Blog Entry 3: Potential for future issues with implementation of Energy Benchmarking Programs

Upon researching and learning about the energy benchmarking issue, my team found an extreme lack of transparency regarding the usage of energy in both the residential and commercial sectors. Before one can even begin to think about how they may conserve energy, they need to know where they stand. Not only do they need to have an initial base level of usage to compare their own attempts for energy saving to, but also in order to compare to other individuals in similar situations. Conserving energy is not necessarily top of mind for most individuals, especially those interested in growing a business which would require an increased consumption of energy. While most are aware of the environmental impact, it is difficult to make an argument as to the extent of that impact without first having the raw data available to analyze which confirms the levels of energy usage.

Furthermore, the effect on telling a person how much energy they have used is entirely skewed when that total is juxtaposed with a neighbor who uses ten, twenty, or fifty percent less energy. We have learned of multiple case studies where specific commercial buildings have seen their energy usage displayed next to others who occupy similar size buildings in similar industries, who have been ashamed of their usage, and in turn decreased usage due to their perceived fault. In many situations, individuals are blissfully unaware that their level of energy usage is not responsible, nor comparable to their more responsible neighbors.

Our team’s idea to create a program to benchmark multi-residential apartment buildings is an effort to step in where there is no current policy in place within the city of Pittsburgh or Allegheny County that currently covers this need. In several other cities such as Seattle and New York City, energy disclosure laws are in place which require buildings of a certain size to disclose their energy usage rates. If similar legislation was enacted in Pittsburgh, the waiver aspect of our proposed program would no longer be needed, dependent upon the size of the building which is required to disclose their energy. In this case, the program would likely need to pivot in to more of an educational form, showing commercial business owners how they may monitor their own energy usage and compare it to similar size buildings, using as an incentive the availability of possible savings.

For the program to succeed, building owners and managers would need to be educated as to it’s value. By starting small and focusing on a few receptive buildings, they could then be designated as flagship buildings of the program. Additional buildings could then be referred to those flagship buildings to reference how they have increased their value to potential tenants and their potential for energy savings. A secondary tier of the program could then offer suggestions as to how they might easily and quickly analyze the data shared by themselves and other similar buildings using tools such as portfolio manager.

An additional factor that could effect the viability of our proposed program would be economic in makeup. While we’ve found most individuals agree that environmental issues are important, they are never the number one issue at hand. While the program has been designed to require minimal work to collect the waivers authorizing the disclosure of data, utilizing that data to save energy could be daunting to an entity that is not able to devote adequate resources to its understanding.

As far as the overall concept of energy usage goes, multiple different conditions could exist in the future that would derail the conversation. Any sort of event which requires immediate attention would pull the focus away from environmental issues which have a much longer gestation period before displaying their dangers.

 

Blog Entry 2: Reflections on the course and energy benchmarking

For myself, the exposure to multiple different speakers working in multiple different fields has by far been the greatest benefit to the course so far. Seeing the working methods of each speaker, and how they were able to utilize their various skills, such as design, to create social change has influenced my approach with my team. In my personal life, regardless of the task, I find the greatest struggle to be just getting started and establishing direction (whether or not it is correct). Seeing the processes of others and how they got started has helped tremendously. Michael Schiller’s presentation was especially helpful, considering he directly works in the space of the policy subject my group has decided to focus on, energy benchmarking.

Some of the greatest learning opportunities I’ve experienced over the few weeks have been through researching this topic. By actually getting out and talking to various individuals who have either been actively researching the space, or directly working in it for an extended amount of time, I’ve learned quite a bit about the subject. Unfortunately, the more I learn, the more I realize how little I actually know about energy bench marking. For every question that is answered, five more are created. Through the individuals myself and my group have met with, I’ve learned a number of key items which must remembered as my group works within the space. Just a few of those takeaways include:

• Energy is cheap in the US. It’s tough to create an immediate financial incentive for individuals to make wholesale changes to their buildings due to this.
• Site vs. Source: There are two ways to measure energy usage. Site refers to the energy usage directly at the building site, and source refers to the amount of energy that is supplied by the power company to the site. Source usage is the current trend.
• Disclosure Laws are starting to show up in other cities, where certain sized buildings are required to disclose their energy usage. Pittsburgh has a number of unique factors present that is slowing this process locally, though talks are currently in place between the Green Building Alliance and the Mayor’s office as to how they may be enacted.
• Privacy issues may be a key factor when it comes to the sharing of energy usage.
• The Pittsburgh area utilities currently don’t have a easy, simple method to disclose energy usage on a per building basis.
• 2030 districts are in place locally, which have promised to cut energy usage by 50% by 2030.
• The software that the majority of buildings utilize is provided by the EPA (Portfolio Manager) and compares usage to a baseline of data from 2003.

While the concept of decreasing energy usage is a popular initiative, I’ve found that actually acting upon it a different case entirely. I’ve found limited concrete incentives to decrease power usage, due to the the lead time it takes to see monetary results. Good publicity and great feelings can only go far in enacting change without these monetary incentives. It seems like most of the success that can be currently found is due to policy initiatives requiring cuts and disclosure. Other industries and partners then have the option to jump in to the space and create products that assist in making those cuts easy to enact. Since these sort of policy changes don’t come to pass in a single semester’s time, I’m currently struggling with how a handful of dedicated individuals can make any sort of impact within such a massive space like energy benchmarking.
Stephen Cook

Group 3 – Energy Benchmarking

Reflections on our brief, design, & policy

After reading Peduto’s 100 policies, it definitely seemed like some were more fleshed out than others, in an effort to hit the 100 number.  Our team chose one of the less clear ones, in an effort to have a bit more room to work with in the space, as there is really no simple solution offered.  My group’s policy deals with energy benchmarking, with nods to the reduction of energy being a good thing since it will increase property prices.  The writeup deals little with the environmental impact, but rather tries to incentivize green buildings in that manner.  Only once does it mention tax credits, which seems to be an obvious route, and only in reference to success in other cities.  I’m more of a hands on person, with an interest in creating items that could be used to effect policy or as means to enact policy.  Exploring this particular policy seemed like a good chance to have an ability to make things, and thus my team came up with the idea of a DIY audit kit through our research and speaking with Anthony Rowe, an assistant research professor at CMU who works with the SensorAndrew project.

My attitude towards design has definitely shifted since the beginning of the course.  As someone who has been working in industry the past 10 years, creating tangible products, I’m a bit surprised of the design ethos here at CMU.  There seems to be less focus on the physical deliverables, and more emphasis on design thinking through all aspects of the process.  I’m definitely more inclined to just get started working and figuring things out along the way, as opposed to thinking about a social impact matrix and the like.  Ultimately, I’ve found a bit more thought beforehand can only help, though I do find the ambiguity a bit frustrating.

This directly affected the process of my group’s exploration of our potential project.  Without the structure I’m accustomed to, usually in the form of a client’s specs/wants/needs, it was a bit tough to figure out what we should actually do.  I found it helpful meeting with Anthony Rowe and learning a bit more about the topic of energy benchmarking, from someone who has been working in the space for over 10 years.  It definitely helped to define our scope by understanding a bit more about his frustrations in the area and getting a few suggestions as to routes to take.  Key things he mentioned were in regards to the little incentive available to change due to cheap energy prices, the benefits for large buildings to switch over to green systems, and where the green industries currently are operating.

A key factor I worry about within this realm is the lack of concrete results to compel anyone to make changes.  While many might agree that we need to be aware of environmental issues and decrease our impact, it’s tough to actually act.  If you say to someone they saved $18 on their monthly energy bill, they have quantifiable results to look at.  This isn’t quite as possible when it comes to environmental factors, and thus the impetus is not there to change your habits.  I’m interested in the areas where we can try and quantify environmental impact, as a means to promote social change.

Ultimately, energy benchmarking within buildings seems to be primarily a policy issue considering the lack on incentive on an individual basis.  Policy change through energy reduction requirements and tax credits at first look seems to be the most likely things to impact change.  Even with these policy changes though, there needs to be clear and easy paths for the property owners to enact the change, or else the policy will get continuously rolled back similar to current healthcare requirements.  Creating that easy path is where my team and I felt we could make the most impact, via a DIY energy audit kit.

– Stephen Cook