TOWARD A NEW MODEL OF SUSTAINABLE URBAN LIGHTING

Lizeth Artemisa Snchez Balvs1, Jess M. Quintero2,4, Antoni Sudra-Andreu3,

Jos Juan de Felipe Blanch1 and Josep Carreras2
1

Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya. SUMMLab, Espaa - felipe@mmt.upc.edu

Institut de Recerca en Energa de Catalunya (IREC). Grupo de Iluminacin, Espaa - jcarreras@irec.cat

3

Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya. CITCEA-UPC, Espaa - sudria@citcea.upc.edu

Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Dep. Ing. Elctrica y Electrnica, Colombia - jmquinteroqu@unal.edu.co
E-mail: lizeth.artemisa.sanchez@estudiant.upc.edu
Abstract

Within a general framework of urban lighting, an index

aimed at reducing the energy consumption without
affecting the comfort and security of the users is
proposed. This index (termed Energy Efficiency Indicator
or simply EEI) represents the attainable energy savings in
an urban lighting system. The Energy Efficiency Indicator
spans the range from 0 to 100 where a 0 value means
zero energy savings, and a 100 value is obtained from
the model for the maximum attainable energy savings.
For low luminance levels, it takes into account the
improvement of visual performance by correcting the
standard photometry system (photopic) by the
recommended system (mesopic) in the CIE 191:2010
technical report. In addition, an assessment for three
different scenarios is made, in order to determine energy
savings using different types of light sources, luminous
flux control and corrections due to the use of the mesopic
photometry system. Each scenario represents different
sectors or areas of a city. Results show that the third
scenario studied, which is based on LED lamps, having
individual luminous flux control and considering the
mesopic photometry system, obtained the greatest energy
savings (EEI = 96).
1.

INTRODUCTION

Cities are the main centres of economic and residential

activities, as well as places with higher population
growth. Despite representing only 2.7% of the global
surface area [1], the worlds cities are responsible for 75%
of the global energy consumption and 80% of greenhouse
gas emissions [2]. Some studies in Spain propose that
new cities should tend to the self-sufficiency and thus
reduce their energetic dependencies by means of
promoting energy savings and energy efficiency in both
building and public spaces [3].
Urban lighting, as an element of the public space design
and a large energy consumer, is the subject of study in
this work. It is worth noting that a poor lighting design
can lead to a waste of energy, light pollution as well as to
a deterioration of the visual comfort and security of the
inhabitants living in an urban area.
Lighting represents approximately 19% of world energy
consumption. In Spain, for 2010, urban lighting was

responsible for 3,629 GWh/year, which represents 0,8%

of the total national energy consumption that in turn is
translated into 747,574 tonnes of CO2/year emitted into
the atmosphere [4].
With the aim of meeting the objective laid out by the EU
to reduce CO2 emissions by 20% before 2020 [5],
European cities and decision-makers are taking actions to
promote energy savings and the reduction of emissions of
CO2 by providing funds for the development of projects
targeting energy efficiency in public lighting,
cogeneration of energy, and construction of net-zero
buildings.
The Energy Efficiency Indicator (EEI) presented in this
work, can be easily applied and read by the non-expert
and shows the potential savings that can be achieved by
using different lamp technologies, luminous flux controls
and the correction to the mesopic photometry.
Even when the amount of electricity consumed by urban
lighting is an important issue, it must be balanced against
the comfort and security of users, and therefore, the EEI
takes into account the visual performance as well.
In the following sections, a brief description of the
mesopic photometry system is briefly described, a number
of important lighting design criteria based on visual
performance are given, relevant studies related to the
execution of visual tasks are listed and, finally, an
example of application of the EEI in three different urban
lighting scenarios closes the work.
2.

VISUAL PERFORMANCE BASED ON

MESOPIC PHOTOMETRY

Human vision is a complicated process in which the

spectral luminous efficiency of the eye is influenced by a
large number of factors [6]. In the mesopic region, which
lies between photopic and scotopic vision, both cones and
rods are activated. Under this situation, the eyes
sensibility changes rapidly depending on factors such as
luminance and the Spectral Power Distribution (SPD) of
the light source used [7]. For these reasons, the CIE has
recently published a recommended system for mesopic
photometry that applies to the whole range of the mesopic
region [6]. This system maintains the photopic V() and
scotopic V() spectral luminous efficiency functions as
upper and lower limits of the mesopic region [7]. The
luminance levels in the edges of the mesopic region are

A capital application of the mesopic system of

photometry is road lighting, since the luminance levels at
night fall into the mesopic region [6]. In this zone, both
rods and cones in the retina are activated, which increases
peripheral vision and enhances visual performance in
specific tasks such as driving at night.
3.

DESIGN CRITERIA FOR URBAN

LIGHTING

The main goal of urban lighting is to provide an adequate

environment for urban tasks while at the same time
preserving comfort, high perception of security and
adequate visibility for safe movement. The designs that
fulfil these requirements encourage citizens to use the
public space in urban areas. These aspects of the urban
lighting are explained in more detail in Table 1.
4.

THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY INDICATOR

(EEI)

The EEI is intended to represent the energy savings that

can be reached in an urban lighting system. EEI is ranged
from 0 to 100. Essentially, there are three steps to
calculate this index: (i) All possible technical scenarios of
the urban lighting under study must be defined. This
implies the definition of a data gathering system that
includes all possible types of light sources, control gears,
environmental and maintenance conditions, types of roads
with their average illuminance (or luminance) levels and
average representation of different possible luminous flux
profiles corresponding to the lighting management of the
lighting system. (ii) An equation that involves all these
parameters is used to calculate the energy consumption
for a large set of combinations of these input conditions
and options. (iii) 100-percentiles (from zero to 100th) are
calculated in order to rate the different scenarios. Here
percentile 100th represents the worst case, or in other
words, is the combination of input options having the
highest energy consumption, while percentile zero
represents the ideal scenario, since is the combination of

Energy Consumption calculations

Let us call Qsa the total energy consumption during one

year per unit of illuminated area. The equation to
calculate this is obtained from the Technical Regulation
of Energy Efficiency in Public Lighting R.D. 1890/2008
[16]. To obtain the energy consumption Qsa, we cleared
this equation for power and multiply it by the average
number of hours that the light system is turned on. Doing
so, the resulting equation reads,
Q!" =

!! !!"
!!"# !!" !! !!

!
!"""

!"#
!!

(1)

Where: Em: Average illuminance level (lux); tua: Annual

time of operation of the lighting system (h); aux:
Efficiency of auxiliary elements (W/W); Knl: Nominal
efficacy of lamps (lm/W); fm: Maintenance factor; fu:
Utilization factor.
From Equation 1, it can be inferred that a reduction of the
energy consumption in practical terms can be obtained by
two ways:
Reducing the annual equivalent operation time of
the lamp (tua). Alternatively, this can be achieved
by using different flux control techniques.
By improving the luminous efficacy of the lamp,
i.e. applying a correction factor associated with
an improvement of the users visual performance
in the mesopic region.
% luminous flux

Mesopic photometry applications

4.1

100
80
60
40
20
0

Full luminous flux (12 hours of operation time per day)

A1 = 100%

fcf = 1

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

100
80
60
40
20
0

% luminous flux

2.1

the input options with the least energy consumption. In

these terms, energy consumption of percentile 100
represents zero energy savings, i.e. EEI = 0, and energy
consumption of percentile zero represents the maximum
attainable energy savings, i.e. EEI = 100.

Bi-level luminous flux control

A2 = 88%

fcf = 0,88

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

100

% luminous flux

0,001 and 10 cd/m2 [6]. This range covers, among others,

street luminance levels, emergency lighting, security
lighting and public lighting for crime prevention purposes
[7].
The recommended CIE photometric system [6] showed in
Table 2 gives the correction factors that have to be applied
in order to obtain the equivalent mesopic luminance level.
These correction factors depend on the standard photopic
luminance level and the so-called S/P ratio of the light
source, which is essentially the ratio of the spectral
energies lying within the scotopic and the photopic
regions. For example, high pressure sodium lamps (HPS)
have a S/P ratio from 0,65 to 1,05, while Metallic Halide
lamps (MH) are from 1,25 to 2,45 S/P [6].

Individual fixture luminous flux control (40% to 100%)

80

fcf = 0,58

60
40
20

A3 = 58%

0
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

hours

Fig. 1. Trhee different luminous flux control profiles.

Fig. 1 shows trhee different luminous flux control

profiles. The correction factor fcf for each type of

luminous flux control is obtained as the area percentage
of the luminous flux profile as compared to the full
luminous flux.

Once the type of lamp, level of photopic luminance and

type of luminous flux control have been defined, two
correction factors can be calculated: fcm and fcf. The
correction factor for the luminance in the mesopic region
fcm is obtained from Table 2, while fcf is calculated from
the flux profile selected, as shown in Fig. 1.

Table 1 Summary of the parameters that define mesopic visual performance in the urban lighting objectives.
Urban Lighting
Aims

Visual tasks

Safe movement

Perception of
safety

Perception of
comfort

Design criteria

Visual orientation

-Luminance levels

Ability to detect
obstacles on the
pavement and road.

-Spectral Power
Distribution (SPD)
of lamps.
-Contrast:
luminance
difference between
the target and its
background.

Perception of spatial
brightness of the
area.

-SPD Lamp
-Luminance levels

Facial recognition

-SPD Lamp

Disability of glare

-Glare control
-Luminaries
photometry

Acceptability
(colour of the light
source)

CRI (Colour
Rendering Index)
CCT (K)
(Correlated Colour
Temperature)

Table 2 Correction factors for mesopic photometry.

HPS

MH

LED

FL

S/P= 0,65
Lp
L
mes
0,5
-6
0,75
-5
1
-4
1,5
-3
2
-2

S/P= 1,85
Lp
L
mes
0,5
13
0,75 11
1
9
1,5
6
2
5

S/P= 2,25
Lp
L
mes
0,5
19
0,75 15
1
12
1,5
9
2
7

S/P= 2,45
Lp
L
mes
0,5
22
0,75 20
1
14
1,5
10
2
8

Source: Table 11 of the Recommendation CIE 191:2010 [7]

Investigations results
To provide suitablelighting levels on signage and key
landmarks within the city [8]. Also it is possible to reduce the
illuminance of the pavement by one class of the S-series when
using lighting of CRI>60 [9], [10].
Using lamps with a broad SPD as metal halide lamps [7].
Contrast is defined by the relative luminance difference
between the target and its background [6].
Obstacle detection increases when the illuminance is increased,
and the dispersion -due to light source type and observers' agein obstacle detection between 0.2 lux and 2.0 lux is greater
than that between 2.0 lux and 20 lux" [11].
At 0,2 lux is better obstacle detection under the ceramic metal
halide (CMH) lamps than the high-pressure sodium (HPS)
lamps. At 2 lux and 20 lux there appears to be no difference in
obstacle detection between the lamps [11].
Light sources that provide a perception of greater brightness
such as CMH lamps are perceived as producing a safer
environment [12][13].
At equal illuminance, CMH and fluorescent lamps are
significantly brighter than HPS lamps [13], [14].
The detection and recognition of pedestrians can be improved
through the use of lighting of higher S/P ratio [7].
Greater ease of facial recognition using CMH lamps as
compared to HPS lamps [14].
If HPS lamps are used for facial recognition of pedestrians at a
distance of 4 metres, the illuminance required is two times
higher than that needed when using white light sources [8].
To install luminaries that distribute light efficiently and that
the correct optics and lamp position. In Spain,
light
distributions having beams directed up more than 5% above
the horizontal plane are not allowed by regulation [15].
Streets illuminated with white light such as CMH are more
comfortable than streets illuminated with HPS [14].

Finally, Equation 2 shows how to calculate the total energy

consumption during one year per unit of illuminated area
considering corrections for mesopic photometry and the
profile of the luminous flux control.
!!" =

!! (!!" !!" )
!!"# (!!" !!" ) !! !!

!"!

!"""

!!

(2)

The nominal luminous efficacy of the lamp (Knl), utilisation

factor (fu) and three different factors needed to calculate the
luminaire maintenance factor (fm), i.e. Lamp Lumen
Depreciation Factor (LLD), Lamp Survival Factor (LSF)

and Luminaire Dirt-Depreciation Factor (LDF) are showed

in Table 3.
Table 3 Values for nominal luminous efficacy, utilisation and maintenance factors for four different light sources
(values taken from ref. [16]).
Lamp
Knl
fu
LLD
LSF
LDF
fm
type
[lm/W] Road Pedestrian Road Pedestrian Road Pedestrian Road Pedestrian Road Pedestrian
HPS
MH
LED
FL

86,69
79,5
80,95
72,73

0,38
0,38
0,55
0,22

0,28
0,3
0,65
0,22

0,94
0,76
-0,93

0,94
0,76
-0,93

0,94
0,94
-0,99

The annual energy consumption values per unit of

illuminated area, Qsa, were calculated for 24 different
scenarios combining different options on the type of
road and light source (Table 3), luminous flux control
(Fig. 1) and the correction factors for mesopic
photometry (Table 2). Taking the minimum value of
energy consumption obtained (0,378 kWh/m2
corresponding to percentile zero) as the maximum
energy efficiency combination (ideal scenario) and the
maximum value of energy consumption (6,914 kWh/m2
corresponding to percentile 100th) as the minimum
energy efficiency combination (worse scenario); we can
define the energy savings or energy efficiency indicator,
EEIp.u as in Equation 3. In these terms EEIp.u equals zero
for the worst scenario (maximum energy consumption),
and EEIp.u equals 1 for the ideal scenario (minimum
energy consumption). Fig. 2 shows the corresponding
percentiles (0 to 100th) of Qsa for all the 24 scenarios
evaluated (PQsa) and represented in a scale from 0 to 1,
along with their corresponding EEIp.u values.

PQsa - EEI p.u.

[a.u.]

!!"!.!. = 1 !!!" (3)

1,0
0,8

Percentiles for Qsa

(PQsa)
EEI p.u.

0,6
0,4
0,2
0,0
0

Energy consumption Qsa [ kWh/m2 ]

Fig. 2 Percentiles for Qsa and calculated EEIp.u. values.

Finally, we let EEI span the [0,100] interval by

multiplying by a 100 factor as is shown in Equation 4.
!!" = !!"!.!. 100 (4)

0,94
0,94
-0,99

5.

0,89
0,89
-0,89

0,86
0,86
-0,86

0,79
0,64
0,80
0,82

0,76
0,61
0,80
0,79

USING THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY

INDICATOR

As an example of application, EEI was applied in three

different scenarios described in (Table 4). Each scenario
represents a type of city or a typical neighbourhood in a
city.
Scenario no. 1: Lighting in road and pedestrian areas
with HPS lamps. HPS lamps are highly efficient and
have relatively long lifetimes (16 000 hours).
However, their use comes at the expense of a extremely
poor colour rendering (CRI of HPS25) [14].
Implementation of illuminance levels given by the R.D.
1890/2008 [16] and the luminous flux control type is
Full Luminous Flux control (the most popular and
inexpensive one).
Scenario no. 2: Installation of different lamps and
luminous flux control for each type of road and
pedestrian area could be a faithful representation of a
real city. Places with intensive pedestrian activity
should be illuminated by white light sources
characterized by excellent colour rendering.
Scenario no. 3: Lighting in road and pedestrian areas
with LED lamps with excellent colour rendering and a
relatively high efficacy. Implementation of illuminance
levels given by the R.D. 1890/2008 [16] and the
luminous flux control type is Individual Fixture
Luminous Flux control (the most expensive gear and
control system).

Table 4 Description of different elements for the three scenarious studied of a urban lighting system.

Scenario No.1
Street Type

Em
(lux)

ME1
ME2
ME3
ME4
Hist. Centre
Res-Comer
Residential
Plazas/Low flux

30
20
15
10
20
15
10
7,5

Street
area
p.u.
0,05
0,05
0,05
0,2
0,05
0,3
0,2
0,1

Scenario No.2

Scenario No.3

Lamp
type

Flux
control

Lamp
type

Flux control

Lamp
type

Flux control

HPS
HPS
HPS
HPS
HPS
HPS
HPS
HPS

Full flux
Full flux
Full flux
Full flux
Full flux
Full flux
Full flux
Full flux

HPS
MH
MH
LED
MH
MH
LED
FL

Bi-level
Bi-level
Bi-level
Individual fixture
Bi-level
Bi-level
Individual fixture
Full flux

LED
LED
LED
LED
LED
LED
LED
LED

Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture
Individual fixture

Note: Average illuminance level (Em) and road types are taken from [16].

6.

RESULTS

In scenario no. 1, where HPS lamps are used, a negative

performance is obtained when evaluated in the mesopic
region, as seen in Table 5 and Fig. 3. This is explained by
an S/P ratio for HPS lamps lower than 1,8, making them
unsuitable for energy savings using mesopic photometry.
Table 5 Scenario no. 1. Energy consumption results Qsa
[kWh/m2] and its evaluation with EEI, including the analysis of
photometric performace in the mesopic zone.

Street Type
ME1
ME2
ME3
ME4
Hist. Centre
Res-Comer
Residential
Squares/
Low flux
Weighted
Ave.Values

Table 6 Scenario no. 2. Energy consumption results Qsa

[kWh/m2] and its evaluation with EEI, including the analysis of
photometric performace in the mesopic zone.

Street Type
ME1
ME2
ME3
ME4
Hist. Centre
Res-Comer
Residential
Squares
/Low flux
Weighted
Ave.Values

Qsa (kWh/m2)
Phot. Mes.

Phot.

5,072
3,381
2,536
1,691
4,749
3,562
2,375

5,176
3,522
2,642
1,799
4,947
3,710
2,526

8
28
45
70
10
24
47

7
24
40
67
9
21
45

1,781

1,895

68

64

Street Type

2,847

2,982

38

35

ME1
ME2
ME3
ME4
Hist. Centre
Res-Comer
Residential
Squares/
Low flux
Weighted
Av. Values

EEI
Mes.

The results of scenario 2 indicate that the diversity of

luminous flux controls and lamps in an urban lighting
system reduces the energy consumption (Table 6) and
therefore the assessment using the EEI is higher than the
scenario 1 (Fig. 3). However, for this study, the EEI
considers only the technological part of the urban lighting
system and does not consider other aspects that could be
evaluated in an urban lighting system with diverse
technology as the optimal.

Qsa (kWh/m2)
Phot.
Mes.

EEI
Phot.
Mes.

4,464
4,013
3,010
0,708
5,261
3,946
0,599

4,555
3,682
2,761
0,595
4,826
3,620
0,504

14
17
33
96
6
19
98

12
22
38
98
10
23
99

2,593

2,125

43

54

2,542

2,309

44

50

Table 7 Scenario no. 3. Energy consumption results Qsa

[kWh/m2] and its evaluation with EEI, including the analysis of
photometric performace in the mesopic zone.

Qsa (kWh/m2)

EEI

Photopic

Mesopic

Photopic

Mesopic

2,125
1,417
1,062
0,708
1,199
0,899
0,599

1,986
1,265
0,949
0,595
1,070
0,803
0,504

55
80
89
96
85
94
98

61
83
93
98
88
95
99

0,450

0,378

100

100

0,866

0,762

94

96

Although the luminous efficacy of LED lamps is lower

than that for HPS lamps (80,95 lm/W vs. 86,69 lm/W,
respectively) major savings are obtained with the LED
lamps (Table 7), because the utilization factor (fu) on
LEDs is higher compared to HPS lamps (0,55 vs. 0,38,
respectively).
Without considering the implementation of costs for
different lamp technologies and luminous flux control
systems, it is clear that LED technology with individual
fixture luminous flux control provides maximum energy
efficiency, being thus the scenario no. 3 the best rated,
showing EEI= 96 for mesopic photometry, see Table 7 and
Fig. 3.
General EEI for 5 Scenarios

EEI

100
80
60
40
20
0

Scen.1

Scen.2
Photopic

Scen.3
Mesopic

Fig. 3 General EEIp.u for 3 scenarios.

7.

CONCLUSIONS

Through an application example, it was demonstrated that

the Energy Efficiency Indicator (EEI) is a reliable and
easy-to-use tool to assess urban lighting systems. Using
the EEI, it is possible to know quickly, in a simple and
intuitive way, the energy savings that can be obtained in
different urban lighting systems depending on the type of
road, light sources, luminous flux control and photometry
system that is used. The application of this indicator
comes in handy either for the lighting industry or decision
makers, whenever the most efficient and sustainable
lighting system has to be chosen for a city.
Using different luminous flux controls and the correction
for mesopic photometry for lamps with factor S/P >1,8
such as LED or MH lamps, was obtained an weighted
average EEI = 50 (scenario 2), and up to EEI = 96 for
that in scenario 3 with LED lamps and a fancy luminous
flux control. Nevertheless, as a subsequent study, the EEI
should be complemented taking into account the
economic cost of acquisition, implementation and
management of the different urban lighting systems
analysed.
8.

REFERENCES

[1] United Nations. Urban Population, Development and the

Environment Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
United
Nations.
(2007).
Available
in:
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/
2007
PopDevt/Urban 2007.pdf

[2] C. Ash, B.R. Jasny, L. Roberts, R. Stone, A. Sugden.

Reimagining cities-introduction. Science. (2008) 319(5864),
739.
[3] S. Rueda; R. De Cceres; A. Cuch; L. Brau. El Urbanismo
Ecolgico. Su aplicacin en el diseo de un ecobarrio en
Figueres. Ed. Agencia de Ecologa Urbana de Barcelona.
(2012), pp. 304.
[4] IDEA (Instituto para la Diversificacin y Ahorro de la
Energa). 2a Plan de Accin Nacional de Eficiencia
Energtica en Espaa 2011-2020. Madrid (2011). Available
in:http://www.idae.es/index.php/mod.documentos/mem.desc
arga?file=/documentos_11905_PAEE_2011_2020._A2011_
A_a1e6383b.pdf> Last consulted: April 2012.
[5] D. Radulovic; S. Skok; V. Kirincic. Energy efficiency
public lighting management in the cities. Energy, (2011),
36(4) 1908-1915.
[6] Commission International de LEclairage (CIE).
Recommended System for Visual Performance Based
Mesopic Photometry. CIE 191:2010, Vienna (2010).
[7] S. Fotios; T. Goodman. Proposed UK guidance for lighting
in residential roads. Lighting Research and Technology,
(2012), 44(1), 69-83.
[8] P. Raynham; T. Saksvikrnning. White light and facial
recognition. The Lighting Journal, (2003); 68: 2933.
[9] British Standards Institution (BSI). Code of Practice for the
Design of Road Lighting Part 1: Lighting of Roads and
Public Amenity Areas. BS5489-1:2003, London: BSI, 2003.
[10] P.R. Boyce; S. Fotios; M. Richards. Road lighting and
energy saving. Lighting Research and Technology, (2009);
41: 245260.
[11] S Fotios; C. Cheal. Obstacle detection: A pilot study
investigating the effects of lamp type, illuminance and age.
Lighting Research and Technology, (2009), 41(4), 321-342.
[12] M Kostic; L. Djokic. Recommendations for energy
efficient and visually acceptable street lighting. Energy,
(2009), 34(10), 1565-1572.
[13] S. Fotios; C. Cheal. Lighting for subsidiary streets:
investigation of lamps of different SPD. Part 2 Brightness.
Lighting Research and Technology, (2007), 39(3), 233-249.
[14] C. Knight. Field surveys of the effect of lamp spectrum on
the perception of safety and comfort at night. Lighting
Research and Technology, (2010), 42(3), 313-329.
[15] OTPC (Oficina Tcnica para la Proteccin de la Calidad del
cielo). Resumen de recomendaciones para la iluminacin
de instalaciones de exteriores o en recintos abiertos, (2010).
Available in http://www.iac.es/adjuntos/otpc/recom2010.pdf
Last consulted Abril, 2012.
[16] Spain. REAL DECRETO 1890/2008, de 14 de noviembre,
por el que se aprueba el Reglamento de eficiencia energtica
en instalaciones de alumbrado exterior y sus Instrucciones
tcnicas complementarias EA-01 a EA-07. Boletn Oficial
del Estado, 19 de noviembre de 2008, nm. 279, p. 45988.

9.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research at IREC was partially supported by the

European Regional Development Funds (ERDF, FEDER
Programa Competitivitat de Catalunya 2007-2013).
Lizeth Snchez would like to acknowledge to the
Mexican National Council for Science and Technology
(CONACYT; grant 211124) for the funding.

10.

BIOGRAPHY

Lizeth Artemisa Snchez Balvs was born in Mexico

City in 1985. She received her
Environmental Engineering degree at
the Instituto Politcnico Nacional
(National Polytechnic Institute, IPN)
in 2007. She studied for a Masters'
degree in Sustainable Development
from 2008 to 2010 at the Universitat
Politcnica de Catalunya (Technical University of
Catalonia, UPC). She is currently a PhD student in
Sustainability at the UPC. Her research interests include
urban sustainability, urban metabolism and its application
in urban lighting.
Jess M. Quintero received the degree of Specialist in
Industrial Automation and Control
from the National University of
Colombia in 2007, a B.S.E.E. degree
from the National University of
Colombia in 1992 and a Specialist
degree
in
Informatics
and
Communications Technology from
Los Andes University, Colombia in 2002. Since 2004, he
has been at the National University of Colombia in
Bogot, where he is a Senior Lecturer on Electrical and
Electronics Engineering, with appointments in the Light
and Lighting program. He is in his fourth year of a Ph.D.
Program in Electrical Engineering studies at the
Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya (UPC) in Barcelona,
Spain and is doing a Ph.D. Fellowship at the Institute for
Energy Research of Catalonia (IREC). His research
centers on high-power light-emitting diodes, luminescent
materials and color quality of light sources.
Antoni Sudri-Andreu received the M.Sc.E.E and the
Ph.D. degrees from Universitat
Politcnica de Catalunya (UPC),
Barcelona, Spain, in 1979 and 2005,
respectively. In 1979, he joined
Electronics Engineering Department,
UPC, as a part-time Assistant
Professor. He joined the Research
and Development Department of a
private railway industry in 1980,
where he developed static converters
for traction and auxiliary services in trains. In 1985, he
joined the Electrical Engineering Department, Universitat
Politcnica de Catalunya in Barcelona, Spain as a FullTime Associate Professor. He has managed numerous
industry research projects and as a consequence, in 2001,
he founded the Centre of Technological Innovation in
Static Converters and Drives (CITCEA), Universitat
Politcnica de Catalunya, with the support of the Catalan
Government. Since 2001 he is the Director of CITCEA.
Also from January 2009 to December 2011 he was the
head of the power electronics and power electric systems

research lines of recently created Catalonia Institute for

Energy Research (IREC).
Jos Juan de Felipe Blanch is currently full-time
professor
of
the
Technical
University of Catalonia. He received
his Naval Machines Engineer degree
(1991), Master of Educational
Formation (1995) and PhD (2004) at
the
Technical
University
of
Catalonia. His principal scientific
and professional activities are centred in dynamic systems
analyses applied in territorial problems with an integrated
vision of the different visions of the sustainability. He
also is an expert reviewer to the FP6 INSURE (Contract
no. 505358). He has published several articles in journals
and participated in several projects.
Josep Carreras received his B.S., M.S. and PhD. (Cum
Laude, with Honours) in Physics from
the University of Barcelona.
He has published more than 30 articles
in several SCI journals, has filed two
patents, participated in more than 15
different projects at a national and
international level.
Since June 2009, he is working for
IREC, where currently he is the Head
of the Lighting Group, leading research in novel concepts
for Energy Efficient Lighting, Colour Science and
Technology, Simulations, Photometry, and Intelligent
Lighting with advanced communication and computation
functionalities. He also helped in the definition of the
research strategies and infrastructures from the early
stages of the Institute and is currently managing the group
and supervising several projects in close collaboration
with industrial partners.