Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Ibe presentation sept 2011


Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ibe presentation sept 2011

  1. 1. Engaging building users in energy reduction: the challenge of behaviour changeDr Richard BullInstitute of Energy & Sustainable Development<br />
  2. 2. De Monfort University<br />World-class university situated in Leicester, with more than 18,000 students and 3,000 staff, five faculties offering around 400 courses and an annual turnover in the region: £132.5 million<br />Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development<br />Leading research institute conducting innovative and groundbreaking research into renewable energy, sustainable development and public engagement. Also run 3 MSc courses.<br />
  3. 3. Three challenges<br />The visibility of energy<br />Whose behaviour are we trying to change?<br />The challenge of public engagement in the workplace<br />
  4. 4. The visibility of energy<br />
  5. 5. By its nature, ‘energy’ is an abstract and invisible force that is conceptualised or commonly defined in a number of different ways, for example as a commodity, as a social necessity, as an ecological resource, or as a strategic material.*<br />*Burgess & Nye (2008), Re-materialising energy use through transparent monitoring systems, Energy Policy<br />
  6. 6.
  7. 7. (2)Whose behaviour are we trying to change?<br />
  8. 8. Cyber Display<br />Energy Cities represents more than 1000 local authorities from 30 countries, mainly municipalities<br />The Display Campaign is a voluntary scheme municipalities can adopt to demonstrate a commitment to reducing energy consumption of public buildings.<br />A key part of the rationale for developing the energy display label was to motivate decision makers towards a common approach for European certification for energy performance of non-residential buildings, and engage municipal energy managers and the general public around the subject of energy and buildings. <br />As a project partner, DMU was responsible for evaluating the success of the campaign<br />
  9. 9. Display communication activities<br />Education/Training programmes<br />Communication Activities<br />Internal Communication<br />Local Energy CYBER Display Days<br />Schools Programme<br />Local Press Articles and Media Relations;<br />Local Communication Materials<br />Staff Training Workshops<br />
  10. 10. Improving building performance<br />The overall trend is of this set of buildings<br />moving ‘Towards Class A.’ By this we mean there<br /> is, overall, a increase in higher rating certificates<br />(A C) and a decrease in ratings G-D.<br />
  11. 11. Findings from Display®<br />Display® lead to demonstrable increases in building performance and energy awareness. But . . . <br />There is no one single measure or ‘quick-fix’ for moving buildings ‘Towards Class A’. <br />The importance and success of Display® is in recognizing that the poster is merely a beginning of the journey ‘Towards Class A’.<br />Buildings in Display® that improve . . . <br />Invest in multiple refurbishments especially lighting controls and boiler replacement and avoid using air conditioning; <br />Invest in new types of building controls especially heating controls; <br />Have a full time energy manager and voluntary environmental champion;<br />Organized local media campaigns and used creative promotional materials;<br />Attended local and national networking events such as 'national users club event'<br />
  12. 12. A technical improvement is the result of someone’s behaviour being changed, be it the facilities manager, finance director, energy manager or mayor.<br />
  13. 13. The challenge of public engagement in the workplace<br /> the aim? To understand the role of ICT in reducing energy consumption of a large scale public building through the design of an ICT interface connecting building users to their electricity consumption.<br />DUALL<br />
  14. 14. Beyond information provision<br /><ul><li>There is a need for a different approach recognising the complexity of user perceptions and understandings (Niemeyer, Petts et al. 2005);
  15. 15. Combining a bottom-up and top-down approach in order to minimise mixed messages (Owens 2000);
  16. 16. The value of public engagement (Burgess and Clark 2009; Ockwell, Whitmarsh et al. 2009).
  17. 17. The importance of context. </li></li></ul><li>
  18. 18.
  19. 19. Conclusions/recommendations<br /><ul><li>Complex issues exist around behaviour change in the workplace, not least – where does responsibility lie for energy reduction & whose behaviour are we trying to change.
  20. 20. There is a need for more creative and less ‘quantitative’ visualisation tools
  21. 21. Significant energy reductions can be made through simple measures (consumption in unoccupied hours is a substantial problem)
  22. 22. Public engagement in the workplace must be ‘fit for purpose’</li></li></ul><li>Thank you for listening.<br />Dr Richard Bull<br /><br /><br />Twitter: richbull or greenviewdmu<br />