Martin Preston (Lutron observer)


Bruce Griffin (Lutron observer)


Dominic Meyrick Julian Sutherland


Mark Ridler


Alan Tulla Simon Robinson


> Downlighters


could have been scrapped but there was an uproar from manufacturers


the guide to lighting terms on the facing page). Some felt the minimum level should have been raised to 65. ‘I have an issue that manufacturing in this country


has too much influence on [the lighting] codes and legislation,’ said Meyrick. ‘Downlighters could have been scrapped [in Part L 2010] but there was an uproar in manufacturing in certain places, and it was seen as being a step too far.’ ‘I’ve had manufacturers come up to me and say, you


can’t go much above 55 [luminaire lumens per circuit watt] because it’s too hard to achieve,’ said Alan Tulla, president of the Society of Light and Lighting, which publishes the Lighting Code. Meyrick added: ‘Part L is a one-size-fits-all, unfortunately. The reason I have an issue about the 55 [minimum requirement] is that there is an enormous refurb market, and that 55 allows a core quality replacement to go in and it will stay there


28 CIBSE Journal September 2010


for 10 years. If they put in a product that’s 65 lumens per watt, that would really save energy .’ ‘But there’s an opportunity for the Code to say: “the minimum standard should be achieved, and we can add to that,” said Mark Ridler of BDP. Many in the group felt that building design should


begin with an emphasis on using natural daylight. ‘But there is a tension between daylight design and solar gains and ventilation system design – for example, I’m getting lots of good daylight but also huge solar gains and am putting in a big cooling system to deal with that,’ added Julian Sutherland of Atkins. ‘When you look at the land between architecture and building services engineering, that tension sits in here and we’re not quite sure who’s responsible [ for resolving it].’ Marc Draper of Scott Wilson said: ‘If you’re looking at overall energy consumption of a building, and are


www.cibsejournal.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88