2012 UH and HPU Kukui Cup
         Energy Consumption Data:

               Preliminary Report


                      Philip Johnson
      Collaborative Software Development Laboratory
            Information and Computer Sciences
                    University of Hawaii


(1)
UH Data Background
      Data points at weekly intervals.

      Prior to challenge (August):
      • One data point last week of August

      Challenge (Month of September):
      • Four data points during September.
      • Orange rectangle highlights interval

      Post challenge (October) :
      • Three data points in October.
(2)
UH Building-level Data




(3)
Lokelani and Mokihana Buildings




(4)
      Upward trend in consumption.
Ilima and Lehua Buildings




Lehua "flat" for first 2 weeks, then upward trend
(5)
UH Lounge-level Data

      For ease of review, only 2 or 3
            lounges per chart




(6)
UH Ilima A, B




(7)
      Little apparent impact of challenge.
UH Ilima C, D, E




 Ilima-E: flattened for first week, then upward.
 Ilima-D: flat the whole way through.
(8)
UH Lehua A, B




      Little apparent impact of challenge.
(9)
UH Lehua C, D, E




Lehua-D: ~9% decrease from 8/27 to 9/17 (64% participation)
(10)
UH Lokelani A, B




Little apparent impact of challenge. (43%, 9% participation)
(11)
UH Lokelani C, D, E




Little apparent impact of challenge. (50%, 20%, 33% participation)
(12)
UH Mokihana A, B




Little apparent impact of challenge. (28%, 38% participation)
(13)
UH Mokihana C, D, E




Little apparent impact of challenge (38%, 32%, 21% participation)
(14)
HPU Data Background
       No lounges: all building level.

       3 week challenge:
       • September 17 – October 7
       • Orange rectangle around interval

       Lehua building data
       • Not available due to meter
         misconfiguration.



(15)
HPU Lokelani




       20% drop from 9/17 to 9/24 (100% participation)
(16)
HPU Mokihana




       13% drop from 9/10 to 9/24 (64% participation)
(17)
HPU Melia




  Little apparent impact of challenge. (8% participation)
(18)
HPU Kukui




       Little apparent impact of challenge. (9% participation)
(19)
HPU Ilima




       Little apparent impact of challenge. (9% participation)
(20)
Insight 1: Participation
       Level of participation is correlated with
       perceptible change in consumption on
       weekly basis.

       If participation is greater than 60%, then
       consumption changes perceptibly
       • UH/Lehua-D: 64% participation, 9% drop
       • HPU/Lokelani: 100% participation, 20% drop
       • HPU/Mokihana: 64% participation, 13% drop




(21)
Insight 2: Building level trends
       UH buildings showed a significant
       increase in energy consumption from
       August to October.
        • Effect of competition was to
          temporarily "flatten" this increase.

       HPU Buildings did not show this trend.
       • Effect of competition was more
         significant.

       Not sure why there is this difference
       between UH and HPU.
(22)
HPU building consumption flat




(23)
UH building consumption increased
       13%, 19%, 26%, 26%




(24)
Questions?




(25)

Kukui Cup 2012 Energy Data

  • 1.
    2012 UH andHPU Kukui Cup Energy Consumption Data: Preliminary Report Philip Johnson Collaborative Software Development Laboratory Information and Computer Sciences University of Hawaii (1)
  • 2.
    UH Data Background Data points at weekly intervals. Prior to challenge (August): • One data point last week of August Challenge (Month of September): • Four data points during September. • Orange rectangle highlights interval Post challenge (October) : • Three data points in October. (2)
  • 3.
  • 4.
    Lokelani and MokihanaBuildings (4) Upward trend in consumption.
  • 5.
    Ilima and LehuaBuildings Lehua "flat" for first 2 weeks, then upward trend (5)
  • 6.
    UH Lounge-level Data For ease of review, only 2 or 3 lounges per chart (6)
  • 7.
    UH Ilima A,B (7) Little apparent impact of challenge.
  • 8.
    UH Ilima C,D, E Ilima-E: flattened for first week, then upward. Ilima-D: flat the whole way through. (8)
  • 9.
    UH Lehua A,B Little apparent impact of challenge. (9)
  • 10.
    UH Lehua C,D, E Lehua-D: ~9% decrease from 8/27 to 9/17 (64% participation) (10)
  • 11.
    UH Lokelani A,B Little apparent impact of challenge. (43%, 9% participation) (11)
  • 12.
    UH Lokelani C,D, E Little apparent impact of challenge. (50%, 20%, 33% participation) (12)
  • 13.
    UH Mokihana A,B Little apparent impact of challenge. (28%, 38% participation) (13)
  • 14.
    UH Mokihana C,D, E Little apparent impact of challenge (38%, 32%, 21% participation) (14)
  • 15.
    HPU Data Background No lounges: all building level. 3 week challenge: • September 17 – October 7 • Orange rectangle around interval Lehua building data • Not available due to meter misconfiguration. (15)
  • 16.
    HPU Lokelani 20% drop from 9/17 to 9/24 (100% participation) (16)
  • 17.
    HPU Mokihana 13% drop from 9/10 to 9/24 (64% participation) (17)
  • 18.
    HPU Melia Little apparent impact of challenge. (8% participation) (18)
  • 19.
    HPU Kukui Little apparent impact of challenge. (9% participation) (19)
  • 20.
    HPU Ilima Little apparent impact of challenge. (9% participation) (20)
  • 21.
    Insight 1: Participation Level of participation is correlated with perceptible change in consumption on weekly basis. If participation is greater than 60%, then consumption changes perceptibly • UH/Lehua-D: 64% participation, 9% drop • HPU/Lokelani: 100% participation, 20% drop • HPU/Mokihana: 64% participation, 13% drop (21)
  • 22.
    Insight 2: Buildinglevel trends UH buildings showed a significant increase in energy consumption from August to October. • Effect of competition was to temporarily "flatten" this increase. HPU Buildings did not show this trend. • Effect of competition was more significant. Not sure why there is this difference between UH and HPU. (22)
  • 23.
  • 24.
    UH building consumptionincreased 13%, 19%, 26%, 26% (24)
  • 25.