An audit, a photometric baseline, a modelled retrofit case and the financial analysis that follows from them — so the capital decision rests on calculated numbers rather than a vendor's savings estimate.
Most retrofit proposals compare a measured existing condition against a manufacturer's claimed performance. The savings look excellent because the two sides of the comparison were produced by different methods, and one of them was produced by the party selling the equipment.
A defensible analysis models both cases the same way. The existing installation is surveyed and modelled at its actual maintained condition, the proposed case is modelled from the same plan with the same assumptions, and the difference between them is the only thing that gets claimed.
Luminaire count, type, mounting height and condition. Measured illuminance where access permits, and a modelled baseline where it does not. Existing controls and whether they are still functioning as installed — frequently they are not, and recovering that alone changes the economics.
Connected load, operating hours by area and shift pattern, and the utility rate structure the savings will actually be realised against.
Energy savings projections built on the modelled cases rather than on rules of thumb. Payback and NPV. Maintenance and relamping cost avoided. Utility incentive programs the project qualifies for and what documentation they require. Where the client is considering Lighting-as-a-Service, the structure is modelled alongside the capital purchase so the two can be compared on the same terms.
Every financial figure is cross-checked against the photometric assumptions it depends on. A savings number that only holds if the space is under-lit is not a savings number.
Yes, and it is a common short engagement. The proposal's assumptions are checked against a modelled baseline, and the findings are issued in writing.
The analysis and the documentation the programs require are part of the work. Which programs apply depends on the jurisdiction and the utility.
LaaS structures are modelled alongside a capital purchase so they can be compared on the same terms. Whether it makes sense depends on the balance sheet treatment you want and the length of the commitment, not on the monthly figure alone.
Multi-site portfolios are routine, including across Canada and the United States, where the applicable energy code varies by jurisdiction.
A few lines is enough: the space, the levels it has to hit, and when it’s needed. You get a written scope, a fee and a schedule back, normally within two business days.