In any ambient warehouse, with the possible exception of automated warehouses, lighting and energy costs will form a significant share of total running costs and lighting will absorb the lion’s share, typically up to 65% of the total. Moreover, the quality of lighting, if poor, can cause staff problems with reading and forklift driving, especially among the older drivers who need much more light than young drivers. Attention to lighting issues has also been highlighted by the need to meet government environmental targets because lighting, if chosen wisely and controlled, can return the best results in CO2 reductions and help comply with the Energy Act of 2011 that comes into force in 2018.
The good news is that lighting technology has advanced greatly over the last 20 years, perhaps best epitomised by the advent of LED lighting, and for the icing on the cake there is even help and advice through the Carbon Trust and government tax breaks for investment in new, energy-saving lights. The bad news, if one could call it that, is that there is still suspicion over the wide variety of energy-saving claims and aftersales service from suppliers in a much more unregulated industry. That said, however, efficient lighting tops the list of ‘green’ technology investments according to a recent survey from the Carbon Trust. This showed that 96% of the businesses surveyed said energy efficiency was an important consideration when buying or upgrading equipment but only 51% were confident about manufacturers’ energy efficiency claims. There is, however, less need for concern here because the Carbon Trust now has a ‘green’ business directory that features energy efficiency and low carbon equipment suppliers who have been independently assessed and accredited via the Carbon Trust accredited supplier scheme.
The tragedy is that this suspicion over payback claims and CAPEX concerns is still costing warehousing wasted energy bills of over £100 million a year, even though these suspicions are no longer warranted if basic precautions are taken and that must include choosing a reliable supplier who will be honest enough to show the case for various lighting schemes and not proceed if he cannot provide a cogent ROI case. Lighting suppliers have also innovated on the CAPEX front by schemes like rent your light, offered by Aura Light. This eliminates investment in equipment and cuts a user’s energy costs from day one. It should appeal to accountants because the scheme aids cash flow, keeping costs off the balance sheet and takes advantage of tax benefits. The scheme provides a full performance guarantee over the contract period.
To avoid incorrectly specifying a lighting scheme that makes lighting ineffective and costly, warehouse operators need to consider what activities are involved and over what periods. In some areas staff may not move from their work stations for long periods while in others less lux may be needed. Generally, 200 lux is enough for general movement and stacking but 300 may be needed to read shipping documents and even 500 lux to read small print on labels.
One of the best aspects of LED lighting is that not only does it use far less energy than more conventional lights but it also has far longer life, leading to lower maintenance costs. Additionally, their ability to incorporate dimming and motion sensors for areas of low traffic and interaction with changing natural light conditions further cuts energy costs. Such a combination of these has been known to cut lighting energy by up to 92%.
There is no doubt that LED options offer a better solution over conventional, high pressure discharge lamps but they may not always be the most suitable solution. At its Thurrock, Essex depot Wincanton, for example, found that a combination of T5 flourescents and controls cut energy costs by 60% over the existing low pressure sodium lighting installation. It was a viable alternative to LED and shows the good sense to select a supplier who offers all lighting forms so as to find the best solution.
Comments are closed.