PUBLIC LIGHTING

1
PUBLIC LIGHTING

• LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE

COLIN PITMAN, DIRECTOR CONTRACT MANAGEMENT CITY
OF SALISBURY
5th February 2002
2
PUBLIC LIGHTING

• STANDARD SETTING
• CONTESTABILITY
• VICTORIAN EXPERIENCE
• by Craig Marschall, Managing Consultant
• Trans Tasman Tariff Fuel Consultants

3
STANDARD SETTING

• PUBLIC LIGHTING STANDARDS
• Over the last few years there have been
  significant modifications to Public Lighting
  Standards by a very active Road Lighting
  Committee.
• These Standards will be elaborated upon by other
  speakers

4

• Representation 
• Membership consists of representatives from
• -            Uhtna Electronics Pty. Ltd.
• -            Phillips Lighting
• -            Pierlite Pty.Ltd.
• -            GEC Lighting
• -            Sylvania Lighting ( 2 reps)
• -            Riverton Engineering Co.
• -            Australian Local Government
  Association.
• -            Christchurch City Council
• -            Energy Australia
• -            Powercor Australia
• -            Energex
• -            ETSA Utilities
• -            Gough Manufacturing
• -            Willoughby City Council
• The Membership is heavily weighted towards
  industry or supplier representatives.

5

• Code Review - Implementation.
•   
• The Code is under constant review, however, the
  fundamentals of the design process are apparently
  standardised, leading to luminaire wattage and
  spacing when applied to existing urban areas, of
  a much higher standard than currently exists.
•   A computer package for design exists which
  models the Code design process to achieve a
  design and illumination.
• Certification of designers exists, and a number
  of the members on the Advisory Committee are
  consultant designers, as are the suppliers.

6

• Reciprocity with Overseas Practice
• Whilst Australian conditions of night-time
  illumination are taken into account in setting
  intensity and distribution, it would appear that
  the issue of commonality of Design Practice and
  breaches of Trade Regulation in terms of the GATT
  Agreement have influenced some members thinking
  on the chosen lighting standards.
•  

7

• The Future
• The future of the lighting design standards must
  be influenced by the following
•   1.    Customer expectation - P Category.
• 2.    Traffic Safety - V Category.
• 3.    Energy consumption.
• 4.    Efficiency i.e., lumens per kilowatt and
  illumination sustainability.
• Some evidence suggests that 60 70 of the
  rated lumens is common, i.e., we pay for 60
  70 of the nominated consumption. 
• 5. Membership on the Committee must focus on the
  customer, rather than the provider of services.
• Membership should include greater Local
  Government representation.

8
CONTESTABILITY

• The enquiry by the South Australian Industry
  Regulator was completed in November 2000.
•  
• The enquiry considered all major cost components
  aside from Transmission and Distribution charges,
  which are fixed by the Electricity Pricing Order
  until January 2003
• Benchmarking was undertaken with other States,
  and comparisons in per annum are provided below
  for the most used lights
•   SA Vic NSW Tas Qld
• LP Sodium 18W 66.48 100 16 100
  77
• Sodium 100W 147 97 194 110
  -
• Fluoro. 40W 73 NA 36 NA
  41
•  
• The Regulators comments suggest South Australia
  is in line with other States. We should question
  this.

9

• The Regulator investigated, in addition to
  lighting charges
• 1.    Performance benchmarking
• 2. Service standards
• 3.     3.    Cost benchmarking
• 4.    4.    Assets and Rate of Return for ETSA
  Utilities and AGL
• 5.        5. Asset life
• 6.        6. Asset valuation.
• 7.        7. Opex and Capex
• 8.        8. Pole charges or Elevation charges.
• 9.        9. Administration costs.
• 10.      10.  Retail costs.

10
Total Revenue Requirement (000) (based on Yr.
2000/2001 in SA)