The U.S.-India Relationship: Cross-Sector Collaboration To Promote Sustainable Development
Collaboration With Industry To Promote Energy Conservation ... · Collaboration with Industry to...
Transcript of Collaboration With Industry To Promote Energy Conservation ... · Collaboration with Industry to...
AC 2009-1798: COLLABORATION WITH INDUSTRY TO PROMOTE ENERGYCONSERVATION AND EDUCATION
Mahmoud Alahmad, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Patrick Wheeler, University of Nebraska, Omaha
Avery Schwer, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Dale Tiller, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Andrea Wilkerson, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Joshua Eiden, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009
Page 14.334.1
Collaboration with Industry to Promote Energy
Conservation and Education
Abstract
The cooperation between academia and industry exposed Architectural Engineering students
to a unique learning opportunity. The project addressed student learning and exposure to re-
search while concurrently addressing energy conservation. The collaborative project allowed
the expertise of University of Nebraska professors and students to be utilized in combination
with the Omaha Public Power District’s (OPPD) financial and customer base support. The
relationships built enriched student learning by providing real world engineering experiences.
The students refined their research, communication, and presentation skills by interacting
with and presenting engineering solutions to a wide range of professionals, engineering stu-
dents, and the community. The students worked closely with professors to prepare profes-
sional documents, analyze data, and develop future research plans. Student interaction with
the community also provides real world interactions in a business environment.
The University of Nebraska in conjunction with OPPD is investigating residential energy
consumption and behavior change as a result of visual and digital real-time energy and cost
information. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effect on household electricity con-
sumption and determine if real-time feedback will aid residential customers in reducing their
energy usage. The educational benefit of this research grant provides students with real life
work experiences in research and offers an outlet for learning about energy conservation
strategies and concepts. Additionally, the study will provide the utility critical information
necessary in projecting the future capacity needs for peaking power plants.
I. Introduction
A common difficulty amongst academic engineering programs is the minimal amount of
coursework that makes a solid connection to industry applications. Upper level courses
should ease the transition from the university to the work place environment. There are sev-
eral program models that ease the transition by exposing students to the industry environment
during their education.
One program model provides students the opportunity to observe professionals in the work-
place. Another program allows students to work in the engineering industry as part of their
course curriculum. A third program model tells students to take time off from school to
work independently for an industry partner1. With all of these options it is difficult to iden-
tify the best model. Each serves to further the student’s understanding of industry challenges
commonly encountered and expose students to real world problems.
Substantial benefits can be realized by both industry and academia when the unique re-
sources of each institution are focused upon achieving a common goal. Replicating the ex-
periences and knowledge that students gain through practical application of their knowledge
in an industry setting is unrealistic in a classroom environment. Many institutions have im-
plemented industry placement programs as a part of their curriculum in order to expose stu-
dents to industry applications. Cooperative Education for Enterprise Development (CEED) is
a university-guided industry placement program utilized by some universities. The program
gives the industry partner the chance to capitalize on the resources of the university and vice
Page 14.334.2
versa. Griffith University integrated the concept of CEED into the new Bachelor of Engi-
neering in Coastal Engineering program. The Coastal Engineering Industry Affiliates Pro-
gram (CEIAP) brought important benefits for everyone involved. These benefits are summa-
rized in Table 11.
Table 1 – Summary of CEIAP Benefits1
Student
Well-rounded education, enriched by practical applications
Realistically evaluate interests and aptitudes
Development of people interaction skills
Development of resume and job search skills
Valuable networking opportunities
Exposure to the latest business practices and technology
Industry Partner
Access to well-trained and highly motivated students
Short term: opportunity to initiate pilot projects
Longer term: evaluation of potential employees
Exchange of ideas and new developments
Enhanced image of the organization
Improved networking opportunities
Use of the latest university technology and equipment
University Partner
Opportunity to enhance student education and learning
Transfer of knowledge
Improved liaison with the industry
Feedback on the quality and relevance of program
Improved opportunities for collaborative research projects
Enhancement of consultancy project involvement
Exposure to an industry environment brings students several advantages2,3
:
≠ Students gain a familiarity with the commercial environment and avoid the culture
shock experienced by many students when transitioning from school to formal em-
ployment.
≠ Proactive attitudes necessary to prevail in the workplace are instilled.
≠ Practical implementation of the work management process and the importance of per-
sonal management are observed.
≠ Personal relationships develop with professionals within the field of study, providing
a crucial industry networking resource that can provide additional support and assis-
tance in obtaining employment after graduation.
≠ A wider range of information sources are available to students, some that may not be
public domain.
Page 14.334.3
≠ Exposure to the necessary non-technical areas of engineering, including communica-
tion styles and cultural awareness, that the students to do gain through their engineer-
ing coursework.
The partnership implemented between the University and OPPD to promote energy conser-
vation and education uniquely builds upon the concept of industry working together with
academia. The utility and the university worked closely to collect information, solve prob-
lems, and develop methods for increasing the community’s awareness on environmentally
sustainable issues relating to electricity production and consumption. Students developed
professional skills in networking and business interactions, and gained exposure to industry
practices and technology. OPPD benefited from the research performed by utilizing the
skills of qualified university professors and students that will aid them in projecting future
business needs. The University as a whole has developed a working relationship that will
continue to bring in grant money and business relationships for students and professors.
Overall the university, utility, and students involved in this study have experienced benefits
similar to CEIAP and other comparable programs.
Through the cooperation and constant communication between the university and the utility,
the eleven students that have been involved on the project have gained valuable insight into
the operations of industry. The majority of decisions made required the agreement of both
parties. Students were exposed to the varying administrative decision making factors and
obstacles that make it difficult to satisfy the requirements of both institutions. Through the
experiences of the project the students have further refined their research, communication,
and presentation skills by interacting with and presenting to a professional board of directors.
The students assisted in the statistical analysis of experimental results, presented the research
project to students and community members, and worked closely with the 151 study partici-
pants, visiting their homes and answering their phone calls. The students visited participants’
residences to install devices, perform device maintenance and administer surveys. This in-
teraction presented the community with the opportunity to ask questions about energy con-
servation and electrical fundamentals. The students were able to apply the knowledge ac-
quired through school and the research project to provide helpful answers and guidance.
Through exposure and involvement in research, the students have improved their ability to
critically and creatively think about problems and develop solutions, orally communicate
ideas and concerns, and prepare technical documents.
Students gained practical experience conducting research that complements their fundamen-
tal engineering learning. The students evaluated and physically tested a wide range of visual
and digital display devices available in the local and international market. A part of the test-
ing process included the design and development of a display board. It replicated a typical
residential electrical system, and consisted of a utility power meter, load center and various
residential loads (Figure 1). Students applied the NEC Code in wiring the system compo-
nents during the construction of the display board. The board was additionally used to dis-
cuss energy monitoring to the university student group of Emerging Green Builders and as a
lecture aid for the university’s Building Electrical Systems II course. The students could
study and analyze the difference between capacitive, inductive and resistive loads as well as
energy consumption and conservation using real-time monitors (RTMs) in conjunction with
Page 14.334.4
the display board. The board is currently in use as an interactive display for the public at
OPPDs headquarters.
Figure 1 – Display Board and RTMs
II. Residential Energy Consumption and Previous Research
U.S. homes use about one-fifth of the total energy consumed in the nation and about 60% of
that is in the form of electricity4. The residential sector, unlike the commercial and industrial
sectors, is made up of multiple small energy users, such as houses, mobile homes, and apart-
ments. Research has shown that these residential energy consumers waste almost 41% of the
power supplied to their homes5. The large amount of usage and waste indicates that the resi-
dential sector has significant energy savings potential. By educating the consumers and of-
fering information on electricity usage the amount of wasted energy could be decreased.
The consumer may not realize that when appliances such as televisions and computers are
not in use they are still drawing power. The phantom loads, or the electric power consumed
by electronic appliances while they are switched off or in a standby mode, of many house-
holds add up to hundreds of thousands of kilowatt-hours (kWh) produced by electrical utili-
ties each year. Additionally, consumers may not understand the quantity of power being
used by various household appliances and loads. This study offers an outlet to educate
homeowners on where energy is being used and how they can save. One researcher stated
that you would not shop in a grocery store without price tags. Under the same pattern of logi-
cal thinking it only makes sense that the purchase of electricity would be accompanied by an
illustrated, upfront cost for the consumer to see in real time. Historically, research has shown
that, in general, when presented with the appropriate information on energy usage, the aver-
age home owner will at least make an attempt to decrease their consumption6.
The use of feedback to reduce energy consumption was initially studied following the Arab
oil embargo of 1973 by psychologists who were interested in human behavior. Barbara Far-
Page 14.334.5
har reviewed several studies incorporating feedback in the form of notes left on the door or
kitchen window, meter reading, and self-monitoring7. These studies were among the first
aimed at the residential sector and sought to help consumers better understand the cost of us-
ing electricity in order to decrease their personal contribution to the power grid. These stud-
ies developed a baseline usage by monitoring the homes for a time frame before starting the
treatment of delivering notes. These studies were performed in the 1970s and 80s and real-
ized energy savings of between 7% and 30% 6,8,9,10,11,12
.
Real-time, in-home feedback is a relatively new technology that aides residential customers
in minimizing their energy usage. The first study using real-time direct digital displays was
conducted by Dobson and Griffin in 199214
. A more aesthetically pleasing and intuitive de-
vice led to increased energy savings in later studies14,15
. The use of real-time feedback pre-
sents an opportunity to decrease residential energy consumption by 10%-20%17
. The order
of magnitude of savings varies depending on the location of the study, type of feedback or
information offered, cost of power, and other social and economic factors. For example,
Humboldt State University is monitoring campus housing energy consumption using The
Energy Detective (TED). The program targets three campus locations to see if promoting
conservation will reduce consumption. TED is helping to target the inefficient houses on
campus and reduce the university’s carbon footprint17
. A synopsis of the recent studies using
RTM technology can be seen in Table 2 below16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24
.
Table 2 - Overview of Utilities and Institutions Using RTMs
Study RTM
Used Timeframe Location
Electricity Savings
Achieved by Feedback
Hydro One PCM 18 months British Columbia, CA TOU – 7.6% RTM – 6.7%
Florida Solar TED 2 years Southern Florida 4.6 kWh/day
CEATI PCM 3 1/2 years Labrador and New-
foundland, Ca 18%
TXU TED Ongoing Texas 15%
Dominion
VA PCM 2008 Pilot Virginia None Published
Humboldt
University TED 2007 California None Published
NSTAR PCM 2007 Pilot Massachusetts 692 kWh/year/participant
NV Energy Multiple Ongoing Nevada 8% (Preliminary)
CA Pilot Orb Ongoing California No direct savings
III. Project Description
The research investigates the effect of RTM’s on household electricity consumption behav-
ior. The purpose of the study is to promote energy conservation, assist consumers in reduc-
ing their energy usage and determine if real-time feedback will aid residential customers in
reducing their energy usage. The existing power capacity of the utility is quickly becoming
Page 14.334.6
insufficient to supply all of its end users at peak times. The project provides a model of how
a university and business can collaborate to conduct a meaningful study that increases the
awareness of the general population while simultaneously benefiting academia and industry.
a. Phase I
The project involved three separate phases. The initial phase of the project sought to evalu-
ate the RTMs on the market and determine which devices would best fit the goals of the
study. These devices include the Ambient Energy Orb25
, Aztech In-Home Display26
, Power
Cost Monitor (PCM)27
, Wattson28
, The Energy Detective29 (TED), Cent-a-Meter30
and EML
2020H31
. The device evaluations analyzed the ease of installation, ease of use, accuracy,
quality of information, and usefulness of data given by each device. To perform these pre-
liminary evaluations devices were installed in research team homes as seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2 - Home Device Installation at Residential Electrical Panel (Cent-A-Meter)
Another consideration discussed included device maintenance. Some devices such as the
PCM and Cent-A-Meter require batteries which would need replacing over time. Signal dis-
tance limitations were also considered for each device in terms of the interaction between the
transmitter and receiver. Other devices such as TED and EML2020H require current trans-
formers to be placed around the incoming mains in the electrical panel. This installation
would involve a trained electrician and added costs. The Energy Orb had a monthly cost as-
sociated with using the company’s network system. Keeping all of the project considerations
in mind, it was determined during the device analysis that the device selected for the study
needed to provide both visual cues and numerical data. Communicating information in vari-
ous ways increases the amount of users who will be able to gain useful information from the
device.
Based on the developed criteria for the project, the Aztech In-Home Display and Power Cost
Monitor devices were selected. The Aztech offers simple visual and digital feedback. The
visual display is based on a rotating color bar at the top of the device replicating a traditional
meter spinning. Quantifiable data in the form of current power consumption, cumulative
kWhs and cumulative cost and graphical information based on the past 24 hours and past 30
days of energy usage. The PCM offers similar feedback without the color changing effect.
Page 14.334.7
A rotating wheel simulates the spinning of the electrical meter and data is in the form of cur-
rent and cumulative consumption and cost. Both monitors easily interface with the Itron
electrical meters installed on the homes in the pilot study region. The devices selected for
the study are shown below in Figure 3.
(a) (b)
Figure 3 – Real-time Monitoring Devices Used in the Study (a) Aztech In-Home Display;
(b) Power Cost Monitor
b. Phase II
During the second phase 500 letters were initially sent to electrical utility customers as an
insert in their bill seeking volunteer participants for the study. The respondents to the letter
were asked to fill out a four question survey to indicate their willingness to participate. The
research team set device installation appointments with those interested in participating.
During this phase monitors were installed in 13 utility employee residences, 6 research team
homes, and 20 customer residences. Each installation involved contacting the participant via
phone or email, setting up an appointment, and visiting their home for half an hour to install
the device and explain its functionality. The initial device installations allowed the research
team and OPPD to evaluate the effectiveness of the devices and address any issues in their
functionality. The testing period examined the benefits of the devices, user interface and in-
volvement, participant motivation for change, and whether or not any behavior change oc-
curred. Phase II tested the project model to ensure that the larger scale operation would run
as smoothly as possible.
In order to gain further information on behavior change for evaluation, two separate custom-
ized colored light bar display schemes were developed for the Aztech devices. The Aztech
type I (AZI) was designed to have a green light bar from 10pm to 7:59am, the color would be
yellow from 8am-1:59pm and 7pm-9:59pm, and it would be red during peak utility demand
from 2pm-6:59pm. The Aztech type II (AZII) light bar color change was based on the aver-
age daily kWh consumption for the household in which it was installed. Data from June-
September of 2006 and 2007 was averaged to develop a daily kWh usage for participants.
The light bar reset to green at 12am each day and turned yellow once 40% of the average dai-
ly usage was met and turned red at 60%. The color changing patterns were intended to pro-
mote conservation based on utility demand and personal usage respectively.
While Phase II was in progress the research team performed many tasks to allow for the suc-
cess of the study. A website was launched to assist participants with questions and provide
additional energy saving information. Call center training at the utility company was con-
ducted by the students to educate the employees on the pilot program. A dedicated university
call center was created for participants to contact the research team in case of issues with
their monitor.
Page 14.334.8
c. Phase III
During Phase III the rest of the devices were installed bringing the total number of partici-
pant homes to 151 (50 AZIs, 50 AZIIs, and 51 PCMs). At the midterm point in late Septem-
ber the participants were contacted via telephone and email to see if they wanted to continue
their participation. At that time appointments were made to perform maintenance on the de-
vices or to remove them from the home based on user preference. Participants were asked to
participate in a midterm survey during the home visit.
IV. Results
The mid-term survey analysis offers a good interpretation of the participant’s interaction with
the devices. In total 109 participants responded to the survey. While the qualitative answers
are not indicative of energy savings, some conclusions can be drawn from the responses.
60.5% of the participants indicated that they did not have any complaints regarding the
RTMs. Additional analysis showed that 77.7% of RTM users looked at the device on a daily
basis to understand their personal impact on the power grid. This is significant when com-
pared to the 2.3% who indicated that they did not really use the device much at all. In addi-
tion 10.5% of respondents indicated that they initially used the device more so than a month
or two down the line when it had been in the home for a period of time. This behavior, along
with the 26% of participants who chose to discontinue the study during the mid-term mainte-
nance visits, indicates that these devices may be best suited for short term usage in a rental
program or in conjunction with a promotional rate structure. 16.3% of the participants used
the device to track the consumption of the individual appliances in their home to find the
biggest sources of possible savings. 55.8% liked being able to track their usage in real-time
and 69.8% stated that they were more aware of their personal energy usage or had at least
attempted to modify electricity usage behavior in some way. From these percentages we can
infer that the participants are being educated on their personal energy usage and making a
conscious effort to decrease consumption.
A synopsis of the survey questions and participant responses is illustrated in Figure 4. The
fundamental problem with this feedback is that all participants were self-selected in that they
had to respond to a survey or contact the university in order to be selected. Since a desire to
conserve must be present before a change can occur, the survey results may not be indicative
of the actual energy savings produced by the RTMs.
Page 14.334.9
Summary of Mid-Term Survey Results
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
AZ AZ1 AZ2 ALL AZ PCM Total
Device Type
Su
rve
y R
esp
on
de
nts
Total Respondents
Enjoyed being able to track real-time usage
Liked seeing how much energy eachappliance used
Expressed no dislike towards thedevice
Used AC, Ltg, and appliances moreconciously
Participant owns their home
Figure 6 – Summary of Mid-term Survey Analysis Results
V. Conclusion
a. Research Findings
The difficult task of developing a connection and communicating between community, aca-
demia and industry was successfully accomplished. Increasing the interaction between the
three differing entities allowed academia and industry to better serve the community and
community appreciation of academia and industry increased. This study enhanced the educa-
tion of students by bringing real world, industry situations into the classroom. Additionally,
the study brought the students out of the context of the classroom and exposed them to indi-
viduals within the community and industry. By combining the resources of academia and
industry, a collaborative experience that benefits each entity developed. The research experi-
ence offered students a segway into further advanced education and independent research
opportunities, while simultaneously providing the utility with crucial research necessary in
the refinement of their billing rates and green initiatives.
b. Student Involvement and Experiences
All of the students participating in the research benefited professionally and personally while
being compensated for their work. The involvement and experience of each of the eleven
students varied. Paul Mooter, a 4th
year architectural engineering student, took a semester off
to work full time for OPPD after a summer experience working on the project. Mooter felt
that “There was a great deal of enthusiasm for saving energy amongst OPPDs customers; es-
pecially with the rising cost of energy” and that “It was good to see how willing people were
to save energy if given the proper tools”. The discussions with fellow researchers and the
enthusiasm of the research participants motivated Mooter to be more aware of his personal
energy usage.
Page 14.334.10
Most of the students involved monitor their personal energy usage more closely after work-
ing on the project. Jamie Tills, a 4th
year architectural engineering student, worked on the
project over the summer, and found it to be a positive experience. She “enjoyed going to
people's homes to set up the devices because it was fun to visit with the people and most
seemed very interested about monitoring the devices”. She found most research participants
were interested in how much energy could be saved by turning off a light or the air condi-
tioner.
Adam Brumbaugh, a 3rd
year architectural engineering student, worked closely with an En-
ergy Efficiency Consultant with Precision Data Systems to assist in device installations.
Brumbaugh found the interaction with a professional to be valuable and a great experience.
The connection with industry professionals and homeowners allowed the students to build
networking, communication, and collaboration skills enabling them to easily assimilate into
their industry professions.
Bibliography
[1] Lemckert, Charles J. (2003). A Coastal Engineering Industry Affiliates Programme Model to Enhance
Student Learning. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education Vol.2, No.3. UICEE
[2] El-Raghy, Saad. (1999) Quality Engineering Education: Student Skills and Experiences. Global Jour-
nal of Engineering Education Vol. 3, No. 1. UICEE
[3] McKee, William A. (1999) Integrating Education and Industry through Enhanced Projects. Global
Journal of Engineering Education Vol. 3, No. 3. UICEE
[4] Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2008). A subset of the U.S. Department of Energy
http://www.eia.doe.gov (Accessed: October 15, 2008).
[5] Williams, Eric D., & Matthews, H. Scott. (2007). Scoping the Potential of Monitoring and Control
Technologies to Reduce Energy use in Homes. IEEE.
[6] Seligman, C. & Darley, J.M. (1977). “Feedback as a Means of Decreasing Residential
Energy Consumption.” Journal of Applied Psychology 62 (4): 363-368.
[7] Farhar, Barbara C. (1989). “Effects of Feedback on Residential Electricity Consumption: A Literature
Review.” Solar Energy Research Institute. U.S. Department of Energy.
[8] Winett, Richard A. and Michael T. Nietzel (1975). “Behavioral Ecology: Contingency Management of
Consumer Energy Use.” American Journal of Community Psychology, 3.2:123-133.
[9] Winett, Richard A., John H. Kagel, Raymond C. Battalio, and Robin C. Winkler
(1978). “Effects of Monetary Rebates, Feedback, and Information on Residential Electricity Conserva-
tion.” Journal of Applied Psychology 63:73-80.
[10] Bittle, Ronald G., Robert Balesano, and Greg Thaler (1979). “The Effects of Daily
Cost Feedback on Residential Electricity Consumption.” Behavior Modification 3:187-201.
[11] Winett, Richard A., Michael S. Neale, and Cannon Grier (1982). “Effects of Self-Monitoring and
Feedback on Electricity Consumption.” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 12:173-184.
Page 14.334.11
[12] Van Houwelingen, Jeannet H. and W. Fred Van Raaij (1989). “The Effect of Goal-Setting and Daily
Electronic Feedback on In-Home Energy Use.” The Journal of Consumer Research 16, 1:98-105.
[13] Dobson, JK and JDA Griffin (1992). “Conservation Effect of Immediate Electricity Cost Feedback on
Residential Consumption Behaviour.” Proceedings, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Econ-
omy, 10.33-10.35.
[14] Tanabe, K (2000). “Energy Conservation Results of the Survey Project on the Status of Energy Saving
in the Residential Sector.” IEA Presentation on standby electricity. The Energy Conservation Center,
Japan.
[15] Mansouri, I and Newborough, M (1999). “Dynamics of Energy Use in the UK Households: End-Use
Monitoring of Electric Cookers. Proceedings, European Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.”
Panel III, 08.
[16] Frank, Susan. (2008). “Hydro One Networks Inc. Time-of-Use Pricing Project Results.“
[17] Wallace, James (2007). “TED the energy detective.” The Lumber Jack. http://media.ww
w.thejackonline.org/media/storage/paper1142 /news/ 2007/04/04/ScienceAnd Technology/Ted-
The.Energy.Detective 2818000.shtml (Accessed: August 25, 2008).
[18] Parker, Danny, Hoak,David, Meier, Alan, & Brown, Richard. (2008). “How Much Energy Are We
Using? Potential of Residential Energy Demand Feedback Devices.” Florida Solar Energy Cen-
ter/University of Central Florida.
[19] CEATI (2008). http://www.bluelineinnovations.com/documents/pr-ceati.pdf (Accessed: August 25,
2008).
[20] TXU Energy Power MonitorTM
(2008). http://www.txupartners.com/powermonitor/. (Accessed: August
25, 2008).
[21] Botkins, David (2008). “Dominion Virginia Power Launches First of Nine Energy Conservation Pi-
lots.” Dominion Virginia Power http://www.dom.com (Accessed: August 25, 2008).
[22] NSTAR (2007). Residential Energy Efficiency Department http://www.ase.org/ (Accessed: August 25,
2008).
[23] Jackson, William G. Jr. (2008) NV Energy. A Review of Equipment Home Energy Display Devices
“Description, Application and Issues.” Paragon Consulting Services Inc.
[24] Nexus Energy Software, Opinion Dynamics Corporation, and Primen (2005). “Information Display
Pilot: California Statewide Pricing Pilot.” Southern California Edison. White paper.
[25] Ambient Energy Orb www.consumerpowerline.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[26] Aztech Associates Incorporated http://www.aztechinc.com/en/ (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[27] Blueline Innovations http://www.bluelineinnovations.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[28] Wattson (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[29] The Energy Detective www.energydetective.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[30] Cent-A-Meter www.cenergies.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
[31] EML 2020H www.powermeterstore.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).
Page 14.334.12