An energy-efficient school district with approximately 4,000 students can save as much as $100,000 per year in energy costs. Over a 10-year period, the savings can reach $1 million. Spending less on operating costs enables school districts to redirect dollars to more critical educational needs, such as hiring additional teachers, purchasing new computers and instructional materials or paying for necessary capital improvements.
(U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs Report, “Energy-Smart Building Choices: How School Administrators & Board Members Are Improving Learning and Saving Money,” 2002)
Roy Lee Walker Elementary School in McKinney, Texas was constructed to incorporate extensive use of daylighting in every classroom. In addition to creating a bright, cheerful environment for students and teachers, the school was able to save the district $40,000 to $50,000 per year in energy costs. When school district zones were re-drawn, so many parents wanted their children to attend the daylit school that the school committed to build two more.
(National Renewable Energy Laboratory Report, “Daylighting in Schools: Improving Student Performance and Health at a Price Schools Can Afford,” 2000)
(School Planning & Management, March 2001)
A series of schools built in Johnston County, N.C., replaced artificial lights with natural light, which resulted in between 22% and 64% energy savings as compared to typical neighboring schools. Since their construction, the schools have saved Johnson County Schools in excess of $500,000 in energy bills. The daylighting measures cost less than 1% of the construction budget and achieved a payback in less than three years.
(U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs Report, “Energy-Smart Building Choices: How School Administrators & Board Members Are Improving Learning and Saving Money,” 2002)
Larry’s Markets, a small grocery store chain in the Pacific Northwest, reports that since upgrading its stores with more energy-efficient lighting and skylights with dimmers, the stores have experienced annual cash savings of $75,000, with an 18-month payback. They have cut utility costs by 20%, which they report is equivalent to a $20 million increase in gross sales.
An Ace Hardware store in Martinez, Calif., which installed a skylight system to reduce energy consumption experienced a 65% annual saving in electric lighting costs, or 4.9 kilowatts per square foot, while interior light levels were increased.
(Building Design & Construction, July 2001)
Costco, an international chain of membership warehouses, experienced utility rate hikes that doubled and even tripled its energy costs during the 2001 energy crisis in California, where 37% of its total U.S. stores were located. As a result, the store stepped up energy conservation methods, including store lighting. While all of its California stores had been harvesting sunlight (the state’s greatest natural resource) since they were built, electric lights were dimmed to take better advantage of the skylights. Most stores reduced their overhead lights to one-third during daytime hours, and new stores were built to incorporate even more skylights. Costco reported that all of its energy-saving measures during the crisis helped reduce energy costs from a $60 to $70 million per year to less than $15 million.
(Discount Store News, May 20, 2002)
In 2001, the flagship Piggly Wiggly supermarket in Sheboygan, Wis., tested out a new store design for the chain, which focuses on natural light, rich color and a circular floor plan, giving the store a more upscale feel. The store’s skylights resulted in an energy savings of 30% or $55,000. Additionally, the chain’s executives have found that the skylights give the whole store a clean, bright and natural feel that is soothing to customers and makes them want to linger in the store longer.
(Display & Design Ideas, December 2001)
(Food Distributor, May/June 2002)
Natural lighting for outdoor gear and clothing retailer REI helped the store realize a 26% reduction in energy usage.
(Print, August 2005)
The Federal Energy Management Program reports that 25% to 50% energy savings can be achieved with advanced lighting equipment and that number can be cut in half again when daylighting is added to the project.
(Consulting Specifying Engineer, December 2004)
The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program reports that daylighting can significantly cut lighting energy use for lighting building interiors, sometimes by up to 75% or 80%. The DOE’s Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Thermal Test Facility in Golden, Colo., was designed to provide natural lighting, allowing it to use 75% less energy for lighting than a building without daylighting features. The DOE reports that for many commercial buildings, the total energy costs can be reduced by as much as onethird through the optimal use of daylighting strategies.
(Federal Energy Management Program Newsletter, March/April 2002)
According to the Wisconsin Daylighting Collaborative, about 86% of electricity in traditional buildings goes for light, fans and cooling. A cool daylighting project can cut these costs by more than 50% by reducing electric lighting, because daylight produces less heat per unit of illumination than most light sources. The Collaborative also notes that the demand savings are more important than the energy savings since daylighting provides energy usage reduction at the most important time – during peak hours, when energy rates are the highest and daylight availability is the greatest.
(Energy User News, April 2001)
The Florida Energy Conservation Assistance Program reported that 29 Florida businesses that installed daylighting systems reduced daytime electric lighting consumption by an average of 93% while still achieving an average of 160 foot candles of light with a color rendering index of 98 in work areas.
(Environmental Design & Construction, January 2001)
A daylighting test at the Federal Office Building in Oakland, Calif., reported up to 86% lighting energy savings and a daily cooling load reduction of up to 24%, with higher worker satisfaction.
(Environmental Design & Construction, January 2001)
According to the U.S. Green Building Council’s Sustainable Building Technical Manual, well-designed daylighting can reduce lighting energy use by 50% to 80%.
(Environmental Design & Construction, January 2001)
A Southern Californian computer company constructed a new facility adjacent to its original facility that was nearly identical to the original except that it incorporated significantly more natural light. After two years, the company recorded a 62% reduction in electricity costs in the daylit building, which allowed a four-year payback on the initial extra capital costs. Additionally, absenteeism was reduced by 45% in the daylit building (a rate which has held steady for seven years).
(Portland Business Journal, July 19, 1999)
Lockheed Martin reports that after daylighting its facility in Sunnyvale, Calif., the company reaped annual energy savings of $500,000 (approximately 75% of its electric bill) plus 15% higher worker productivity.
(Journal of Property Management, September 1998)
According to the Sustainable Building Industries Council in Washington, D.C., the average middle school that incorporates daylighting will save $500,000 over the next 10 years.
(Article by Dan Reicher, Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy, as written in the School Board Journal’s “Learning by Design” website: www.asbj.com/lbd, 2002)
Researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, Calif., reported the successful use of daylighting techniques in the retrofit of the single-story Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce resulted in reduced annual electricity consumption of 47%. Additionally, the daylighting retrofit was met with positive feedback from the building’s occupants, many who were often able to work with no electrical lighting at all.
(Environmental Design & Construction, January 2001)
