Green Lights Partners
(as of March 2, 1992)

Charter Partners

@Bell Atlantic (Bri) iF) Ger ( re =) CITICORPOCTIBANC FABANAT
BD Geren gg ggeee SENERAL DYNAMIC

Maytag the Gillette Company
iss er WeBor BD Tscs so =

Ril MEMOREX TELEX Tex Aor LVERINE

Alaska Airlines, Inc. Aulince American Council for an
A&C E q
&C Enercom Albany General Hospital A Energy Efficient Economy

casec"* American-Standard ARSTECHAl me

Health Care Worldwide AP? Bank of America ico. Ashland, Automatic Data
ra Belicore ARC » Processing, Inc{
f B.P. Exploration-Alaska BALDOR ARCO

Carnegie Mellon University versity Bay Area Hospital Baxter —

E.J. Brach Corp. SeunCoroalGot BOLING

Carrier Corp., North
CCB The Catalyst Group American Operations

GamiGeietex = Chemical Bank

ta cox RED sei Colonial Pacific Leasing CAROLINA

Colonial npg Con Columbia University
LOMPAL
te s Pizza =a" ie ome Ik Usa
Data General Corp. rR.

(Pirst Doce Resources tne."

G.M. Popkey Company, Inc. tae punsceu The First National
Georgia Dresser Rand Bank of Chicago

Genovese Drug Stores, Inc, ELKHAR r

GRAINGER ——— fe) Wawoete

Hewlett Packard Goonfrear(qqi3 keh Horizon Air Industries, Inc.
enrec a - Honeywell, Inc. ey Technology Corp.

Hoechst / RNY Karastan Bigelow |
echst Ea ASN dumana 022%" HOPE vont

SS

VA a Kinder-Care KM Kenyon Oil Co., Inc.
Jantzen. Jewel Food Stores Learning Center, Inc. IN a Aerospace and Defense

EPA, as a matter of policy, does not endorse the institutions listed above or their products or services.


First Year Success Stories

Johnson & Johnson:
Charter Member Upgrades 20 Facilities

Johnson & Johnson was one of the charter members of Green Lights. Under the
leadership of Harry Kauffman, Johnson & Johnson’scorporateenergy manager, the
company has comprehensively surveyed more than 1.9 million square feet of
corporate space located in New Jersey, Georgia, Massachusetts, California, Penn-
sylvania, Ohio, and Connecticut. The facilities run the gamut of use: office and
administration buildings, manufacturing facilities, warehouses, and research labo-
ratories. Even a parking lot was included. :

Lighting upgrades are underway or complete at 20 facilities. These upgrades
areresponsible formorethan$338,000in annual savings, and internal ratesof return
(IRRs) range betweena low of 17 percentand a high of 120 percent. Justasimportant
is the pollution prevented. The upgrades at these 20 facilities have meant that more
than 4.6 million kilowatt-hours per year of electricity use were avoided.

Thisis good news for the environment, for it translatesinto important pollution
prevention. Saving more than 4.6 million kilowatt-hours per year means that 7.3
million pounds of carbon dioxide, more than 55,000 pounds of sulfur dioxide; and
more than 27,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides are not released into the air. The
greenhouse effect, acid rain, smog—these are the problems directly alleviated by
serious energy efficiecy efforts such as those of Johnson & Johnson.

Johnson & Johnson has been involved in the installation of energy-efficient
designs and technologies since the early 1980s. Their efforts over the last year have
included installing the latest in lighting technology: occupancy sensors, TS fluores-
cent lamps, electronic ballasts, compact fluorescent lamps, dimming devices, and
high pressure sodium lamps.

Amoco Corporation:
6000 Sensors Save $316,413 per Year

The Amoco Corporation, a Green Lights charter partner, recently replaced
6,000 light switches with 6,000 occupancy sensors in its Naperville, Ilinois, office
and laboratory buildings. Comprising more than 1.2 million square feet, the
buildings were upgraded with the sensors early this year, effecting $316,413 in
savings annually and avoiding almost 4.5 million kilowatt-hours per year.

Preston Trucking:
P Recei Maryland E: A i

Preston Trucking received the State of Maryland’ first Energy Achievement
Award from Governor William Donald Schaefer on October 29, 1991. Preston’s
successful energy conservation program, led by Construction Manager Steve Gay,
reduces energy use, establishes an energy education program for company associ-
ates, and contributes to an improved environment. The new lighting system at
Preston uses 40 percent less energy and will save the company more than $20,000
per year.

Preston changed more than 2,500 40-watt lamps to32-watt T8 lamps; upgraded
950 fixtures with electronic ballasts; and converted the loading dock’s mercury
vapor lighting system to high pressure sodium. The company saves approximately
300,000 kilowatt-hours annually.


using standardized procedures and allow direct comparison between compet-
ing products for all relevant performance characteristics. These reports are sent
free of charge to all Green Lights participants.

Green Lights is also working with several lighting professional societies to build
a national certification program for lighting professionals. This will permit
individuals with true expertise in lighting to demonstrate their skills and
distinguish themselves in the marketplace.

¢ Problem-Financing: In existing buildings, the lighting system is usually
working, and any improvements are traditionally viewed as an expense,
despite the fact that they are actually an investment that is frequently more
profitable, and lower risk, than any other investment the company might
make. Even where lighting investments are demonstrably more lucrative
than other investments, companies will sometimes have different “hurdle
rates” for different kinds of investments: a low one for core business
investments, and a higher one (paradoxically) for lower-risk cost-cutting
investments. Smaller businesses and governmental agencies frequently
have no capital to spare for any cost-cutting investment and accept paying
a higher operating overhead year after year.

Solution: Green Lights has developed a unique registry of financing resources.
First offered in February 1991, it has since been updated twice. The registry
provides detailed information on more than 200 utility programs that offer
lighting rebates and free installations to their customers. It also provides a
directory of more than 75 companies that can finance lighting efficiency up-
grades using leasing, shared savings, guaranteed savings, and other financing
techniques. The registry is provided free of charge to all Green Lights partici-
pants.

* Problem-Restricted Market: Because energy-efficient lighting has cap-
tured only a tiny fraction of the overall lighting market, unit prices have often
been high compared with the “garden variety” products they replace. When
new technology is introduced, R&D costs and new factories have to be
amortized, and the unit marketing costs for low-volume products further
raises the price. Distributors are often reluctant to reserve valuable shelf
space for slower-moving products. Innovators are slow to introduce new
technology. As a result, energy-efficient lighting hardware has remained
expensive, further slowing its penetration in the marketplace.

Solution: Green Lights. The program is catalyzing a rapidly increasing demand
for energy-efficient lighting products, with visibleimpacts on shipment volumes
and prices. New competitors are entering the market, bringing innovative
technologies and further price and service competition. Green Lights and other
lighting efficiency programs are projected to increase the market share of
energy-efficient lighting products from its current 5 percent to around 40
percent by 1995. Prices of some products have been already been falling (by as
muchas 25 percent in the last 12 months) and are expected to continue declining
as shipment volumes increase.

¢ Problem-Split incentives: There is often no incentive to upgrade lighting
systems. For example, a typical lease in a master-metered building requires
the tenant to pay a fixed rent, which includes a pro-rata share of the
building’s utility charges. If that tenant wanted to upgrade the lighting
system and reduce their electricity consumption, the lease would need re-

coe ~,

AL)

% aneiroeTM



Green Lights Partners
(as of March 2, 1992)

oo INSON Lyondell () Louisville Resource Conservation Council
MagneTek, Inc. ‘

lockheed LONE STAR ae en whe
The Marriott Corp. erman miler
MOTOROLA hy The Melville Corporation

Monsanto Mobil #\Nestis Usa.INC.
@ National W fester Bancorp om TM New Canaan YMCA ECO Corp.

ATANATVE EN enexcy North Ottawa
Community Hospital
PALMER ee D

BELLEVUE (Pepe, RIGOM «

Perry Bru rug Stores Richman Gordman Inc.
Redlands Federal Bank sSQUTTHWIRE

Oxford Properties Florida, Inc.

= Northern Illinois
* Medical Center

‘A coy os, seri and Seng, 333 -
sem i _
Sexe ( SS neconprten Talat
THRE? Valu Stores, Inc. i Ea
Tenneco Minerals shot’ 9 DRUG Toshiba America. TRANSAMERICA

Trade Press Publishing Corp. raxaco Consumer Products, Inc. US Ba
@) Underwriters Laboratories Inc.© _ a NCAR A NCAR Mia near (E University USFRG USX
The University of +The University of Miami |,
Illinois at Chicag ¥ ny of Mam J ManO [IQWEST

Walton Monroe Mills Inc,

Qari wes XHROX [MO] “hie Caste

GOVERNMENT PARTNERS:
The State of California The State of Florida The State of Idaho The State
The State of Missouri y
at Naperville The State of Oregon Broward County, Florida
The State :) of South Dakota The City of Houston, Texas USS. Virgin Islands
GREEN LIGHTS ENDORSERS:
Area aee’

Association of Professional Energy Managers
Consulting Engineers Council of Metropolitan Washington
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America
InterNational Association of Lighting Management Companies
EPA, as a matter of policy, does not endorse the institutions listed above or their products or services.


Green Lights Allies

ALP. Lighting + Ceiling Products.
Advance Control Technologies, Inc.
Advanced Transtormer Company
Amaico Metals, lac.

American Electric
American Energy Management
American Lighting Corporation
American Lighting Systems
American Iiluminetics, Inc.
American Systems and Services
Appliance Control Technology, Inc.
‘Art Directions Inc,

Badger USA, Inc.

Brayer Lighting, Inc.

Bright Side Lighting

Brownlee Lighting

Bryant Electric

Cantera Electronics International
Cooper Lighting

C.EW. Lighting, Inc.

CMB Associates, Inc.

CSL Lighting Mtg., Inc.

Dark To Light inc.

Davis Controls Corporation
Dazor Manufacturing Corporation
DuraLux Industries

Duray Reoresceat Masutacturing
Duro-Test Corporation

Dysamic Energy Prodects, inc.
Edison Price Lighting

Biba USA, Inc.

Blectronic Ballast Technology, lac.
Emergency Safety Products, inc.
Energy Dezign Corporation
Enersave Company

Enertron Technologies, Inc.
Enterprise Lighting, inc.
Environmental Energy Group
ESCO intemetional

Etta industries

Exitronix Division of Barron Manufacturing
Corporation

Flaxiwatt Corporation

Flexlite lac.

mm

FedCircte Ballast Recyclers

{GE Ughtiag

Geissenberger Manutecturieg
‘The Goalyte Group

Guardian Lighting Controls, Inc.

(as of March 2, 1992)

Manufacturer Allies

Harris Manufacturing, Inc.

Heath Company

Hetherington Industries

Holophane Company, Inc.

Honeywell Inc,

House 0' Lite

Hubbell incorporated, Lighting Division
UWlumination Contro! Systems
taternational Conservation Equipment, Inc.
International Energy Conservation Systems
Janmar Lighting

Jedcor Energy Management Company, lac.
Johnson Controls, lac.

K-Lite Division of IC] Acrylica/K-S-H Inc.
Kenall

Kitowatt Saver, Inc.

‘The Kirin Company

Lamar Lighting Company, inc.

LexaLite international

Light Energy Corporation

Ughting Resources, Inc.

Ughtitedia Corporation

Ughtroa of Comwall, Inc.

Utetronics International

Ughtway industries

Uecontrol

Uthone Lighting

Lorin Industries

‘Lasnatech Corporation

‘Lamax Indestries, Inc.

‘Magnaray inemationa!

MagneTek, inc.

Megalite Corporation, lac.

‘Mercary Recovery Services
‘MetalOptics, inc.

MM

Mirrorlight, Inc.

ML Systems

Mor-Lite

Motorola Lighting, Inc.

‘Mule Emergency Lighting, Inc.

MyTeck Corporation

(NOVA Conservation end Load Management
Novitas, Inc.

NRG Lighting lac.

Omega Eneruy lac.

Optical Coating Laboratory Inc.
Optitight tne.

OrEqual, lnc.

OSRAM Corporation

Paramount Industries

Parke industries, Inc.

Parrish Lighting and Engineering, inc.
Peerless Lighting Corporation
Peschel Energy, Inc.

Philips Lighting Company
Powerline Communications, inc.
Pre Finish Metals, inc.

Prime Ballast
Pritchett Wilson Group, Inc.
Prolight

RAB Electric Maautacturing Company
Reflect-A-Light
Reflective Light Technologies
Ramtec Systems

Roth Bros., lac.

‘Ruud Lighting, Inc.

Salesco Systems USA

‘Scientific Component Systems
‘Sharlin-Lite

‘Silverlight Corporation

‘Slmkar Lighting Ficture Company, Inc.
‘Solar Kinetics, Inc.
‘Southco Metal Services, Inc.

‘PI Lighting lac,

‘Sterling, RMC

‘Sytvania Lighting Division
‘Tamarack Corporation

‘Teron Lighting

Torratux, tac.

‘Thomas indastries, Inc.

‘Topaz Enorgy Systems, Inc.
Toshiba America Consumer Products, inc.
‘Triad Technologies

Trimbletiouse Corporation

U.S. Ught Bulb, inc.

Ulster Precision, Inc.

UNENCO

United Energy, inc.

United Energy South

Valmont Electric

Venture Lighting Internationa!
‘Waldmann Lighting Company
Warner Technologies.

‘Tes Watt Stopper, lnc.
‘Wellmade Metal Products Company
WE. Willems, lac.
‘Wiemarq Light Company, lac.

Xtra Light

‘X-Tra Light Systems, Inc,

EPA, as a matter of policy, does not endorse the institutions listed above or their products or services.


Partners Talk About
Green Lights

“Green Lights sets a savings goal attainable by any institution
committed to energy savings. By providing independent verification
of the value of lighting efficiency methods, Green Lights removes
barriers normally faced by non-profit institutions leery of many
claims. We have found that adhering to the Green Lights standard
can successfully reduce lighting wattage by over 65 percent with no
sacrifice in lighting quality.”

- Lindsey Audin
Manager of Energy Conservation
Columbia University

“We signed up because of the mathematics of the situation. I
saw an opportunity to benefit the company in the short-term, and the
environment and the company in the long-term.

“I could see that if we lit our properties better and saved
money and energy, the environment would be better and long-term
consumption rates would be lower. It’s an opportunity for
government, industry, and power generation companies to all
benefit.”

- Sidney Kirschna
President
National Service Industries, Inc.

“For Xerox, Green Lights is a major energy conservation
program. Participation in Green Lights allows us to more clearly
focus on not only the impact that lighting has on the environment,
but also the impact that lighting has on our bottom line.”

- B. Lum Lee
Manager, Energy and Recycling Programs
Xerox Corporation

“Clean air and energy conservation are compatible goals. By
encouraging efficient use of lighting and reducing demand for
electricity, the Green Lights program demonstrates how American
creativity can lead to cost-effective and practical solutions to our
complex environmental problems.”

- Lodwrick M. Cook

Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
ARCO


Ally Program Highlights

Manufacturers Prolight, American Energy Managementand Sylvania Lighting
recruited Domino's Pizza, Brach Co., and Westin Hotels, respectively, as
Partners. And, at least seven LMC Allies recruited one or more Partners-the
biggest being the Melville Corporation, recruited by Mira Lighting and Electric
Service.

¢ Lamp and ballast manufacturers as well as Lighting Management Company
Allies provided information for the publication Survey and Forecast of Marketplace
Supply and Demand for Energy-Efficient Lighting Products.

* Ballast manufacturers cooperated with the Lighting Research Center to produce
the first NLPIP Specifier Report on ballasts. Reflector and power reducer
manufacturers are now working on future Specifier Reports.

¢ Several Lighting Management Company Allies provided case studies and gave
comments on the Green Lights Lighting Upgrade Manual. .

© Manufacturers and Lighting Management Company Allies sit on the Decision
Support System user advisory group. Allies beta-tested the system, and in
September, 40 Allies came toa prescreening of the system to review the software
and help develop a list of prices for the database.

* Portland General Electric and EPA sponsored.a Green Lights workshop in
Portland, Oregon, in May. More than 300 participants representing 200 corpo-
rations attended the marketing event. Twenty manufacturers exhibited their
technology and services at the Green Lights conference in Atlanta in July,
helping to make the event a big success.

* Magnetek developed its own Green Lights brochure and launched its Green
Zone program to promote energy-efficient lighting, targeting Green Lights
Partners. Other companies (e.g., Sylvania Lighting) developed brochures
promoting the environmental benefits of energy-efficient lighting, and Lithonia
Lighting incorporated Green Lights into their LEEP (Lithonia Energy-Efficiency
Program), using the Green Lights logo extensively and distributing Green
Lights Light Briefs.

* Fifteen LMC Allies advertised their participation in a Green Lights “Special
Report’ inthe September Building Operating Management Magazine. [llumElex
promoted the Green Lights program through its “Business Spotlights” in
national newspapers. And Oé<A Electric Cooperative featured a special Green
Lights section in their summer marketing publication “Along Our Highlines.”



* Telemarketing: Starting in July 1991, the program office built a
telemarketing system, complete with the latest telemarketing soft-
ware, to assist in selling the program to the 8,000 contacts stored in
the program’s marketing database.

¢ Mass Communication: Green Lights is increasingly using advertis-
ing and news coverage to reach a broader audience. More than a
hundred Green Lights news stories have appeared in dozens of
media outlets, and Green Lights advertising (sponsored by the
program office or by program participants) is increasingly visible in
the popular, business, and trade press. Green Lights advertising has
appeared in the Portland Oregonian, the Atlanta Constitution and
Journal, Atlanta magazine, BusinessWeek, and Discover.

The typical organization takes approximately 4 months to decide to
join Green Lights, with some taking up toa year. The process starts with
an EPA presentation, a piece of direct mail, an article in a newspaper, or
an advertisement in a magazine. Several rounds of visits, telephone
contact and technical support follow, sometimes including a lighting
survey of a major facility to validate the savings opportunities available
to the potential Partner. It is normal for several different groups within
the organization to get involved: facilities management, environmental
compliance, energy, finance, strategic planning, public affairs, and so
on. Each department may require direct contact with EPA to ensure that
all of its questions and concerns are addressed. The final step is the
signing of the Memorandum of Understanding by a senior officer and
the initiation of the lighting upgrade program.

Scorecard

On January 31, 1991, Green Lights had 40 participants. As of Febru-
ary 18, 1992, 402 institutions had signed Memoranda of Understanding
with EPA to join Green Lights. This number includes 168 Corporate
Partners, 9 Government

Partners, 144 Manufac-
turer Allies, 48 Lighting
Management Company Green Lights
Allies, and 27 Electric zai

Utility Allies. In addition, Participa nts
6 trade and professional
organizations have en-
dorsed the program. The
program participants col-
lectively own or lease 2
billion square feet of fa-
cility space, about 2.5
percent of the national
total. This is equivalent
to all of the leasable office
space of the metropolitan 50 I"
areas of New York City, 0
Los Angeles, Chicago, San 1991
Francisco, Washington,
D.C., Philadelphia, and [BpPortners [| Manufacturer ag
Dallas.

Total Participants
ge53 888

jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jen

Lighting |

Utility
Allies



negotiation to allow pass-through of the savings. In addition, without direct
metering, it is difficult to validate the exact amount of savings due to that
tenant. Conversely, with all of the utility charges passed through to the
tenants, the landlord rarely sees it in his interest to install more efficient
lighting systems when the building is first built. Instead, the lowest first-cost
system is chosen.

Solution: Green Lights has initiated a project to develop standard lease
language that will remove the split incentive barrier, and the program will
encourage participants to use the model language in lease negotiations. The
program isalso working toaccelerate the adoption of submetering by encouraging
Partners to submeter their lighting upgrades.

¢ Problem-Market Fragmentation: Buyers and sellers of lighting equipment
and services often have trouble communicating. Most lighting manufactur-
ers produce and market only one kind of product: lamps, ballasts, fixtures,
and so on. Lighting purchasers need systems composed of many different
products and need “system thinking” from their vendors. Vendors, in turn,
are frustrated by the low priority assigned to lighting by most major
businesses and by their lack of understanding of the importance of good
lighting.
Solution: The Green Lights Allies programs. Green Lights Allies are members
of the lighting manufacturing and service industries as well as electric utilities,
who join Green Lights on terms very similar to those of the Green Lights
Partners. However, in addition to committing to upgrade their facilities, Green
Lights Allies also commit to help EPA and the Green Lights Partners success-
fully implement the program. Allies have delivered on this commitment in a
variety of ways: recruiting new Partners, providing data to the National
Lighting Product Information Program, helping to design the Decision Support
System, and advertising their membership in and allegiance to the principals of
the Green Lights Program. While Green Lights does not endorse the products
or services of the Green Lights Allies, the existence of the program has enhanced
communication throughout the lighting industry on the subjects of energy
efficiency, environmental protection, and lighting quality.

Program Highlights

Recruitment

Green Lights is a voluntary program. As such, the program must
persuade lighting users that energy-efficient lighting is good for the
environment, good for their bottom line, and a good opportunity to
work in cooperation with EPA. The program office has used a variety of
marketing tools to recruit new members to Green Lights.
¢ Conferences: Green Lights conducted three large marketing confer-

ences in 1991 (Washington in January, Portland Oregon in May, and

Atlanta in July), attended by representatives of 600 corporations.
¢ Direct Visits: Green Lights staff have visited dozens of corporate

and governmental headquarters, a process that accelerated with the

inauguration of a full-time travelling sales campaign in October

1991,


Allies Talk About Green Lights

“We're pleased to participate in the Green Lights program. It's
gone a long way in just a few months to give lighting upgrading
the credibility it deserves. And giving energy efficiency the
awareness it needs. Green Lights is great for the environment and
great for business. We've already recruited two Partners and we're
excited about helping Green Lights expand its reach.”

~Cary Mendelsohn, president, Imperial Lighting
Maintenance Company, in Mainlighter,
November 1991.

“We're very optimistic that Green Lights will be a successful
program. The 1990s and beyond will be dominated by energy and
environmental issues. We expect to do our part to help the
environment and we expect that our customers will do their part.”

~ Paul Von Paumgartten, manager of lighting

services, Johnson Controls, Inc., in The
Construction Specifier, October 1991.

“The educational aspects of the program are particularly
important.”
- Peter Caldwell, vice president of marketing,

Electronic Ballast Technology, Inc., in Energy
User News, January 1992.



Green Lights
Implementation
Scorecard
as of February 23, 1992

Number of companies reporting 40

Buildings Number Million Sq.Ft.
surveyed 109 46.3
trial installation 7 3.0
partial upgrade 16 6.7
complete upgrade 49 21.0

Percentage of reporting
participants’ square footage 23%
in the “upgrade pipeline"

Typical lighting
electricity reductions 40-70%

Typical rate of return 30-60%

Kilowatt-hours avoided
by completed upgrades 35.2 million
(per year)

Pollution pre- (Ibs)
vention (per year) CO, 52.8 million
from completed so, 449,692
upgrades NO, 193,833

Cost of conserved

energy at com-

pleted upgrades 1-3 cents per kWh
(range)



SEPA

United States Air and Radiation

Environmental Protection (ANR-445)
Agency

EPA/400/1-92/003
February 1992

Green Lights
Program

The First Year

& Printed on Recycled-Paper


Green Lights 1991 Tih

* Program launched
at week-long confer-
ence in Washington,
DC. Features present-
ations by EPA
Administrator William
K. Reilly and other
EPA officials, discus-
sions on technical
projects, and displays of
lighting products and
services.

* Manufacturer ally program,
launched in conjunction
with Partner program

January

February

¢ Computerized Utility
Rebate Registry released

* Green Lights featured at
the 1991 LightFair
International Lighting
Exposition

March
April

* Lighting Management
Company and Electric
Utility Ally programs
launched

* Customer Services
Department established

‘magazine.
© 1991 by Times
Mirror Magazines.

* Lighting Services Group
established

* Green Lights workshop
held in Portland, Ore., May
15, co-sponsored b
Region 10 and Portlai
General Electric Co.

* First two states—California
and Maryland-join
program; followed by two
more in next two months
(Oregon, June 28; Florida,
July 15)

May

June

* NLPIP Guide to
Performance Evaluation of
Efficient Lighting Products
released

+ First Light Brief flyer (on
occupancy sensors)
released


"BusinessWeek

nat us

Green Lights in the News

“The voluntary program will seek to persuade chief executives that investments in more efficient
lighting in offices, stores and factories will return bigger profits than any other use of the money, while
providing better working conditions and good public relations.”

- The New York Times,
“EPA Urging Electricity Efficiency,” Jan. 16, 1991

“3M's commitment to Green Lights is expected to reduce energy consumption by 40 million
kilowatt hours and air pollution by more than 80 million pounds. 3M also expects to save $2 million
in operating costs as a result of installing new energy-efficient lighting at 3M facilities.”

- Stemwinder, a newspaper for Twin Cities area 3M employees,
March 6, 1991

“Green Lights aims to make companies feel like heroes by making an investment that cuts their
electricity use, lowers pollution and returns a quick, low-risk profit... . EPA expects to save more
energy this way—perhaps as much as 10 percent of national electricity demand—than it could through
regulation.”

- The Washington Post, “Green, Inc.,”
by Jessica Mathews, March 15, 1991

By installing the modern lighting in about 70 million square feet of space, nearly all of the state's
buildings, [Gov.] Wilson said that California will see its electrical energy requirements reduced by
more than 3 billion kilowatt hours over the period of the agreement, enough to power 167,500 homes.”

- Los Angeles Times, “State Switches On to High-Efficiency
Lighting Program,” May 31, 1991

“Energy-efficient lighting is the wave of the future, one of those rare instances where the “win-
win” message of environmental economics shines so brightly that success is virtually guaranteed.”
- Green Market Alert, “EPA's Green Lights Program:
Sometimes It Is Easy Being Green!” April 1991

“The opportunity has been right in front of us all along, but this new, fine-tuned strategy to
organize all of the members in a particular industry into an effective ‘energylenvironment task force’
far outpaces anything yet attempted. With Green Lights, everyone is a winner.”

- Strategic Planning for Energy and the Environment,
Summer 1991

Green Lights is one of “a series of cooperative ventures based on the common-sense view that you
can get further by seeking people's help than suing them...EPA’s Green Lights program encourages
the voluntary use of energy efficient lighting. Green Lights promotes energy conservation, which saves
electricity and cuts doum on pollution.”

- President Bush, in remarks at the Grand Canyon,
Sept. 18, 1991

“In addition to the environmental benefits of Green Lights, the program has the side benefit of
opening lines of communication between the government and corporate America. . . . This
communication link gives companies the opportunity to discuss lighting efficiency as well as other
environmental issues with EPA,” .

- Building Operating Management Magazine, September 1991


Implementation

Green Lights participants have five years to complete their lighting
upgrades. The typical plan for most companies has been to use the first
year or two to survey buildings, develop expertise, train staff, and
acquire budgets. The first two years also include, in most cases, some
lighting upgrades; this helps with the training process and allows staff
to develop procedures for budgeting, procurement, installation, con-
tracting, reporting, and so on. Years three and four will be the time of
major upgrades by Green Lights participants; several are planning
national procurements for firms that will supply upgrade materials and
installation labor for all of their facilities.

Green Lights staff and contractors assist participants in implement-
ing the program. The program offers two-day training courses twice a
month across the country:

Washington, D.C. Nov. 1991 Chicago April 1992
Ashland, KY Dec. 1991 Oklahoma City April 1992
Los Angeles Dec. 1991 Boston April 1992
New York City Jan. 1992 Raleigh, NC May 1992
New Orleans Jan. 1992 San Francisco May 1992
Nashville Feb. 1992 Boulder June 1992
Washington, D.C. Feb. 1992 New York City June 1992 ©
Tampa, FL March 1992 Seattle July 1992
Washington, D.C. — March 1992 Kansas City July 1992

The training courses feature an intensive introduction to energy-
efficient lighting, instruction on the use of the Decision Support System
software, and ideas on how to be an effective project manager. Green
Lights staff and contractors also have conducted more specialized
meetings at participants’ buildings, either to help perform a lighting
survey or to help the company organize its resources to implement
Green Lights. The program also operates two hotlines: the Customer
Service Center answers general questions about the program and mails
out program materials (approximately 2000 envelopes per month), while
the Lighting Services Group operates a hotline for Partners with technical
questions. Participants also receive a monthly newsletter, the Green
Lights Update. Finally, the Green Lights Electronic Bulletin Board will
come on-line on March 2, 1992.

Implementation
Scorecard

Because program participants report their progress onan anniversary basis, the
signatory “classes” of January and February 1991 recently reported their upgrade
status. Several non-anniversary participants also have submitted interim reports
on their progress to date. Alll told, as of February 23, 1992, 181 buildings were in the
officially-reported “upgrade pipeline,” covering 77 million square feet of facility
space (equivalent to the office and warehouse space of the Baltimore metropolitan
area). Forty-nine buildings have been fully upgraded, with a typical reduction in
lighting electricity use of 40 to 70 percent. The table at right provides further details.


Green Lights Allies

(as of March 2, 1992)

Lighting Management
Company Allies

‘AM Lighting Service Company
‘ABD Lighting Management Company
‘Astna Corporation
[Allied Lighting Services, Inc,
‘American Lighting ine.

‘Antech Lighting Services
‘Approved Lighting Corporation
Barney Roth Company
Broadway Maintenance Company (NJ)
Cherry City Electric
‘Chicago-Edison Corporation
Colorado Lighting
Conserve Electric Company, inc,
Continental Lighting Services, Ine.
(Creative Lighting Maintenance
Energy Controls & Concepts
Eveready Electric Company
Fluorescent Maintenance Company (CO)
‘Fuoresceot Maintenance Service, ine(R
Fasorescent Maintenance Service, Inc. (MS)
Fluorescent Maintenance Sign Co. (AL)
General Lighting and Sign Service, Inc.
Mhumélex Corporation
mperial Lighting Maintecance Company
Ughtea Up, inc.

Ughting Maintenance, Inc. (IL)
Ughting Maintenance and Service, inc.
Lighting Management Corporation
Lighting Systems Too!
Luminaire Servic, ine.
Master Lighting Service
(Mira Lighting and Electric Service, inc.
Maxphy Electric Maintenance Company
New Mexico Energy Consutants
Planned Lighting, ine.

Primo Lighting Management
Prolite Lighting and Sign Maintenance
Puget Energy Management Systems
‘SICA Electrical & Maintenance

Stay-Lite Lighting Service
‘Suburban Lighting, In.
Superior Light and Sign Maintenance Co.
Syivania Lighting Services
United Electrical Maintenance Corporatioa
Universal Lighting Services
USA Energy Corporation,

Vista Universal, Inc.

Electric Utility Allies

‘Asizona Public Service Company
‘Atlantic Energy
Boston Edison Company
Central Maine Power
City of Georgetown, Texes
City Uses of Springfield
Consatidated Edison ot New York, inc.
Ouke Power Company
Energy Resource Center
‘Grant County Public Utility District
Jersay Central Power & Light Company
Kansas City Power & Ligtt
Les Angeles Department of Water and Power
(New York Power Authority
0& A Bectric Cooperative
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Part Angeles Light Department
Portland General Electric Company
PSI Energy, Inc.

P.ULD. #1 of Grays Harbor County
Public Service Electric and Gas Company
Puget Sound Power & Light Company
Rockland Electric
‘Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Sekt River Project
South Carolina Electric & Ges Company
‘South Carolina Public Service Authority
Scuthem California Eéizen Company
‘Springfield Usility Board
Tampa Electic
Teuton Municipal Lighting Ptant
‘The UNIT System of Companies

Wisconsin Electric Power Company

EPA, as a matter of policy, does not endorse the institutions listed
above or their products or services.


Why Green Lights?

An often-asked question runs, “If energy-efficient lighting is so profitable,
and is so good for the environment, and delivers such superior lighting quality,
why does the Federal Government have to get involved?” The answer lies in the
haze between the ideals of economics and the reality of lighting today. Energy-
efficient lighting technologies, design practices, and maintenance systems
evolve over decades (if not centuries, if one considers the evolution from the
open fire to the candle to the oil lamp to Edison’s light bulb), and market
penetration is often slow. The energy-efficient lighting technologies and design
principals available today were introduced 5 to 10 years ago but have been
rarely used, typically capturing between 1 and 5 percent of the market. There are
six principal barriers, and Green Lights is attacking all of them:

¢ Problem-Low Priority: Lighting is not a high priority for the vast majority
of USS. institutions. Typically the province of facility management, lighting
is viewed as an overhead item. Because of this, most facilities are equipped
with the lowest first-cost (rather than the lowest life-cycle cost) lighting
systems, and profitable opportunities to upgrade the system are ignored or
passed over in favor of higher visibility projects. Asa result, institutions pay
needless overhead every year, reducing their own competitiveness and that
of the country. And wasteful electricity use becomes a particularly senseless
source of pollution.

Solution: By signing the Green Lights Memorandum of Understanding, a
corporation’s senior management makes clear that energy-efficient lighting is
now one of the business’ high priorities. Authority is granted, budgets are
approved, procedures are streamlined, and staff are assigned to make the
upgrades happen.

* Problem-Information and Expertise: Lighting is more complex than
screwing in a light bulb, and the technologies and design strategies are
diverse and sometimes complex. To arrive at an energy-efficient lighting
solution for a particular space requires accurate, comparable information
about dozens of lighting technologies, design ability, and an investor's eye
for long-term profit. Unfortunately, information is often scarce or suspect,
design is frequently overlooked in favor of “cookie-cutter” solutions, and
few institutions focus on lighting as a profit (rather than cost) center.

Solution: Green Lights has created the institutions and tools to help overcome
these barriers.

On November 4, 1991, Green Lights released its lighting Decision Support
System, the most sophisticated lighting survey and economic analysis software
available. The system allows a building surveyor to rapidly inventory the
current lighting system and choose from more than a thousand different
upgrade options to find the system that will be most energy-efficient. The
financial analysis is done on a life-cycle basis and allows the user to capture all
relevant streams of costs and benefits, including taxes and depreciation, opera-
tion and maintenance expenses, and the potential benefits of improved lighting
quality. The software is offered to Green Lights participants free of charge at a
series of training workshops held twice a month around the country.

A second institution created by Green Lights is the National Lighting Product
Information Program (NLPIP), based at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s
Lighting Research Center. NLPIP produces name-brand reports on lighting
hardware, covering dozens of manufacturers and models. All data are gathered


Elkhart General Hospital:

Upgrade Saves More Than $100,000

Elkhart General Hospital in Elkhart, Indiana, became a Green Lights Partner in
June 1991. A relatively small institution, yet with all of the high electricity use
associated with hospitals, Elkhart had completed about a third of their upgrade
work by the end of August 1991 and were projecting more than $100,000 in annual
energy savings. The upgrade included the installation of T8 lamps, compact
fluorescents, electronic ballasts, occupancy sensors and timed switches, and re-
duced light levels where appropriate. Additionally, the reduced heat load has
solved some air conditioning problems and there has been a dramatic drop in
maintenance costs—annual maintenance savings of $20,000 are projected.

The Boeing Company:
Energy Use in Upgraded Buildings Drops 50%

Boeing has upgraded an incredible 4 million square feet since becoming a
Green Lights Charter Partner in January 1991. Led by Larry Friedman, energy
conservation manager for Boeing Support Services, the company has saved 14
million kilowatt-hours and almost $500,000 already. The energy savings translate
into reductions in power plant emissions of 26 million pounds of carbon dioxide,
110,000 pounds of sulfur dioxide, and 70,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides. That's a
lot of pollution taken out of our air-and Boeing is just getting started. They have 64
million square feet to go, and they're working on it.

Charter Partners Report Progress

A large number of Green Lights partners who have been in the program fora year are
just completing the survey phase of their effort. A combined total of more than 16 million
square feet has been surveyed by Browning-Ferris Industries, Yellow Freight Corporation,
Whirlpool Corporation, Union Camp Corporation, Joseph E. Seagram é& Sons, Texaco,
Hasbro, Inc., Gerber Products, and American Standard, Inc.

Other companies are further along. The Oliver Carr Company in Washington,
DC, hasupgraded morethan 1.3million square feet through delamping, reballasting,
and reflector installation, for an estimated annual savings of $480,000. The LoneStar
Steel Company in Texas has upgraded more than 400,000 square feet by replacing
mercury vapor lamps with high pressure sodium lamps and through general
delamping. Officials plan to install occupancy sensors and to reduce daily lighting
hours in remote facilities from 24 to3. Wolverine World Wide, Inc.,in Michigan has
upgraded its exit signs by replacing incandescent lamps with fluorescent. Workers
also are installing reflectors in many fixtures.

Warner-Lambert in Morris Plains, New Jersey, has installed almost 3,500 T8
fluorescent lamps, which will yield an annual savings of $190,000. Phillips
Petroleum has replaced approximately 16,000 40-watt lamps with 34-watt lamps,
foran annual savings of $17,000; almost 500 incandescent lamps have been replaced
with compact fluorescent lamps, yielding annual savings of $7,000. Additionally,
lighting management systems were installed at 38 locations. American Express in
New York has completed 85 percent of a 1.6 million square-foot installation.
Annual savings of almost $285,000 will be realized through the use of T8 lamps,
reduction in lighting hours, and occupancy sensors.

The Polaroid Corporation in Waltham, Massachusetts has surveyed almost 1.3
million of its square feet and begun upgrades. Generally, T8 fluorescent lamps are
being installed with electronic ballasts; compact fluorescents are replacing
incandescents; mercury vapor lamps are giving way to high pressure sodium
lamps; and some occupancy sensors are being installed.

ELKHART
GENERAL
|

SOLEING


Selected Green Lights Materials

Green Lights produces several information and promotional products.

Video: A general overview of the program as well as a section on the program's
more technical aspects.

Brochure: A general overview of the program.

Light Briefs: Technical product description flyers for the layperson; they cover
such topics as electronic ballasts, energy-efficient lamps, occupancy sensors, reflec-
tors, disposal of lighting products, and financing options.

‘Financing Database: Diskette containing a database of funding sources from
utilities, energy-service companies, and government sources.

*Update newsletters: Monthly newsletters distributed to all program participants,
designed to provide the latest information on all aspects of the program.

Slide Show: A 46-slide presentation with annotations; describes the Green Lights
program in detail.

*Camera-ready logos: Color and black and white versions of the Green Lights logo,
distributed for participants’ use in their own printed materials.

“Buttons: Imprinted with the color Green Lights logo.
*Window Decals: Stickers imprinted with the color logo.
* Available only to program participants

Green Lights, For more

information:
EPA Green Lights
(ANR-445)
Washington, DC
20460

Customer
Service Center
(202) 775-6650

(202) 775-6680 fax

Partner (202) 776-6671

Se Eavronmental Potton Agency bulletin board



EPA’s Commitments

When EPA signs the Memorandum of
Understanding, it agrees to provide

Decision Support System - a state-of-
the-art computer software program that
allows Green Lights corporations to survey
lighting systems in their facilities, assess
their options, and select the best energy-
efficient lighting upgrade.

Training Workshops-— programs,
scheduled nationwide, that feature
comprehensive training on the Decision
Support System as well as lighting
fundamentals, technology, project
management, and Green Lights reporting.

National Lighting Product
information Program- an independent
lighting information program that
provides an objective source of name-
brand product information.

4
4
4
[
4
14
4

databases containing information on utility-
sponsored financial assistance (e.g., auditing
and technical support, lighting design
services, free installation, rebates, and loans),

energy-service company programs, and
government grants and low-interest loans.

Lighting Services Group- offers
technical support, problem solving, and
training for Green Lights participants
installing energy-efficient lighting.

Corporate Communications—
advertising and marketing materials

designed to recognize participants for their
commitment to the program and to keep

Ally Programs-individual programs
designed for manufacturers, lighting
management companies, and utilities to
ensure that the lighting industry is involved
in the program and aware of the
environmental and economic benefits of
Green Lights.

Partner's
Commitments

When a Green Lights Partner
signs the Memorandum of
Understanding, it agrees to

oO Appoint an implementation
manager to coordinate the

program.

Oo Survey the lighting in all of its
US. facilities.

OO Consider a full range of lighting
options to reduce energy use.

O Upgrade 90 percent of the square
footage of its facilities with the
options that maximize energy
savings to the extent that the
upgrade is profitable and does
not compromise lighting quality.
There are no technology

OC Complete upgrades within 5
years of signing the agreement.

oO Annually document the
improvements it makes.

oO Design all new facilities to meet
most current building efficiency
standards.

C1 Educate its employees about the
benefits of energy-efficient
lighting.

When companies sign the Green Lights
Memorandum of Understanding, they
agree to upgrade their facilities with
energy-efficient lighting. In return, the
EPA commits to provide a wide variety
of products and services designed to
make the job easier. Over the program's
first year, the EPA has delivered on every
one of its commitments.


Program Summary

The Environmental Protection Agency's Green Lights Program was
officially launched on January 16, 1991. The program’s goal is to prevent
pollution by encouraging major U.S. institutions—businesses, govern-
ments, and other organizations-to use energy-efficient lighting. Be-
cause lighting is such a large consumer of electricity (about 25 percent of
the national total) and so wasteful (more than half the electricity used for
lighting is wasted by inefficient technology and design practices), the
Green Lights program offers a substantial opportunity to prevent pollu-
tion, and to do so at a profit. Lighting upgrades reduce electric bills and
maintenance costs and increase lighting quality; typically, investments
in energy-efficient lighting yield 20 to 30 percent rates of return (IRR)
per year.

EPA promotes energy-efficient lighting by asking major institutions
to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Agency; in
this MOU, the signatory commits to install energy-efficient lighting in
90 percent of their space nationwide over a 5-year period, but only where
it is profitable and where lighting quality is maintained or improved.
EPA, in turn, offers program participants a portfolio of technical sup-
port services to assist them in upgrading their buildings (see opposite
page). Sample MOUs are available upon request.

Every kilowatt-hour of electricity not used prevents the emission of
1.5 pounds of carbon dioxide (the most important greenhouse gas), 5.8
grams of sulfur dioxide (a principal component of acid rain), and 2.5
grams of nitrogen oxides (precursor to both acid rain and smog), as well
as the pollution attendant upon mining and transporting power-plant
fuels and disposing of power-plant wastes.

Energy-Efficient Lighting
Prevents Pollution

If everyone in the United States used
Profitable energy-efficient lighting, we.
would prevent the emission of 232 million
tons of carbon dioxide, 1.7 million tons of sulfur
dioxide, and 900,000 tons of nitrogen oxides.

22 Million
Tons

If energy-efficient lighting were used wherever profitable, the
nation’s demand for electricity could be cut by more than 10 percent,
leading to 4 to 7 percent reductions in the emissions of carbon dioxide,
sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides. In terms of carbon dioxide, energy-
efficient lighting offers the same pollution prevention opportunity as
taking 42 million cars off the road, the equivalent of one-third of
the U.S. fleet.


Me of Major Milestones

* Survey & Forecast of
Marketplace Supply and

* Green Lights workshop
held in Atlanta, including
an exhibition of lighting
products and services

July
August

¢ Lighting Services hotline
established

* Second edition of Utility
Rebate Registry released
and non-utility financing
source list added

« Light Brief flyers on
electronic ballasts and
reflectors released

Demand for Energy
Efficient Lighting Products
released

¢ Light Brief flyers on
financing, rollin
financing, and T-8/T-10
lamps released

September
October

* Nationwide direct
marketing campaign
begins

+ Video released

¢ Naperville, lll., joins as
first city Partner

¢ Decision Support System
software launched Nov. 4
at Washington, DC,
workshop. Training
workshops begin across
the country.

* Lighting Upgrade Manual
released

November

December

* Third edition of
financing database
(including utility and
non-utility sources)
released on diskette

* Namebrand-specific
Electronic Ballast
Specifier Report
released

* Two Decision Support
System workshop held


The Future of Green Lights

The first year of Green Lights has validated the basic principles of the voluntary
corporate leadership approach to energy efficiency. And, not surprisingly, it has
raised tantalizing prospects for the year tocome. The program has five goals for the
coming years:

© Increase participation: The program's goal for 1992 is the recruitment of
another 3 to 5 percent of the nation’s square footage.

© Support implementation: Green Lights participants have taken on a serious
responsibility, and the program office is committed to making their implemen-
tationas profitable and quality-enhancing as possible. Our goalistohaveevery
Green Lights participant complete one major lighting upgrade in 1992.

¢ Broaden program participation: Commercial, industrial, and institutional
users account for 75 percent of the nation’s lighting electricity use; they were the
natural first audience for the Green Lights Program. However, in the coming
year, the program will begin outreach to the residential sector, to broaden
awareness of the pollution prevention benefits of energy efficiency.

¢ Accelerate market transformation: Green Lights will claim success when the
program isn’t needed anymore; on that day, lighting will be done “smart”
without any extra effort or thought on the part of the customer, vendor or
lighting consultant, and a dynamic of continual improvement in the lighting
marketplace will be set into motion.

¢ Explore replication of the program in other technology areas: Green Lights
will not be the last voluntary energy-efficiency program; it is the prototype for
many others. By theend of 1992, EPA hopes to offeraGreen Buildings program
and/or a Green Energy Corporation program to further the nation’s goal of
preventing pollution.

Bulletin Board Available in March

Green Lights has established an electronic bulletin board, available free of
charge to the general public, which is to include current program information,
news, participant lists, and technical information about energy-efficient lighting.
Designed to provide easy access to program information, the bulletin board will be
accessible by modem beginning in March.

To use the bulletin board:

© —Setupa 2400 or 9600 baud modem and modem software on your PC (9600

baud capacity available end of March);

¢ Set the parameters on your communications software to

data bits: 8
parity: N
stop bits: 1

© Dial (202) 775-6671;

¢ Answer the questions (e.g., name, city, type of monitor) to log on;

© When prompted, choose “register” and answer the questions;

* Once you reach the Main Menu, explore the “Bulletins” and “Program

Information" sections for information on Green Lights.

Questions? Fax (202) 775-6680.