Dsecember 4, 2008

Excellent business
LighTec helps energy go farther

Last month, Merrimack engineering firm LighTec, Inc., which offers precision-engineered lighting solutions, received the 2008 Excellence in Business Services Award from New Hampshire Business Review. LighTec owner and founder James Grady, 62, was recently named to the state’s Energy Efficiency and Sustainability Board, which works to develop “sensible, responsible and cost-effective” energy strategies, Grady said. Grady has been guiding LighTec since he opened it 18 years ago. The company focuses on commercial and industrial facilities, large and small, as well as universities. Grady graduated from the Lowell Technological Institute with a degree in industrial management.

Q: What makes your company unique?
What we’re really selling is reduced operating costs. ... You make a one-time investment that lowers your energy bill by 30 percent. For the first couple of years, you’re using that money you saved to pay off the investment, but after that, you’ve made the gift that keeps on giving. Like any investment, you are assuming some risk. The bet is the cost of energy in the future is going to go up. It’s been a pretty good bet over time.

What are some projects you’ve worked on that people would recognize in the area?
We just finished it — the seven elementary schools in Manchester. We did the gymnasium lighting. There is a significant amount of energy that was saved. They had metal halide [lights], which are traditional gym lighting. Each one of those fixtures consumes 455 watts. We went with a high-performance electronic ballast fluorescent system that used 234 watts per fixture. That’s about a 50-percent reduction in electricity used to make the light. And we ended up with more light. The energy use goes down by 50 percent and the light is brighter. And there’s a motion sensor, so if there’s nobody using it, it automatically shuts off. It works really well. We also did the legislative office building in Concord. The project up there reduced lighting consumption again by about 50 percent. We’ve done the same thing in Nashua City Hall, Nashua Department of Works buildings. 

What could an average homeowner do to improve his or her lighting efficiency?
We could start by keeping incandescent bulbs in dimming fixtures. When they’re dim, they don’t use a lot of electricity. You don’t want compact fluorescent bulbs in that socket. They don’t dim well. But when you’re not dimming, you should really be using compact fluorescent. There’s all different kinds, so you kind of have to experiment in order to get the right one. I would suggest just get on the Internet and scan around. Now what to look for is a buzzword: cold cathode compact fluorescent. They work well in chandelier systems. They look really, really nice.

There’s more than one option, so you would suggest doing some research ahead of time?
Yeah, we don’t directly sell to homeowners, but we end up ... talking to people about lighting. People say they went to Lowe’s and picked up a bulb, popped it in, and they’ll say it didn’t last that long or it didn’t light up right away. There’s all different kinds. You really have to do some experimenting.

What is the demand side of energy?
Everybody agrees this is one of the very rare times where government spending might be advisable. Now the discussion is about, we’ve got a lot of infrastructure problems ... at the same time we’re talking about the energy problem — we need to be developing clean power, wind, solar. These are supply side ideas. These are OK. We’ve got to be careful in not spending all that money in research and development. We need to spend money creating jobs for products that are on the market and ready to go. If you want to create a lot of green jobs, you’ve got to understand some jobs are greener than others. If we had $100 million to spend on developing a green project, how much carbon could we take out for $100 million? When you have that money to spend, how much would you spend on alternative energy supplies, like nuclear, solar, wind, and how much on demand reduction — end-use energy efficiency — like higher-efficiency refrigerators, televisions, motors, lighting and controls? Those are very important things to understand. When we’re trying to reduce appetites for energy, it’s always going to be cheaper to invest in something that uses less of it, rather than something that generates more of it. Use less before generating more.

Why doesn’t that demand side get as much attention?
People need a symbol. If you’re talking about wind power, draw a picture of a windmill. It can be a beautiful thing against the blue sky and it makes sense to people. But when talking about energy efficiency ... they don’t really get to see that all that much. People tend to think on the supply side before the demand side. ... People say, “I’m not going to drive a real heavy car because it uses a lot of fuel,” but if you carpool in a van that gets 18 miles per gallon and you fit six people, that’s more efficient than driving a hybrid.  Everything we do, we have to look at how efficient it is. With 300 million people each doing little things, it can have a huge effect on the big picture.

You’re not saying you’re opposed to renewable fuel sources?
Oh no. But before you do that, have we made all lighting systems, heating systems and ventilating systems as efficient as we can? Once you do that, you might just need a $30,000 windmill rather than an $80,000 windmill.  —Jeff Mucciarone