Loading...
Energy Efficient Street LightsCity of Kalispell Post Office Box 1997 - Kalispell, Montana 59903-1997 - Telephone (406) 758-7000 Fax - (406) 758-7758 Al REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and. City Council FROM: James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT: Energy Efficient Street Lights MEETING DATE: May 2, 2005 BACKGROUND: Attached please find a memo from Jinn Hansz concerning Energy Efficient Street Lights. There is an opportunity to replace our existing inefficient street lights utilizing efficiency rebates which will pay roughly 43% of the cost leaving approximately $72,300 left to fiend. We do have the ability to take an internal loan or B01 loan for this amount and pay it back over the next five years with estimated savings cost as well as revenues in the light maintenance fund. FISCAL EFFECTS: Overall energy savings at the end of five years and reduced light pollution. Respectfully submitted, Jaynes H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell Public Works Department w Post Office Box 1997, Kalispell, Montana 59 3-d997 - Telephone 406 t58-7720, Fax 4 '75&-7831 MEMORANDUM 27 April 2005 To. lames Patrick, City Manager From: James C. Hansz, P.E., Director of Public Works / City Subject: Energy Efficient Street Lights 1n January I provided you with some information developed in response to the public's interest in reducing the cost of City street lighting while improving its efficiency. I asked Fred to re -visit that data and check again with FEC on costs and availability of the lighting program. As you will recall, in January the dark skies advocates outlined their concerns at a City Council work session. One of their concerns was with the old style inefficient street lights installed throughout Kalispell. They indicated that new more efficient styles are available which are less costly to operate. During the discussion they indicated FEC now had information on these new lights. (FYI, several years ago we discussed changing out our street lights with Pacific Power & Light, who were the electrical provider for a short time during a period of industry change. That discussion led nowhere; PP&L stated they would not change the street lights because they had no economic reason to do so and had no personnel to do the work.) In January, Fred contacted FEC who now operate the local electric utility. FEC and Bonneville Power do have programs with efficiency rebates which will pay roughly 43% of the cost, approximately $53,502.00, to change over to more energy efficient lights. We checked with FEC today and confirmed these programs are still available. The remaining 57% of the cost, approximately $72,300, is the responsibility of the City. Once the lights are changed the monthly energy charge per light will drop from $10.50 to $8.50, a savings of $24.00 per year per light. This reduction totals $11,568/year for our 482 lights and calculates to an approximate six -year payback of the $7s,200.00 energy efficiency investment. The $73,200.00 cost must be paid up front to get the project moving. But, FEC has indicated the project could be approached in two phases if budgeting is an issue. memo0192045.doc At the present time street light power costs are paid through an assessment on property. If this investment is made we will need to identify a way to fund the up -front costs then use the assessments to repay the funded amount. It may be possible for the City to lend itself the money from some fund having surplus cash, or there may be a way to issue warrants similar to those used to fund sidewalks. Another option may be a Board of Investment loan. These options should be discussed with Finance to determine the best alternative to move the project forward. I recommend we proceed with this project before these special utility subsidies are ended by the utilities. MEMORANDUM January 21, 2005 To: James Hanusz, Director of P lic Works From: Fred Zavodny,4'1y$ ct M Re: Street Lighting Energy s t n Funds The City Council was recently approached by concerned citizens regarding lighting issues in the community. In particular the mercury vapor street lights were criticized for output and energy related inefficiencies. I was asked to investigate the possibility of receiving an energy related rebatelincentive to convert the mercury vapor lighting to high pressure sodium lighting. Bonneville Power administers a rebate program for undertakings that result in a consequential kilowatt hour savings. Replacing the mercury vapor lights with high pressure sodium lights is a qualifying Bonneville Power rebate project. Flathead Electric Cooperative recognizes the importance and value of this undertaking to the community and will also contribute significantly towards the rebate. The proposed rebate calculations are as follows: Cost to convert 482 175W Mercury Vapor lamps tol00W high Pressure Sodium lamps = $125,802 Bonneville Power and Flathead Electric Cooperative rebates — $ 53,502 Total conversion costs to the City after rebates = $ 72,300 The annual flat rate savings realized by converting the 482 mercury vapor lights to high pressure sodium lights amounts to $11,568. This equates to an approximate 6 year payback based on the total conversion costs to the City. All values are based on current equipment and labor costs.