AC 2009-1798: COLLABORATION WITH INDUSTRY TO PROMOTE ENERGYCONSERVATION AND EDUCATION

Mahmoud Alahmad, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Patrick Wheeler, University of Nebraska, Omaha

Avery Schwer, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Dale Tiller, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Andrea Wilkerson, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Joshua Eiden, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009

Page 14.334.1

Collaboration with Industry to Promote Energy

Conservation and Education

Abstract

The cooperation between academia and industry exposed Architectural Engineering students

to a unique learning opportunity. The project addressed student learning and exposure to re-

search while concurrently addressing energy conservation. The collaborative project allowed

the expertise of University of Nebraska professors and students to be utilized in combination

with the Omaha Public Power District’s (OPPD) financial and customer base support. The

relationships built enriched student learning by providing real world engineering experiences.

The students refined their research, communication, and presentation skills by interacting

with and presenting engineering solutions to a wide range of professionals, engineering stu-

dents, and the community. The students worked closely with professors to prepare profes-

sional documents, analyze data, and develop future research plans. Student interaction with

the community also provides real world interactions in a business environment.

The University of Nebraska in conjunction with OPPD is investigating residential energy

consumption and behavior change as a result of visual and digital real-time energy and cost

information. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effect on household electricity con-

sumption and determine if real-time feedback will aid residential customers in reducing their

energy usage. The educational benefit of this research grant provides students with real life

work experiences in research and offers an outlet for learning about energy conservation

strategies and concepts. Additionally, the study will provide the utility critical information

necessary in projecting the future capacity needs for peaking power plants.

I. Introduction

A common difficulty amongst academic engineering programs is the minimal amount of

coursework that makes a solid connection to industry applications. Upper level courses

should ease the transition from the university to the work place environment. There are sev-

eral program models that ease the transition by exposing students to the industry environment

during their education.

One program model provides students the opportunity to observe professionals in the work-

place. Another program allows students to work in the engineering industry as part of their

course curriculum. A third program model tells students to take time off from school to

work independently for an industry partner1. With all of these options it is difficult to iden-

tify the best model. Each serves to further the student’s understanding of industry challenges

commonly encountered and expose students to real world problems.

Substantial benefits can be realized by both industry and academia when the unique re-

sources of each institution are focused upon achieving a common goal. Replicating the ex-

periences and knowledge that students gain through practical application of their knowledge

in an industry setting is unrealistic in a classroom environment. Many institutions have im-

plemented industry placement programs as a part of their curriculum in order to expose stu-

dents to industry applications. Cooperative Education for Enterprise Development (CEED) is

a university-guided industry placement program utilized by some universities. The program

gives the industry partner the chance to capitalize on the resources of the university and vice

Page 14.334.2

versa. Griffith University integrated the concept of CEED into the new Bachelor of Engi-

neering in Coastal Engineering program. The Coastal Engineering Industry Affiliates Pro-

gram (CEIAP) brought important benefits for everyone involved. These benefits are summa-

rized in Table 11.

Table 1 – Summary of CEIAP Benefits1

Student

Well-rounded education, enriched by practical applications

Realistically evaluate interests and aptitudes

Development of people interaction skills

Development of resume and job search skills

Valuable networking opportunities

Exposure to the latest business practices and technology

Industry Partner

Access to well-trained and highly motivated students

Short term: opportunity to initiate pilot projects

Longer term: evaluation of potential employees

Exchange of ideas and new developments

Enhanced image of the organization

Improved networking opportunities

Use of the latest university technology and equipment

University Partner

Opportunity to enhance student education and learning

Transfer of knowledge

Improved liaison with the industry

Feedback on the quality and relevance of program

Improved opportunities for collaborative research projects

Enhancement of consultancy project involvement

Exposure to an industry environment brings students several advantages2,3

:

≠ Students gain a familiarity with the commercial environment and avoid the culture

shock experienced by many students when transitioning from school to formal em-

ployment.

≠ Proactive attitudes necessary to prevail in the workplace are instilled.

≠ Practical implementation of the work management process and the importance of per-

sonal management are observed.

≠ Personal relationships develop with professionals within the field of study, providing

a crucial industry networking resource that can provide additional support and assis-

tance in obtaining employment after graduation.

≠ A wider range of information sources are available to students, some that may not be

public domain.

Page 14.334.3

≠ Exposure to the necessary non-technical areas of engineering, including communica-

tion styles and cultural awareness, that the students to do gain through their engineer-

ing coursework.

The partnership implemented between the University and OPPD to promote energy conser-

vation and education uniquely builds upon the concept of industry working together with

academia. The utility and the university worked closely to collect information, solve prob-

lems, and develop methods for increasing the community’s awareness on environmentally

sustainable issues relating to electricity production and consumption. Students developed

professional skills in networking and business interactions, and gained exposure to industry

practices and technology. OPPD benefited from the research performed by utilizing the

skills of qualified university professors and students that will aid them in projecting future

business needs. The University as a whole has developed a working relationship that will

continue to bring in grant money and business relationships for students and professors.

Overall the university, utility, and students involved in this study have experienced benefits

similar to CEIAP and other comparable programs.

Through the cooperation and constant communication between the university and the utility,

the eleven students that have been involved on the project have gained valuable insight into

the operations of industry. The majority of decisions made required the agreement of both

parties. Students were exposed to the varying administrative decision making factors and

obstacles that make it difficult to satisfy the requirements of both institutions. Through the

experiences of the project the students have further refined their research, communication,

and presentation skills by interacting with and presenting to a professional board of directors.

The students assisted in the statistical analysis of experimental results, presented the research

project to students and community members, and worked closely with the 151 study partici-

pants, visiting their homes and answering their phone calls. The students visited participants’

residences to install devices, perform device maintenance and administer surveys. This in-

teraction presented the community with the opportunity to ask questions about energy con-

servation and electrical fundamentals. The students were able to apply the knowledge ac-

quired through school and the research project to provide helpful answers and guidance.

Through exposure and involvement in research, the students have improved their ability to

critically and creatively think about problems and develop solutions, orally communicate

ideas and concerns, and prepare technical documents.

Students gained practical experience conducting research that complements their fundamen-

tal engineering learning. The students evaluated and physically tested a wide range of visual

and digital display devices available in the local and international market. A part of the test-

ing process included the design and development of a display board. It replicated a typical

residential electrical system, and consisted of a utility power meter, load center and various

residential loads (Figure 1). Students applied the NEC Code in wiring the system compo-

nents during the construction of the display board. The board was additionally used to dis-

cuss energy monitoring to the university student group of Emerging Green Builders and as a

lecture aid for the university’s Building Electrical Systems II course. The students could

study and analyze the difference between capacitive, inductive and resistive loads as well as

energy consumption and conservation using real-time monitors (RTMs) in conjunction with

Page 14.334.4

the display board. The board is currently in use as an interactive display for the public at

OPPDs headquarters.

Figure 1 – Display Board and RTMs

II. Residential Energy Consumption and Previous Research

U.S. homes use about one-fifth of the total energy consumed in the nation and about 60% of

that is in the form of electricity4. The residential sector, unlike the commercial and industrial

sectors, is made up of multiple small energy users, such as houses, mobile homes, and apart-

ments. Research has shown that these residential energy consumers waste almost 41% of the

power supplied to their homes5. The large amount of usage and waste indicates that the resi-

dential sector has significant energy savings potential. By educating the consumers and of-

fering information on electricity usage the amount of wasted energy could be decreased.

The consumer may not realize that when appliances such as televisions and computers are

not in use they are still drawing power. The phantom loads, or the electric power consumed

by electronic appliances while they are switched off or in a standby mode, of many house-

holds add up to hundreds of thousands of kilowatt-hours (kWh) produced by electrical utili-

ties each year. Additionally, consumers may not understand the quantity of power being

used by various household appliances and loads. This study offers an outlet to educate

homeowners on where energy is being used and how they can save. One researcher stated

that you would not shop in a grocery store without price tags. Under the same pattern of logi-

cal thinking it only makes sense that the purchase of electricity would be accompanied by an

illustrated, upfront cost for the consumer to see in real time. Historically, research has shown

that, in general, when presented with the appropriate information on energy usage, the aver-

age home owner will at least make an attempt to decrease their consumption6.

The use of feedback to reduce energy consumption was initially studied following the Arab

oil embargo of 1973 by psychologists who were interested in human behavior. Barbara Far-

Page 14.334.5

har reviewed several studies incorporating feedback in the form of notes left on the door or

kitchen window, meter reading, and self-monitoring7. These studies were among the first

aimed at the residential sector and sought to help consumers better understand the cost of us-

ing electricity in order to decrease their personal contribution to the power grid. These stud-

ies developed a baseline usage by monitoring the homes for a time frame before starting the

treatment of delivering notes. These studies were performed in the 1970s and 80s and real-

ized energy savings of between 7% and 30% 6,8,9,10,11,12

.

Real-time, in-home feedback is a relatively new technology that aides residential customers

in minimizing their energy usage. The first study using real-time direct digital displays was

conducted by Dobson and Griffin in 199214

. A more aesthetically pleasing and intuitive de-

vice led to increased energy savings in later studies14,15

. The use of real-time feedback pre-

sents an opportunity to decrease residential energy consumption by 10%-20%17

. The order

of magnitude of savings varies depending on the location of the study, type of feedback or

information offered, cost of power, and other social and economic factors. For example,

Humboldt State University is monitoring campus housing energy consumption using The

Energy Detective (TED). The program targets three campus locations to see if promoting

conservation will reduce consumption. TED is helping to target the inefficient houses on

campus and reduce the university’s carbon footprint17

. A synopsis of the recent studies using

RTM technology can be seen in Table 2 below16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24

.

Table 2 - Overview of Utilities and Institutions Using RTMs

Study RTM

Used Timeframe Location

Electricity Savings

Achieved by Feedback

Hydro One PCM 18 months British Columbia, CA TOU – 7.6% RTM – 6.7%

Florida Solar TED 2 years Southern Florida 4.6 kWh/day

CEATI PCM 3 1/2 years Labrador and New-

foundland, Ca 18%

TXU TED Ongoing Texas 15%

Dominion

VA PCM 2008 Pilot Virginia None Published

Humboldt

University TED 2007 California None Published

NSTAR PCM 2007 Pilot Massachusetts 692 kWh/year/participant

NV Energy Multiple Ongoing Nevada 8% (Preliminary)

CA Pilot Orb Ongoing California No direct savings

III. Project Description

The research investigates the effect of RTM’s on household electricity consumption behav-

ior. The purpose of the study is to promote energy conservation, assist consumers in reduc-

ing their energy usage and determine if real-time feedback will aid residential customers in

reducing their energy usage. The existing power capacity of the utility is quickly becoming

Page 14.334.6

insufficient to supply all of its end users at peak times. The project provides a model of how

a university and business can collaborate to conduct a meaningful study that increases the

awareness of the general population while simultaneously benefiting academia and industry.

a. Phase I

The project involved three separate phases. The initial phase of the project sought to evalu-

ate the RTMs on the market and determine which devices would best fit the goals of the

study. These devices include the Ambient Energy Orb25

, Aztech In-Home Display26

, Power

Cost Monitor (PCM)27

, Wattson28

, The Energy Detective29 (TED), Cent-a-Meter30

and EML

2020H31

. The device evaluations analyzed the ease of installation, ease of use, accuracy,

quality of information, and usefulness of data given by each device. To perform these pre-

liminary evaluations devices were installed in research team homes as seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2 - Home Device Installation at Residential Electrical Panel (Cent-A-Meter)

Another consideration discussed included device maintenance. Some devices such as the

PCM and Cent-A-Meter require batteries which would need replacing over time. Signal dis-

tance limitations were also considered for each device in terms of the interaction between the

transmitter and receiver. Other devices such as TED and EML2020H require current trans-

formers to be placed around the incoming mains in the electrical panel. This installation

would involve a trained electrician and added costs. The Energy Orb had a monthly cost as-

sociated with using the company’s network system. Keeping all of the project considerations

in mind, it was determined during the device analysis that the device selected for the study

needed to provide both visual cues and numerical data. Communicating information in vari-

ous ways increases the amount of users who will be able to gain useful information from the

device.

Based on the developed criteria for the project, the Aztech In-Home Display and Power Cost

Monitor devices were selected. The Aztech offers simple visual and digital feedback. The

visual display is based on a rotating color bar at the top of the device replicating a traditional

meter spinning. Quantifiable data in the form of current power consumption, cumulative

kWhs and cumulative cost and graphical information based on the past 24 hours and past 30

days of energy usage. The PCM offers similar feedback without the color changing effect.

Page 14.334.7

A rotating wheel simulates the spinning of the electrical meter and data is in the form of cur-

rent and cumulative consumption and cost. Both monitors easily interface with the Itron

electrical meters installed on the homes in the pilot study region. The devices selected for

the study are shown below in Figure 3.

(a) (b)

Figure 3 – Real-time Monitoring Devices Used in the Study (a) Aztech In-Home Display;

(b) Power Cost Monitor

b. Phase II

During the second phase 500 letters were initially sent to electrical utility customers as an

insert in their bill seeking volunteer participants for the study. The respondents to the letter

were asked to fill out a four question survey to indicate their willingness to participate. The

research team set device installation appointments with those interested in participating.

During this phase monitors were installed in 13 utility employee residences, 6 research team

homes, and 20 customer residences. Each installation involved contacting the participant via

phone or email, setting up an appointment, and visiting their home for half an hour to install

the device and explain its functionality. The initial device installations allowed the research

team and OPPD to evaluate the effectiveness of the devices and address any issues in their

functionality. The testing period examined the benefits of the devices, user interface and in-

volvement, participant motivation for change, and whether or not any behavior change oc-

curred. Phase II tested the project model to ensure that the larger scale operation would run

as smoothly as possible.

In order to gain further information on behavior change for evaluation, two separate custom-

ized colored light bar display schemes were developed for the Aztech devices. The Aztech

type I (AZI) was designed to have a green light bar from 10pm to 7:59am, the color would be

yellow from 8am-1:59pm and 7pm-9:59pm, and it would be red during peak utility demand

from 2pm-6:59pm. The Aztech type II (AZII) light bar color change was based on the aver-

age daily kWh consumption for the household in which it was installed. Data from June-

September of 2006 and 2007 was averaged to develop a daily kWh usage for participants.

The light bar reset to green at 12am each day and turned yellow once 40% of the average dai-

ly usage was met and turned red at 60%. The color changing patterns were intended to pro-

mote conservation based on utility demand and personal usage respectively.

While Phase II was in progress the research team performed many tasks to allow for the suc-

cess of the study. A website was launched to assist participants with questions and provide

additional energy saving information. Call center training at the utility company was con-

ducted by the students to educate the employees on the pilot program. A dedicated university

call center was created for participants to contact the research team in case of issues with

their monitor.

Page 14.334.8

c. Phase III

During Phase III the rest of the devices were installed bringing the total number of partici-

pant homes to 151 (50 AZIs, 50 AZIIs, and 51 PCMs). At the midterm point in late Septem-

ber the participants were contacted via telephone and email to see if they wanted to continue

their participation. At that time appointments were made to perform maintenance on the de-

vices or to remove them from the home based on user preference. Participants were asked to

participate in a midterm survey during the home visit.

IV. Results

The mid-term survey analysis offers a good interpretation of the participant’s interaction with

the devices. In total 109 participants responded to the survey. While the qualitative answers

are not indicative of energy savings, some conclusions can be drawn from the responses.

60.5% of the participants indicated that they did not have any complaints regarding the

RTMs. Additional analysis showed that 77.7% of RTM users looked at the device on a daily

basis to understand their personal impact on the power grid. This is significant when com-

pared to the 2.3% who indicated that they did not really use the device much at all. In addi-

tion 10.5% of respondents indicated that they initially used the device more so than a month

or two down the line when it had been in the home for a period of time. This behavior, along

with the 26% of participants who chose to discontinue the study during the mid-term mainte-

nance visits, indicates that these devices may be best suited for short term usage in a rental

program or in conjunction with a promotional rate structure. 16.3% of the participants used

the device to track the consumption of the individual appliances in their home to find the

biggest sources of possible savings. 55.8% liked being able to track their usage in real-time

and 69.8% stated that they were more aware of their personal energy usage or had at least

attempted to modify electricity usage behavior in some way. From these percentages we can

infer that the participants are being educated on their personal energy usage and making a

conscious effort to decrease consumption.

A synopsis of the survey questions and participant responses is illustrated in Figure 4. The

fundamental problem with this feedback is that all participants were self-selected in that they

had to respond to a survey or contact the university in order to be selected. Since a desire to

conserve must be present before a change can occur, the survey results may not be indicative

of the actual energy savings produced by the RTMs.

Page 14.334.9

Summary of Mid-Term Survey Results

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

AZ AZ1 AZ2 ALL AZ PCM Total

Device Type

Su

rve

y R

esp

on

de

nts

Total Respondents

Enjoyed being able to track real-time usage

Liked seeing how much energy eachappliance used

Expressed no dislike towards thedevice

Used AC, Ltg, and appliances moreconciously

Participant owns their home

Figure 6 – Summary of Mid-term Survey Analysis Results

V. Conclusion

a. Research Findings

The difficult task of developing a connection and communicating between community, aca-

demia and industry was successfully accomplished. Increasing the interaction between the

three differing entities allowed academia and industry to better serve the community and

community appreciation of academia and industry increased. This study enhanced the educa-

tion of students by bringing real world, industry situations into the classroom. Additionally,

the study brought the students out of the context of the classroom and exposed them to indi-

viduals within the community and industry. By combining the resources of academia and

industry, a collaborative experience that benefits each entity developed. The research experi-

ence offered students a segway into further advanced education and independent research

opportunities, while simultaneously providing the utility with crucial research necessary in

the refinement of their billing rates and green initiatives.

b. Student Involvement and Experiences

All of the students participating in the research benefited professionally and personally while

being compensated for their work. The involvement and experience of each of the eleven

students varied. Paul Mooter, a 4th

year architectural engineering student, took a semester off

to work full time for OPPD after a summer experience working on the project. Mooter felt

that “There was a great deal of enthusiasm for saving energy amongst OPPDs customers; es-

pecially with the rising cost of energy” and that “It was good to see how willing people were

to save energy if given the proper tools”. The discussions with fellow researchers and the

enthusiasm of the research participants motivated Mooter to be more aware of his personal

energy usage.

Page 14.334.10

Most of the students involved monitor their personal energy usage more closely after work-

ing on the project. Jamie Tills, a 4th

year architectural engineering student, worked on the

project over the summer, and found it to be a positive experience. She “enjoyed going to

people's homes to set up the devices because it was fun to visit with the people and most

seemed very interested about monitoring the devices”. She found most research participants

were interested in how much energy could be saved by turning off a light or the air condi-

tioner.

Adam Brumbaugh, a 3rd

year architectural engineering student, worked closely with an En-

ergy Efficiency Consultant with Precision Data Systems to assist in device installations.

Brumbaugh found the interaction with a professional to be valuable and a great experience.

The connection with industry professionals and homeowners allowed the students to build

networking, communication, and collaboration skills enabling them to easily assimilate into

their industry professions.

Bibliography

[1] Lemckert, Charles J. (2003). A Coastal Engineering Industry Affiliates Programme Model to Enhance

Student Learning. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education Vol.2, No.3. UICEE

[2] El-Raghy, Saad. (1999) Quality Engineering Education: Student Skills and Experiences. Global Jour-

nal of Engineering Education Vol. 3, No. 1. UICEE

[3] McKee, William A. (1999) Integrating Education and Industry through Enhanced Projects. Global

Journal of Engineering Education Vol. 3, No. 3. UICEE

[4] Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2008). A subset of the U.S. Department of Energy

http://www.eia.doe.gov (Accessed: October 15, 2008).

[5] Williams, Eric D., & Matthews, H. Scott. (2007). Scoping the Potential of Monitoring and Control

Technologies to Reduce Energy use in Homes. IEEE.

[6] Seligman, C. & Darley, J.M. (1977). “Feedback as a Means of Decreasing Residential

Energy Consumption.” Journal of Applied Psychology 62 (4): 363-368.

[7] Farhar, Barbara C. (1989). “Effects of Feedback on Residential Electricity Consumption: A Literature

Review.” Solar Energy Research Institute. U.S. Department of Energy.

[8] Winett, Richard A. and Michael T. Nietzel (1975). “Behavioral Ecology: Contingency Management of

Consumer Energy Use.” American Journal of Community Psychology, 3.2:123-133.

[9] Winett, Richard A., John H. Kagel, Raymond C. Battalio, and Robin C. Winkler

(1978). “Effects of Monetary Rebates, Feedback, and Information on Residential Electricity Conserva-

tion.” Journal of Applied Psychology 63:73-80.

[10] Bittle, Ronald G., Robert Balesano, and Greg Thaler (1979). “The Effects of Daily

Cost Feedback on Residential Electricity Consumption.” Behavior Modification 3:187-201.

[11] Winett, Richard A., Michael S. Neale, and Cannon Grier (1982). “Effects of Self-Monitoring and

Feedback on Electricity Consumption.” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 12:173-184.

Page 14.334.11

[12] Van Houwelingen, Jeannet H. and W. Fred Van Raaij (1989). “The Effect of Goal-Setting and Daily

Electronic Feedback on In-Home Energy Use.” The Journal of Consumer Research 16, 1:98-105.

[13] Dobson, JK and JDA Griffin (1992). “Conservation Effect of Immediate Electricity Cost Feedback on

Residential Consumption Behaviour.” Proceedings, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Econ-

omy, 10.33-10.35.

[14] Tanabe, K (2000). “Energy Conservation Results of the Survey Project on the Status of Energy Saving

in the Residential Sector.” IEA Presentation on standby electricity. The Energy Conservation Center,

Japan.

[15] Mansouri, I and Newborough, M (1999). “Dynamics of Energy Use in the UK Households: End-Use

Monitoring of Electric Cookers. Proceedings, European Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.”

Panel III, 08.

[16] Frank, Susan. (2008). “Hydro One Networks Inc. Time-of-Use Pricing Project Results.“

[17] Wallace, James (2007). “TED the energy detective.” The Lumber Jack. http://media.ww

w.thejackonline.org/media/storage/paper1142 /news/ 2007/04/04/ScienceAnd Technology/Ted-

The.Energy.Detective 2818000.shtml (Accessed: August 25, 2008).

[18] Parker, Danny, Hoak,David, Meier, Alan, & Brown, Richard. (2008). “How Much Energy Are We

Using? Potential of Residential Energy Demand Feedback Devices.” Florida Solar Energy Cen-

ter/University of Central Florida.

[19] CEATI (2008). http://www.bluelineinnovations.com/documents/pr-ceati.pdf (Accessed: August 25,

2008).

[20] TXU Energy Power MonitorTM

(2008). http://www.txupartners.com/powermonitor/. (Accessed: August

25, 2008).

[21] Botkins, David (2008). “Dominion Virginia Power Launches First of Nine Energy Conservation Pi-

lots.” Dominion Virginia Power http://www.dom.com (Accessed: August 25, 2008).

[22] NSTAR (2007). Residential Energy Efficiency Department http://www.ase.org/ (Accessed: August 25,

2008).

[23] Jackson, William G. Jr. (2008) NV Energy. A Review of Equipment Home Energy Display Devices

“Description, Application and Issues.” Paragon Consulting Services Inc.

[24] Nexus Energy Software, Opinion Dynamics Corporation, and Primen (2005). “Information Display

Pilot: California Statewide Pricing Pilot.” Southern California Edison. White paper.

[25] Ambient Energy Orb www.consumerpowerline.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[26] Aztech Associates Incorporated http://www.aztechinc.com/en/ (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[27] Blueline Innovations http://www.bluelineinnovations.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[28] Wattson (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[29] The Energy Detective www.energydetective.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[30] Cent-A-Meter www.cenergies.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

[31] EML 2020H www.powermeterstore.com (Accessed: February 1, 2009).

Page 14.334.12