Improving Occupant Behavior to More Effectively Achieve Net Zero Energy Buildings

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Improving Occupant Behavior to More Effectively Achieve Net Zero Energy Buildings
Physical Description:
1 online resource (61 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Nickels,Steven M,Jr
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.S.B.C.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Building Construction
Committee Chair:
Kibert, Charles J
Committee Co-Chair:
Issa, R. Raymond
Committee Members:
Flood, Ian

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
behavior -- buildings -- construction -- energy -- monitoring -- net -- occupant -- real -- sustainable -- time -- zero
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
Net Zero Energy Buildings are essentially the pinnacle of what sustainable construction is trying to accomplish. As a minimum, a net zero energy building must achieve an operating net zero energy demand. This means that all building energy demands must be offset by the energy harvested within the site or project. Energy efficient technologies and buildings (i.e., LEED certified buildings), along with integrated design have historically been considered the key components to achieving a Net Zero Energy Building. An area that has not received the necessary attention, is improving upon building occupant behavior. This is remarkable considering that a building?s occupant behavior can account for half of a building?s energy demand. The combination of implementing both the energy efficient technologies seen in LEED certified buildings along with the improvement of occupant behavior, could significantly increase the possibility of achieving a Net Zero Energy Building. This study has determined the effectiveness that financial incentives and disincentives could have on improving occupant behavior. Currently at the University of Florida, academic units are not held accountable for their energy use. Without holding these academic units accountable to a monetary budget, there is no way to control or encourage responsible occupant behavior. If each academic unit was held to a budget, then perhaps managing occupant behavior could be more attainable. Furthermore, if each academic unit passed along financial incentives and disincentives based on this budget to full-time occupants; there would be true accountability of occupant behavior. The survey results were tested against the hypothesis that building occupants who are presented a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (based on their energy use) would report more improved energy use behavior than before being presented the policy. The data collected determined the impact that financial incentives and disincentives could have on improving certain occupant behaviors. It also provided information regarding the most effective mediums for occupants to monitor the real time energy use of their building. The goal was to collect information from all the full-time professors with offices at the University of Florida?s Rinker Hall. The survey examined respondents? current energy use habits and how financial incentives and disincentives could affect those same behaviors. It also examined personal views on the fairness of the policy. These factors were then used to determine the effect that financial incentives and disincentives would have on improving occupant behavior. The results indicated that occupants would improve their behavior if they were subjected to a policy of financial incentives and disincentives.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Steven M Nickels.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local:
Adviser: Kibert, Charles J.
Local:
Co-adviser: Issa, R. Raymond.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID:
UFE0043420:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 IMPROVING OCCUPANT BEHAVIOR TO MORE EFFECTIVELY ACHIEVE NET ZERO ENERGY BUILDINGS By STEVEN M. NICKELS JR. A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT S FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Steven M. Nickels Jr.

PAGE 3

3 To God for all that he has provided for me; To my family, friends and Rachel I attribute all that I have accomplished to the love and support you have shown me throughout my life.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who helped me through the process of completing my thesis. First, I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Charles Kibert, for his guidance and assistance in choosing a topic I became so interested in. I also would like to thank my co chair Dr. Raymond Issa and committee member Dr. Ian Flood. Their knowledge and input has proven to be invaluable t o my successful completion of this study In addition to my committee member s, I would like to show my appreciation to our Graduate Program Assistant, Dottie Beau pi ed. I cannot thank her enough for her genuine care and assistance, not only in completing my thesis, but also I would like to thank the M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction at the University of Florida for the many opportunities it has given me. This school has allowed me to reach my fulles t potential as a student and most importantly facilitated the opportunity I was given to work for one of the premier general contractors in the nation.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ............................. 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 12 Background of Problem ................................ ................................ .......................... 12 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ .............................. 13 Aim ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 13 Hypothesis ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 13 Research Objective ................................ ................................ ................................ 13 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 14 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 14 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ .......................... 16 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 16 Evolution of Energy Use Behavior ................................ ................................ .......... 17 Green Buildings ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 18 Energy Efficient Technology ................................ ................................ ............. 19 Integrated Design ................................ ................................ ............................. 19 Improving Occupant Behavior ................................ ................................ .......... 20 Net Zero Energy Buildings ................................ ................................ ...................... 21 The Dynamic Nature of Human Behavior ................................ ............................... 22 Occupant Behavior Management ................................ ................................ ........... 23 Supplementing Technology ................................ ................................ .............. 23 Ri nker Hall ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 24 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 25 Survey ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 25 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 25 Population ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 25 Facility ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 25 Survey Design ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 26 Survey Questions ................................ ................................ ............................. 27

PAGE 6

6 Section One ................................ ................................ ............................... 27 Section Two ................................ ................................ ............................... 28 Section Three ................................ ................................ ............................. 29 Section Four ................................ ................................ ............................... 29 Section Five ................................ ................................ ............................... 29 Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 30 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ................................ ................................ .................... 31 Demographics of Sample Population ................................ ................................ ...... 31 Survey Responses ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 32 Current Energy Use Behaviors Section One ................................ .................. 32 Section Two ................................ ................... 35 Effective Real Time Energy Monitoring Methods Section Three .................... 36 Effectiveness of Financial Incentives and Disincentives Section Four ........... 38 Section Five ................................ ........................ 44 5 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 47 Analys is Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 47 Recommendations ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 49 APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONS ................................ ................................ ........................... 51 B APPROVED SURVEY CONSENT FORM ................................ .............................. 57 C UF IRB APPROVAL LETTER ................................ ................................ ................. 58 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 59 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ............................ 61

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Survey Responses Section 1 ................................ ................................ ........... 32 4 2 Survey Responses Section 2 ................................ ................................ ........... 35 4 3 Survey Responses Section 3 ................................ ................................ ........... 36 4 4 Survey Responses Section 4 ................................ ................................ ........... 38 4 5 Survey Responses Section 5 ................................ ................................ ........... 44

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4 1 Rinker Hall Oc cupant Behavior Survey Response Rate ................................ .. 31 4 2 Rinker Hall Occupant Behavior Survey ......... 31 4 3 Decrease in responsible occupant behavior toward printers and other peripheral devices in comparison to computers (Question 1 vs. Question 3) ..... 33 4 4 Decrease in responsible o ccupant behavior toward printers and other peripheral devices in comparison to computers (Question 2 vs. Question 4) ..... 34 4 5 Decrease in responsible occupant behavior toward printers a nd other peripheral devices in comparison to computers (Question 5 vs. Question 6) ..... 35 4 6 Effect of financial incentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 1 v s. Question 15) ................................ ............................... 40 4 7 Effect of financial incentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 2 vs. Question 16) ................................ ............................... 41 4 8 Effect of financial incentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 3 vs. Question 17) ................................ ............................... 41 4 9 Effect of financial incentives and dis incentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 4 vs. Question 18) ................................ ............................... 42 4 1 0 Effect of financial incentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 5 vs. Question 19) ................................ ............................... 43 4 1 1 Effect of financial incentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 6 vs. Question 20) ................................ ............................... 44

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF ABBREVIATION S B CN C ommon nomenclature used when referring to the M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction at the University of Florida HVAC Heating ventilation and air c onditioning LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design NZEB Net zero energy b uilding USGBC United States Green Building Council VOC Volatile organic c ompound

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Scienc e in Building Construction IMPROVING OCCUPANT BEHAVIOR TO MORE EFFECTIVELY ACHIEVE NET ZERO ENERGY BUILDINGS By Steven M. Nickels Jr. August 2011 Chair: Charles Kibert Cochair: Raymond Issa Major: Building Construction Net Zero Energy Buildings are essentially the pinnacle of what sustainable constru ction is trying to accomplish. As a minimum, a net zero energy building must achieve an ope rating net zero energy demand. This means that all building energy demands must be offset by the energy harvested within the site or project. Energy efficient technologies and buildings (i.e. LEED certified buildings), along with integrated design have historically been considered the key components to achieving a Net Zero Energy Building. An area that has not recei ved the necessary attention is improving upon building occupant behavior. occupant behavior can account for half of a buildi The combination of implementing both the energy efficient tech nologies seen in LEED certified buildings along with the improveme nt of occupant behavior, could significantly i ncrease the possibility of achieving a Net Ze ro Energy Building This study has determined the effectiveness that financial incentives and disi ncentives could have on improving occupant behavior. Currently at the University of Florida, academic units are not held accountable for their energy use. Without holding

PAGE 11

11 these academic units accountable to a monetary budget, there is no way to control or encourage responsible occupant behavior. If each academic unit was held to a budget, then perhaps managing occupant behavior could be more attainable. Furthermore, if each academic unit passed along financial incentives and disincentives based on this budg et to full time occupants; there would be true accountability of occupant behavior. The survey results were tested against the hypothesis that building occupants who are presented a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (based on their energy us e) would report more improved energy use behavior than before being presented the policy. The data col lected determine d the impact that financial incentives and disincentives could have on improving certain occupant behaviors. It also provided information regardin g the most effective mediums for occupants to monitor the real time energy use of their building. The goal was to collect information from all the full time The survey examined re current energy use habits and how financial incentives and disincentives could affect those same behaviors It also examined personal views on the fairness of the policy. These factors were then used to determine the effect that financial incent ives and disincentives would have on improving occupant behavior. The results indicated that occupants would improve their behavior if they were subjected to a policy of financial incentives and disincentives.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The improvement of technology for energy efficiency has been embraced worldwide and adopted by the construction industry as much as any Owners demand the most energy efficient technologies to be incorporated into the design and construction of their buildings. Some owners are looking to take it a step further by seeking Net Zero Energy Buildings. achieve an operating net zero energy demand. This means that all building energy demands must be offset by the energy harvested withi n the site or project (Phillips et al. i ntegrated design and the energy efficient technologies of green buildings (i.e. LEED certified buildings) have yielded favorable results, energy waste due to poor occupant behavior may deserve even mo re attention. The potential savings captured by improving upon occupant behavior, could be quite substantial due to the high number of building occupants and the relative no cost nature of the approach (Masoso and Grobler 2010). Improving occupant behavior to supplement the energy efficient technologies of a green building could make achieving a Net Zero Energy Building more of a reality. Background of Problem Historically, integrated design and high performance green buildings are considered to be the mo st important components to achieving a Net Zero Energy behavior, which can be responsible for half of a build ). Ramsey stated (Malin and Boehland 2 005 point where efficiency is more expensive than something like ren ewable energy or

PAGE 13

13 for achieving maximum energy efficiency will never be reached. Purpose of the Study In order to achieve the maximum energy efficiency potential of a building occupant behavior cannot be ignored. Improving occupant behavior could be the key to owners seeking to achieve Net Zero Energy Buildi ngs. It was the purpose of this study to show how a policy of financial incentives and disincentives enforced on occupants could meet this challenge and improve behavior. Aim This study first focused on current energy use habits of the full time occupants (professors After determining the current occupant behavior at the time a financial incentive and disincentive policy based the occupants. The goal was to determine the effectiveness that financi al incentives and disincentives could have on improving occupant behavior in terms of energy use. Hypothesis The null hypothesis was defined as the following: N 0 = Building occupants who ar e presented a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (based on their energy use) would report more improved energy use behavior than before being presented the policy. Research Objective The study conducted sought to address the following: Disco ver c urrent energy use behavior of Rinker Hall full time occupants

PAGE 14

14 Determine the most effective approach for building occupants to access real time energy monitoring Test how effective financial inc entives and disincentives could be o n improving occupant b ehavior Reveal specific occupant behaviors that need improvement Deter mine specific occupant behaviors that an incentive and disincentive based system could most effectively improve upon Significance of the Study Research up to this point has mainly looke d at occupant behavior as an indicator of the functionality of systems (Saelens et al. 2010). There has been research on the e been a study to determine the effect that financ ial incentives and disincentives could have on improving behavior. Overview Following this introduction, Chapter 2 covers the literature review. This covers studies on both occupant behavior and the need for improved occupant behavior when seeking to acco mplish Net Zero Energy Buildings The chapter also provides definitions and discusses current applications of occupant behavior and approaches to achieving Chapter 3 outlines the methodology used for this research. A survey was conducted to gather input from full time occupants of Rinker Hall on their current energy use habits and the effect that financial incentives and disincentives would have on improving their behavior. Chapter 4 shows the results from the survey and the analysis conducted to d etermine what energy use habits were improved by a policy of financial incentives and

PAGE 15

15 disincentives It also identified the most effective approaches for building occupants to access real time energy monitoring Finally, Chapter 5 draws conclusions based o n the findings of the study and provides recommendations for future research.

PAGE 16

16 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Background The sustainability movement that has occurred this past decade was arguably one story T his movement transformed the construction industry as much as any. As a result, the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) created the LEED rating system. The rating system is frequently utilized in construction projects to ensure that only the most energy efficient and sustainable products are used. Owners seek the various certifications (LEED Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum) for their buildings that the USGBC awards for meeting its requirements. The LEED rating system has been an inval uable tool in bringing sustainability to the forefront of the construction industry. It has forced manufacturers to design new products that meet the high demands of the rating system. New technologies hav e allowed the development of high performance gre en buildings that we see today. What has not been thoroughly researched is the effect that occupant behavior has on systems and the energy required to operate them. In the research on occupant behavior that has been done, there have been reports of more bui lding energy consumption during non operating periods than during operation. This is not due to poor technology, but to poor occupant behavior. Through all the recent innovation that has come about this past decade, there has been the potential to experien ce the highest energy savings at no cost. What is intriguing is that we have not yet captured these savings despite our capability (Masoso and Grobler 2010 ).

PAGE 17

17 Evolution of Energy Use Behavior The evolution of technology and the transformation of human lif e the world has experienced over the last 100 years have been remarkable to say the least. It was n o t long ago that candles used to be lit at night to illu minate a space or one rode on horseback to get from point A to B. It i s almost unimaginable that this was a standard way of life. Now, it i s pretty common to start up a 300 plus horsepower vehicle with air conditioning to get where one need s to go The lifestyle that technology has given us today is one that those lighting candles could never fathom. Toda y, in industrial countries like America, this is the standard way of life. If people are hot they are going to turn on the ir air conditioning units When they leave a room, they might forget to turn off the lights or le ave something plugged in. It has beco me apparent that this irresponsible lifestyle carries graver consequences than once expected. The construction industry has acknowledged the excessive use of energy that we have taken for granted for so long. In the last decade, the movement to ward susta inable construction has been the most rapid cultural evolution we have ever seen in the industry What has allowed this movement to be embraced so quickly is its e ffect on people from different ends of the political spectrum. The initial thought may be tha t sustainable construction only appeals to liberal focus groups such as environmentalists. The typical environmentalist would agree quite strongly with the sustainable construction concept. Sustainable construction promotes environmental responsibility tho ugh low VOC materials, reduction in energy use and reuse of resources. Could this also be true for the fiscally conservative right winger, who is driven by profit and the bottom line? The answer is yes it can. An educated business person can quickly see ret urn on investment that sustainable construction offers through life cycle cost analysis.

PAGE 18

18 Sustainable construction in a sense has no enemies. Whether it be a social or economical reason an individual has for supporting sustainable construction, it is diffic ult to disagree with this concept. Green Buildings I t i s safe to say that energy efficient building technologies are now the standard. LEED rating syste m is the standard in green building and environment/energy consci ous corporations seek to obtain the various levels of certification available Corporations that were once not considered environmentally friendly before must now embrace these ideals and new technologies. Consumers and potential clients want to buy products and services from corporations that embrace these sustainable principles and corporations are listening. Verizon company executive Kathryn C. Brown (2010) stated the following to its conf erence board : At Verizon, we are focused on how to ensure, in the 21st century Information Age, that the latest advances in human inventiveness are sustainable. We have a very active, engaged and deep thinking team that assesses both what our systems can do to reduce energy use and decrease our carbon footprint and to create smart cities, smart medicine, smart education and to borrow from IBM, one of our corporate partners a smarter planet. Corporations are not only realizing the importance of sustainable social responsibility, but they also see the economic opportunities it brings. Investments in green buildings (i.e. LEED certified buildings) are a great way to show consumers that a corporation holds sustainable responsibility as one of its core values. This could inherently increase sales to sustainab i l ity consci ous consumers, but these buildings also achieve real cost savings over time for the owner.

PAGE 19

19 Energy Efficient Technology The technologies that green building products and systems use are far mor e energy efficient tha n their predecessors. In 2009, p roducts that utilize d the government backed Energy Star rating helped America avoid greenhouse emissions equivalen t to those from 30 million cars, all while saving near ly $17 billion on utility bills (J ackson, 2010). The focus on using high performance materials has been at the forefront of sustainable construction and is ever growing. Interestingly, what has been overlooked through the development of more sustainable products is in fact our own behavior (Masoso and Grobler 2010 ). Integrated Design To achieve the most energy efficient buildings, there must be a collective effort starting at the pre design phase of a project. Building orientation, wind speed and direction, path of the sun, etc. are all i mportant to ensure the functionality of energy saving technologies and systems (i.e. wind turbines, photovoltaic devices) (Frechette et al. 2009 ). Embracing an integrated design approach is part of the foundation of the green building proce ss. By having a ll parties (i.e., architect, contractor, owner, etc.) involved, starting with the pre design phase, sustainable technologies and design can be implemented in a cost effective an d efficient manner. What integrated design cannot ccupant behavior. Ramsey stated (Malin and Boehland 2005 ), you can go really far before you get to a point where efficiency is more expensive than something like renewable energy or nergy efficient as opposed to onsite renewable energy to be more cost effective. Ramsey did not mention an improvement in occupant behavior as a means to be more energy

PAGE 20

20 efficient and cost effective, but the theory still applies. It may even be more appropr iate given the little to no cost of improving occupant behavior. It is not to say that the integrated design process should be abandoned and owners should solely focus on improving occupant behavior, but that it should be used as a supplement to achieve wh at integrated design cannot. Improving Occupant Behavior It is quite remarkable that we have an elaborate building rating system in LEED is no emphasis on what is fr ee and readily available to everyone in managing human (occupant) behavior. It would be nave to believe that human behavior is easily changed or even controlled. Products that are utilized in the LEED rating system are easily controlled and monitored. The y have been perfected over time to reach the high energy performance they operate at. But if the same attention that has been given to energy efficient technologies and products were given to altering occupant behavior, we could see substantial energy redu ction at almost not cost. According to Masoso and Grobler working hours (56%) t han during working These conclu sions were based on six randomly selected commercial buildings in Botswana and South Africa (which is a hot and dry climate). Given the lack of research on the effect building occupant behavior has on energy consumption, this research is a great example for other countries to follow and build upon (Masoso and Grobler 2009 ). There has been extensi ve research on building occupant behavior in the past however this research has a different perspective In the past, research looked at the effect building technologies could have on productivity and comfort of building occupants (i.e. thermal comfort, effect of stimuli like illumination levels, shading, glar e,

PAGE 21

21 etc.) For this type of research the focus is on using occupant behavior to maximize the potential of building technologies (Masoso and Grobler 2010) Net Zero Energy Buildings The s ustainable co nstruction movement that has been booming over the past decade has fostered the development of Net Zero Energy Buildings. This relatively new addition to the sustainable construction scene is looking to revolutionize the industry a step further. An importa nt part of obtaining a Net Zero Energy Building is responsible occupant behavior. C urre ntly, occupant behavior seems to not be getting the attention it deserves. Since the Industrial Revolution we have seen some of the greatest modern techn ologies develop ed and perfected; many of which have become a part of our everyday life. These technologies that we have become so accustomed to require a demand for energy that we are now realizing to be economically and environmentally irresponsible. Though we may have realized the errors of our ways, many of these advancements have become part of the foundation of our economy, and the task of breaking such habits seems insurmountable. Additionally, any technology we produce to be more efficient and sustainable will onl y be as useful as those who are willing to embrace that technology. When one think s about Net Zero Energy Buildings, one probably think s of the design, materials and technology as the three main driving forces in reaching Net Zero energy consumption. It i s true ; these are three crucial factors in obtaining Net Zero Energy in a building and are all things that can reduce the energy a building demands. However, there is one more factor that can demand and which is some how overlooked; building occupants (Malin 2010 ). B rockman stated that ( Malin 2010 a

PAGE 22

22 200,000 square foot multi tenant project pursuing Living Building certification in Poland, discovered just how cr itical the occupants would be when they break out the energy loads in their net zero energy model and found that occupant loads accounted for a full Establishing the use of Net Zero Energy Buildings is not going to rely on the applicati on of photovoltaics, wind turbines, or other engineering accomplishment s Instead, it will require that the users of these buildings embrace the lifestyle of sustainable behavior. Given the dynamic and uncontrollable nature of occupants, finding effective ways to improve behavior will be key to achieving Net Zero Energy Buildings (Frech ette and Gilchrist 2009 ). The Dynamic Nature of Human Behavior The current demand for energy in industrial countries like China and the United States is the high est in histor y. It has become a part of our cultures to continuously rely on fossil fuels and electricity to power our vehicles and devices we are dependent upon. Every day new construction designs and methods are being implemented to move towards a more sustainable bu ilding environm ent Engineers and scientists will be able to perfect technologies overtime by field testing and market input. These are relatively static and controlled processes, which help them narrow in on exactly what they need to e a ne w product better than the last. However, p eople are dynamic, unpredic table, and difficult to control Unlike the reengineering of a product or a process tha change the way they use energy will require innovati ve policies that will improve their behavior. Building occupants come from different climates, have different customs and backgrounds and will have various personal views when it comes to energy use. Given the diversity of building occupants, unbiased ince ntives and disincentives must be used

PAGE 23

23 to create a universal effect on improving occupant behavior. Financial incentives and disincentives generally hold no bias on the effect they have on human behavior and have the potential to be highly effective in impr oving occupant behavior. Occupant Behavior Management At the University of Florida, the Physical Plant Division manages all campus utilities. Currently all academic units on the campus are collectively using 5 mega watts of power and cost the university $38 million per year for electricity alone, (Physical Plant Division 2010). The university as a whole assumes the financial responsibility of the energy usage (individual academic units are not required to meet or come below a mandated energy use budget ) Given the staggering number of dollars spent on energy at a campus of this scale, there has been discussion to shift some responsibility from the campus collectively to the individual colleges or departments. This would inherently create an incentive for users of these facilities to be more energy consci ous due to potential financial penalties for exceeding a m andated benchmark or awards for usage below this benchmark Supplementing Technology One of the most energy efficient buildings on the University of Florida campus is Rinker Hall, which by no coincidence is home to the Rinker School of Building Construction. Rinker Hall is a LEED Gold Certified Building. This certification verifies that the building has been constructed with products and technologie s that are substantially more energy efficient than a typical building, especially in comparison to older buildings on the University of Florida campus. technologies and components make it a great candidate to conduct researc h on building occupant behavior. After exhausting all approaches to reaching maximum efficiency that

PAGE 24

24 a LEED certified building offers, the real benefits that managing occupant behavior can have can be seen As noted previously, on average 56% of electrici ty use is during non working hours, while 44% is used during working hours. Masoso and Grobler ( 2009 ) took a On one hand, this number reveals h is waste reveals the potential that improving occupant behavior can have in reducing cost This makes research in occupant behavior quite valuable for an owner. Rinker Hall Rinker Hall is used by twenty faculty members, five hundred undergraduate and one hundred twenty graduate students, and various other staff (Chini 2010). Considering the various schedules of students, the most accurate pool of users to focus research on would be the faculty. A g ood start would be to survey faculty with questions that fo cus on both their current energy use at Rinker and the potential effects of mo netary incentives and disincentives on improving behavior. Other appropriate objectives would be to get feedback on technologies that users would find effective in helping them m onitor/manage energy consumption (i.e. real time energy display monitoring devices and software). A n incentive/penalty system could affect occupant behavior by having the academic unit (i.e. M.E. Rinker Sr. School of Building Construction) pass along th e monetary energy savings or loss to the end user (full time faculty members).

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY This study was conducted through an online survey sent to participants. The survey consisted of twenty yes/no questions and one optional comment box. Befo re the survey could be sent to participants, UF IRB approval had to be obtained The survey was made available to participants for thirty seven days. Survey Overview The survey questions focused on current occupant behavior and the effect that financial incentives and disincentives could have on this behavior. Other information gathered from respondents included: Occupant opinions of the incentive and disincentive based policy Effective methods of delivering real time energy monitoring to occupants The ef Suggestions by occupants on monitoring and improving occupant behavior The answers to these questions were gathered to determine whether financial incentives and disincentives would ha ve an impact on improving occupant behavior, thus making a goal of Net Zero Energy more feasible. Population The sample population that was chosen for this survey included all full time professors with an office at Rinker Hall. Facility Rinker Hall was chosen for this study because of its LEED Gold Certification. By holding this certification, we can assume that in comparison to most buildings all efforts have been exhausted in regards to integrating the most energy efficient design, systems

PAGE 26

26 and materia l. This makes it a prime candidate for demonstrating the advantage that combining a high performance green building and improving occupant behavior can have in better achieving a Net Zero Energy Building. Survey Design The intent of the survey was to have all full time occupants (professors) of Rinker Hall to report on their current energy use behaviors honestly. The diverse cultural backgrounds of Rinker Professors, provides a well rounded occupant pool within a controlled environment. Rinker Professors c ome from all over the world with customs that vary greatly in their views o n energy use. This data provides a chance to see the impact those different backgrounds have on occupant behavior and the effectiveness of a financial incentive and disin centive bas ed system. Before the survey could be sent out, it had to be submitted to the University of Florida IRB 02 o ffice for review. The IRB 02 office reviews all surveys conducted through research at the University of Florida and their approval is required bef ore conducting a survey Along with the survey, a consent form was required to be drafted and submitted per the requirements of the IRB 02 office. These items were first submitted on March 29, 2011 and were denied on March 31, 2011. The first submission wa s denied due to the following missing verbiage in the consent form, y our participation is completely voluntary and you do not have to answer any question you do not want to answer." Also, the time required to complete the survey was not indicated These c orrections were made and the survey items were resubmitted on April 4, 2011. The survey items were then approved on April 5, 2011. The approved consent form that was returned by the IRB 02 office contained a stamp with a signature line. It is their

PAGE 27

27 require ment that participants sign this document before participating in the survey. It was also required that one signed consent form be submitted to the IRB 02 office upon comple tion of the study This is for their record to ensure that correct protocol was bei ng followed. The survey was created and distributed through Kwik Surveys ( http://www.kwiksurveys.com ) and consisted of five sections (see Appendix A). The link to complete the survey was sent out April 7, 2011 a nd the survey remained open until May 13 2011. The first section probed occupants on their current energy use behaviors at Rinker Hall. Before the second section of questions a financial incentive and disincentive based policy on occupant behavior at Ri nker Hall was presented. The second set of questions sought to find out the opinions of the occupants in regards to the policy presented. The third, fourth, and fifth sections questioned the best methods of presenting real time energy monitoring to occupan ts, the effect that the policy presented had on their answers in section one and best practices for monitoring and improving occupant behavior. All sections consisted of only yes/no answers except the fifth section which was an optional comment box. Surv ey Questions Section One The first and second question of the survey asked respondents your computer on in your office when you depart for the day ? computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend All pro fessors at Rinker Hall use their computers f or a variety of reasons through out the day and arguably more frequently tha n any other electronic device. This will help reveal fundamental views of respondents towards occupant behavior, since it is a frequent a nd routine activity for

PAGE 28

28 them. printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the day leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the weekend These are devices that may be easily overlooked due to their less frequent use. The fifth and six th computer on when you depart from you office for longer than 2 hours you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours could prove to be a key opportuni ty to improve occupant behavior and may be even more overlooked than questions three and four. Before th e second section questions were asked, a policy was present to the respondents. The policy is as follows; Physical Plant is enforcing a policy that gives individual academic units (i.e. BCN/Rinker Hall) a budget on their energy use. Physical Plant would hold the academic unit (BCN) financially responsible for any cost overage in energy use. In addition, if energy use were substantially lower than the required benchmark; the savings would be passed along to the academic unit (BCN). BCN has decided to cut f ull time faculty travel budgets as a means to pay for overages, but all savings will also be pass ed Section Two These quest ions give insight on personal views of the respondents. The acceptance of this policy could be key in achieving maximum participation.

PAGE 29

29 Section Three Questions nine thr ough thirteen asked respondents opinions regarding real time energy monitoring and the best way to provide this inf ormation to occupants at Rinker By knowing the most effective way to deliver real time energy monitoring to occupants, improving occupant behavior becomes more of a reality. Section Four Question fourteen a collective effort of reducing energy at Rinker Hall, would you apply these practices in an opportunity to determine the effect that this type of policy can have in the wa y individuals regard energy use outside of the workplace. This is important because it will directly affect the next gener children occupant behavior. Question s fifteen through twenty asked the respondent s whether or not their a nswers to questions one through six would change if the previously mentioned policy were enforced. This information will reveal the impact that a financial incentive and disincentive based policy could have on improving occupant behavior. Section Five Que stion twenty you have any other suggestions on monitoring and improving occupant energy brings value to the study by allowing the respondents to present ideas that they believe wo uld be most effective in reaching the goals of improving occupant behavior. By integrating these suggestions into an occupant behavior management program, cooperation of occupants can be maximized.

PAGE 30

30 Analysis The results of the survey were analyzed by firs t determining the current behavior of the respondents. From this information, the potential for improving upon this behavior was identified. Once the potential for improvement was determined, the next step was to discover the effect that a financial incent ive and disincentive based policy could have on improving this behavior. This was accomplished by comparing the possible potential for improvement and the actual improvement that was achieved after the policy was presented to the respondents. The informati on that was yielded from the analysis revealed behavior that is most influenced by a financial incentive and disincentive based policy. Habits of irresponsible energy use were identified in addition to the personal opinions of the respondents towards the p olicy. The analysis was also able to determine the most effective methods for monitoring and managing occupant behavior.

PAGE 31

31 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Demographics of Sample Population S eventeen full time professors from the Rinker School of Building Construction at the University of Florida completed the survey This was out of a possible eighteen respondents (only one professor did not respond to the survey request). In the sample population 35% were originally from countries outside of the United S tates. The remaining 65% were born in the United States. Figure 4 1 Rinker Hall Occupant Behavior Survey Response Rate Figure 4 2. Rinker Hall Occupant Behavior Survey 6% 94% No Response 35% 65% International

PAGE 32

32 Survey Responses Current Energy Use Behaviors Sec tion One Current energy use behaviors of Rinker Hall occupant s were analyzed in Section One This information was gathered from the respondents answers to questions one through six of the survey. Table 4 1 shows the results. Questions one and two revealed that occupants are currently responsible in regards to turning off their computers when departing for the day or weekend. The survey results indicated that 82% of respondents currently did not leave their computers on when departing for the day and that 8 8% did not leave their computers on when departing for the weekend. A computer is arguably the most frequently used device by a Tab le 4 1. Survey Responses Section 1 (1) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the day? Frequency Percent Yes 3 18 No 14 82 (2) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? Yes 2 12 No 15 88 (3) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the day? Yes 6 35 No 11 65 (4) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the weekend? Yes 6 35 No 11 65 (5) Do you leave your computer on when you de part from your office for longer than 2 hours? Yes 11 65 No 6 35 (6) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours? Yes 12 71 No 5 29

PAGE 33

33 professor so it would be reasonable to believe that turning a computer off when leaving for the day or weekend would not be overlooked. Turning off a computer could be part of an end of the day routine for someone who uses one as frequent ly as professor s do Questions three a nd four revealed that occupants were fairly responsible in turning off their printers or peripheral devices when departing for the day or weekend, but less responsible than they were in turning off computers. Th e results indicated that 65% of respondents c urrently turn off printers or other peripheral devices when departing for the day and for the weekend. Printers and other peripheral devices are not used as frequ ent as computers and can be easily overlooked when leaving for the day or a weekend. This is s hown in Figure s 4 3, 4 4 and 4 5. Figure 4 3 shows the decrease in occupants turning off printers and other peripheral devices when compared to computers before departing for the day. Respondents were 17% less likely to turn off their printers and other pe ripheral devices than they were their computers before departing for the day. (1) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the day ? Frequency Percent Yes 3 18 No 14 82 (3) Do you leave your printer o r other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the day ? Yes 6 35 No 11 65 Figure 4 3 Decrease in responsible occupant behavior toward printers and other peripheral devices in comparison to computers (Question 1 vs. Q uestion 3) Responsible Behavior Responses : Computers: 82% Printers and other peripheral devices: 65% Difference: 17%

PAGE 34

34 (2 ) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? Frequency Percent Yes 2 12 No 15 88 (4 ) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? Yes 6 35 No 11 65 Figure 4 4 Decrease in responsible occupant behavior toward printers and other peripheral devices in com parison to computers (Question 2 vs. Question 4 ) Figure 4 4 demonstrates the decrease in occupants turning off printers and other peripheral devices when compared to computers before departing for the weekend. Respondents were 23% less likely to turn off their printers and other peripheral devices than they were their computers before departing for the weekend. Questions five and six revealed the most interesting results and an opportunity to examine the effects that an incentive and disincentive based system could have on occupant behavior. The data reveals a drop off in responsible behavior when occu pants depart from their offices for an extended period of time (more than two hours but less than a day). This study concluded that 65% of respondents currently leave their computers on when departing their office for longer than two hours and that 71% lea ve their printers and other peripheral devices on. This creates an opportunity to improve upon this behavior through financial i ncentives and disincentives. Th ough there was a substantial drop in responsible behavior, once again occupants were more likely to turn off their computers than they were their printers and other peripheral devices (see Figure 4 5). Responsible Behavior Responses : Computers: 88 % Printers and oth er peripheral devices: 65% Difference: 23%

PAGE 35

35 (5 ) Do you leave your computer on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? Frequency Percent Yes 11 65 No 6 35 (6 ) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? Yes 12 71 No 5 29 Figure 4 5 Decrease in responsible occupant behavior toward printers and other peripheral devices in comparison to computers (Question 5 vs. Question 6) Sectio n Two Before questions were asked in the second through fourth section s a policy of financial incentives and disincentives was presented to the respondent s. Rinker Hall opinions towards this policy were examined in this section. This information was gathered from the respondents answers to questions seven an d eight of the survey (see Table 4 2 ). Table 4 2 Survey Responses Section 2 (7 ) Do you ? Frequency Percent Yes 12 71 No 5 29 (8 ) Do you ? Yes 11 65 No 6 35 Both question seven and eight revealed that overall, respondents v iew a policy of financial incentives and disincentives as being fair. Th e study concluded that 71% of respondents view a financial incentive and disincentive based policy enforced by the Responsible Behavior Responses : Computers: 35 % Printers and other peripheral devices: 29 % Difference: 6 %

PAGE 36

36 r. Th e results indicated that 64% of the respondents believed a policy where each academic unit passed along the same policy to their full being fair. Support for a policy by those it is ultim ately affecting is important to the effectiv simply being subjected to it will increase the effectiveness of the policy. Effective Real Time Energy Monitoring Methods Section Three The most effectiv e methods of monitoring and reporting on real time energy consumption data were analyzed in this section. This information was gathered from the respondents answers to questions nine through t hirteen of the survey. Table 4 3 demonstrates the results. Tabl e 4 3. Survey Responses Section 3 (9 ) Would you be interested in access to a real time energy monitoring system on the ? Frequency Percent Yes 16 94 No 1 6 (10 ) If a r eal time energy monitoring system were in place, would you reduce your energy use after observing a trend of potential energy overages for a period ? Yes 16 94 No 1 6 (11 ) Would you be interested in being alerte d via text message on the current trends of ? Yes 6 35 No 11 65 (12 ) Would you be interested in being alerted via email on the current trends of Rinker ? Yes 10 59 No 7 41 (13 ) Would you use online tools to help you practice better energy management if they were available ? Yes 13 76 No 4 24

PAGE 37

37 Question nine revealed that occupants were very interested in monitoring their real time energy use. It also revealed that having access to this info rmation through a website would be most effective Th e results indicated that 94 % of respondents were interested in having access to a real time energy monitoring system on the BCN This method of delivering real time proves to be an effective approach at Rinker Hall. Question ten revealed the effectiveness that a combination of financial incentives and disincentives along with real time energy monitoring access can have in improving occupant behavior. Th e results indicated that 94% of respondents would reduce their energy use after observing a trend of potential energy overages for a period. This is a strong indic ator that occupants will improve their behavior if they foresee losing a financial opportunity or being subjected to a financial loss. Question s eleven and twelve revealed that occupants would choose not to be alerted via t ext message on current trends in Rin most would be inter ested in email alerts. Th e results indicated that 65% of respondents would not 59% of respondents reported that would be interested in email alerts. This reveals that overall, respondents feel that access to real time energy monitoring via a web site is sufficient, but there is potential for some other computer based alert system (i.e. email). Question thirteen revealed that occupants would utilize online energy mana gement tools. Th e results indicated that 76% of respondents would use online tools to help them practice better energy management if they were available. This

PAGE 38

38 information is valuable since it reveals not only that occupants would be interested in these too ls, but in fact that they would utilize them. This makes a good case for a facility like Rinker Hall to provide th ese resources to its occupants. Effectiveness of Financial Incentives and Disincentives Section Four The effectiveness of receiving financial incentive s due to an improvement of occupant behavior at work has on improving the behavior at home was analyzed in this section In addition, the effect that a policy of financial incentives an d disincentives would have on current occupant behavior was also analyzed. This was done by asking respondents questions one through five again, but now with the proposed policy enforced. questions fourteen through twenty of the survey (see Ta ble 4 4 ). Table 4 4 Survey Responses Section 4 (14 ) energy at Rinker, would you apply these practices in your own home? Frequency Percent Yes 14 82 N o 3 18 (15 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 1 change? (Question 1: Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the day?) Yes 2 12 No 15 88 (16) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 2 change? (Question 2: Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend?) Yes 2 12 No 15 88 (17) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 3 change? (Questi on 3: Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the day ? ) Yes 6 35 No 11 65

PAGE 39

39 Table 4 4. Continued (18 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 4 change? (Question 4 : Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you d epart for the weekend ? ) Yes Frequency 11 Percent 35 No 6 65 (19 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 5 change? (Question 5: Do y ou leave your computer on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours? ) Yes 9 53 No 8 47 (20) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 6 change? (Question 6: Do you leave your printer or other peripheral device s on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours? Yes 11 65 No 6 35 The responses to q uestion fourteen revealed that if occupants were receiving financial incentives from improving their behavior at Rinker Hall, that they would a pply the same efforts at home. Th e results indicated that 82% of respondents would apply the same practices in their home, if they were collective effort of reducing energy at Rinker. This shows the exponential effect th at a financial incentive and dis incentive based policy can have in improving occupant behavior, even beyond the direct control of the policy. By occupants experiencing real financial gains from their improved occupant behavior at work, they can improve upo n this same behav ior at home to reduce their own energy burdens Improving behavior at home could set an example for their children to follow, which could result in improved occupant behavior of future generations. While the responses to q uestion one reve aled that 18% of respondents reported they currently leave their computers on when they depart for the day those to q uestion

PAGE 40

40 fifteen revealed that 67% of those respondents would no longer leave their computer s on in their office when they depart for the d ay if the policy was enforced. This demonstrates the potential for an improvement in occupant behavior by enforcing a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (see Figure 4 6). (1) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for th e day ? Frequency Percent Yes 3 18 No 14 82 (15 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 1 change? (Question 1: Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the day ? ) Yes 2 12 No 15 88 F igure 4 6. Effect of financial i ncentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 1 vs. Question 15) While the responses to q uestion two revealed that 12% of respondents reported they currently leave their compute rs on in their office when they depart for the weekend the responses to q uestion 16 revealed that 100% o f those respondents would no longer leave their computers on in t heir offices when they depart for the weekend if the policy was enforced. This demonst rates the potential for an improvement in occupant behavior by enforcing a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (see Figure 4 7). The responses to q uestion three revealed that 35% of respondents reported they currently leave their printers or o ther peripheral devices on in their office when they depart for the day. In comparison q uestion seventeen revealed that 100% of those Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives and Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 18 % Occupant improvement: 12% Improvement potential achieved: 67%

PAGE 41

41 respondents reported they would no longer leave their printers or other peripheral devices on in their offices when they d epart for the day if the policy was enforced (see Figure 4 8). (2 ) Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? Frequency Percent Yes 2 1 2 No 15 8 8 (16 ) With this new policy in place, would yo ur answer to Question 2 change? (Question 2 : Do you leave your computer on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? ) Yes 2 12 No 15 88 F igure 4 7. Effect of financial i ncentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 2 vs. Question 16) (3 ) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral device on in your office when you depart for the day ? Frequency Percent Yes 6 35 No 11 65 (17 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer t o Question 3 change? (Question 3 : Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the day ? ) Yes 6 35 No 11 65 F igure 4 8. Effect of financial i ncentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 3 vs. Question 17 ) Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives and Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 12 % Occupant improvement: 12% Improvement potential achieved: 1 00% Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives and Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 35% Occupant improvement: 35% Improvement potential achieved: 100%

PAGE 42

42 The responses to q uestion four revealed that 35% of respondents reported they currently leave their printers or other peripheral devices on in their offic e when they depart for the weekend. In comparison, the responses to q uestion eighteen revealed that 100% of those respondents reported they would no longer leave their printers or other peripheral devices on in their offices when they depart for the weeken d if the policy was enforced (see Figure 4 9). (4 ) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral device on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? Frequency Percent Yes 6 35 No 11 65 (18 ) With this new policy in place would your answer to Question 4 change? (Question 4 : Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on in your office when you depart for the weekend ? ) Yes 6 35 No 11 65 F igure 4 9. Effect of financial i ncentives and disi ncentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 4 vs. Question 18) As mentioned in the first section, question s five and six revealed an area of occupant behavior that needs the most attention. Thes e questions revealed that a m ajority of occupants tend to lea ve their computers, printers or other peripheral devices on when they depart from their offices for more than two hours, but less than a day. This is especially interesting, considering that the majority of the same occupants reported turning off the se devices when departing for the day or weekend. Furthermore, this is a Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives an d Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 35 % Occupant improvement: 35% Improvement potential achieved: 100%

PAGE 43

43 great opportunity for a financial incentive and disincentive based policy to improve upon this behavior. The responses to q uestion five revealed that 65% of respondents reported they currently leave their computer s on when they depart from their office for longer than two hours In comparison, the responses to q ue stion nineteen revealed that 82 % of those respondents reported they would no longer leave their computers on when they depa rt from their office for longer than two hours if the pol icy was enforced (see Figure 4 10 ). (5 ) Do you leave your computer on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? Frequency Percent Yes 11 65 No 6 35 (19 ) With this new policy in place, would your answer to Question 5 change? (Question 5: Do you leave your computer on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? ) Yes 9 53 No 8 47 Fi gure 4 10. Effect of financial i ncent ives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 5 vs. Question 19) The responses to q uestion six revealed that 71% of respondents reported they currently leave their printers or other peripheral devices on when they depart from their office for longer than two hours. In comparison, the responses to q uestion twenty revealed that 92% of those respondents reported they would no longer leave their printers or other peripheral devices on when they depart from their office for longer than two hour s if the poli cy was enforced (see Figure 4 11 ). Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives and Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 65 % Occupant improvemen t: 53% Improvement potential achieved: 82%

PAGE 44

44 (6 ) Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? Frequency Percent Yes 1 2 71 No 5 29 (20 ) With this new pol icy in place, would your answer to Question 6 change? (Question 6: Do you leave your printer or other peripheral devices on when you depart from your office for longer than 2 hours ? ) Yes 11 65 No 6 35 Fi gure 4 11. Effect of financial i ncentives and disincentives on improving occupant behavior (Question 6 vs. Question 20) Section Five This section gave respondents the option to offer their own suggestions on monitoring and improving occupant energy behavior at Rinker Hall. Of the seventeen respondents, six chose to offer suggestions. This information was gathered from the o question twenty one. Table 4 5 demonstrates the results. Table 4 5. Survey Respons es Section 5 (21) Do you have any o ther suggestions on monitoring and improving occupant behavior at Rinker? Responses: (A) Energy usage should be determined by individual room number including hallways and stairways besides the entire building. (B) Having access to a system that shows e nergy consumption at different locations of the Rinker Hall (rather than one for the whole building) would be more effective in changing the occupants behavior. Occupant Behavior Improvement Captured from Financial Incentives and Disincentives : Improvement potential possible: 71 % Occupant improvement: 65% Improvement potential achieved: 92%

PAGE 45

45 Table 4 5. Continued (21) Do you have any other suggestions on monitoring and improving occu pant behavior at Rinker? Responses: (C) Ensure the controls that are in place are working (ex ample: A re the lighting controls working as intended? A re the VAV boxes working as designed?) Ensure educating faculty, staff and students and monitoring/reporti ng usage by end use through sub metering. Ensure that new equipment is highly efficient (a control in the procurement process, perhaps) Ensure any physical plant or department policy needs are comprehensive and address the concerns of faculty, staff and st udents. (D) T he use of space heaters is very common in the building during the winter. There is a problem with doors swelling in the summer because of the set up schedule of the air conditioning system. (E) Feedback on individual office energy use woul d be most helpful. The energy use in Rinker Hall may mask the good effort of some faculty as well as the bad efforts of other. (F) Provide as many incentives as possible. Maybe have a competition with other academic units. revealed that occupants want more specific monitoring of occupant behavior integrated into the policy that individual energy use should be monitored pants access to a real time energy monitoring system that monitored many different parts of the building to more effectively monitoring of the entire building and said feedback on individual off ice energy use could identify irresponsible occupant behavior. respondents revealed in questions seven and eight, by suggesting that behavior would be improved by incentives. Respondent vide as many incentives as possible. Maybe have a competition with

PAGE 46

46 The suggestions that were offered by these respondents are a great starting bui and be more effective in improving behavior This will be discussed even further in the next chapter.

PAGE 47

47 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION There is a substantial amount o f energy waste in buildings during non operating periods. This creates an ideal opportunity to improve occupant behavior and turn this waste into savings (Masoso and Grobler 2010 ). Up to this point, occupant behavior has been overlooked as one of the key f actors in achieving a Net Zero Energy Building, (Malin 2010 ). By combining the energy efficient technologies that a LEED certified building offers and improving occupant behavior thr ough a policy of financial incentives and disincentives, achieving a Net Zero Energy Building becomes a reality. Analysis Overview The findings of this study support the hypothesis that building occupants who are presented a policy of financial incentives and disincentives (based on their energy use) would report more improved energy use behavior than before being presented the policy Even in cases where the majority of occupants reported responsible behavior, the policy yielded a substantial improvement on the minority population that had not previously reported responsible behavior. The results demonstrated an overwhelming 94% of occupants would access real time energy monitoring on a website based platform if it were available to them. It was also indi cated that most occupants would be interested in receiving email alerts on current energy trends, but would not want to be alerted via text message. The most important finding in terms of the effect energy monitoring has on improving occupant behavior was that 94% of respondents reported they would reduce their energy use after observing a trend of potential energy overages for a period. This is a strong

PAGE 48

48 indication that real time energy monitoring is crucial to improving occupant behavior. This also indicat information necessary to improve their behavior. In all cases, occupants were less likely to turn off their printers or other peripheral devices than they were their computers. This cou ld be attributed to the less frequent use of printers and peripheral devices by occupants and overlooking them when departing for a period of time. In all cases though, after the policy was presented respondents reported they would dramatically improve up on this irresponsible behavior by achieving anywhere from 92% 100% of possible improvement potential. Respondents reported they would be extremely likely to improve their behavior at home after capturing financial incentives from improved behavior in the workplace. This study concluded that 82% of respondents would apply the same practices in their own home if they energy at Rinker. This effect on occupant behavior at home would set a g reat example for future generations of building occupants to act more responsibly. Overall, respondents believed that holding individual academic units accountable for their energy use to be fair. Furthermore, most respondents also believed it was fair fo r the academic units to pass along the accountability to full time building occupants. However, the optional comment section of the survey revealed that occupants would like more specific monitoring of energy use to better identify poor behavior. Monitorin g individual offices rather than a collective monitoring of the building as a whole could accomplish this.

PAGE 49

49 The most notable finding revealed by this study was an overwhelming amount of occupants leave devices on when departing from their offices for longe r than two hours, but less than a day. This was a great opportunity to test the effect that the policy could have and favorable results were revealed. This study concluded that 65% of occupants left their computers on and 72% left their printer or other pe ripheral devices on when departing from their offices for longer than two hours. It was also concluded that 82% of the same occupants would no longer leave their computers on and 92% reported they would no longer leave their printers or other peripheral de vices on if the policy were enforced. So not only did these results reveal the most problematic duration of poor occupant behavior, but that financial incentives and disincentives would have a dramatic effect on improving this behavior. This improvement co uld translate in to substantial energy savings and is an area of occupant behavior that should receive the most attention by owners. Recommendations Another study of this same topic should be done in different academic units at the University of Florida; ideally in other energy efficient buildings (i.e. LEED certified buildings). This study should also be repeated at other universities across the nation to compare results. Since the results identified a period of over two hours as being the most problema tic for responsible behavior, future studies should focus on this in greater detail. More specific monitoring of building occupants should also be incorporated to better identify irresponsible behavior. If the funding were available, future studies should also quantify the energy savings from a financial incentive and disincentive base policy with real time energy

PAGE 50

50 monitoring devices. Real time energy monitoring will allow owners to see how this policy can contribute to achieving a Net Zero Energy Building by demonstrating actual energy savings. Based on the responses to this study future studies should offer real time energy monitoring via a website and through email alerts to participants. In addition, future studies should quantify the energy usage of di fferent devices in a building. By identifying the most energy demanding devices, more effective occupant behavior management can be implemented to better achieve Net Zero Energy Buildings. There is also a need for better energy benchmarking of buildings. Future studies should attempt to identify accurate energy benchmark ing that is specific to each individual building. This will be necessary to achieve the most effective financial incentive and disincentive based policies.

PAGE 51

51 APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONS

PAGE 52

52

PAGE 53

53

PAGE 54

54

PAGE 55

55

PAGE 56

56

PAGE 57

57 APPENDIX B APPROVED SURVEY CONS ENT FORM

PAGE 58

58 APPENDIX C UF IRB APPROVAL LETTER

PAGE 59

59 LIST OF REFERENCES Baker, J. M. (2010). Green Design Build Model Crafted for Buildings To Achieve Net Zero Energy Use. ENR: Engineering News Re cord, 264 (15), 26. Brown, K. C. (2010). On Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability. Vital Speeches of the Day, 76 (9), 408 409. Busby, Perkins, & Will (2007) Roadmap for the Integrated Design Process: Part One Summary Guide. Stantec Consulting, 12 1 7. Chini, A. (2010 ). Message from the Director M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction Website < http://www.bcn.ufl.edu/dcp_director_message.shtml > (April 15, 2011). Crawley, D ., Pless, S., and Torcellini, P. (2009). Getting to Net Zero. ASHRAE Journal, 51 (9), 18 25. Frechette III, R. E. and Gilchrist, R. (2009). Seeking Zero Energy. Civil Engineering, 79 (1) 38 47. Jackson, L. P. (2010). Energy Star 2009 Annual Report En ergy Star Website < http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/publications/pubdocs/2009%20CPPD%20 Annual%20Report.pdf > (March 2, 2011). Makower, J. (200 6). World Changing, < http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/004265.html > (March 4, 2011). Malin, N. (2010). The Problem with Net Zero En ergy Buildings (and the Case for Net Zero Neighborhoods). Environmental Building News, 19 (8), 1 15. Masoso, O.T. and Grobler, L.J. (2010). Building Energy Use. Energy and Buildings, 42 (2), 173 177. Phillips, D., Beyers, M., and Good, J (2009). How High Can You Go? ASHRAE Journal, 51 (9) 26 35. P hysical Plant Division (2010). Energy. University of Florida Website, < http://www.ppd.ufl.edu/energy.htm > (March 1, 2011). Post, N. M. (2010). Green Design Build Model Crafted for Buildings To Achieve Net Zero Energy Use. ENR: Engineering News Record 264(15), 45 56. Saelens, D., Parys, W. and Baetens, R. (2011). Energy and Comfort Performance of Thermally Activate d Building Systems Including Occupant Behavior. Building and Environment, 46 (4) 835 848.

PAGE 60

60 Schneider, J. (2009). Absolute Zero: The Path to Net Zero Energy Buildings. Eco Structure < http://www.eco structure.com/net zero energy/absolute zero.aspx > (March 15, 2011). Torcellini, P. A. & Crawley, D. B. (2006). Understanding Zero Energy Buildings. ASHRAE Journal, 48(9), 62 69. Torcellini, P., Pless, S, Deru, M., and Crawley, D. (2006). Zero Energy Buildings: A Critical Look at the Definition ; Preprint. National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1 12. Yu, Z., Fung, B. C. M, Haghighat, F., Yoshino, H., and Morofsky, E. (2011). A Systematic Procedure to Study Influence of Occupant B ehavior on Building Energy Consumption. Energy and Buildings, 46 (6 ), 1409 1417.

PAGE 61

61 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH from Bishop Kenny High School, Jacksonville, Florida, in 2004, he made the trip to During his junior year at the University of Florida he became quite interested in the field of construction despite being an e conomics major. The summer going into his senior year he worked a s a laborer on a 1,000,000 square foot tilt wall project for a self performing general contractor in Jacksonville, FL. After this experience, he knew that he wanted to pursue construction as a career. In August of 2009, Steven successfully grad uated from the University of Bachelor of Science in Business Administration major in g in e conomics with a minor in r e al e state. He was then accepted in to the m nstruction in the fall of 2009. Du time project management internship positions while taking on full course loads for three semesters. He also held a full time three month summer internship in t he summer of 2010. After graduating in August 2011 with a Master of Science in Buildin g Construction, Steven began his career as an Assistant Project Man a ger with one of the