So how does this translate?
Street lighting accounts for around 30% of a local authority’s overall electricity consumption. This could be more or it could be less depending on whether the assets have been converted to LED yet or not. Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of CO2 is generated per year by street lighting and with the climate emergency we need to drive this to become NET Zero.. Switching from traditional light sources to LED can deliver energy savings > 60% and it has additional benefits for reduced maintenance costs too.
Is it just driven by energy and the green agenda though or is it more a reflection of recent funding challenges?
Salix funding and toolkits supported by the government look to deliver whole life value, and these are assessed on a payback basis….So typically for larger or borough wide schemes with public funding, whether direct or through a maintenance contract, it becomes who can work the numbers most effectively i.e lowest energy consumed to deliver the level as close to the required class as possible using the lowest capital cost in the shortest time. It is purely a numbers game for everyone in the supply and/or contract chains. What does that mean from a practical perspective? It means that collectively we look at the most efficient way to meet the numbers. Taking a broad brush approach ignoring the smaller details of each individual scheme ratherthan trying to undertand whu=y we are lighting a space and for whom?
Powered by FlippingBook