I recently had the opportunity to interview Chris Bailey, Vice President, Integrated Solutions – Lighting at Hubbell Incorporated, for an article about the WELL Building Standard I developed for tED Magazine’s September issue. This is the transcript.
DiLouie: What is the WELL Building Standard and how would you describe lighting’s role in it?
Bailey: Lighting plays a key role in the WELL Building standard. Whereas many building applications seek to achieve a prescriptive lighting criterion which is more quantitative in nature, the WELL Building Standard more fully considers light spectrum and occupant exposure, in an effort to better inform the matter of light and human health. In fact, lighting is prominently featured as one of the seven primary categories Well uses to qualify where a building stands in relationship to its inhabitants.
DiLouie: If WELL were adopted by all buildings, what would be the result for illumination and occupants?
Bailey: Generally, there would be better light quality which research suggests results in better health. Occupants would see less eye strain, more alertness, better biological rhythms, all meaning healthier and happier inhabitants, less fatigue, more productivity.
DiLouie: Where is WELL being adopted now? How much traction is it getting?
Bailey: The successful adoption of any standard requires a great deal of effort in terms of awareness and translation into application archetypes. While excitement about the WELL Building Standard is well-placed, and it is growing in mindshare and relevance, it may be a while yet until the criterion is more broadly woven into the body of work completed by specifiers today.
DiLouie: Does WELL follow lighting design practices, extend them, or contradict them?
Bailey: I would not go so far as to say the WELL standard contradicts conventional guidelines established by standards organizations such as the Illumination Engineering Society (IES), however some may find the criteria to be more generalized in nature. For example, whereas IES criteria often reflects the average age of and specific task(s) being performed by observer, the WELL standard provides sound, but more general guidance.
DiLouie: How practical or simple is it to implement WELL’s lighting provisions?
Bailey: Implementing many of WELL’s provisions in the areas of electric and solar glare control, workstation design, color quality, surface design, automated shading and dimming control, exposure to daylight (right to light, daylighting modeling and daylighting fenestration) may be very practical for many new building designs or major renovations. However, specifiers may find some of the criteria, especially those which relate to daylight, difficult to achieve in older buildings.
DiLouie: How well does WELL work with LEED, which might be described as a cousin of the standard?
Bailey: WELL and LEED offer different, yet complementary, points of view. In fact, WELL builds and extends some of the criteria of LEED, like Indoor Environmental Quality, to enhance the building for people. WELL addresses more items pertaining to inhabitant’s heath, like fitness, that LEED doesn’t. Keep in mind the former CEO of the USGBC, Rick Fedrizzi, influenced LEED, and he is now the CEO of WELL.
DiLouie: How well does WELL work with prevailing commercial building energy codes and standards such as 90.1, IECC, and Title 24?
Bailey: Whenever you increase light quality there is usually some tradeoff with efficacy. However, just like LEED, if you use the integrative process and bring WELL into the design early in a project in a collaborative manner you should be fine.
DiLouie: Some lighting designers have stated WELL addresses and promotes quality lighting. What is your take?
Bailey: Including someone with lighting design experience, not just installation, should always have a positive impact on the quality of lighting in a space.
DiLouie: What are disadvantages or shortcomings of the lighting provisions in the current version of WELL?
Bailey: Given that the WELL standard attempts to address the “health and wellness of building occupants” through “100 performance metrics, design strategies and policies,” the standard’s text provides a well-informed and broad narrative for specifiers who wish to approach occupant health and wellness through a variety of potential opportunities within the built environment. As such, it is not necessarily within its scope to fully consider the nature and variety of visual tasks possible, which would be better informed though application-specific guidelines (e.g. IES Recommended Practices).
DiLouie: What approach should a distributor take with a client that is adopting WELL but is reluctant to implement the lighting provisions? What provisions in WELL are the easiest and which are the hardest? Which are most influenced by design and which by product?
Bailey: My advice: Do not go it alone. Find a reputable lighting designer. The WELL standard is very approachable, however there are nuances which need to be considered. Working with a professional lighting designer will go a long way towards interpreting the criteria and reducing it to practice in both new and existing buildings. The WELL Standard takes us one step closer to systems thinking and holistic building design, in that several disciplines are likely to be involved in the design process. In any lighting application, no matter how great the product, its effectiveness is almost always dependent on its application. Therefore, lighting equipment selection and lighting design should not be considered disparate workstreams, instead they are interdependent.
DiLouie: If you could tell the entire electrical industry just one thing about the lighting provisions in the WELL Building Standard, what would it be?
Bailey: The lighting provisions are well conceived and intentioned. While some may find them more general in nature, and potentially difficult to reduce to practice in existing buildings, they are geared towards achieving desirable and tangible results for building occupants.
DiLouie: Is there anything else you’d like to add about this topic?
Bailey: The topic of occupant health and wellness is likely not going away any time soon. As our understanding related to the human condition and the natural and artificial environments in which we live expands, so too will the art and science of building technologies, and the disciplines associated with building design and construction. What is clear at this stage is, that many future advances will come at the result of systems thinking and interdisciplinarity, and to a much lesser extent, standalone products or solutions.
