U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Office – Information Resources
Text-Alternative Version: DOE Five Year Commercialization Support Plan
Below is the text-alternative version of the DOE Five Year Commercialization Support Plan webcast.
Speaker: I'm going to give you an overview of the Department of Energy's five year solid-state lighting commercialization support plan. This plan addresses a range of activities that the Department of Energy has planned for helping to commercialize solid-state lighting, and it is important to note that this plan is a strategic part of the Department of Energy's overall effort to bring solid-state lighting to market. The DOE for a number of years has made a major investment in helping to develop the technology. They've worked with universities and companies in this industry to develop and improve the technology upon which this lighting is based. And so this plan addresses the programs and projects that are going to be implemented by the Department of Energy to help bring this technology into the market, specifically into the general illumination market.
The plan is very much influenced by a study that was done on the market introduction of compact fluorescent lamps in the United States. The study is entitled "Compact Fluorescent Lighting in America: Lessons Learned on the Way to Market." And that was prepared for the Department of Energy by our laboratory with Linda Sandahl being the lead author. It was recently completed in June of '06. It is available on the Web. You can see it there on your slide if you want to download a copy of it. Now, this study took a look back at the entire market introduction, experience of CFLs and even looked back prior to compact fluorescent lamps. It looked all the way back to fluorescent lamps. And as maybe many of you know, the early days of fluorescent lamps were not in the best phase for fluorescent lamps. They had rather quickly developed a reputation for poor lighting quality. They tended to have a green tint in the light they produced, and that was due to the use of halophosphors in those lamps so they rather quickly gained a reputation for producing harsh, unattractive light, and that reputation hung on. Even though fluorescent lighting—and I am speaking primarily right now about the fluorescent lighting that comes from linear tubes.
That lighting has retained much of its earlier reputation despite being greatly improved. The fluorescent lighting that we use in our offices and buildings now is much better than the products that were introduced in the market many years ago, but much of the early reputation for CFLs and an indication as to how persistent that reputation is you can do a simple experiment like I did, which is to get on your computer and do a Web search for the term harsh fluorescent lighting, and you will see a very large number of hits pop up. It seems that in American culture that the words harsh and fluorescent go together almost all of the time. You probably see it in newspapers as well, when reporters refer to harsh fluorescent lighting. I've got a quote from a recent Google search that I did just I think it illustrates how that term is often used to connote some kind of negative environment. It is quoted as a "harsh fluorescent lightning linoleum floors and regular plaster walls are not ideal surroundings for a neonatal intensive care unit." So obviously the author of this line is trying to create the impression to the reader that fluorescent lighting contributes to the negative surroundings for the neonatal intensive care units.
So I spoke just to the last slide about the lighting quality associated with the first fluorescent products, the linear tube fluorescent products that were introduced but when CFLs were brought into the market back in the '80s. They generated initially a very negative reputation. It extended beyond the color quality that was produced by the light. They were known to be too big, too heavy. They caused floor lamps to tip over, given that they used large electromagnetic ballasts. They created a lot of buzz and flicker that disturbed people sitting near the lamps. They had rather poor cold weather performance. As I mentioned, like their predecessors, the linear tubes, they produced poor quality light and they were very expensive. You see some photos there of a range of these products. So people experimented with these products, and by and large, most people who did experiment with these early products didn't like them for the long list of reasons that you see here in the slide.
So that early experience, that early reputation, carried over and stuck with those products for many years and damaged the market for those products for many, many years, long after those products were greatly improved by the manufacturers. So it is a key take-away experience from the CFLs that we want to be mindful of with regard to the market introduction of the solid-state lighting. We want to carry many of the lessons that can be learned from that experience over to solid-state lighting. I am not going to go through all of the lessons that are identified in this report by Linda Sandahl. You can see the many lessons that are in there by downloading the report. But we picked up on many of these lessons in helping develop this new strategic plan for solid-state lighting commercialization support.
Now I am going to quickly introduce you to the overview of the plan, and then after this I will go through some of the elements of the plan to give you more information on what those elements contain. But first of all, with regard to the purpose of this plan, it spans a five-year period from FY'08 to FY'12 and it applies only to general illumination solid-state lighting luminaries. It does not apply to lighting products that are intended for indications for example, traffic lights or any kind of signage. It is meant for products that provide general illumination. And there are three purposes. They are all related. The first of which is the activities covered by the plan attempts to affect the types of products that are adopted by the market. It addresses the efforts to accelerate the commercial adoption of those products and then last it provides supports for applications that maximize energy savings. Those are the three separate but related purposes of this plan.
There are multiple goals addressed by the plan. As you see here, the goals that are established for the last year in the plan, fiscal year 2012 and the goals are broken into three main categories: the products brought to market, market adoption, and energy savings. Those categories parallel the purposes of the plan that you saw in the previous slide. Now with regards to products brought to market, here we have some very specific goals, and those goals are broken into two separate categories, those which applies to warm white products and those which applies cool white products. So of course, when I am referring to warm white products I am referring to the type of light produced by LEDs. So for those LEDs that produce warm hued light, we have a set of three goals that we are hoping to see are brought to market partly as a result of the efforts carried out by the DOE products that achieve 68 lumen per watts, luminaire efficacy. I want to emphasize that this is a measure of luminaire efficacy and not system efficacy for lamp efficacy measures that you might be more familiar with. So with regards to luminaire efficacy, we are talking about the total light out of a fixture divided by the total power into that fixture.
So in addition to a 68 luminous per watt luminaire efficacy bulb, DOE would like to see this specific product achieve a color quality measured via the color rendering index of at least 85 or better or in the event that revised color quality metric is adopted and there is one under development by METS. We would switch to a new metric. But so long as CRI is the metric that is being used by the industry, we will use that, as well. We are hoping to see this product achieve its CRI of at least 85. And then, last within this group of warm white products, we would like to see these products have a correlated color temperature of 3500 Kelvin or less. Now similarly we have a set of goals for cool white products. The luminaire efficacy goal is higher and the reason is because it is easier to design products with higher efficacy that produce cool light. So we have a much more aggressive luminaire efficacy goal. This 88 luminous per watt luminaire efficacy is a very high efficacy relative to fluorescent products. For example, that is 88 luminous per watt luminaire efficacy will outperform just about any fluorescent system available in the market today.
I didn't mention back on the warm white products that the 68 luminous per watt luminaire efficacy also will outperform by far the majority of the fluorescent products that are available on the market today. I include in that all the high-end linear fluorescent products that are out there. A second goal that we have under the cool white products category is achieving a CRI of 70 or better. As you know, that number is lower than the goal under the warm white products; it is just partly because the technology for cool white products is such that it is harder to achieve the higher color rendering that it is possible with the warmer light products so we have a lower CRI goal there. And then it is consistent with this being the cool white product category, we allow much higher color temperatures so we allow up to 6500 correlated color temperature in this goal category as you can see.
Moving on to the second set of goals under market adoption, we are hoping that via this plan that we can induce the sale up to one million solid-state lighting luminaries per year, one million high-performance units, and the surrogate definition that we are using for hydro performance units is meeting ENERGY STAR requirements so that is our market adoption goals. And then last, we are hoping to achieve energy savings through these efforts of 230 gigawatt hours per year by the year 2012. We were also explicit about the market barriers that this plan is intended to address, and we have a short list here. We have not addressed technical barriers. Those barriers are separately addressed in DOE's R&D planning and R&D projects so we are only looking at market barriers here. And we believe that three primary market barriers faced by general illuminations solid-state lighting luminaires are their high cost relative to conventional lighting products, the lack of industry standards and test procedures for solid-state lighting general illumination products. And then last, lack of information in the marketplace by almost all parts of the market by the users, by the producers, by design professionals, there is generally a widespread lack of information about this new technology. That is not to say that those segments of the market are not trying to learn about this product, this technology. It is just that it is new. It is radically different. It is going to require a lot of new learning to understand what the limitations of this technology are. What its advantages are. How it can be properly applied and a lot of the old rules of thumb that were used with other technologies, other lighting technologies will not be able to be used with this technology, so there is a lot that this industry needs to learn for successful productive application of solid-state lighting.
So those are three market barriers addressed by this plan. Now parallel to those barriers, we've developed a set of market needs that we believe help address those barriers. And this list of market needs was developed after rather extensive conversations with a number of people in this market that are interested in participating in the solid fit markets. The first market need is do we believe that the market needs an effective set of product purchasing and architectural design guidance so buyers need help in being led to good products that they are going to be satisfied with. And lighting designers need good guidance to help them successfully apply this technology in their businesses. Another major market need is the need for illustrations for state-of-the-art products and lighting designs. People tracking this technology know that it is rapidly changing, and we believe that we need examples of the state-of-the-art to show people where this technology is going. It is a not a static technology. It is important to show people that what they learn about the technology for its applications today won't necessarily instruct on the advantages or disadvantages of the technology next year. And we think it is very important to get good illustrations of the state-of-the-art into the marketplace so that people understand where the technology is going and understand how quickly it is heading there.
Third, DOE believes highly visible examples of model solid-state lighting applications are needed, so this is basically demonstration projects. We need some examples of good applications using the current state of the technology, good applications of these products so people can understand how to successfully apply this technology today. Another major market need is for independent performance test results on commercial products. Given the lack of standardized test procedures, a little bit of the Wild West has prevailed out there in the solid-state lighting world. Some manufacturers have exaggerated the performance of their products, and the consequence there is a little bit of confusion over how well these products actually perform. So we would ideally like to see some independent, objective-type quality test results introduced into this market to help guide buyers and users of these products to good performing products. Another major market need is for objective technical information from a credible source. Given that it is a new market and given that the sort of plans that are being made as I described, it is important that there is good technical information available from a source such as the Department of Energy that is perceived as objective and reliable. Another major market need is for the industry standards and test procedures that will support the development of the general illumination market for solid fit lighting. By and large, these standards and test procedures don't exist today. They are under development. The Department of Energy is involved in their development but they don't yet exist. This is a major market need for the development of this market.
And then last, DOE believes that there is a market need for coordination of the current and the rapidly growing efforts to help introduce solid-state lightning into the general illumination market. There will be many organizations stepping into this deal to help establish this technology, and DOE believes that it is important to help provide coordination among these many local, regional, and federal activities that will be underway. So I now have a brief outline of the major strategic elements of the solid-state lighting plan and I will follow this outline with a little more description of what is in each of these elements. So very quickly, you see the major elements are buyer guidance, design competitions, technology demonstrations linked to follow up procurement, commercial product testing, technical information, standards and test procedures support, and last coordination and leadership. So these elements flow from the market needs that were discussed in the previous slides.
Now, going into more detail on each of these strategy elements. So first, the buyer guidance, the primary element under the buyer guidance is ENERGY STAR. The department has been busy developing ENERGY STAR criteria for solid-state lighting general illumination luminaires since the fall of 2006. These criteria apply to general illumination products only. They do not apply to products intended for indication. Further, they apply to both residential and commercial lighting products. And DOE hopes that these criteria will provide some early market presence, some early guidance to help lead buyers to higher performing products. DOE's issued its first draft of these criteria in December of '06. There was a follow-up workshop in Washington, D.C., in February of 2007 that workshop was then followed by a second draft to which DOE received a very wide range of comments and very useful advice. Those comments and advice have been incorporated into the final specifications. So I now have just a brief explanation for why DOE's decided that it was a good time to develop the ENERGY STAR criteria for these products even though these products are still relatively in their early stages of development.
As noted here on this slide, we observed many new products entering into the market and that a number of those products were being sold with rather exaggerated claims for performance, at least it appeared that their performance were greatly exaggerated. We saw claims from some manufacturers saying that their products last a million hours and claims that is by far the most efficient lighting choice available. And DOE's purchased a number of these products, tested them and found that their performance fell far short of what these manufacturers were claiming. So we worried that the image was being done to this market in the same way that those early CFLs damaged the market. We worried that early buyers of these products were going to be disappointed. That they were going to share their disappointment with their friends and family and that news would cascade through the market, potentially spoiling the market for a very long time and greatly slowing the future growth of these products. So this is the place where we applied some of the lessons learned from the CFL market introduction experience and decided that DOE needed to develop some ENERGY STAR specifications to help guide buyers to higher-performing products that they are more likely to be satisfied with than they would otherwise be.
I have just a brief example of the kind of performance exaggeration that I was referring to. There is one manufacturer who is producing it, Downlight, and they claimed the product was performing at 40 luminous per watt. They didn't say whether that was a measure of luminous efficacy or whether it was system efficacy. There is all of these different ways of measuring, but the manufacturer just left it open, and I am sure assumed that the buyers were going to interpret this 40 luminous per watt to be similar to numbers that they had seen before on fluorescent products, so they assumed that this is going to be a relatively high-performing product. DOE's measured this product and found that it was producing only 13 luminous per watt and producing on 193 luminous. Now that efficacy is less than half the efficacy of a typical CFL downlight. Now we are measuring luminaire efficacy here so it is total luminous out of the fixture divided by total power into the system. This particular product performed at half the efficacy of a typical CFL downlight and perhaps even more importantly it produced only a third of the light that the typical CFL downlight produced, so we worry that, that sort of product might cause a negative buyer reaction that would then cascade through the market, spoiling this market for a long period of time.
Despite the negative spin that I just gave you on the market with these kinds of products that can damage the market, DOE is also aware that many new much higher-performing products are coming into the market. As I mentioned at the beginning of the presentation, DOE has been very active in research and development for this technology, so it is well-aware of the future potential for these products. And then, we coupled that knowledge with the announcements from a number of major manufacturers indicating that some much, much higher-performing products were moving into the marketplace. And so the combination here is that we have some products that have what appear to be highly exaggerated claims associated with them. And having the potential to damage the market, and we have great future promise and so DOE believes that it would be very useful and very influential in the market to get this respected influential brand into the marketplace, in this part of the marketplace, to help guide buyers to products that they would be more likely to be satisfied with to head off this early market spoilage that we saw with CFLs.
The second element under buyer guidance strategic element of the plan is design guidance. The Department of Energy is working with the IES of North America to develop some early design guidance for lighting designers that introduce them to some of the unique properties of solid-state lighting and help them improve the design that they are using for these early products that they introduce into the market. This project is currently underway. The second major strategic element of the plan is design competition. As many of you listening may be well familiar with the Department of Energy has been active with the American Lighting Association and Consortium of Energy Efficiency in a design competition known as Lighting for Tomorrow for a number of years. That competition was only recently expanded to include solid-state lighting products. And so DOE plans to continue its participation and collaboration with these organizations and running Lighting for Tomorrow, and DOE in particular will be focusing its efforts on the solid-state lighting elements of that plan. This design competition uses expert judges to review the submittals and then selects winners, and then we take the winning products and try to promote them heavily throughout the lighting market and draw attention to products that we think represent the better and higher performing among these products. And we are doing that because we want to increase the likelihood that buyers of these products will be satisfied with what they buy. And then we also want the market to see what can be done with solid-state lighting. We want them to see that it can be incorporated into various attractive fixtures that provide high-quality lighting services.
In addition to the existing design competition for the existing Lighting for Tomorrow design competition, DOE is planning to develop a design competition for commercial illuminators. Now I should point out that the Lighting for Tomorrow competition applies only to residential fixtures, so this new design competition will be addressing commercial illumination. It is likely to be similar in style and in structure, but it is going to be aimed at commercial luminaries. In addition to that, DOE is considering the creation of a future solid-state lighting architectural design competition so this design competition will not apply to lighting products, the fixtures, but to the designs that are created by a lighting designer in the spaces that they like.
Both of these competitions are being discussed actively now with the idea the IDS'. The third strategic element of this plan is technology demonstrations and procurements. The purpose of these demonstrations are to demonstrate advance technologies in illumination applications to improve the visibility of this technology and improve the understanding of those involved in this technology so they understand where it can be productively applied, where it can provide high-quality lighting services so that their users end up being satisfied with the products. We are closely linking these demonstrations with follow-up procurement activity. We don't want to leave these demonstrations with just a report on the shelf. We would like to see some significant market activity, and so we are looking for partners who are committed to following up successful demonstrations with significant purchases of these products.
We have two types of demos planned, both market readiness demos and field testing demos. The only difference between the two is that the market readiness demos are aimed at products that are deemed via the evaluation an expert review to be ready for some significant follow purchase. In other words, there is nothing radically different about these products relative to previous or current state-of-the-art technology for solid fit lighting. The second sets of demos are going to be aimed at products that have features that are novel and haven't been tested in the field yet. And so there are two types of demos; the only difference is basically the state of the technology, the state of the market readiness of these technologies. We've already started the first round of technology demonstrations. We issued an invitation to manufacturers soliciting their participating in March. We have been talking to a wide range of potential hosts including a large number of federal agencies that have expressed strong interest in participating, as well as quite a number of electric utilities and efficiency organizations. We have this underway, and so we are likely to have products installed in the field, operating in these demonstrations in the summer of 2007 and we anticipate another round of these demonstrations beginning before the end of this fiscal year.
Another major element of the plan is the commercial product testing, and within this product testing the testing is aimed primarily at. I shouldn't say primarily but exclusively at luminaires that produce white light. We are looking at both indoor and outdoor luminaires, and both luminaires intended for the residential market as well as those in the commercial market. We are testing for a wide range of performance attributes of these products. You can see it listed there on your screen, so there are various other color quality measures, flex measures, measures that allow us to calculate the efficacy of these products. Now, moving onto the fifth strategic element of the plan, technical information. The department plans to develop a number of materials that will help people in this marketplace understand the new technology, understand how it is different from the technologies that have come before it, understand its weaknesses and its strengths. You can see on this screen some examples of some of the early products that have come out of its programs. These are simple two-page fact sheets that address a number of issues. On the screen we have a fact sheet on the lifetime of white LEDs. The lifetime of these products are quite different from conditional products such as HID products or resi- candescent products, and so these fact sheets explain the specifics of how lifetime of LEDs are different from these other technologies. And similarly you see a number of other topics on the screen. The DOE is going to continue to churn out a large number of these fact sheets.
In addition to these fact sheets, DOE anticipates developing a number of short papers and brochures and other products depending on market needs and depending on the requests that we receive from the partners that we are working with. So in total we see a fairly substantial effort going toward development of this kind of information and getting it out there to influence the development of this market. In addition to the technical information, the Department of Energy planned a technical information network. Matter of fact, this was recently underway. In this network we partnered with the Consortium for Energy Efficiency and the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships to efficiently distribute technical information out to a very wide network. DOE is thinking that we want to take advantage of existing efficient network for moving information out to the organization and companies that can put this information to good use. And we want to basically leverage existing networks rather than breeding whole new networks. So this technical information network is built on the backs of existing networks that work quite well.
And we anticipate that this network can be used to move information all the way out to final users of these products, including retailers, homebuilders and the likes. The sixth element of the DOE program is standards and test procedures support. And this standards and test procedures, as I said, are largely not in existence now but the Department of Energy has been working actively with energy organizations to develop these. You see listed on the screen here a number of measurement issues that are in need of standards and test procedures, methods for measuring chromaticity and color rendering, electrical characteristics of these products. The particular electrical characteristics of the drivers, that the driver is another name for the product similar to a ballast of a fluorescent system, light rating and the like. So it is a wide range of issues that are in need of new test procedures and standards that are developed specifically for solid-state lighting. DOE kicked off this effort in March of 2006, meeting with a very large group of industry standards organizations. You can see their logos on the left side of the screen. We talked about the need, and these organizations have agreed. They have been very, very helpful and have worked quite efficiently in developing a wide range of draft standards and test procedures, many of which you see listed on this screen. The key standards and test procedures that you see listed here are all scheduled to be completed by the end of 2007. A number of these will form the basis of the standards and test procedures that are referenced in the new ENERGY STAR specifications.
And the last strategic element is coordination and leadership. As I mentioned earlier, DOE sees a great need to coordinate the many efforts that will be launched by various organizations to help get this new technology established in the marketplace. So DOE wants to use its role in the federal government to influence what other federal agencies are doing in its area. In addition, we want to work with organizations outside of the federal government providing services to help improve the efficiency with which all of these organizations can reach this marketplace. We will be organizing a wide range of workshops and meetings to facilitate this. As a matter of fact, you are participating in an example of these sorts of meetings. So this is just the sort of thing that DOE tends to address with its coordination and leadership elements in this plan.
Now, every plan deserves a big complicated chart with arrows going every which direction, otherwise you can't call it a serious plan. And so we have done this, of course, for this plan. I am not going to explain the entirety of this. It will take a great deal of time, and as you can see there are arrows going every which direction. I will leave that for you to study some evening when you can't find anything else to do. The main point that I just wanted to make with this slide is that DOE's commercialization efforts play a very specific role within the whole of what the Department of Energy is doing in solid-state lighting. That whole strategy that DOE has for solid lighting is called their lab-to-market strategy. It begins with basic energy sciences over on the far left and it runs all the way through commercialization support to achieving significant market penetration of energy-efficient, cost-effective products.
And then I wanted to close with the final slide pointing everybody to the Department of Energy's Solid-State Lighting Web site. You may already be familiar with the Web site. If you are not, I wanted to make sure that you are aware of it. The URL for the Web site is at the bottom of the page there. It contains a wide range of information. Some of it is very technical. Much of it is more market-oriented. I think you can steer yourself around and find what is the most useful. There are all kinds of information, publications, and reports from workshops. And then there is one particular feature that I would like to point out on this Web site that I would like to draw your attention to, and that is you can register for getting regular updates from the Department of Energy. And when you receive those updates you get a short little email providing you information on some new development. Sometimes it is a new report, new study. Sometimes it is a planned meeting, but you can keep abreast of what is going on in this solid-state lighting world if you register on that Web site.
So that is the end of the presentation. I hope that I have addressed some of your needs and I now look forward to answering your questions.