consortium.
Now I'd like to turn your attention to the executive committee. There's a wide range of needs that the Consortium has even before we get off the ground and so rather than leading this to just myself or my staff, what we will be doing is establishing an executive committee that can help us to accomplish a wide range of tasks. So we want to identify accurately the different needs of the Consortium. We want to organize, select, and prioritize demonstration sites, develop guidelines for subcommittees, make recommendations for subcommittee establishments, and assist in identifying tools needed for members. The executive committee members will come from among our primary members.
And so with that in mind, let's talk a bit about the eligibility for those members. So first of all, we want these to be fully sponsored primary members, and we say fully sponsored. What we really mean is we want to be sure that the organization that's being represented by that committee member, such as for instance the City of Seattle, we want to make sure that the mayor of that organization has bought into the plan. We want to make sure that at an executive level, the organization has bought into the participation, the full participation of their members so that we can get the most out of their members, so that we know that their member will be accessible and available to us. And so we think that's important and we think that you're going to be benefit from that. And secondly, we want these individuals to come from those stakeholders that we mentioned earlier, those primary members, those owners of the publics' infrastructure. We want to make sure that they have a vested interest in the success of the organization.
So next let's turn our attention to the subcommittees. The subcommittees will be formed under the advisement of the executive committees. They will have decision making authority and decision making power, and that's important. And so they'll be vested with specific tasks and needs of the Consortium items specifically needing to get done, and we'll talk about those a little bit here on our next slide. So what they will do is share their findings through teleconferences and through postings with us and really keep us updated on what is going on in the different environments across the different regions of the Consortium. So primary and advisory members are both eligible for subcommittees, and that's important.
So what about our first subcommittee? What do we have in mind? Well first we really want to talk about a solid-state street lighting standards committee. We know this is one of the primary tools that many of you are looking forward to working with and fortunately we won't be starting from scratch. We already have some good sample tools that the GATEWAY program and other programs have been working on and so we'll be looking to those as a outline to further develop a solid-state street light standard, so look forward to that from our first subcommittee, and that would be the first deliverable. So again, a solid-state street lighting performance specification is something that we're all looking forward to.
So how to get involved, participation in subcommittees. The subcommittees are developed and established and used by members, so that's one really good way to get involved, participation and demonstrations in your areas. Many of you are already going down this road, and we want to make a large number of these a part of what we do as a Consortium. Webcast, teleconferences, regional meetings, other postings, these are all ways that you can participate in the different activities of the Consortium. Later on, we'll talk about our first annual meeting coming up this fall in September.
Why join the Consortium? Well one of the very important benefits of joining the Consortium is access and collaboration. Access and collaboration with our many different members across the nation, access and collaboration on different programs and projects that will all be able to participate on. We'll receive access to the different resources that are available out there and answers to questions such as how do LEDs work? LEDs 101. And really tying into some of the things the GATEWAY program is doing and has been doing is really going to be helpful in that area. How do I find the right fixture for my application? And these are important questions that people are asking all over the nation and we want to be able to answer these. And then another important question is: Where are the real savings in this technology? Do they really work and do they produce a savings? Earlier in the program, we talked about access to many of the DOE programs, and Bruce will help us with more on that in just a little bit. Participation with peers is really going to be something that helps out to many of the different members. It's one thing to read a report, but to find out what our peers up the street or up the freeway are doing in another municipality is really going to be a big key to helping us as individuals understand how to best use this new technology. And also benefiting from the presentations from our peers and different individuals that we've worked with over the years or maybe new to us is going to be another benefit that will be very, very helpful. So minimize the risks and costs associated with independent efforts and let's get educated together.
So what are some of the early products to be pursued? Well first of all, we'll be looking at an inventory of member organizations' lighting systems and descriptions. How many fixtures are in the territories of your counterparts is a question that we get often. How many miles of road are in a one particular jurisdiction? These are often questions that we see some across our computer screen with surveys from other locations. We want to be able to compile this information from our member organizations in one location for you to reach out to that information to get the matrices from different organizations. We'll be looking at, like we talked earlier, a performance standard for LED street light applications. And if you take a brief look at this DOE 2010 multiyear plan, one of the things that you'll notice quickly is that in the past five years and moving forward to the next ten years, there will be many, many improvements, and there have been many improvements, to the technology that we're looking at. What that really means then is there's going to be a continued need to move forward and progressively reevaluate our standards. So it'll be one of the early deliverables and it'll be something that we'll wanting to be updating on a relatively regular basis, so another early deliverable that we will be looking to are the demonstrations to follow GATEWAY models. And so early on as we get started, please look forward to the many different demonstrations that we are going to try to undertake.
So then next, we want to turn our attention back to Bruce Kinzey and he'll give us some more information on how we can best utilize the different DOE programs and the GATEWAY program in particular to accomplish many of the goals that we have. Bruce.
Bruce Kinzey: Thanks, Ed. As I mentioned earlier, the decision to go with LEDs should be made in consideration of all the facts at one's disposal. And a common way of phrasing this is doing one's due diligence, and I think that's key to achieving a good installation and one that really generates useful results. The implementation of LED lighting technology essentially represents a shift from analog to digital in the lighting world. And just like we've seen in other areas where this transition has occurred, such as telephones or television and music, we're going to see similar fundamental changes and capabilities and operating characteristics and lifetimes and so on in this arena as well. So just like the way the telephone in your pocket has completely changed the way we communicate compared to 30 years ago and 30 years from now, the features offered by the lighted environment may be very different from what we know today.
Today, however, we're still just at the earliest stages of this transition and there are many uncertainties remaining. We need exactly the kind of field experience we're discussing today to move the technology forward, so this includes feedback to manufacturers on where things are working or they aren't or new features and capabilities that are needed in the market. It also includes sharing lessons learned with other users so that not everyone has to keep making the same mistakes or something isn't working or could be otherwise improved. It also includes maximizing the benefits we receive from implementing the technology as we get better and better at doing it right.
To achieve these things, we need careful and objective documentation of experience without faulting anyone for honest mistakes or trying to hide anything that's critical for advancing the state-of-the-art or that otherwise might harm the market if not addressed. Based on our experiences in the GATEWAY Demonstration program, which I'll discuss more in just a moment, conducting the overall process and doing it right quickly gets very complicated by all the various factors that come into play when you're designing a lighting installation or deciding what you're comparing against, measuring the actual performance of the installed systems, and then reporting on it. Mistakes in any of these areas could call really the entire effort into question.
And so just to provide a few examples here: Problems with the results of demonstrations can come from simple errors such as miscounting the number of poles or luminaires on those poles or measuring apparent power rather than real power at the pole base, in other words not taking into account power factor. Not consistently following IDS procedures for conducting the lighting measurements and many, many others. Sometimes information is incomplete and someone makes an unreasonable assumption or even a leap of faith, if you will, to get to the result. We frequently encounter missing information in the GATEWAY program such as, for example, not well documented maintenance costs that we have to make assumptions about because we just have no other choice. But I think most people probably know the difference between an assumption and what might be called a heroic assumption. Sometimes there are other drivers that come into play that lead to overstating the results, sometimes slightly and sometimes not so slightly, and these kinds of pressures can be coming from any direction, including a manufacturer or the end user or even a third party with their own agenda. Often we see results stated without knowing how they were produced or being able to tell. GATEWAY's often asked to compare our results with someone else's, but it's very difficult without knowing the underlying details. Obviously providing all the information used in an evaluation opens the study up for scrutiny and potential criticism, but that's the whole point. In our studies, we really want to provide all the information so that if you don't agree with these numbers, and you may not, go ahead and substitute your own.
Sometimes we see broad conclusions drawn from a very small sample that doesn't justify them, such as a statement about all LEDs that are based on the results of testing one product. Increasing sample sizes is part of the intent of this Consortium. To really advance the state of knowledge in this technology, we need to provide consistency, accuracy, and transparency to the best of our abilities in all of our demonstrations and evaluations, and this takes time and effort but is to be a central focus of the Consortium.
Now I want to provide just a quick introduction to the GATEWAY Solid-State Lighting Technology Demonstration Program that you've heard mentioned a few times. GATEWAY is supported through the Department of Energy Solid-State Lighting Program and its purpose is to demonstrate new state-of-the-art products and real world applications that meet the three criteria of saving energy, matching or improving illumination, and being cost effective for the user. And the reason DOE supports demonstrations is because they provide all these things we've just been talking about, performance comparisons among different products and, by the way, we strive to make these as much of apples-to-apples comparisons as possible. Operating characteristics of individual products, but also of LED products in general, and useful information of how they compare with conventional products. Validation of whether or not individual products or applications are ready for primetime and just generally advancing the state of knowledge about the technology. Some of the specific details of the overall process we follow are changing slightly with time and as we get more and more experienced with these products and may continue to changes, we implement the process and support of the Consortium just due to the basic mechanics of this organization and its membership. In general though, all GATEWAY projects involve the following seven steps, which by the way I'll note are not numbered here because they don't always necessarily occur in the defined order. Sometimes things happen simultaneously, for example.
But generally the first step is identifying the project, and in the case of the Consortium, we'll need to come up with a standard approach for identifying and selecting products to be demonstrated and also for selecting installation sites for those products. We may or may not obtain actual samples of a given product and submit it to an independent testing lab for photometric testing before proceeding on a demonstration depending on what information's already available on the product. Some of these are getting to be pretty well known. We always conduct a pre analysis by collecting as much as information as we can on the intended installation, including what's installed there currently, make and model numbers, mounting heights and spacing and so forth. In fact, site layouts or electric plans are great so that we can create a rendering of the installation on the computer and then we'll also get whatever information's available on the specific product to be installed so that we can produce side-by-side comparisons of the products under consideration with what the site has now. We also want information on costs, not only for electricity, but also what's currently spent on maintenance, if that's available, to get a pretty good idea of the economics before the project goes any further. And we'll compile all this information and put it out there for the relevant parties, all the different participants to consider, and at that point a go/no go decision is made regarding whether or not to proceed with the demonstration, and of course our result at this point are really just ballpark kinds of estimates, but at least they provide a general idea of how well the project is expected to meet the three criteria I mentioned earlier of saving energy, matching or improving illumination, and being cost effective.
The next step is forming the project team, including identifying the participants and establishing the specific details of who's going to be responsible for what and so on. We generally document all this in an informal teaming agreement, which is a non-legally binding document that just ensures everyone's on the same page with how the project is planned to proceed so that there aren't any surprises down the road.
Once the products have been delivered to the site, the installation date is scheduled. Our staff arrive at the site the day before the installation and that evening layout a measurement grid and take measurements of the existing lighting. The host site has already installed fresh lamps into the existing luminaires approximately two weeks prior to this date so by the time the measurements they've been properly seasoned and we're measuring initial lumens for use in our calculations. Then the next day, which is installation day, LED - - the LED products replace existing lighting and then that evening our staff will repeat the measurements along the same grid they used the night before to provide, again, as close to apples-to-apples measurements as possible. And also in addition to illumination measurements, we also take power readings at the base of a number of poles for - - this is both pre and post installation so that we can get a good average for each of the products. And all of these measured values at this point formed the basis of our analysis going forward or in other words evaluation is using real values rather than simulated values from this point on.
A very important aspect of the evaluation process is collecting user feedback on the illumination quality of the new lights relative to what they've replaced. The group of people queried here in a survey might consist of residents of a neighborhood or people who work in the building of a parking lot, for example, whatever's relevant for the given application. We strive to make the survey questions as neutral as possible so we're getting responses specifically about the quality of lighting and not about what the respondents think about energy efficiency or whether the city should be spending its money on these new lights or what they think about the mayor, et cetera. We get enough of those kinds of comments as it is anyway, so we like not to encourage them.
We compile all this information and conduct our analysis and ultimately document everything in a final report. This report's circulated to all the team members for review and comment prior to finalization and in the end it's posted on a public website and then discussed in presentations and articles and elsewhere. We quite widely share the results, and this would certainly be the case inside the Consortium. Again, a few of these steps may need to be slightly modified to fit the circumstances of the Consortium, but I see any demonstrations there following these same general procedures.
And then just to reiterate on a couple things I think the Consortium is going to need to resolve along these lines, it's undoubtedly the case that we will haves numerous products offered for our review in consideration. The Consortium's going to need to develop a formal process for identifying which ones it wants to pursue further, such as establishing a lighting specification that Ed talked about earlier, and DOE will definitely help with that. Similarly, we've already had a number of sites volunteer to host demonstrations and that's quite possible we'll have many more sites volunteer than we actually need, so some process is going to be need developed to equitably and to rationally choose among these whether or not it's looking at different regions and so on.
The Consortium is going to need a procedure for completing and approving products, so who needs to review and who needs to sign off, et cetera. Also there may need to be a means of resolving any conflicts or disagreements in the results should there be any. And also, there may be studies conducted outside the official auspices of the Consortium or other issues brought to their attention that they'll want to provide a formal response to. You probably don't want individual members speaking for the Consortium without first establishing what the official position is or even whether the Consortium wants to take an official position on something.
So these are just a few examples of issues that I've thought early on. I'm sure there will be plenty more to resolve as the Consortium progresses.
Okay, so now I will turn the floor back over to Ed.
Ed Smalley: Hey, great job, Bruce. Thank you very much. And you raise a number of interesting points. There are several topics and several issues that we will need to resolve as we move forward. And in particular, as we start to address some of the questions that come up by many of the different members and so we're really going to be needing to get a lot of that established before we can move on to answering some of the questions that are on the minds of many of the members. For instance, what is maintenance? What approach does one use for lumen dirt depreciation in these fixtures that have such a long life? How to provide manufacturers with constructive feedback that yields results that we can continue to work with them as partners as we move forward on our different projects and this is an important one that many have raised to me: How can controls impact lumen depreciation and energy efficiency? So there are a wide range of questions and avenues to research with this new group, and I think it's going to be incumbent upon all of us to participate, to provide feedback, and to get involved, so I really look forward to working with each and every one of you on this new Consortium. I think it's going to benefit basically all of our customers as well.
So then, what are our next steps? Well next we really want to establish one of our core groups, our executive committee, so nominate yourselves. We'll be posting an email address here after we've finished here. Nominate yourself. Nominate those who are in the industry that you know will do a good job. Keep in mind the guidelines that we laid out earlier for executive committee eligibility and let's put some names forward that we can select from and really produce a good quality executive committee for the group here. We hope to have that process completed and an announcement made by the week of May 17th.
Next, we plan on having our first annual meeting of primary and advisory members only the last week of September in the L.A. area. We'll be putting more information out as we - - or as arrangements have been solidified to make that happen, but we're hoping to make this coincide with the Street and Area Lighting Conference that will be held that last week of September, so look forward to more information about that. Please, please plan on participating. Please plan on attending that meeting. It will… We'll have lots of things that we will be doing via email and other things between now and then, but that'll be our first annual meeting, and I look forward to seeing you there. So we're going to also shoot for at least quarterly teleconferences in a general format. We'll be more than likely having the need for others in between there. But as a routine, we'll be looking for quarterly teleconferences and in this way we can all keep in touch and keep updated as to what's going on, so look forward to seeing announcements for that as we move forward as well.
So then with that, I want to turn things over to our colleague at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Jason Tuenge, and he's going to direct us through questions and answers.
Jason Tuenge: All right, thanks, Ed. We've received a number of questions, and we'll try to get as many as possible. I guess first up here we have got a question for Ed. How does this Consortium differ from the DesignLights Consortium sponsored by NEEP?
Ed Smalley: That's a good question. One of the basic missions of the DesignLights Consortium is to work directly with commercial buildings and properties and also through utilities to encourage energy efficiency. And so a large difference will be, we're actually in the private right-of-way. We're actually primarily working out on the roadways and the streets. We'll be working directly with municipalities and also with utilities as well. We very, very much welcome to have those utilities come on and thus far we've had at least 60 plus have sent in their applications, so that's encouraging. So there's - - the primary difference there again is we're working with the municipalities and on the infrastructure that they're responsible for in the public right-of-way.
Jason Tuenge: Thanks, Ed. Next up is a question for Bruce. Is this Consortium designed to address area lighting, such as parking lots and wallpacks?
Bruce Kinzey: Short answer is yes. We're looking to investigate any of the applications that might be of interest to municipalities or basically the exterior environment. That might also include parking structures, for example.
Jason Tuenge: We've got a question referring back to the draft ENERGY STAR criteria that have been kind of in limbo for a while now asking: What is the status fait of FTE? Basically right now, DOE is working with NEMA to see if a better metric can be developed. That work is ongoing. In the meantime for this application, we're really more interested in taking advantage of knowing the actual applications that we're looking at and optimizing each project on a project-by-project basis, not just relying on labels or simple metrics like efficacy. So, yep, the FTE is still kind of in limbo, but that's not going to hold us up by any means.
Jason Tuenge: Next up, we've got another question for Ed. As a representative of the Illumination Engineering Societies IES Roadway Committee, how can we work together to forward the mission of the Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium and avoid the duplication of efforts? Reason I ask is that there seems that we both have many goals in common. Ed.
Ed Smalley: That's also a good question. We definitely want to avoid too much overlap. The Consortium is not in any way designed to do the things that the IES does nor any of the subcommittees there. However, we not only welcome but encourage the participation from those that are out there that are also members of IES. Matter of fact, as we started to develop, we've - - I've sought out personally advice and direction from folks back at IES and looking for individuals that could participate on our advisory as advisory members and so we definitely would love to have folks that are heavily involved, especially with IES Roadway Committee and even the SALC folks participate here. One caveat, however, is we need to stay clear of manufacturers in that area. We love to work with manufacturers and we will be working with manufacturers as partners through these programs; however as primary and advisory members, we're trying to limit that participation directly in those two categories.
Jason Tuenge: Here we have another question that I can tackle. I hope we'll address light pollution upward during our discussion. Will we? The answer is yes. Light pollution will definitely be a consideration, I believe, for all cities, but this is not something will necessarily drive the design. Really the idea here is to get quality and quantity as needed and basically one obvious result of having up light is that that light is most likely wasted, so that kind of naturally falls into place that we will be restricting up light.
Jason Tuenge: All right, next up, we've got something for Ed. The City of Welland, Ontario, Canada, has aggressively been pursuing and implementing projects on a yearly basis utilizing LED lighting. As we are a Canadian municipality, are we still able to members of the Consortium?
Ed Smalley: Yes. The answer is definitely yes. We definitely welcome the folks up in the different municipalities in Canada and even some of the utilities have sent in applications. However, as we are using taxpayer dollars, we are not able to do demonstrations obviously in Canada or lend too much to how much - - how many resources are devoted. However, we'd like to have these folks at the table. They've done a lot of good work, and I think that that's going to be beneficial to some of the other members here in the U.S., and so participation on the executive committee is also limited to organizations in the U.S.
Jason Tuenge: Thanks, Ed. Next up for Bruce. How do manufacturers get invited as guests?
Bruce Kinzey: Okay. Another good question, of course they're all good. Manufacturers will be participating through a variety of means. Of course, we'll be demonstrating products from them so that's an obvious way, but we will also be involving - - soliciting their help in reviewing products of the Consortium before they're final. I think it'll be important to get feedback from manufacturers on things before they - - before they're finalized, and we will also be inviting them to occasionally come in and present on topics of interest to the Consortium. And so in that latter case and in most of these cases, the Consortium will be identifying the speakers on their own. A member might identify a topic of interest and maybe even have a suggestion of who might be good to come and talk about it or we might just float a question to see - - out there to see who might be interested in making a presentation and who's qualified to maybe make that presentation on a specific topic of interest. We'll probably… This is up to the Consortium to decide, but we will probably have some sort of - - at least it makes sense I think to have some sort of a list of manufacturers who basically have volunteered. They're interested in reviewing any products of the Consortium. They're interested in being considered as speakers on topics of interest and so forth. But that's something for the Consortium to decide so details on that will be available at some point probably in the near future. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: Next up, a question I can tackle. Will the Consortium address the issue of potential visibility benefits when using broad-spectrum lighting and how this might impact current recommended practices for street lighting design? This one comes up quite often and basically for now we would direct you to a position statement from IES. If you just Google IES and space PS-02-09, they basically established their current position, which in short is that research is ongoing. There are many reasons to believe that shorter wave lengths can be beneficial. They can also be problematic in other aspects. Research is ongoing, and we're going to just keep watching IES. There's nothing we're really pushing here.
So next up is one for Ed. Can you estimate what the time requirements of the executive committee members will be?
Ed Smalley: Sure. You bet. And I think we covered in our last slide there. What we're hoping to do is look at… Like we've got over 120 or plus different municipalities, along with over 60 different utilities, and these are all folks who have placed in their applications. We're going to put out some more guidelines a little bit deeper. Actually we talked about it earlier regarding getting folks fully sponsored with their cities. If you're signing up saying you represent the City of L.A. or San Francisco or Seattle, we want to make sure that, like I said earlier, that we have those officials in those cities buy off and so when we talk about selection of the executive committee, what I'm going to be looking for are folks who are nominated from locals that are fully vested into this program, and I'm going to be making those decisions based on those who are nominated by May 17th. So we hope to get a good number of folks already in the door, and I think that'll come up, I think we'll do pretty well with getting some good nominees that are strong in the industry and that have some good leadership qualities.
Jason Tuenge: All right, thanks, Ed. Now I've got one for Bruce. When do you plan to look into the standards to communicate to the Life*? There's a discussion on power line communication as part of the smart grid, but a suggestion by the Consortium would be beneficial. Bruce.
Bruce Kinzey: Yeah, thanks. Well obviously we believe that controlled systems are - - of various types are going to become an increasingly important component of street and area lighting as this technology progresses and so we fully anticipate that we'll be incorporating controlled systems of various types into our evaluations. This could happen as soon as we have a good application, a good site for installing something. However, I should note that the primary focus of this effort, the Consortium still remains on solid-state lighting, so controls are really seen as more of an ancillary-type system, but yet a very important contributor and obviously is going to play a huge role in the future. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: Okay. I've got one for Ed here. We'd like to know more about what advice you have with dealing with a public utility commission and energy providers to better ascertain how rates are assigned. In our community, this seems to be the primary obstacle with regard to determining next steps.
Ed Smalley: That's a good question because I've heard that from many different municipalities. We're… The Consortium is not here to challenge what the different utilities are doing. However, I believe… And so I don't have a direct answer to that. I don't have a direct piece of advice. However, I would say that because of the way we're going to be organized and the amount of communication that each of you will have with the different members, I believe you can develop a strategy for how you want to handle that in your own territory by looking at the different models that are developed by others. So I don't have a direct answer for that, but I do know that it is a question that many, many, many have asked me and my only hope is that we can get some of you folks in the same room, you can find out what the other models are, and we can go from there.
Jason Tuenge: Okay, thanks, Ed. One for Bruce here. Is there going to be a website that consumers can access to see the right application for them?
Bruce Kinzey: I think that question… I think what it's asking is about the right product for their application. Of course, we're mainly focusing on street lighting applications. It's a very complex issue, as I said, even the design process, even selecting specific products, sometimes a product is a great product, but it's not suitable for the given application. You may go with something else and so it's very hard to develop this sort of a generic table or something like that where somebody can just go and say, "Okay." Or even a given product from a given manufacturer who has proven that their products performed very well and so forth, may not be the best selection for a specific application, so it really… We probably… We will not be maintaining an approved list, I guess if that's the question. We won't have something like that, you can just go to the list and pick a product off that table and use it and be confident that it's going to be a homerun for your situation and that's just due to the simple complexities I think in doing something like that. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: Another one for you, Bruce. Will induction technology be evaluated?
Bruce Kinzey: Again, the primary focus of the Consortium is on solid-state lighting. DOE is mandated by a congressional act to focus on solid-state lighting. We have done some and actually are in the process right now of doing some comparisons between and looking at more as we speak, some comparisons between LED technology and induction technology. We may do some side-by-side types of evaluations like that in the future. If it's determined by the Consortium members that they want to do this kind of an evaluation, they want to take a look at some products side-by-side, we're open to that. We won't be doing exclusively induction projects however. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: Okay. One for Ed here. A little bit lengthy, so bear with me. Among the sharing information, will members be able to see the simulation results, actual measurement data, and roadway characteristics from other members? We know CALiPER program already tested few street lights to verify the published data of manufacturers. We also know the GATEWAY program and City of L.A. also published the demonstration reports recently from several blogs. We also know the reaction from residents of City of Seattle on LED street lights. What are the main topics that the members should be shared? Will there be any specific reports released to people outside the Consortium or people must join or get invited in order to see the shared information? Since a lot of traffic signal lights already converted to LED as light source, when do we expect 50 to 70% of street lights converted to LED as a light source? Will Consortium recommend the suitable manufacturers for specific applications? I did give you a chance to read this a little bit earlier, Ed, but understandably you probably can't hit all these questions at once.
Ed Smalley: We've got a couple of questions in there, and I'll try to hit the first one here about publicizing the information. That's why we actually one of the main reasons for developing the Consortium is to not only share this information with those who are in the room while we have our meetings, but also to publicize it because not everybody's going to be able to make the meetings. But the… What we want to obviously before we publicize is, like I pointed out earlier, we want to make sure all of this is thoroughly vetted, that we've checked in with all of our team members who will include obviously manufacturers before we get this up on our website for publishing. So that I believe was the first question. So we will be publicizing the different roadway characteristics, the type of information - - the before and after roadway characteristics and as well as other information regarding maintenance practices for that particular demonstration site, and there are a number of other things that we've been talking about that we want to do with testing fixtures in the - - in a controlled environment prior to putting them onto a public roadway, et cetera, and again using some consistency with this. So there's a couple of comments regarding the different community feedback from different websites, and that's going to continue to happen obviously.
So let me see here if I can… There was one question in here about when we will be expecting 50 to 75% of the street lights to be converted. That's basically a pretty good question because we've seen this 30 years ago with mercury vapor and high pressure sodium. We've seen it 30 years prior to that with the going to the mercury vapor from the incandescent and so over the next five years, I anticipate that we're going to see a large number of municipalities across the nation pull the trigger in one way or the other or make some serious decisions. Now do I… I don't have any hard numbers on this, but I think we can start. We will over the next five years, even over the next 12 months, we're going to see a lot pull the trigger. But over the next five years, I think we're going to know exactly what the majority are going to be doing.
Jason Tuenge: Okay thanks, Ed. Got a quick one for Bruce. Match or improve illumination, this needs clarification.
Bruce Kinzey: Okay, that's another good question, and again it's a simple question with a very complex answer. It's not so much the case I think in street lighting. But sometimes in parking lots and other applications, the typical approach is to overlight compared to what's recommended by IES and basically that's our starting point. We always want to look at what are the recommended illumination levels from IES and then look at what's there. In some cases, actually in many cases, we have found in the GATEWAY program when somebody has approached us and said they want to investigate the use of LED lights, we will go out and look at their proposed location and find that even the current lighting does not meet the IES recommended levels, and so this is a really tough question. Like how… Are we matching or are we improving? Well if we can say, "bring a site that's noncompliant, say that's not meeting those required - - those recommendations, if we can bring that into meeting them, then we've obviously improved the illumination." But in other cases, we might be looking at reducing illumination levels because according to the recommendations, the site is considerably over lighted, and we've seen this in a number of situations too. So we might be saying it's better to - - we recognize that we'll be reducing illumination levels some, but we're honing them down to what is determined to be the appropriate lighting level, so I don't know if that - - I hope that provided enough answer to that question, but we can follow-up with that later again if that needs further clarification. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: Okay. I've got one here for Ed. Will there be different groups - parking lot lighting, street lighting, and ornamental - or will this cover all lighting? Ed, we can't hear you. You might still be muted.
Ed Smalley: Okay, I guess I was. I was unmuted before and now I'm back. Okay. Well probably since you didn't hear the first part of that answer, I'll start all over. We will be looking at street and area lighting. We'll be looking at what municipalities typically have the purview of and a lot of times also the utilities. We won't be getting into parking garage lighting. That we've covered on one of the - - on a previous deal we programmed, but we will be looking at the different areas - parks and parking lots adjacent to parks and also roadways, so basically the street and area lighting that you typically handle from a municipality perspective.
Jason Tuenge: Okay, we've got a question here that I can probably tackle. Can standards developed through this Consortium be officially adopted by organizations or do they need approval from IES, ANSI*, et cetera? Basically the way this works is IES publishes recommended practices. These are not made law until they're made law by some local jurisdiction. No city has to meet IES recommended light levels. So basically any set of criteria established by any city or say by the Consortium, that's something that most likely should meet IES recommendations in general, but doesn't really have to. It just becomes more of an issue of potential liability, and it's certainly a lot easier to defend yourself if you do meet IES recommendations. ANSI is really just a process of creating and maintaining standards, not so much them actually enforcing anything or creating anything themselves. So I think that'll pretty well settle that question.
Next one. How many demos are you anticipating you'll be able to do per year? I might toss that one at Bruce.
Bruce Kinzey: Good question. I don't know. I guess we're anticipating a lot of help from the individual location, so it's not, again, and we've touched on this many times, we're expecting a lot of assistance from local people. Depending on how much assistance we can get in doing this, we can do more demonstrations. I would expect that, and I guess another aspect of this is that we may decide that for one particular product, we don't want to just demonstrate it. We don't want to take a look at it in just one location. We may pick five or six or eight locations around the country because we want to look at its performance say in different ambient environments, for example, or for some other reason, and so we might be doing multiple locations that we're calling one demonstration. So I can't give you an exact answer there, but I would expect that we might be able to do something on the order of half a dozen to ten projects maybe in a given year that would include projects that had multiple locations, maybe we can do more than that if - - depending on how much assistance we can rely on the local members. Thanks.
Jason Tuenge: And now we're definitely answering questions real time, so you'll probably hear some hemming and hawing from each of us. Question for Ed. Ed, we have a project that is underway now with research parameters just in development and fixtures installed over the next month. How can we solicit advice/direction from you and Bruce sooner rather than later?
Ed Smalley: So I guess if your project's in either Fiji, Hawaii, I don't know Guam, we can probably get to those this weekend. But for the rest of them, shoot us an email and let's discuss your project and see where you are and let's see what type of advice or direction we can help with, and it just may be that we've looked at a similar application in the past or it might be - - may be one of the first demonstrations that we take a very quick look at. But let's take a look at your project, see what the parameters are and we'll go from there.
Bruce, actually before we finish off on that, Jason, let's see if Bruce has any thoughts on that as well.
Bruce Kinzey: In general, we like to get - - the GATEWAY program likes to get involved at the outset of the project just so that we're involved in - - we're assured that all things are being considered when the decision is made to select a product. Sometimes it's not infrequently when we get pulled in sort of at the tail end of a project, we'll discover an error or something. I mentioned - - gave some examples earlier. Sometimes there will be issues that we say, "Well the decision might've been different had we had this other information available at the time or something, so we do do that frequently though. We do… We are asked to come in after the fact occasionally and take a look at the project as it's going forward and basically make some recommendations and so on, and we can do that. And I think the best approach on an individual basis, as just as Ed suggested, go ahead and send us your information, especially if you've got any specific questions or things like that that we might be able to answer. Obviously we don't want to do a full blown type of pre analysis that might say, "Stop what you're doing." I don't think probably the host site is interested in that nor any of the other participants, but we'll do what we can in the timeframe available.
Ed Smalley: And I just checked, Fiji is actually not in this territory, so we have to scratch that one.
Jason Tuenge: Okay. I've got another one here for Ed, should be a pretty easy one. What type of organization is Seattle City Light?
Ed Smalley: So Seattle City Light is a municipally owned utility. We're owned by the City of Seattle. We have about eight or nine dams across the State of Washington and partially into Canada and so we own about 84,000 street lights over seven cities that the utility serves.
Jason Tuenge: Okay. I'm trying to catch up with some of these questions now. A lot came in at the end, trying to avoid repeating questions basically, so bear with me for a second. I just don't even understand, sorry. How can engineering consultants provide engineering of lighting systems on behalf of municipalities, be a participant in the process? I can probably throw that one to either one of you. You'll probably both want to comment, so maybe Ed first.
Ed Smalley: Sure. One of the primary or one of the designs that we've had laid out here is a lot of the engineering consultants and the different manufacturers, they'll be working not - - just earlier Bruce had mentioned, we'll be taking a look at maybe a list of those who want to participate with manufacturers, but we also want to make - - let them work hand-in-hand with their municipality and we'd like to see that program come to us as one of our demonstrations and with those partners, those partners being the manufacturers. Those partners being the engineering consultants. So while the tool here is primarily for the municipalities, we recognize that they're going to have partners on their team and that is one of the larger ways these consultants will be able to participate.
Bruce Kinzey: Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing I was going to say. A particular municipality may have a consultant that they like working with, for example, and so they want to have them involved in a project that takes place in their location and that's fine. We wouldn't have any issue with that.
Jason Tuenge: Okay, we're actually starting to run out of questions here. I've got another one which effectively counters an earlier email basically alluding to a tug-of-war between the pros and cons, at least potential pros and cons, of different types of sources and different spectral content, so right now there's a lot of research ongoing into what advantages you might get from additional blue content and what kind of negative impacts you may have from higher blue content and some sources. And this question that just came in, if I can find it again, there we go: Can you comment on the environmental impacts of 6,000 K and higher LEDs on animals, insects, and humans? And so basically research is ongoing. DOE is very interested and active in these areas, basically currently serving to kind of bring researchers together, not so much actually conducting research itself. We're leaving this to the experts, but trying to facilitate these discussions just like we are with discussions of the emerging technology in general. So basically right now, the general advice is to evaluate projects on a case-by-case basis in terms of your own requirements for light levels, optimal spacing, optimal product, and the same goes for surrounding wildlife and any other considerations. You may find in some cases, a particular species has certain needs and from what we've seen this varies widely, so blanket statements really just don't work. So we're watching this with great interest. But at this time, there's really nothing conclusive to work from, and this is reflected in IES recommendations.
Let's see if I can find any more questions. A lot of these are just repeats of previous questions. I'm not sure if we really answered this one before. I can throw this at Ed. Will Consortium meetings be open to nonmembers?
Ed Smalley: Right. Yeah, these won't be open meetings. There's a reason for that. We want to make sure that the members feel comfortable about what's going on and that they have… One of the things that happens when you open up a meeting is we have some competing agenda - - not - - I guess I can say agendas, be straightforward, there's some competing agendas that really take the conversation and the discussion in different directions they can fly off onto a tangent. So we want to make sure that the consortium meetings are - - they're meant for members. There will be invited guests to these meetings that, as Bruce pointed out, will giving presentations of various kinds. These invites may be that a member has - - like we had pointed out, has a project they're working on and we really want a manufacturer or a consultant or someone else to come in and give us a presentation of some sort. So we want to make sure that the environment is set so that we can get the best productivity. One of the things that we have to recognize is the economy that we're in, the economy that our different members are facing, especially the municipalities with the budgets are very tight. We want to get the most out of these meetings as we possibly can and so therefore we're going to really try to hold onto a very tight agenda.
Jason Tuenge: I have another one that's similar to an earlier question. Do you see the Consortium coordinating efforts with the International Association of Lighting Designers or seeking IALD member participation on committees? So this analogous to the earlier one regarding IES coordination or coordination with IES. I can probably direct this one over to Bruce.
Bruce Kinzey: I'm sorry, okay, that one, I was anticipating you were sending that one to Ed. So are we going to coordinate with IALD and other, that's the question?
Jason Tuenge: Yes.
Bruce Kinzey: Yeah, I think… I mean I guess well taking that organization as the example, IALD, that's one of the exact organizations I had in mind when we were talking about what are the different kinds of membership categories, and we thought of advisor - - advisory-type members. Actually I was thinking that someone like IALD might want to join, so we do see them playing a very important role and hope - - very much hope that those people will participate in the Consortium.
Jason Tuenge: We still got some questions trickling in, so I'm trying to keep up with them here. Oops, that was just a comment, okay. Okay, I'll throw this one out. I'm not sure if we've already answered this. Have you yet to send applications for primary membership, executives of the committees, et cetera? And probably direct that one to Ed.
Ed Smalley: So far we have received from our website over 350 applications for primary and advisory members. As far as the executive goes, we have a few names that have been submitted/nominated and we're looking for those who would typically fall in our primary category to be nominated further.
Bruce Kinzey: I think, Ed, we're also looking for maybe - - do you think on the order of maybe eight or ten or something about that many people on the executive committee, that many slots to fill?
Ed Smalley: Exactly. The executive committee is - - what we're looking for is a really deep breadth of understanding of the industry that we're in. We're actually… We're also looking for these folks to come from all over the country and so eight probably is where we're going to top out, but possibly ten, and I've actually put out feelers myself to different organizations speaking with individuals and trying to find out: Okay, how do we make this as effective a group as possible to help us get off the ground as quickly as we can? But, yes, you're right, about eight to ten people.
Jason Tuenge: Here's one for Bruce. Will replacement strategies be developed by the Consortium, for instance, group replacement geographically versus replacement by age of existing or perhaps existing lamp type?
Bruce Kinzey: To me that seems like that's really going to be up the site who's implementing the LEDs. I mean they have - - they're going to have their own approach. They may decide: Well we've got the funding to basically start replacing these. I know some locations now replace lights as they burn out. They'll just go in and replace the conventional fixture with an LED fixture. Other ones, for example the City of Los Angeles, is replacing about a thousand lights, a thousand street lights a week right now is what I believe Ed Ebrahimian told us a few weeks ago and so they're basically doing a group re-lamping schedule there across the whole part of the city that's being re-lamped. I think that's really going to be up to the individual municipality or utility or owner of those street lights to make that kind of decision.
Ed Smalley: I would add simply that when we talk about strategies, again, another reason for the Consortium is you're going to find that some of your colleagues have already thought about some of these things and some haven't. But just getting folks into the room together, it's going to generate the type of conversation that will help us to see what the different models are. EG3, the IES guideline, talks obviously about the spot and the group replacement of lamping fixtures, but those strategies obviously can be applied to group replacements of fixtures as well. So as we start developing the different performance standards and specifications, obviously that's going to be part of the conversation; and while we may not get specifically deep into specifics of some areas, in other areas we will and so let's get folks together and see which direction we want to take this.
Jason Tuenge: I've got one I think for Ed. I represent a manufacturer from Asia. Considering the Buy America provisions of the ARRA*, will Asian manufacturers get to submit products for review?
Ed Smalley: Actually I'm probably going to pass that one over to Bruce. There are some specific guidelines with the Buy America provision and, Bruce, I think we chatted earlier about this and I think the answer a pretty good thought process on that. Maybe you can share that with us.
Bruce Kinzey: Yeah, definitely the products that we will be considering through the Consortium will have to meet Buy American types of - - the restrictions. And in fact, we haven't added to this our website yet, but there will be within the next week or two will have a fairly simple submission process that's posted up on the website that will say "If you want your products to be considered for use - - for demonstration by the Consortium, please follow these few steps and provide the requested paperwork." And assuming everything's in order, they'll just go into basically a product database that from that point forward, the products will be considered for their use. One of those requirements will be eligibility under the Buy American Act and that's another fairly complicated - - nothing seems simple with this technology, that's another fairly complicated set of requirements, which we will probably just provide a link to the original source document because there are some - - for example, there are waivers and things like that that are really better explained or better left to the organization that's established those requirements to answer.
Jason Tuenge: Bruce. Got a question for Ed. What kind of financial commitment is anticipated for primary and/or executive committee members?
Ed Smalley: And that's a good question because, as we pointed out earlier, another reason for wanting these folks to have buy-in from their organizations is because we really want to meet on a regular basis. We really want to have… We're going to have quarterly teleconferences, et cetera. But you know what, we're going to be getting out into the field and we're also going to be making some decisions. If our executive members are able to participate and set aside that time and even occasionally travel for meetings, that's important to us. So while we… That's the type of commitment we're looking for. And if I said this would be two to three times a year, that's a good guess for now, but - - and also we're going to be having our annual meeting in September after the SALC, the IES Street and Area Lighting Conference as well. We're trying to tie that into together with IES. But these are the types of financial commitments we're really talking about. In addition to that, because of the locals of the different individuals, they'll also be able to work in the different regions with the different cities in those regions and be able to even hold a few smaller meetings and gatherings. So we're looking for a real good time commitment, and as far as a financial commitment, we're looking talk about an investment in these individuals in travel.
Jason Tuenge: Okay with that, I think we're down really to one last question asking for an email address that they can use to send any questions in the meantime, so I don't know if one of you wants to explain or if it was actually given in one of the slides an email address or just a website which will contain a link to that email address. I guess either one of you can take that.
Ed Smalley: Sure I can take that. We do have an email address set up for general questions - msslc, that's for Municipal Solid-State Street Lighting Consortium, @seattle.gov, so firstname.lastname@example.org. And we'll make sure that that gets posted on the website as well. Currently when folks have filled out their applications, that's where those have gone as well.
Bruce Kinzey: And let me add that the DOE website will always have - - the Solid-State Lighting website supported by DOE will always have links to all of this information. The address for that was on the very first slide of this presentation and so any time if you lose everything else, all you need to do is go to the DOE website and you'll be able to find your way from there.
Ed Smalley: And it's also on the slide that's on your screen right now.
Jason Tuenge: Okay and we are now out of time. There was one last question, which offers a good closing, and that's: Are we going to be able to get a copy of these questions and answers? And yes, that should be available or will be available online and the video file, which will be quite large. We might also be providing a written transcript. I'm not sure about that offhand.
With that, I'm going to close up and hand it off. Thank you all for attending.
Terry Shoemaker: Thank you for participating in today's webcast brought to you by the U.S. Department of Energy. You may all disconnect.