2.5.2.2. Defining the Gap
The most significant problem as shown above is the use of PAR lamps as a downlight
solution in spaces with high ceilings. The severity of the problem is revealed in Table
3, which shows the relative energy use of incandescent as compared to the rest of the
connected load in the courtrooms. On average, 54% of the total connected load is direct
incandescent lighting--the most inefficient type of lighting.
Table 4. Relative Energy Use of Different Types of Light Sources.
Courthouse and
% Linear
% Compact
% Incandescent
% Metal Halide
Courtroom Description
Fluorescent
Fluorescent
Tampa, FL
42%
9%
49%
0%
801 North Florida Ave
Gibbons Courthouse-
District Courtroom, 13B
Tampa, FL
35%
7%
14%
43%
801 North Florida Ave
Gibbons Courthouse-
District Courtroom, 14B
Tallahassee, FL
90%
0%
10%
0%
111 North Adams St.
US Courthouse-
District Courtroom
Montgomery, AL
34%
0%
66%
0%
One Church Street
Johnson Courthouse-
District Courtroom
Columbia, SC
93%
7%
0%
0%
901 Richland Strreet
Perry Courthouse-
District Courtroom 13B
Central Islip, NY
0%
74%
0%
26%
100 Federal Plaza
Alfonz D'Amato Courthouse-
9th floor Courtroom
500 Pearl Street
81%
0%
19%
0%
Manhattan, NY
Moynihan Courthouse-
Foley Square, Rm 15A
Subtotal
54%
14%
23%
10%
2.5.2.3. Point-by-point Calculations
Given the results in Table 4, the first challenge was to find a substitute for incandescent
lighting that would meet the strict criteria of courtroom lighting, including excellent
color rendering and dimmability, while providing sufficient horizontal light levels. To
identify possible solutions, point-by-point calculations were performed using five
different downlight options.
March 2006
Page 12
Previous Page
