Dive Brief:

• Organizations can benefit financially by applying sustainability principles to their LED lighting systems, according to a report from Oxford University and Germany-based research organization Academics for Circular Economy.
• Three-quarters of U.K. and European organizations in a sample either lowered their capital or maintenance costs, extended the life of their systems or avoided downtime by repairing, refurbishing or taking other steps to reuse their older LED systems rather than replace them, said the researchers, whose work was supported by Netherlands-based lighting company Signify.
• “This is not an argument against replacement” of older LED systems,” Priya Saikumar, doctoral researcher at the University of Oxford, said in a statement. “It is an argument against making replacement the starting point. The smarter question is: What do we need to improve, and what can we retain?"

Dive Insight:

Widespread replacement of incandescent and other types of lighting with LED-based systems has enabled organizations to use 10 times less energy over the life of their systems, but there are lifecycle costs associated with LED lighting that can go unnoticed, according to the report, From energy efficiency to resource efficiency, released last month. 

LED systems rely on valuable resources — aluminum, iron, copper, silicon, lithium, nickel among a dozen other materials — that should be preserved to the extent possible as the systems age. And the embedded carbon from the manufacturing process is also extensive. 

For these and other reasons, managing lighting systems with an eye to maximizing their useful life and minimizing replacement costs is a value worth pursuing, according to the report. “Rapid technological change can lead organizations to replace whole installations, discarding functioning components, valuable materials and remaining asset value,” it said.

On a practical level, organizations can save money, the researchers said.

Out of 50 buildings that used sustainable management practices — referred to as circular principles in the report — 37 lowered their maintenance costs, 31 extended the life of their system, 23 avoided downtime and 20 avoided full replacement of an obsolete system, according to the research. 

The Yarm School in North Yorkshire in the U.K., for example, saved money by upgrading existing light fittings rather than replacing them. The Shell Centre in London avoided producing 38.4 metric tons of steel by reusing materials. And BlackRock in London saved £122,400, or roughly $163,000, in maintenance costs over five years by reusing or refurbishing parts of its system. 

“The main financial contribution of circularity comes from costs avoided,” the report says. 

The environmental benefits are valuable, too, the researchers said. A Westminster office that refurbished its system reduced the amount of embodied carbon it would otherwise have been responsible for had it gone with replacement. “Not all users' value can be expressed directly through payback,” the report said. 

Different regulatory requirements affecting circularity principles, like recycling, in the U.K., Europe and the United States mean savings potential might differ in different countries. 

Technical issues can make a circular lighting approach challenging to implement, the report says. The researchers outline a decision-making approach facilities managers might take that starts with mapping their lighting systems and analyzing the retention value of the material in the systems. The remaining steps are about analyzing what’s worth preserving, repairing, retrofitting and so on compared to different approaches to disposal and recycling.   

“Match the condition and performance of each asset to a suitable intervention, ranging from maintenance and repair to retrofit, remanufacture or recycling,” the report says. 

For building operators that don’t have the expertise or resources to manage their systems with circularity as a goal but want to leverage its benefits, they can consider contracting with a lighting-as-a-service company. These companies own and manage organizations’ lighting systems using circular-economy principles on a fee basis. 

“The user pays for a defined lighting outcome, while the provider manages lifecycle services intended to extend product life,” the report says. “Lighting as a Service (LaaS) supports circularity by giving the provider a direct interest in extending product lifetimes and keeping products in use for longer. The provider also has the best knowledge and expertise to maintain, repair, refurbish, and upgrade them over time.”