A: Not exactly. The US Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 bans inefficient incandescent lamps commencing in 2012. Filament or incandescent lamps were commercialized in 1879 by Thomas Edison and the technology has advanced incrementally since then. However, in a symbolic move of banning some inefficient incandescent lamps, the US Government hopes to spur development of more efficient lamps for most residential applications. Philips' line of Halogená® Energy Advantage lamps already meet the law's requirements which phase in between 2012 and 2014. So, yes, the oldest-technology filament lamps in popular consumer wattages and styles will soon be outlawed. However, filament lamps using modern filament, gas-fill, and/or bulb-envelope technologies and designs with efficacy improvements of at least 30% over their predecessors will provide viable options for the installed base of billions of incandescent sockets—with dimming, color rendering, and color temperature characterstics similar to those of old. For more information see "New Energy Law to Phase Out Today's Common Incandescent Lamps…"

A: No. Although halogen lamps typically produce higher temperatures at the filament and bulb (a function of how the halogen cycle works—allowing for efficacies of up to 2 times better than those of standard filament lamps), they are safe when used properly. In the mid-1990s, a popular floor light (torchiere—with a flared shade to uplight the ceiling above it) with a halogen lamp was a very convenient and cheap way to introduce lots of electric light into a room. Unfortunately, many of these cheap torchieres exhibited poor design—easily tipped over, and/or had no protective glass or metal screen over the lamp, for example—or were used improperly—placed next to window drapes, for example—resulting in some catastrophic fires and loss of life. So, many apartments, condominiums, and university dorms banned these halogen torchieres. Some people extrapolate this to mean "all halogen lamps" are banned from use or are a bad idea. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water! [Note: It doesn't help that the popular-press reference to "lamps" means luminaire or light fixture.]

A: Many criteria should be considered when designing lighting—illuminance (light level) being one. If illuminance is the sole or most important priority, then floor planes and workplanes will probably be "well lit." However, walls, ceilings, objects in space (like people)— most of the stuff we all really need and want to see—not so much! Priorities should be based on a collection of robust criteria outlined in Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 8.

A: LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design—a third party certification program by the U.S. Green Building Council) should not be another step in the design process. Reducing energy use and energy waste and solid waste without sacrificing the built setting's benefits to users should be de rigueur across all aspects of the design process.

A: LEDs certainly garner lots of popular press. These small, but reportedly highly efficient and long-lived lamps would seem a natural for every lighting application. They aren't. Key aspects are outlined in Section 10.7 and additional information is available in the slideshow "LEDs: Eye Candy or Life Savers."

A: No. Just like "meeting light level requirements" won't necessarily result in a good lighting design, meeting LEED requirements does not guarantee a good lighting design. Indeed, more energy and Earth resources will be wasted if an efficient and more sustainable lighting system results in unhappy and dissatisfied occupants who use the built setting less frequently or less productively. Lighting criteria and priorities should be based on discussions in Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 8.

A: Much less so than incandescent lamps. Popular press reports sensationalize the fact that fluorescent lamps exhibit what amounts to a very minute amount of mercury. Mercury vaporizes when electrified and creates ultraviolet radiation which excites a phosphor coating on the inside of the lamp, producing white light quite efficiently (typically 3 to 4 times more efficiently than incandescent). Of course, any exposure to mercury is to be taken seriously. However, in the USA, nearly 50% of the electric power is generated by coal plants—which release mercury into the environment where it is never  captured or recycled. This atmospheric mercury is a real and pervasive exposure hazard. If fluorescent lamps are recycled, then their use results in a 75% reduction in mercury released into the environment over incandescent lamps. Read more here.

A: Lighting schedules (aka fixture or luminaire schedules) are no substitute for lighting specifications. If a client goes to the trouble of hiring a lighting designer—whether that also be an architect, engineer, or interior designer, the lighting should be clearly specified. A specification should outline the product's salient features—functional, mechanical, dimensional, optical, and aesthetic attributes. This minimizes unsatisfactory substitutions or, at the very least, gives the designer a technical, legal document justifying rejection of any lighting substitutions.

A: Creativity is an innate ability of some people. However, many people can be creative if they make the effort. Sometimes creativity is a team effort—relying on group interaction and brainstorming to develop ideas that address a lighting problem in a novel way. Sometimes creativity is an independent effort involving periods of concentrated thought and exploration into various lighting techniques, approaches, and technologies—to find unique and aesthetic solutions. Creativity involves imagination—imagining being in the space or area of design interest and understanding the flow of the architecture and the materials and finishes being proposed. Then conjuring ways to light this architecture and these materials in a compelling manner. To some extent, creativity is based on previous experiences and on experiences of others—taking inspiration from visits to other projects or from other projects' photographs and improving/modifying/molding these to meet the challenges of the problem at hand. However, directly lifting design approaches isn't creative, it's copying. In any event, creativity takes time, effort, and ultimately passion and should not to be shortchanged simply to "speed the design" along.

A: This depends on what qualifies as "the lighting problem." Generally, however, most dynamic colored lighting effects are considered entertainment rather than architectural expressions. Where colored light helps to render an already inherently colored architectural surface more richly or deeply and/or where select wavelengths of color dynamically change the perception of these colored surfaces, the solution of "dynamic colored light" may be appropriate. Where neutral architectural surfaces are transformed with colored light, static or dynamic colored light may be appropriate in defining the architectural setting. Overdoing these dynamic colored effects in permanent architectural lighting applications dilutes their impact and many times diminishes the character and quality of the very architecture they are to enhance (e.g., blue light on limestone).

A: Lighting consists of some downright nasty procedures—whether it be the processes and/or raw materials needed to make the hardware or some of the energy used to run lights once they're installed. We can certainly develop habits and design practices that will limit the need for these nasty procedures, but doubtful they'll be eliminated. Why is it considered bad practice to consume wind-generated energy to run less efficient but nicer-to-live-by filament lamps (when LED and/or fluorescent might be more efficient) in residential settings? What if that wind power went to operating efficient LED and/or fluorescent lights—but more of them to provide better brightnesses and more functional light in workplaces?

A: So-called "designer" lights are typically just eye candy used to "decorate with lights." Many of these source from Europe and most use outdated and/or high wattage lamp technologies (since those are cheapest and easiest to implement in a luminaire design). Most are residential-quality and not appropriate for commercial, institutional, or hospitality applications. Some of these are not UL/NRTL listed and labeled. A real maverick or renaissance luminaire design would not only exhibit a unique and attractive style, but would be based on efficient lamp engines and would exhibit UL/NRTL listing and labeling. Do your part for the environment (most of these are energy hogs) and for your client (most are costly and functionally obsolete)—don't specify this stuff. Specify UL/NRTL listed and labeled lights using efficient, long-life lamps—typically LED, CFL, or CMH for commercial, institutional, and hospitality projects. Such equipment that is also cool can be found, but requires more than just a Google.

A: Although the quick and seemingly obvious reply is "yes," in depth review of the electric lighting and its purpose(s) is needed before programming all electric lights to extinguish during daylight in all applications. Lighting spatial voids is impossible—we light surfaces, objects, and people which then transmit and/or reflect light to create the visible scene. If daylight appropriately lights the surfaces, objects, and people, then simultaneously using electric lighting for this purpose is a waste of energy and resources. On the other hand, if daylight is unable to provide an appropriate degree of rendering/modelling of surfaces, objects, and people, then some amount or all of the electric lighting may be necessary for satisfactory function. The LED chandelier shown in the image under the Contact/Bio page could be extinguished during many daylight hours. However, the visual aesthetics of this condition (the chandelier as an unlit object will make for an eerily uncomfortable ascent/descent of the stairs) and the commercial implications (the unlit grand chandelier will call to question the hotel's operating status as a viable and vibrant enterprise) trump the daylight. In this case, the low-wattage long-life LEDs as the light source make for a more sustainable application than would filament (incandescent) or CMH lamps—resulting in a marketing strategy  akin to "saving energy/reducing carbon footprint without sacrificing performance." Electric lighting required to meet safety and security requirements also trumps daylight.

A: The answer depends on the definition of lighting design. At its purest, lighting design is the practice of developing and specifying lighting systems for the benefit of the intended users of a given space or area. Lighting design simultaneously addresses both aesthetic and functional aspects. The issue gets fuzzy and complicated by economics. Is the lighting designer independent or beholden to manufacturing or sales or installation interests? Is the client more interested in a lighting design appropriate to the intended uses and users or in using Brand X's products because they're cheap, readily available, or both and/or because Brand X's "design" service is free? Forcing Brand X's products into a "design" is probably sustainably inappropriate. Glare, overlighting, and/or the use of less-durable lighting equipment, for example, can easily negate the low-initial-cost and short-leadtime attributes of Brand X's products. Is it really worth saving a few percentage points in cost and/or a few weeks in time on a project that is to have a lifetime of many decades? In the States, a Lighting Certified (LC) program sponsored by the National Council on Qualifications for the Lighting Professions (NCQLP) offers baseline certification of lighting professionals across many industry sectors. This forms a network of individuals conversant in current lighting technologies, techniques, and design strategies and advances their application. LCs subscribe  to a Standard of Conduct. Nevertheless, the art and science of lighting design will be filtered by the designer's personal and economic priorities.