Using Buildings to Teach Environmental Stewardship: Real-time Display of Environmental Performance as a Mechanism for Engaging, Educating, Motivating

& Empowering Campus Communities

Dr. John E. PetersenDirector Environmental Studies Program, Oberlin College

Andrew deCoriolisDirector of Campus Projects, Lucid Design Group

Trends in Building Management & Education1 Green construction technologies and facilities management1. Green construction, technologies and facilities management2. Educational initiatives focused on occupants

– Occupant behavior as critical component of management– Educational value ≥ financial returns

Summer

Wi tWinter

Ecological Impact of Buildings

EnergyEnergy

Inputs Outputs

Matter MatterMatter Matter

• U.S. Buildings:→37% total energy→67% l t i it • Annual student consumption at Oberlin→67% electricity→12% fresh water→35% CO2

Annual student consumption at Oberlin→8,000 kWh electricity→3 tons coal for heating→23 000 f t l→9% global CO2→23,000 cf natural gas→18,000 gal water→15 tons CO2e

Buildings & Campus as Ecological SystemsNatural Ecosystem Built Environment

Matter

Natural Ecosystem Built Environment

Matter Matter

Energy EnergyEnergy

• Ecological design: design of human systems that mimic desirable properties of natural ecosystemsp p y– Solar powered– Material recycling

Developmental trajectories towards increased efficiency– Developmental trajectories towards increased efficiency– Regulation via dynamic feedback

• Question: How can we use real-time feedback displays of Q p ythe environmental performance of buildings to engage, educate, motivate and empower students to be better stewards of the bioregion?

Case Studies in Real-Time Display1. Research at Oberlin1. Research at Oberlin

a. Lewis Center for Environmental Studies “Green” buildingsb. Campus Resource Monitoring System “Brown” Buildingsc. SEED House Total GHG emissions monitoringd Great Lakes Project Multiple sources modes and scales of feedbackd. Great Lakes Project Multiple sources, modes and scales of feedback

2. “Building Dashboards” on other campuses what’s been done/found?3. “Campus Conservation Nationals” Between school competitions

M ttB d i C llMatterChoicesOccupants

Bowdoin College

Energy

Impacts

a) Lewis Center for Environmental StudiesArchitectural goals:Architectural goals:

• A building that teaches environmental stewardship• “A building that would cause no ugliness, human or

ecological, somewhere else or at some later time” (Orr, 1998)ecological, somewhere else or at some later time (Orr, 1998)

Key ecological design features• Material recycling Ecologicaly g

– Recycled content– Sustainable harvest– Low toxicity

Ecologicalcycling

Materialthru-flowLow toxicity

– “Products of service”– “Living Machine”

• Integrated landscape

Technologicalrecycling

Integrated landscape– Restored native ecosystems– Permaculture

• Energy efficiency• Energy efficiency– Enhanced thermal envelope– Ground source heat pump

Efficient appliances– Efficient appliances– “Smart building” controls

• SolarN t l li hti– Natural lighting

– Passive heating and ventilation– 160 kW grid-integrated photovoltaics

Key ecological design features• Material recyclingy g

– Recycled content– Sustainable harvest– Low toxicityLow toxicity– “Products of service”– “Living Machine”

• Integrated landscapeIntegrated landscape– Restored native ecosystems– Permaculture

• Energy efficiency• Energy efficiency– Enhanced thermal envelope– Ground source heat pump

Efficient appliances– Efficient appliances– “Smart building” controls

• SolarN t l li hti– Natural lighting

– Passive heating and ventilation– 160 kW grid-integrated photovoltaics

Key ecological design features• Material recyclingy g

– Recycled content– Sustainable harvest– Low toxicityLow toxicity– “Products of service”– “Living Machine”

• Integrated landscapeIntegrated landscape– Restored native ecosystems– Permaculture

• Energy efficiency• Energy efficiency– Enhanced thermal envelope– Ground source heat pump

Efficient appliances– Efficient appliances– “Smart building” controls

• SolarN t l li hti– Natural lighting

– Passive heating and ventilation– 160 kW grid-integrated photovoltaics

Key ecological design features• Material recycling Summery g

– Recycled content– Sustainable harvest– Low toxicity

Winter

Low toxicity– “Products of service”– “Living Machine”

• Integrated landscapeIntegrated landscape– Restored native ecosystems– Permaculture

• Energy efficiency• Energy efficiency– Enhanced thermal envelope– Ground source heat pump

Efficient appliances– Efficient appliances– “Smart building” controls

• SolarN t l li hti– Natural lighting

– Passive heating and ventilation– 160 kW grid-integrated photovoltaics

Data monitoring and display system:Goals:

• Render performance of green technologies visible, engaging and easily accessible to a non-technical audience

• Quantify and improve ecological performance over timey p g pApproach:

– Sensors– Data acquisition devices– Data acquisition devices– Server– Web & Lobby displays

Scope of monitoring in the AJLC>170 sensors in building & landscape• >170 sensors in building & landscape– Weather– PV production and end-use consumption – Building and HVAC temperatures– Water flow– Water quality and metabolismWater quality and metabolism– Soil moisture & temperature– Cistern and pond water storage

• Lobby display and touch-screen kiosk

Real-time display and accessLobby display and touch screen kiosk

• Website display

• Downloadable data

www.oberlin.edu/ajlc

www.oberlin.edu/ajlc

Impact of AJLC data systemDisplay extensively used for education• Display extensively used for education

• Data have been used for research to improve performance• “Smart” building and academic function limit potential forSmart building and academic function limit potential for

local behavior to affect performance

AJLC

Automated sensors Server Kiosk & Web

Knowledge,Attitude &

Energy

Matter

AJLC

R

Attitude &Behavior

Energy

Re

sea

rch

x Missing Feedback

Prior Research on Residential Feedback• ~50% of residential electricity us is discretionary (lifestyle)50% of residential electricity us is discretionary (lifestyle)• Addition of feedback ~5-15% electricity savings• Premise: Sophisticated, multimodal, socially and environmentally

contextualized displays may increase impactcontextualized displays may increase impact• Key features of contextualization:

– Real-timeSocially comparative within monitored entities and among groups– Socially comparative within monitored entities and among groups

– Empathetically connects decision-making to nature, community and future generations– Engaging, Educational, Motivational and Empowering

ChoicesOccupants

Impacts

b) Campus Resource Monitoring SystemGoal:

Feedback Concept:

GoaRender environmental consequences of behavior choices immediately visible to dormitory residents and situate these in comparative & competitive social context

1. Monitor electricity and water use in dormitories2. Contextualize information3. Combine real-time feedback with competition

Occupants Behavioral Choices

Environmental &Economic Costs

MonitoringDevice

InformationConduit

Web Interface (www.oberlin.edu/dormenergy)

Implementation: Web Interface

Published Findings (2007)• Feedback + education + incentives reduced electricity use

40%

60% Reductions in Electricity Use* * FR

FR

Feedback + education + incentives reduced electricity use– 56% for dorms with real-time– 2-wk total savings

• 70,000 kWh

20%

40%

UP

UP

,• $5,000• 150,000 lbs of CO2

-20%

0%

Dorms Included in Study

UP

• Feedback actively utilizedy– >4,000 website hits, 46% from dorm rooms

• Survey results suggest active learning– Feedback + incentives self-education– 52% will continue energy strategies52% will continue energy strategies – 45% motivated to conserve by real-time data in absence of competition

Findings from 3 subsequent competitions• No seasonal effect on electricity in dormsy• Significant reduction in electricity use occurs during competitions (>10%)• Reductions are sustained during post competition period• Upper class dorms seem to have lower energy use than lower class dorms• Upper class dorms seem to have lower energy use than lower class dorms

(but reduce less during the competition)• % reduction during competitions positively related to social cohesion and

connectedness to nature but not related to energy knowledgeconnectedness to nature but not related to energy knowledge

2006‐’072007‐’0814kW

)

2008‐’0914

13

m e

lect

ricity

(k

12

11

e w

hole

-dor

m

Before Fall Break

After Fall Break

Before Spring Break

Competition After Competition

10

Aver

age

c) SEED House Display system goals:Display system goals:

• Feature greenhouse gasses as a unifying display currency • Ultra-high resolution feedback on occupant behavior

Approach:Approach:• Separately monitor water, electricity and gas to each side of duplex• Separately monitor electricity and temperature in each room• Develop web site and orbs that displays total carbon emissions• Develop web site and orbs that displays total carbon emissions

SEED House Blog (http://inside.oberlin.edu/seed/)

d) Great Lakes Protection Project Goals:• Provide residential and commercial building occupants inProvide residential and commercial building occupants in

multiple contexts with resource use feedback • Employ and assess multiple scales, multiple sources and

multiple modes of feedbackmultiple modes of feedback • Develop approach that can be deployed throughout Great

Lakes communitiesChoicesOccupants

Impacts

Project Collaborators:

Approach: Multi-Scale feedback1 Monitor utility use in residences & businesses1. Monitor utility use in residences & businesses2. Monitor impacts on watershed and electrical grid3. Process and contextualize information

DecisionsOccupantsEnvironmental

Conditions

3 ocess a d co e ua e o a o4. Provide real-time feedback to consumers

DecisionsOccupants Conditions

Translation to Environmental & Economic Costs Automated Monitoring Technology

Approach: Multi-Mode feedback1. “Consumer Dashboard” website2. “Bioregional Dashboard” website3. Social networking websites and competition module4. Desktop screen gauges (“widgets”, “gadgets”)5. Email notifications6. Text messages7. “Environmental orbs”8. Public displays

Current research: “Dorm Energy Orbs”• Concept:Concept:

– Develop, deploy and assess impacts of “ambient” feedback

Ch iChoicesOccupants

• Approach:ppImpacts

• Preliminary findings:100% 200%50%

“Empathetic Gauges”Goal:Goal:

– Develop real time gauges most effectively engage and connect users with each other with resource usewith each other, with resource use and with nature

– Develop characters and objects that animate the story of resource useanimate the story of resource use

• Findings for user test – Most interesting

• Face>Orb>>Needle

– Most “personally meaningful”• Face>Orb>> Needle

– Most motivating• Face = Orb >> Needle

Conclusions from Oberlin Research:1) Real time feedback in “green” buildings can be used to enhance ) g g

educational value of technologies incorporated

2) Socially comparative real-time data feedback in “brown” buildings allows occupants to teach themselves how to be better penvironmental stewards (“creates smart people in dumb buildings”)

3) Impact can likely be enhanced through use of multiple currencies, multiple modes and multiple scales of feedback• Currencies: Water, Gas, Electricity, Energy, $, GHGs• Modes: Internet, Orbs, Public Displays• Scale: Room Dorm/House/Business Community

ChoicesOccupants

Impacts

2. Building Dashboards in Higher Education

• Real-time monitoring as a classroom teaching tool

• Engaging students in campus organizing and conservation behaviors

• Involving students in authentic research

Real Time Feedback in the Classroom• Integrating data and authentic research into the• Integrating data and authentic research into the

curriculum (and in classes for non majors) • Interdisciplinary (being used in physics earth• Interdisciplinary (being used in physics, earth

sciences, math, psychology, building sciences)• Context specific data relevant to studentsContext specific data relevant to students• Classroom exercises that are more than

hypothetical, and lead to students askinghypothetical, and lead to students asking additional questions

Essay prompt:y p pReview the resource consumption in your residence hall. Describe the patterns you are seeing. How much of what your seeing is due to behavior? What patterns are due to the building g p ginfrastructure? How do those things relate?

Resource Conservation Through Competitions

NRG GamesDo It In the DarkPowerLESSPowerLESSCompete to Reduce Energy Battle

Whatever the nameWhatever the name, the impacts go beyond the kWh conserved

Campus Organizing Through Competitions

Examples from the field - Deerfield: before and after (relevant technology)

CU B ld ki li t h l l- CU Boulder: making climate change local - Bowdoin College: peer-peer education - BC: grouping matter

CFLs local food dinners bingo- CFLs, local food dinners, bingo…

Feedback is Empowering Unlike organizing for other social/environmental causes, ,these programs allow people to measure and see the results of their work

Behavior Change Research Hamilton College Competition Research Student surveys taken after the 2009 Do It In the Dark competition

Positive Results: • 98% are apt to turning lights off in dorm rooms• 32% reported turning off the lights in the hallways/common rooms, bathrooms, and dorm rooms more often than normal during this period• 22% reported turning strips off more oftenp g p

Did you learn any new behaviors that you plan to continue to use?YES: 33%YES: 33%

Students can engage in tangible authentic research in a context that matters to them

Results are similar to other schools.

Campus Resource-use Reduction Competitions• Many schools host recurring competitions among dormsMany schools host recurring competitions among dorms• Electricity reductions range from 5 to >50% relative to baseline• A few energy competitions among campuses

Increasing number of schools use real time feedback• Increasing number of schools use real-time feedback

Andover AcademyBowdoin CollegeCSU ChicoCarleton College

3. National Competitions Between Schools

Partners: The Alliance to Save Energy, National Wildlife Federation, Lucid Design Group, The Ohio Board of Regents. Oberlin College

National Competition: Concept

• Schools compete to reduce water and electricity use in residence halls • Freely available interface allows schools to join, view status, configure

competitions and upload manually collected datap p y• Concurrent competitions for multiple scales and groupings

– Dorms compete within each school– Schools compete for best dorms and best average of dormsSchools compete for best dorms and best average of dorms– Rival dorms, schools and organizations compete in self-defined groupings

• Pilot competition for Ohio and California schools Nov 1-19, 2010

National Competition: Goals

• Engage, Educate, Motivate & Empower Conservation– Build communities within and across campuses around resource

conservation.conservation.– Provide a context in which students teach themselves conservation behaviors

that they can employ in the home and workplace in the future.– Educate students around energy and water conservation and sustainability gy y– Achieve measurable resource savings (kWh, gallons, GHGs)– Enable students to develop leadership and community organizing skills.

Resources Consumed in Campus Buildings

Climate Action Plans

context

Transforming Culture

How it works. technology

How it works. technology

How it works. technology

How it works. technology

How it works. technology

How it works. technology

How it works How it works.

How it works How it works.

Campus Conservation Nationals Campus Conservation Nationals

Partners

Andrew deCoriolisCustomer Programs ManagerLucid Design Group510.907.0400 x22 office510 381 1621 Cell

John Petersen

510.381.1621 Cellandrew@luciddg.com

Dr. John E. PetersenAssociate Professor of Environmental Studies and BiologyDirector Environmental Studies ProgramOberlin Collegejohn petersen@oberlin edujohn.petersen@oberlin.edu