How Smart Do Intelligent Buildings Need to Be

- [Lindsay] Good morning. Welcome to this Conservation Applied Research and Development webinar today on How Smart Do Intelligent Buildings Need to Be? This webinar will report on findings of a three-year U.S. Department of Energy and CARD funded project. Thanks so much for joining us today. I'd like to cover a few housekeeping items before we start. All attendees will be in listen-only mode. We will answer all questions at the end of the presentation, but as questions occur to you, please type

them into the Q&A box and send them to all panelists. The Q&A box can be opened by clicking the ellipse in the lower right of your screen as indicated on this slide. We will do our best to answer all questions within the time allocated, but if we don't get to some, we will answer them after the webinar. This webinar is being recorded, and will be available on the department's website in a few weeks. The slide set from this webinar will also be available on the website, and I plan to email it to

all registrants in the next week or so. If you need it sooner, please email me directly. Finally, if you would like closed captions on this webinar, click the CC bubble in the lower left of your screen. I am Lindsay Anderson, an analyst and research planner at the Minnesota Department of Commerce Division of Energy Resources within the Energy Conservation and Optimization Business unit. In that role, I identify and analyze gaps within utility energy conservation and optimization programs and coo

rdinate and plan research to fill those gaps. The CARD program is a major tool of that work. With me today is Adam Zoet, an energy planning director at the Department of Commerce where he specializes in the regulation of electric and gas utility energy conservation and optimization programs. Adam is the project manager on the research that is the subject of this webinar, and he will moderate the Q&A portion of today's presentation. Now, I'd like to introduce our presenters. Our presenters today

are Lester Shen from Center for Energy and Environment, and Stacee Demmer from LHB. As a senior research engineer at CEE, Lester leads research projects dealing with commercial, building, energy efficiency and emerging technologies. Stacee is an architect and vice president at LHB where she leads the 90-person integrative design team consisting of architects, landscape architects, and engineers. Her area of practice includes commercial, education, and community projects. Stacee is passionate abo

ut growing the business case for sustainability, wellness, and resilience in the built environment to help clients and communities optimize their resources. Welcome, Lester and Stacee. We look forward to your presentation. This webinar is one in an ongoing series designed to summarize the results from research projects funded by Minnesota's applied research and development fund, which was established in the Next Generation Energy Act of 2007. The purpose of the fund is to help Minnesota utilitie

s achieve their energy savings goal. $2.6 million is set aside annually for the CARD program, which awards research grants in a competitive request for proposal process. Results from CARD projects provide utilities with data to enhance energy efficiency program designs within their energy conservation and optimization portfolios. As you can see by the pie chart, CARD projects funded to date have been in all building sectors as well as some that cross multiple sectors. The subject of today's webi

nar is the commercial sector, and we'll discuss results from a recent CARD project that demonstrated the use of IT network switches to power and control lighting, plug loads, and HVAC equipment at a variety of buildings. Now, with that, I will turn it over to Lester for today's presentation. - [Lester] Thanks, Lindsay. Before beginning with this presentation, we would also like to express our appreciation and support for, or our appreciation of her support and leadership of the CARD program to M

ary Sue Lobenstein who will be greatly missed. We also want to acknowledge the contributions to this project by our collaborators Brad Cult, intelligent building strategist from HGA, and Luis Suau Chief business officer of Sinclair Digital. This presentation will present the findings of a market analysis of intelligent building technologies in the commercial and industrial sector. Intelligent building systems offer benefits and energy savings, productivity and health and safety, but can yield in

creased costs, base loads, and operations and maintenance. During this presentation, we will first describe the research objectives of the project. We will then cover three primary topics. What are the benefits of intelligent buildings, and the opportunities that they provide? What is the price that is incurred by adopting these intelligent systems, and what implications might that have on the implementation of these systems? And three, given our need to move forward for carbon-free energy futur

e, how can we spur a greater adoption of intelligent building technologies? For our market analysis, we define the following research objectives and perform the following tasks to achieve these objectives. These included a literature review and technology overview to assess and define the current state and trends of intelligent buildings in Minnesota, two, a stakeholder survey to identify the obstacles to and opportunities for adoption and implementation, building simulations to estimate the ene

rgy benefits of the use of intelligent building technologies and the cost effectiveness of investing in that intelligence, recommendations on how the intelligent building technologies should be fitted for the specific building spaces and space uses for optimal and efficient building operation, and finally, strategies to spur greater adoption of intelligent buildings. And we'll turn it to Stacee right now. - [Stacee] All right. As intelligent building uses technology to control or manage somethin

g about its interior environment, this isn't new technology as we've been using building automation systems and lighting controls for years. However, we are starting to better understand the potential of intelligent buildings. So this concept is getting more attention. The internet of things, advancements in sensors, controls, and metering, the use of automation, machine learning, and AI, and growing industry standards and regulations have led to the development and proliferation of intelligent

building technologies, or IBTs. The impact of IBTs are felt across all of the building systems today, including energy management, building infrastructure management and maintenance, access control systems, security and safety management, and occupant experience. For the commercial and industrial sectors, the benefits of intelligent buildings include improved operational efficiency, which can result in lowered utility bills, greater occupant comfort and improved occupant experience, improved sus

tainability and resiliency, ratings and certifications that can bring recognition to the building, and increased financial performance through greater productivity and/or tenant occupancy. The primary stakeholders for intelligent buildings are the building owner, developer, or investor who are kind of the main decision makers behind the investment into intelligent buildings. We have the building operator who is responsible for the operation of the building systems. We have the IT manager who ove

rsees the information systems that are the backbone of the intelligent building systems. We have designers and engineers who have specified the intelligent building systems that are being implemented. And then we also have the contractors and vendors who help to oversee the systems and work with the building operators and the IT staff to ensure that the systems are well-integrated with the building and other building systems. And then most importantly, we have our building occupants. These are t

he stakeholders that use the building and depend on the building to provide a comfortable and healthy space to support their productivity. The interactions between the building and the occupants can create a very powerful feedback loop that significantly impacts building operation and performance. This feedback loop kinda on the right there has been supercharged in recent years because we can now layer on the data and analysis provided by intelligent building technologies. Market projections pre

dict that the global smart building market size will reach $570 billion by 2030 and expand at a compound annual growth rate, or CAGR, of 25% from 2022 to 2030. This graph is from one market research firm and shows that U.S. intelligent building market will grow at a CAGR of 24% from 2023 to 2030. The energy management segment is expected to grow at a CAGR of 28% during the same forecast period. The support and maintenance segment is expected to grow at a CAER of 30% over the forecast period. In

2022, the implementation segment accounted for the largest revenue share at 35%, and the commercial sector held a revenue share of 53% and should dominate the market through 2030. This figure starts to show us the schematic of how typical IBT, how a typical intelligent building operates. The appliances are the devices or end uses that perform the operations that occur in the building. The sensors measure the building conditions, and the actuators are the controllers or motors that receive the co

mmands to operate the appliances. These all feed information to a gateway that then communicates to the cloud where the management system often resides on servers that can be accessed by supporting contractors and system integrators. A lot of us already use IBT on a daily basis with things like home digital assistance, video doorbells, or smart bulbs. Much of what is out there in the consumer market are proprietary systems that don't always integrate with other building systems. So to maximize t

he potential of IBTs, we're looking for non-proprietary technology that will allow for greater data transparency and analysis, adaptability, and machine learning. This figure shows the intelligent building system related to energy use of the building. In the center of the graphic, the Building Automation System, or BAS, and the Energy Management Information system, or EMIS, serve as the brains of the intelligent building with a two-way feed of information and data. The BAS and EMIS control the b

uilding systems on the left, which include heating, lighting, ventilation, air conditioning, day lighting, plug loads, and distributed energy resources such as solar and energy storage. The building systems feed data into the fault detection and diagnostics that can detect and anticipate any system malfunctions, possibly even generating and distributing appropriate service tickets. Weather data, utility grid data, and trend data on the right of the image are also used to inform how the building

should operate and to facilitate the powerful feedback loop that we noted earlier. - [Lester] A 2017 American Council for an energy efficient economy report found that whereas an upgrade to a single component or isolated system can result in energy savings of five to 15%. An intelligent building with integrated systems can realize 30 to 50% savings in the existing buildings that are otherwise inefficient. Savings can reach 2.4 kilowatt hours per square foot. The report examined a range of smart

technology opportunities that included HVAC systems, plug loads, lighting, window shading, automated system optimization, human operation, and connected distributed generation and power. DOE is currently supporting two initiatives that are dependent on the further adoption of intelligent buildings. The grid-interactive efficient buildings, or GEBs initiative, is intended to help make buildings become smarter about the amount and timing of energy use and emit less carbon. GEBs are energy efficien

t buildings with smart technologies characterized by the active use of distributed energy resources, or DERs, such as solar energy, battery storage, and even EVs to optimize energy use for grid services, occupant needs and preferences, and cost reductions in a continuous and integrated way. By combining energy efficiency and demand flexibility with intelligent building technologies and communications, these buildings can serve as clean and flexible energy resources. By 2030, the DOE estimated th

at GEBs could save up to $18 billion per year in power system costs and cut 80 million tons of carbon emissions each year. DOE has published an a national roadmap that identifies the most important barriers and outlines the key opportunities for full implementation of GEBs and associated demand flexibility. This figure shows how GEBs will rely on intelligent building technologies to provide buildings with efficient operation, the ability to integrate buildings and connect with the grid, and the

functionality required to perform grid services through load flexibility. In addition to GEBs, DOE has established the Connected Communities Funding program. Connected Communities are defined as a group of GEBs with diverse, flexible end use equipment and other distributed energy resources that collectively work to maximize building community and grid efficiency while meeting occupants' comfort and needs. In 2021, the program invested $61 million for 10 projects to equip over 7,000 buildings wit

h smart controls, sensors and analytics to demonstrate how connected communities can reduce energy cost, energy cost, use costs, and GHD admissions. Again, intelligent buildings will serve as the backbone of connected communities where these group of buildings work in concert with the integration of DERs and coordinated controls to support the grid and lower carbon emissions. To provide some guidance in the development of intelligent buildings, we've created an intelligent building taxonomy, whi

ch defines five levels in which intelligent buildings can be categorized. These are level zero, which is the baseline building defined as complying with the U.S. building codes. The building has segregated, decentralized building systems with independent controls and sensors. Level one is the automated building, which is automated systems to allow for centralized operation and management. Level two is the integrated building where the building systems communicate with the cloud through IoT devic

es and systems to allow remote coordination with onsite building facilities and IT staff. Level three are GEBs, which are DERs, and which have DERs and are integrated with the grid. And level four are buildings that are part of a connected community which share energy resources with other buildings while also providing grid services. As we consider the important role that intelligent buildings will play in our energy future it's important to be aware that there is an energy price that comes with

building intelligence. Throwing a technological fix at a problem will not necessarily provide the optimal solution. It is possible to be too smart for your own good. This slide shows schematics for two network lighting systems, an AC powered dolly system and a DC powered PoE system. These network lighting systems can provide added functionality such as on-off scheduling, occupancy and lighting control, dimming and color tunability, luminaire level control, and integration with the VAS and secur

ity life safety systems. Notice that the additional equipment that is needed to support this network intelligence, such as sensors, controls, drivers, power supplies, gateways, servers, network switches, and routers. These devices not only add capital costs and operational and maintenance complexity, but also must be powered, and therefore incur an energy cost. This graph shows a comparison of two lighting systems in identical classrooms. One lighting system is a typical AC powered lighting syst

em controlled by a wall switch and occupancy and day lighting sensors. While the other classroom is a PoE luminaire level network lighting system with two occupancy sensors and a day lighting sensor. The graph shows how the power draw of both systems increases as the power brightness levels of the lights also increase. Since the slopes of the two lines are parallel, the power demands of the LED lamps in the two classrooms are nearly identical. However, looking at the Y-intercept, we can see that

the base load power of the PoE network equipment is about 50 watts while the base load power of the AC system was measured to be about three watts. Based on this we can find, we can define two types of power loads for intelligent building technologies, effective power and non-effective power. The effective power is the power drawn from the device hardware that is directly translated into work as perceived by the user. In this example, the light emitted by the classroom fixtures. The non-effecti

ve power is the power drawn by the devices that bring intelligence and network capabilities to the lighting system. This power produces no work perceived by the user. It can also be called baseload power or standby power when the lights are off but are in standby state waiting to be turned on. In residential applications, this is often called phantom loads or vampire power. And for energy efficiency are considered loads that you try to minimize. Returning to the two classrooms, these graphs show

a comparison of the two lighting systems for one day during the winter and another in the summer. In order to assess the energy savings benefit of the network lighting system, the operational savings provided by the network lighting systems should not only show savings compared to the operation of the non-network lights, but also needs to overcome the load incurred by the sensors, controllers, and network devices that run 24/7. In the case of these classrooms, the networked luminaire level ligh

ting system incurs an energy penalty and is not cost effective. This example shows that there is not one size that fits all for intelligent building technologies and systems. - [Stacee] Now that we understand the equipment costs and energy loads for network systems, we needed to evaluate appropriate level of intelligence for different space types. Buildings are composed of a number of different space types, which will have their own uses and operational needs. This table shows the range of space

s typically seen in office and school buildings. We then identified typical needs and functionality for each. For example, an intelligent lighting system in an open office area of cubicles could benefit from more individual luminaire controls in the lights in a conference room or a lobby. The type of controls that are available for the different building systems will help to define the appropriate level of intelligence needed for that space. In this table, the controls are shown for four buildin

g systems. The lighting system can have either a zoned space or building level control, or luminaire level control. The HVAC system can be controlled by thermostats in the space or by networked controls through the building automation system. Plug loads can be controlled on the individual device level or via outlet or power strip control. And finally, occupancy management can be controlled by the individual or by the space. With these control types in mind, a matrix was created, which recommends

the type of control options that are appropriate for the various building systems and space types. For example, based on the previous experience with classrooms, luminaire level control would be a case of over-engineering, and the lighting control in the classroom should either be for the entire space or at most two or three zones. Aside from cost and energy impacts, over-engineering can impact ease of use and be detrimental to the occupant experience. Overly complicated systems can be prone to

misuse or being deprogrammed out of frustration. This matrix tends to show a higher degree of intelligence recommended for systems with higher energy use, and therefore higher energy savings potential. Networked controls can be cost effective and add value for HVAC, indoor air quality, and indoor environmental quality for nearly all space types. - [Lester] This raises the next question. How do we get guidance on the energy efficiency of IBTs? While the energy start program has ratings that allo

w consumers to compare the energy efficiency of devices and appliances, and even ratings and certifications for buildings, there currently is not a rating system for intelligent building technologies or systems. The closest ratings that are available from Energy Star are for IT equipment such as servers, UPSs, and storage. Energy Star has, however, developed an energy performance rating system for data centers that could be useful for intelligent buildings systems. The metric is called the power

utilization efficiency, or PUE. The PUE is a standard measure of facility infrastructure efficiency in the IT industry. It is a measure of how much energy is consumed by data center infrastructure equipment like power supplies and cooling relative to the amount of energy delivered directly to the IT equipment. That is, PUE equals total facility power divided by the power of the IT services. As an example, in the pie chart shown almost 50% of the power drawn by this data center are from infrastr

ucture loads like cooling and HVAC and lighting. Since 50% of the power is IT load, the PUE of this data center is 2.0. Typically the PUE of a data center is between 1.25 to three. When applied to IBTs, the data center infrastructure power load can be considered the non-effective power of an IB system, intelligent building system. Therefore, a similar form of the PUE can be defined for IBTs where the PUE is the total power load of the IBT. In other words, the sum of the non-effective and effecti

ve powers divided by the effective power. Returning to our classroom example, we can calculate the PoUE for the two classrooms and find that the PUE IBT of the non-network lighting system is 1.0, while the PUE system had a PUE IBT of 1.12. In this case, the PUE IBT is a measure of the amount of intelligence of the system, and given the needs of the classroom, a system with a PUE IBT close to one should be expected. Another use for the PUE IBT could occur while choosing between comparable IB syst

ems or when designing and specifying an IB system that will be installed. In this case, devices could be specified that help minimize the phantom loads that come from less efficient equipment or unnecessary operation of devices on standby. We have discussed the benefits and need for intelligent buildings and the design considerations for optimal implementation of IBTs. But while projections for market growth arose, they were still in the early stages of adoption. To achieve the energy goals that

we want, an integrated approach toward adoption that is informed by DOE'S roadmap is ideal. This figure shows the typical diffusion curve showing how a product is successfully adopted by consumers within a market. The rate of adoption of a new product is governed by five groups. Innovators who are willing to take risks and try out a new product with little persuasion. Early adopters are opinion leaders who are aware of the need for change and comfortable with adopting new ideas. They do not nee

d information to convince them to change, just how to interpret it. The early majority need to be convinced that the innovation works before adopting it. Success stories and evidence of effectiveness will sway this group. The late majority are skeptical of change and will adopt the innovation only after it has been tried by the majority. Laggards are very conservative and bound by tradition. Skeptical of change, they need pressure or fear to eventually bring change. There will always be people w

ho hoard incandescent light bulbs, for instance. It has been observed with the adoption of high tech products that a chasm often exists moving from the early adopter stage to the early majority stage. It is often only after you've gotten over the chasm that you reach a tipping point and start to get critical mass with the first early majority and propels the product to full adoption. Malcolm Gladwell in his book "The Tipping Point," analyzed how these trends arise, propagate, and take hold to sh

ift a paradigm or transform a market. Gladwell defines the tipping point as the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point that can foment exponential growth or adoption. He posited two questions. Why is it that some ideas, or behaviors, or products start epidemics and others don't? And what can we do to deliberately start and control positive epidemics of our own? Through his analysis of epidemics, Gladwell observed that they require three factors. One, power who, people who tran

smit the infectious agent. Two, the agent, virus idea, or product that infects and spreads. And three, an environment where the conditions allow the infectious agent to dwell and operate. Gladwell defined three change agents that cause a tipping point. One, the law of the few, two, the stickiness factor, and three, the power of context. The law of the few notes that a tipping point often relies on a small number of very special personas who can be classified as mavens, connectors, and salespeopl

e. Mavens are the information banks who bring the message, connectors are the social glue who spread the message, and salespeople are the ones with the skills to convince others that the message is worth believing in and inspire a critical mass to action. The stickiness factor deals with the ability of the content of the message to attract and retain the audience's attention. The power of context deals with transmission and the environment in which ideas or trends propagate. Small changes in con

text can be important to create tipping points. - [Stacee] Applying the three rules to intelligent buildings, we will start with the stickiness factor. So bursting out of the concept of internet of things, intelligent buildings already suggest the optimism and hope that technology, automation, and artificial intelligence will bring forth the dreams of the future that were envisioned by the Jetsons. The dire consequences that we're beginning to feel and see from climate change is also grabbing ou

r attention and spurring us into action. Ratings and certifications can bring attention to the need to create more efficient buildings. The rise of sustainable investing is driving corporations towards ESG, which is environmental, social, and governments reporting and climate action planning, which brings, further brings the message to our attention. In a tight labor market, staff recruitment and retention is a driving force. The labor-saving benefits of intelligent buildings for facility staff

is a compelling reason to promote intelligent building adoption. Likewise, intelligent buildings lead to higher indoor environmental quality, and we know that people who are physically comfortable have an enhanced sense of wellbeing, they are more productive, and they perform better at critical thinking and problem solving skills. And finally, there are the economic benefits and market differentiation that intelligent buildings, and they can be a convincing reason for building owners, developers

, and investors to spur change. We'll turn it back over to Lester. - [Lester] On February 20. On February 7th, 2023, governor Tim Walz signed a clean energy bill that required Minnesota's electric utilities to transition to 100% clean energy by 2040. Xcel Energy and Minnesota Power, Minnesota's two largest electric utilities, had set goals of a net zero energy future by 2050. These are strong driving forces in the public and private sectors. These are important contextual factors that will bring

major changes in the electrical infrastructure of the state and will impact how buildings consume electricity and interact with the grid. This sets the stage for a very important role that intelligent buildings will need to take on. Finally, we get to the law of the few. Currently, we are still waiting for a small group of connectors, mavens, and salespeople to coalesce and form the leverage that effectively spreads the message and creates a tipping point. There are many candidates within the I

B stakeholders where these connectors, mavens, and salespeople can be found. These include the decision makers like building operator, or building owners who invest in and develop intelligent buildings and tenants who create the demand for the buildings, the designers who enable the implementation of intelligent buildings, the manufacturers and vendors who supply the IBTs and systems, the onsite staff who operate and maintain the IBTs and also benefit from them, and the contractors who provide s

ervices in support of the building staff to operate and maintain the intelligence systems. In search of the law of the few that we need, the building intelligence group of the Twin Cities was founded as a local professional association of intelligent buildings, practitioners, and enthusiasts. By virtue of B.I.G.'s unique mix of practitioners, the law of the few personas of connectors, mavens, and salespeople are well represented and could be the source of the individuals needed to spur a tipping

point for intelligent buildings. They could be an excellent resource for planning, developing, and delivering utility programs that support IBTs. Tipping points are often observed retrospectively, but given all the factors at hand, it should be possible for a public-private partnership to spur a tipping point that leads to the widespread adoption of intelligent buildings, GEBs, and the creation of connected communities. For our market analysis, we have seen that intelligent buildings have an im

portant role not only in delivering more efficient operation of buildings, but also as a necessary part of creating a carbon-free future. The IB market has the potential to grow rapidly over the next decade and beyond. There's a price for this intelligence, and it needs to be applied wisely to optimize its benefits. Optimal integration in a building requires the appropriate application of IBTs based on space use. Widespread adoption of intelligent buildings is in need of a tipping point, and whi

le many of the factors are in place, public-private partnerships need to be established to help catalyze a tipping point. - [Lindsay] Please type any additional questions into the Q&A panel and send them to us as we move into getting some time with Lester and Stacee to ask some questions. Adam, do you have any questions queued up for Stacee or Lester? - [Adam] Thanks, Lindsay. And let me see. I guess one question is, with hybrid work becoming more of a norm at organizations, what can intelligent

buildings complement this type of work arrangement? - [Stacee] I can take that one. You know, hybrid work really has led to a different and complex pattern of building occupancy. I think we all get a sense of that just by noticing that office occupancy and traffic levels on Mondays and Fridays are very different compared to what we see midweek. I think that intelligent buildings are gonna help us optimize the energy use in buildings by adapting to those real patterns so that we aren't obviously

lighting, cooling, or ventilating vacant spaces. But I think IBTs will also allow the systems to be more predictive without the manually programming aspect that we would have to do in a more standard building. You know, in most offices, one example is energy use during the July 4th holiday week probably didn't adjust much, if any, but if we had an intelligent building system, it might have caught that nearly no one worked on July 3rd. And that occupancy was also pretty low, you know, for the re

mainder throughout the week. One of the other benefits I see is just a better understanding of how people use spaces. You know, I see it in my very own office, you know, one person sitting in a 12-person conference room all day for privacy reasons, when there really could be a less resource-intensive way to provide for those same needs. So I think the data and the analytics that we can get from IBTs can really help our real estate work smarter, you know, from both an operational and a inputing c

arbon standpoint. - [Adam] Thanks, Stacee. Could you talk more about the return on value for intelligent buildings? - [Lester] Yeah, this has been, this came up as we've been doing some computer modeling to determine, well, actually as part of the project we're also doing computer modeling, some simulations to verify and quantify energy savings from intelligent building technologies and strategies. And as we've been doing, we've been working on the economic analysis. We've been looking at return

on investment, and the ROI, you know, typically is the usual metric for the economic benefit of how much money is spent on a measure. But the thing with intelligent buildings is that their benefits of intelligent buildings can all, are not just based on kind of objective standards like ROI, but they're also subjective value judgments, and these can be, you know, unique to specific buildings and specific uses. And one of the things that, concepts that we've been looking at has been return on val

ue rather than internal investment. Because the ability of, or the benefits of IBT can improve building performance, it also then can impact on comfort, productivity, and wellbeing, which aren't necessarily the easiest things to quantify. And so return on value looks at the value that is added by IBTs and expands a viewpoint beyond just the financial silo that ROI will focus on. And so that is something that we've been working on in terms of our economic analysis and will be included in the fina

l report. - [Adam] Sounds good. Any thoughts on some of the key cybersecurity issues and privacy issues with data related to intelligent buildings? - [Lester] Well, with buildings and IBTs, well, with the way we work today, we're using technologies more and more. And as the technologies develop, they become more and more networked. And as they become more networked, the that need for cybersecurity becomes greater and greater. And now as these systems communicate more and more with the cloud, the

entry points into the network, into the system increase, and they increase not only through the building systems, but also any other networks that these systems can communicate. For instance, the increase in grid interactive buildings could increase the danger of hackers getting access to the grid through vulnerabilities in the buildings, connected building systems. And we have any remote connections that might be existing between the building and support systems where contractors have access t

o say IT, or security, or HVAC services, which they help manage and operate. And so these are huge issues, and obviously they are issues that need to be addressed, not just by buildings, but I think a coordinated effort through the work of, you know, DOE, government entities, utilities, grid, and IT services. And yeah, cybersecurity obviously is gonna be a huge issue, and as obviously we become more reliant on the cloud, that then becomes a huge issue with data privacy also. I hope that answered

the question. - [Stacee] Yeah. I have a little bit to add just in terms of general privacy and some things that I've seen in the industry. You know, we are seeing a lot more, you know, occupancy sensors, people counting, that sort of thing. And one of the concerns that I've heard from clients is they wanna make sure that that data is anonymous. There's a concern, if you are now suddenly putting occupancy sensors at assigned desks, you know, people don't necessarily, they're uncomfortable with t

he idea of being tracked to that degree. So I think that there's some work to do in terms of, you know, how do we get the data in terms of who is where and how spaces are being used, and without kind of having that big brother view of tracking people every move throughout their space. - [Adam] Thank you both. How do you see information from this study being incorporated into SIP utility programs either now or in the future? - [Lester] Well, I think currently you can take advantage of SIP program

s now, which have incentives for network lighting systems, kind of the IT network equipment that's used, HVAC equipment and even sensors. I think these incentives could be expanded to other intelligent building technologies and systems. In some ways you could use a current custom rebate programs where you would do calculations for savings, and then that would be a systems approach. Ideally down the road, prescriptive rebates might be developed for IBTs. Going beyond just intelligent buildings, r

enewable energy incentives can be used to support the development of GEBs in connected communities, and that, again, will help support IBT deployment. And then I think looking at the utility programs, in some sense, incentives shouldn't be based solely on energy efficiency. Given the impetus to a carbon-free energy system, we should start looking at providing incentives for systems that increase building load flexibility and grid interactivity. - [Adam] Thanks, Lester. What do you think is the s

ingle most important takeaway from the results of this study? - [Lester] Well, as we develop IBTs, we need to be aware that systems also have power requirements. So we need to answer two questions. Are the energy savings that the operation of these intelligence systems bring, offset and exceed the energy consumed by the systems during operation and standby. And two, are the systems designed to operate as efficiently as possible considering, you know, not only the power consumption of the compone

nt devices, but also how power is delivered and where it's used and maybe to optimize that. I guess one thing that we've kind of been looking at is when you look at, say electronic devices, they typically run on DC power. And currently in, currently we need to convert AC power to DC power. And so if there are opportunities to remove those, any of those inefficiencies and power delivery, that can push energy efficiency throughout the system. - [Stacee] I think for me, really what struck me is und

erstanding how to use the right tools and the right application, and that importance of simple interconnectedness between systems. I think the benefit of IBTs is the combination of the energy optimization and the improved human experience. You know, but I do see a real risk. And if IBTs get too complex, they get underutilized, and in that case we've got the power draw, but we don't necessarily achieve the other benefits. So figuring out where is that balance between the tools and the benefits. -

[Lester] You know, I'd like to go back to the SIP utility programs for a second. One thing, you know, a lot of times we think in terms of SIP programs as, you know, just rebates and incentives, but I think there's an important educational and training component. And one thing that we've learned from working with kind of new technologies, especially with intelligent buildings, is there's a need for education and training. And I think especially with kind of intelligent building design, maybe a d

esign assistance program might be useful. And I dunno, Stacee, you're an architect and designer. What value do you see in gaining some, having some level of design assistance available? - [Stacee] Right, I think it's huge. You know what I'm seeing now is that with this being pretty new technology, it's requiring just a closer collaboration between the design teams, and the contractors, and the vendors, and the building operations. And no one party really has it all figured out, so it feels like

we're all flexing a little bit out of our traditional roles. So having that education component to kind of fill those gaps would be really important. And then I think the information really should not just be focused on the energy since integration with the other building systems brings that overall efficient building operations and will promote that greater IBT adoption. Which is, there's a lot of unknowns at this point. And I think, you know, we talk about the early adopters and you know, the

middle, and medium, and late adopters, and I think there just are a lot of people who are not educated at this point or don't know of the potential for these systems. - [Lester] Yeah, I think, you know, we've talked a little, you know, we are trying to introduce the idea of the tipping point and how do you create a tipping point that might cause adoption of IBTs, or intelligent buildings, to just grow by itself and fuel itself. And I think, again, it is information and knowledge. And so getting

the mavens, and the connectors, and salespeople to go beyond the normal silos that we have in the building trades or the building community, and see what leverage points there are and how we can expand demand. I'll give you an example of one project that I worked on where we were working with the school, and we were looking at a, they had a POE lighting system, and it was kind of with regard to the classroom data I showed earlier. But talking to the IT people, you know, we were talking about the

classroom, but we also said, well, you know, the nice thing about the system now that it's networked is we can now communicate with the HVAC system and with the school security system. So we integrated it with the security system. And so whenever there was a threat level that required, you know, some, you know, kind of warning to the entire school, we could program the lights to flash. And the teachers and students preferred that because often they wouldn't hear what was coming over the loudspe

aker. And then as we're talking about this, we said, well, you know, we could put luminaire level control on the hallway lights. So not only could we get, have them flash to say that there was a security episode, but say in the case of a fire, or in case of kind of egress from the building, we could program the corridor lights to show safe passage out of the building. And talking to the IT person, he was like, "Oh boy, if we can do that, we can put in, you know, we would absolutely wanna have a

network lighting system." And so that's one of those cases when you're talking about a design assistance is that there are ancillary reasons for IBTs that may not have energy efficiency benefits, but by implementing the systems, you get the energy savings while also providing value in another way. And that's where we go back to return on value. And if you're just talking with a lighting person, you know, the vendor, they may not be pushing the benefits that go beyond the silo that they're in. An

d this is where the benefit of some level of design assistance could be useful. And again, when we talk about the tipping point, reaching out, and finding and educating the mavens, connectors, and salespeople, and giving them a platform, and helping them transmit that message, is that a way that we can create a tipping point? And maybe it is through a design assistance program or some sort of educational program that maybe SIP could support. But I'll leave that to, I'll leave that to DER now. (L

ester laughs) - [Lindsay] Adam, if there's maybe one more question we can ask before moving towards webinar closure, that'd be great. - [Adam] Yeah, it looks like we just have one more in the chat asking which intelligent building technologies do you think are the most likely to have the greatest near-term adoption? - [Lester] I think when you think of intelligent building technologies, a lot of times you think about the end use, end uses in the systems, and it may very well be the sensors and c

ontrollers that are, that have the greatest near-term adoption, and maybe have the greatest barriers too. But you know, Stacee mentioned occupancy sensors, but occupancy sensors, IEQ sensors, getting information about the system and how it, about the building and how the building is used. I mean, that sort of information that if we can draw upon that, and then use it to control and operate the systems that we have in the building like HVAC. So I guess it's, the most important thing is how do we

make buildings? How are we able to get that information in a transparent way and how do we, and then making that available, and then making that available in ways- You know, it may vary well be that it isn't the technologies or the systems that drive IBTs, or intelligent buildings, but it may be how we collect that data and how we make that available to the different systems through a transparent way, maybe through BACnet, maybe through APIs, and have that able to communicate to all the building

systems that are there. So it'd be like creating a brain and the nervous system. And that the nervous system would be the sensors and controls. And the brain is the cloud and the network. And so the main thing right now is sensors and controls. So I guess that that would be probably the greatest near-term adoption or the greatest need. - [Stacee] Yeah, I kind of agree with that in terms of even what I'm seeing when new office projects and even renovations is there is a huge push to understand,

you know, where people are at, who's in the office. So I think there's a new found acceptance that we should have a better idea of how many people are in the office at any given time and how they're using that space. And I, you know, both in terms of desk booking, and shared spaces, and conference rooms that sit empty because someone's reserved them, but they're working from home. So I think that there is some momentum there and some acceptance that that is gonna be the norm in our spaces. So if

we can, like Lester said, learn how to harvest that, I think there's a lot of potential there. - [Adam] Great. Yeah, thank you Lester and Stacee for the really insightful discussion. I don't see any other questions in the chat, Lindsay, so I'll kick it back to you. - [Lindsay] Excellent. Yeah, thank you again Stacee and Lester for your presentation, and to Adam for facilitating the Q&A. If you attendees have any other follow up questions about this CARD project, feel free to reach out to Lester

or Stacee, or those in the department depending on what your question is. So to wrap up, yes, this webinar is being recorded, and will be made available on the department's website. The slides, that will be emailed to all webinar registrants within a week or two. This recording, like I said, will be available on the department's website along with the final report in a couple of months. When available, you can link to either of these from the quick links on our applied research and development

webpage as indicated on this slide. The department's R&D webpage has additional resources and information related to the CARD program and to CARD research projects, which you can check out by going to the address on this slide. The department's website recently underwent a major change and is continuing to undergo improvement, so please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns related to accessing CARD research posted here. We appreciate your interest in CARD projects

and for attending the webinar today. You can keep abreast of upcoming webinars and other news related to the Minnesota Conservation Improvement Program by signing up for the SIP updates on our email list. You can use the link on this slide to do that. In the meantime, contact me if you have questions or suggestions, and there'll be a short evaluation that launches after this webinar. So we'd appreciate it if you were able to take a couple minutes to fill it out and let us know how we did. All ri

ght, with that, continued thanks. This ends our webinar. Take care and have a good day. Bye-bye.