Zero Carbon Footprint Lighting?

[DyeONiceUs]

Hi all. We've just put together a new black box theatre space on campus and I am working with our Alternative Energy Engineering program to try to create a zero-carbon-emission system for the theatre. We've got the power system wrapped up with serious expertise there, but the theatrical lighting, we'll need som help and advice with.

In order to effectively do so, I am ditching our old Altman 6's and 8's in favor of LED lighting. I am currently looking at the Altman Spectra Color 100w''s for the lighting (though I see they also make a 50w version), but am rather new to the LED world. I've read I believe all the LED forum discussions here and have a better idea of what I am up against. Technically, we have a very short throw grid (<10') and we're hoping to light an approximately 30' x 40' space with (typically) 6 acting areas. I am calculating approximately 36 instruments for this space. In addition, I am hoping to replace some of our 3.5qs with some sort of LED (or other low-wattage) instrument with gobo projection capabilities, perhaps in the market for 4 or 5 of these. We're running an Leprecon LPC 48 with 36 Leprecon high-wattage ULD dimmers (no problems in the power department).

My questions for the more knowledgable: Will the LPC effectively run 36 LED fixtures or will I run out of capability? And, will 36 100w fixtures be sufficient, not enough or overkill for the space? And... what are your recommendations for low-wattage gobo projection/spotlighting in this space? We're looking at a budget of less than $60k total.

Thanks in advance for your help and expertise.

Cheers:
Eric

 

[Footer]

What is your time frame? Are you looking to do this project next month or a year from now? If you can, wait, at least until after LDI (October). Reveal has some pretty amazing stuff out right now. I have a feeling we will see the fabled LED ERS style fixture that we are all craving. It might even be worth your while to fly out to Vegas to go look at specific gear.

 

[PeteEngel]

For gobo projection this is the fixture. no need to wait for other prototypes to emerge. The AledIN is available now.
ROBERT JULIAT Products
the pool of light and projection abilities are far superior to any ERS.

Have fun!

 

[shiben]

A year or few ago, a University of Illinois team outfited a black box theatre with a all non-conventional setup for about 30-40k, if I remember correctly. They got around 40 Chauvet color block type washes, and something like 4 seachanger Nemos. They found the Chuabet units unacceptable for face light, and used the Nemos for that. For an additional 20K, you could probably outfit yourself with a few more Nemos or slightly better color wash systems. I believe BillESC was showing some LED PARs that are probably a lot nicer for like 500 bucks or so, so you could get around 40 of those for 20 grand, I would assume the NEMOS are in the 4k range? so maybe 10 of those to fill out the remaining 40k? The only real advantage of the seachanger NEMO over the AledIN is that it can change colors, although I would imagine the AledIN is at a slightly lower price point, and the field is unquestionably nicer than those of any ERS, so for gobo work, those are probably the best option, if you dont mind not being able to use multiple colors from the same fixture in the same show. Not sure on the price of the Altman Spectra 100Ws, but I have heard a lot of good things about the Spectra Cyc units, so your probably in good hands there. I would imagine that for under 10' of grid height, any LED for theatrical use would be bright enough, its just a matter of demoing those in your price range, and then choosing the best fit for your space.

Your console appears to have a full DMX universe of control, so it should work fine.

The biggest problem that I can see with this entire plan is that a true zero carbon footprint rig is at this point impossible. Straight up. True carbon free rigs would need to control just about every aspect of production, from mining raw materials to trucking the finished unit to your facility. Most all places claiming to have zero carbon footprint actually offset all the carbon they dump getting their gear by planting a lot of trees or building a green roof or something. Dont let this technicality stop you, though. This is where theatres are going to move eventually, although very slowly. Colleges and University black boxes are the most logical first step for low carbon footprint theatres, because they have money to spend on "experimental" things, and will train new designers into using LEDs for things other than cycs, etc. I like this idea, and am currently working on getting a setup like this for our college (probably wont happen, but whatever).

 

[DyeONiceUs]

A year or few ago, a University of Illinois team outfited a black box theatre with a all non-conventional setup for about 30-40k, if I remember correctly. They got around 40 Chauvet color block type washes, and something like 4 seachanger Nemos. They found the Chuabet units unacceptable for face light, and used the Nemos for that. For an additional 20K, you could probably outfit yourself with a few more Nemos or slightly better color wash systems. I believe BillESC was showing some LED PARs that are probably a lot nicer for like 500 bucks or so, so you could get around 40 of those for 20 grand, I would assume the NEMOS are in the 4k range? so maybe 10 of those to fill out the remaining 40k? The only real advantage of the seachanger NEMO over the AledIN is that it can change colors, although I would imagine the AledIN is at a slightly lower price point, and the field is unquestionably nicer than those of any ERS, so for gobo work, those are probably the best option, if you dont mind not being able to use multiple colors from the same fixture in the same show. Not sure on the price of the Altman Spectra 100Ws, but I have heard a lot of good things about the Spectra Cyc units, so your probably in good hands there. I would imagine that for under 10' of grid height, any LED for theatrical use would be bright enough, its just a matter of demoing those in your price range, and then choosing the best fit for your space.

Two huge issues with the LEDs of the past have been light intensity and color quality. All the LDs I've talked with about going LED have begun the discussion with a string of obscenities. The advantage of the Altman spectra pars in my research thusfar are their use of amber diodes (in addition to the rgb) for supposedly naturalistic lighting and better color mixing, as well as range/power. Last year, I bought two different LED units, one a typical DJ (no name brand) rgb 64 par can, and the other a rip-off of the colorAdo. As an LD, for theatrical lighting, I wouldn't use either, but the colorAdo bar light puts out some serious light. I can flood the entire stage with four of those. Now light QUALITY.... that's another thing. So in the consideration, have you had experience with the light quality of the chauvets? And, in your experience with panel floods, how do they compare with a par? Is the cost differential ($1300 par versus $500 panel) worth what one gains?

The biggest problem that I can see with this entire plan is that a true zero carbon footprint rig is at this point impossible. Straight up. True carbon free rigs would need to control just about every aspect of production, from mining raw materials to trucking the finished unit to your facility. Most all places claiming to have zero carbon footprint actually offset all the carbon they dump getting their gear by planting a lot of trees or building a green roof or something.

True. True zero carbon emission would be next to impossible, particularly in setup of a new system. And frankly, we're all going to make a sizable step into the carbon heap on a daily basis, unless we're dead. Though from a day to day operation standpoint, at least as far as the alternative energy folks are concerned zero-sum carbon footprinting in theatre is an absolute possibility. Our solar array will actually feed surplus back into the grid at a 2 to 1 (feed to use) ratio, and we're looking into a geo-thermal heating system as part of the setup next year. Over the long-haul, we'll be offsetting at least a sizable chunk of even the setup impact of the system. I am working with a friend of mine in Oregon who is big into eco-set design, so this year's sets will be at least 75% recycled materials. Next year, we'll up that. Because of our use of used clothing for costuming, used props, reused materials in sets and props building, I think that theatre is poised to be one of the greenest "industries" in the country. For those interested in such issues, pick up a copy of "Greening Up Our Houses" by Theresa May and Larry Fried. It's older, but carries a lot of relevant info on ways to dink around with sustainability. And, as you mention Shiben, there are other means by which a theatre (or individual) could reduce its carbon footprint. Purchasing carbon credits and not using them is one. Planting trees or installing a green roof is another. Also, researching your suppliers (when you do need to buy new) is often overlooked as a means; environmentally responsible suppliers can go a long way to reducing your print. Another trickle down greening effect can be produced by investing in companies that are researching green technologies. And even if you don't have the means to pop a windmill on top of your stage or a solar array, many local energy companies offer programs that allow you to get your energy from renewable sources.

Thanks all for your thoughts and insight.
-Eric

 

[STEVETERRY]

Two huge issues with the LEDs of the past have been light intensity and color quality. All the LDs I've talked with about going LED have begun the discussion with a string of obscenities. The advantage of the Altman spectra pars in my research thusfar are their use of amber diodes (in addition to the rgb) for supposedly naturalistic lighting and better color mixing, as well as range/power. Last year, I bought two different LED units, one a typical DJ (no name brand) rgb 64 par can, and the other a rip-off of the colorAdo. As an LD, for theatrical lighting, I wouldn't use either, but the colorAdo bar light puts out some serious light. I can flood the entire stage with four of those. Now light QUALITY.... that's another thing. So in the consideration, have you had experience with the light quality of the chauvets? And, in your experience with panel floods, how do they compare with a par? Is the cost differential ($1300 par versus $500 panel) worth what one gains?



True. True zero carbon emission would be next to impossible, particularly in setup of a new system. And frankly, we're all going to make a sizable step into the carbon heap on a daily basis, unless we're dead. Though from a day to day operation standpoint, at least as far as the alternative energy folks are concerned zero-sum carbon footprinting in theatre is an absolute possibility. Our solar array will actually feed surplus back into the grid at a 2 to 1 (feed to use) ratio, and we're looking into a geo-thermal heating system as part of the setup next year. Over the long-haul, we'll be offsetting at least a sizable chunk of even the setup impact of the system. I am working with a friend of mine in Oregon who is big into eco-set design, so this year's sets will be at least 75% recycled materials. Next year, we'll up that. Because of our use of used clothing for costuming, used props, reused materials in sets and props building, I think that theatre is poised to be one of the greenest "industries" in the country. For those interested in such issues, pick up a copy of "Greening Up Our Houses" by Theresa May and Larry Fried. It's older, but carries a lot of relevant info on ways to dink around with sustainability. And, as you mention Shiben, there are other means by which a theatre (or individual) could reduce its carbon footprint. Purchasing carbon credits and not using them is one. Planting trees or installing a green roof is another. Also, researching your suppliers (when you do need to buy new) is often overlooked as a means; environmentally responsible suppliers can go a long way to reducing your print. Another trickle down greening effect can be produced by investing in companies that are researching green technologies. And even if you don't have the means to pop a windmill on top of your stage or a solar array, many local energy companies offer programs that allow you to get your energy from renewable sources.

Thanks all for your thoughts and insight.
-Eric

The Arcola Theatre in London has been working on just this for about two years. They drive the entire system on fuel cells.

One point: The efficacy of RGB LED fixtures in LPW is not yet that great. Before you throw out tungsten in favor of all-LED, make sure you can deliver the required number of footcandles to the stage. I have yet to meet a director or designer who would sign on to the idea "We can't make the look you want because it uses too much power"

Arcola made extensive use of HPL 375W lamps as well as LED's.

ST

 

[shiben]

The Arcola Theatre in London has been working on just this for about two years. They drive the entire system on fuel cells.

One point: The efficacy of RGB LED fixtures in LPW is not yet that great. Before you throw out tungsten in favor of all-LED, make sure you can deliver the required number of footcandles to the stage. I have yet to meet a director or designer who would sign on to the idea "We can't make the look you want because it uses too much power"

Arcola made extensive use of HPL 375W lamps as well as LED's.

ST

Thats why I would use at least a few of the seachanger nemos, or some other form of non-conventional tungsten colored light. But this is a good point, a 375 or even a 575W lamp run off of a solar panel is way more carbon neutral than the most efficient LED run off of a conventional grid. In the department of brightness, I think that a lot of the issues of "very bright" go out the window because its a 10' throw. You can use table lamps to get a bright enough for stage look in that kind of situation, and that is what makes this setup ideal for LEDs for color wash duties.

So in the consideration, have you had experience with the light quality of the chauvets? And, in your experience with panel floods, how do they compare with a par? Is the cost differential ($1300 par versus $500 panel) worth what one gains?

I have had no-theatrical experience with either, as I read about the place in Lighting and Sound America. However, I think that for the most part, if your not doing frontlight with LEDs or using special made LEDs specifically for face light, your quality will probably be acceptable. BillESC has posted some photos of gear his company sells that are facelit with LED RGBAW strips, and the the quality looks acceptable.

 

[DuckJordan]

This thread has been taking a very interesting turn, more about the effects and uses of "green" energy in the theatrical environment. There has also been a lot of mention of throw here, at what range would certain LED products bleed off to much to be effectively used in the environment you put them. 10' is a short distance compared to most place such as an example from the space i am currently working which has throws of up to 75'.

So my question to these if the OP would want or have to change places of staging, which lights would be more apt to throwing longer distances?

Lastly, mention of the fixtures has been stated fairly extensively, now how about the control console? If the inventory of fixtures gets large enough where they are required to use 100+ LED fixtures each with 5-7 channels a piece, that's easily at least one DMX universe. Not to mention the more time it takes to program these fixtures as instead of just setting intensity and gel which multiple people can do, you have to program the show exclusively on the console, so while it would save energy right away what about the energy to keep the console on while programing, refrigerator for the technician who is controlling (not really that big of an issue but its possible). So while looking exclusively at fixtures to go green its really a whole process of how theater should be setup in order to effectively go green.

So along with posts about fixtures and such we should really be covering the whole process of lighting.

 

[shiben]

This thread has been taking a very interesting turn, more about the effects and uses of "green" energy in the theatrical environment. There has also been a lot of mention of throw here, at what range would certain LED products bleed off to much to be effectively used in the environment you put them. 10' is a short distance compared to most place such as an example from the space i am currently working which has throws of up to 75'.

So my question to these if the OP would want or have to change places of staging, which lights would be more apt to throwing longer distances?

Lastly, mention of the fixtures has been stated fairly extensively, now how about the control console? If the inventory of fixtures gets large enough where they are required to use 100+ LED fixtures each with 5-7 channels a piece, that's easily at least one DMX universe. Not to mention the more time it takes to program these fixtures as instead of just setting intensity and gel which multiple people can do, you have to program the show exclusively on the console, so while it would save energy right away what about the energy to keep the console on while programing, refrigerator for the technician who is controlling (not really that big of an issue but its possible). So while looking exclusively at fixtures to go green its really a whole process of how theater should be setup in order to effectively go green.

So along with posts about fixtures and such we should really be covering the whole process of lighting.

The short answer to the first issue is that at 75' of throw, good luck using an LED for anything. As for the added programing time, using a color wheel/color presets and pallets you can probably have similarly rapid programing. I the console can operate up to 512 control channels, and has 2 DMX outputs, so I doubt size of the console will be an issue for now, if you end up with more than 100 LED units, then you probably have more than 60k to play with? I dont know, but I do agree that the whole process is probably worth dealing with on here...

 

[jstroming]

Zero carbon emission?? Do all your employees plan on walking to work? just kidding! haha couldn't resist.

 

[shiben]

Zero carbon emission?? Do all your employees plan on walking to work? just kidding! haha couldn't resist.

Actually, there are ways to make that happen... Example, give every employee a 1% discount on their insurance or something every week/month they walk or bike to work at least half of the days in that time period, and maybe 2% if you only drive yourself for 1 day a week. If not driving isnt always possible in your area, issuing bus discount/free ride cards are a good way. Our college issues cards that make each fare $1/ride, which is cheaper than gas, so it encourages people to take the bus instead of drive. A combination of incentive programs can be effectively used to keep the majority of employees walking to work the majority of the time, or at least using a low carbon option to get to work.

 

[DyeONiceUs]

The "radiant argument" to carbon footprinting is always an interesting one to consider; when you've got people involved, it gets complex: cars, THEIR houses, what THEIR families and extended families are doing, etc. etc. It's the classic slippery slope flaw. When you look total package (and total everything connected with a carbon reduction project), it's tough to imagine anything that is zero carbon footprint. Transportation ranks WAY up there on the carbon draw. Though, as Shiben suggests, at PSU we encourage both students and staff to utilize public transportation by reducing/eliminating the cost of using it.

In my analyses specifically with a theatre, the major carbon draw is nearly always HVAC and lighting. The lighting is of specific concern for us as theatre practioners. When you've got traditional instrumentation running at 500-2000w each and put 30-250 of those in use at the same time, you've got some serious draw! At the bottom end of that estimate (500w * 30 * a 3 hour show) that equals 45 kilowatts (per show, if you're running at full). At the upper end, we're talking 1500kw per show. Just for comparison, the typical home in the US uses 920 kw a month. These of course are not "real world" examples of energy consumption by the average theatre in the US, but perhaps can put things into a bit more relative perspective.

My grandmother refuses to recycle. "Dearie, my eight soda cans a week are not going to make any difference in the long run." But grandma, your eight soda cans and your eight friends' soda cans add up to 3328 soda cans at the end of the year. Try to fit those in your green room. My point (long way about) is: every bit counts, no matter how seemingly insignificant.

Plus, we're also planning on running everything by hydrogen powered robots. Actors included! *wink*

 

[DuckJordan]

Plus, we're also planning on running everything by hydrogen powered robots. Actors included! *wink*

So were are going to see an improvement in abilities?

 

[derekleffew]

...At the bottom end of that estimate (500w * 30 * a 3 hour show) that equals 45 kilowatts (per show, if you're running at full). At the upper end, we're talking 1500kw per show. Just for comparison, the typical home in the US uses 920 kw a month. ...

/pedantic
500W x 30 fixtures x 3 hours = 45 kWh. "The average household in the United States uses about 8,900 kilowatt-hours of electricity each year." which is ~24 kWh per day. But the theatre's 45 kWh (and that's exaggerated as it's unlikely that all 30 fixtures will be at 100% for three hours) entertains 100-200 people, whereas the average US household is 2.6 people.

Install all the fluorescent, discharge, and LED sources you want in lobbies, corridors, shops, dressign rooms, etc., but PLEASE leave me the incandescent sources for the auditorium and stage, at least during the performance when audience is present.

A similar topic arose on another forum. I contended that modern rock and roll shows, even though using fewer discharge sources (moving lights), use more energy today than the 500-1000 PARcan rigs of the past. A moving light uses 1200W the entire time the lamp is struck, whereas the PAR uses 1000W only when it is on and at full.

Another anecdote: Bette Midler (or her press agency) stated that it was "greener" for her to do a sit-down engagement in Las Vegas, rather than a tour with 20-30 trucks and busses traveling the country. I countered with "4000 people a performance, traveling from all over the country via plane and car to see her, versus 10,000 people traveling less than 50 miles to their local arena."

All food for thought.

 

[JD]

That is the thing about ML shows, you are at full draw all of the time even when the stage is black. You have to fire them up well before the show starts, and usually leave them on during breaks. With standard lights, the only ones lit are what the scene calls for and even those may not be at full. Until very high output LEDs with solid wide band spectrums become affordable, the conventional lights will do just fine. I am not sure any real amount of power savings is being achieved using discharge lamps. (Outside of followspot.)

 

[PeteEngel]

well, when you are working strict wattage, you need to take into account the effeciency of the light source. a standard HPL generates around 25 lumens per watt. while a xenon lamp generates 40 to 50 lumens per watt, and a HMI type lamp between 85 and 115 lumens per watt. so a 750w HMI lamp produces 4 times the lumen output as a 750w HPL. much more effecient, but it does stay on much longer. just babbling here.

 

[zmb]

Don't many newer moving lights have an electronic ballast that can partially dim the lamp when the blackout shutter is closed?

 

[derekleffew]

Some do, but I wouldn't say "many." It works so well, I don't even notice. I think Martin does, but VL doesn't.

 

[WooferHound]

I know that High End dims the bulbs to about 25% when the Gate or Shutters are closed. This was tought in thier classes which I attended several of. Really I can't remember the exact percentage that the brightness is reduced to, but it's just enough to keep the arc going.

 

[JD]

What they do is use two capacitors in the ballast instead of one. (In series with the lamp.) For example, if the design called for a 40 mfd cap, the circuit would have a 10 mfd cap in series with the lamp and a second 30 mfd cap isolated by a relay. For full brightness, both caps would be paralleled and you would have the equivalent of 40 mfd in the circuit. In standby mode, the 30 mfd cap drops out of circuit leaving the 10 mfd one in place, greatly reducing the current flowing through the lamp while maintaining the same arc voltage. The trick can be done with magnetic or electronic ballasts. (Example above was for a magnetic.) It's a very old and effective trick and actually increases the lifespan of the lamp while reducing heat trapped in the fixture.

EDIT: Old, in has been done with architectural mercury and MH fixtures for a long time.