Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments


Thank you for participating in the 2015 Climate CoLab Buildings contest, and for the time you spent in creating and revising your entry.

The Judges have strongly considered your proposal in this second round of evaluation, and have chosen to not advance it as a Finalist for this contest.

We, the Judges and contest Fellows, are truly grateful for your contribution to the Climate CoLab and for your commitment to address climate change.

We encourage you to keep developing your work. Transfer it to the Proposal Workspace to re-open it, make edits, add collaborators, and even submit it into a future contest. You can do so by logging into your account, opening your proposal, selecting the Admin tab, and clicking “Move proposal”.

We hope you will stay involved in the Climate CoLab community. Please support and comment on proposals that have been named Finalists and vote for which proposal you would like to be nominated as the contest’s Popular Choice Winner.

If you have questions, please contact the Climate CoLab staff at admin@climatecolab.org

Keep up the great work. And thank you again for being a part of this mission to harness the world’s collective efforts to develop and share innovative climate change solutions.



2015 Climate CoLab Judges



Additional comments from the Judges:

Comment 1:

This proposal does not seem fully developed and lack clarity. In particular what the author claim as possible driver to energy savings, real-time access to data, concerns more people awareness and behavior than data crowding. While building commissioning would be a good practice, the proposed approach does not seem the best way to spread it.

Comment 2:

This proposal essentially suggests taking current building energy disclosure efforts to the next level, which is an interesting proposition with significant promise-- unfortunately, the author has not provided key details required in terms of workability. The proposal also lacks any acknowledgement of current disclosure efforts and some of the challenges faced in implementation. I do encourage the author to continue developing this idea.

Comment 3:

This is a very interesting proposal, I particularly like the idea of the crowd sourcing, more information on how this would be publicised would help make this more convincing. While the proposals go into quite a lot of detail on the potential impact of this energy use monitoring, it does not touch much on how the monitoring will be set up, commissioned, monitored for dropouts etc. It would be advantageous for the authors to state specified protocols, tools and techniques for how data should be captured allowing this to then be comparable across projects. The savings shown in the GSA case study are impressive it would be good to know how this monitoring project was set up. There are also no figures on the cost projections for setting up the monitoring, it may be ambitious to think governments will be willing to fund these types of projects before an idea of energy savings can be given. Is an initial audit/ energy review part of this process? You could imagine a couple of pilot projects being able to kick start further projects once convincing data is available.

Comment 4:

In general an innovative approach, using data analytics of operation data for fault detection and improvements in operation. Studies however show that only visualizing the consumption does not have a long-lasting effect as people tend to go ‘back to normal’ quickly. The idea to crowdsource the data analysis may be problematic because in order to identify (meaninful) faults and optimization potentials one needs a thorough knowledge of the system installed as well as knowledge in HVAC systems. The datasets however could be used by researchers and experts, as this has been done before. Privacy is an issue here, I find it problematic ‘to make occupants behaviour amenable to social pressure’ by people who themselves probably are not aware / do not care about their own energy consumption. The impact of the proposal is rather small as public buildings only make up a small portion of the building stock; also the scalability is not given as private owners hardly would make their consumption public.

Comment 5:

Energy disclosure is a very important topic, and issues associated with broader adoption and greater effectiveness are important and interesting. This proposal doesn't address the body very large and active initiatives, as well as the dedicated staff and research in city, state, and NGOs, and as such this isn't adding to considerations underway in the Boston Energy Disclosure Ordinance Program (BERDO), Massachusetts state benchmarking and disclosure initiatives, City of New York Greener Greater Buildings Program, Institute of Market Transformation (IMT) 10 city program on disclosure, European building labeling initiatives, etc. What is potentially important is the real time aspect. The standard requirement is annual - so very specific ideas related to real time, including how the real time aspect would be used by the public, and where and how it would be displayed, and what the application of the data would be in a crowdsourced environment, is potentially novel but not developed. I hope they will expand their idea. Also, it’s great that the authors are working to have the city of Somerville, MA become active and perhaps lead creatively in this program. When the opportunity of pursing this allows them to discover and describe a unique and novel technique to make such programs effective, I hope they will reapply.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' ratings


Novelty:
Feasibility:
Impact:
Presentation:

Judges'' comments


Your proposal has been selected as a Semi-Finalist!

Congratulations! Your proposal, "Plug Energy Leaks Through Crowdsourcing and Real-Time Feedback on Energy Use" in the Building contest, has been selected to advance to the Semi-Finalists round.

You will be able to revise your proposal and add new collaborators if you wish, from July 1st until July 14, 2015 at 23:59pm Eastern Time.

Judges' feedback are posted under the "Evaluation" tab of your proposal. Please incorporate this feedback in your revisions, or your proposal may not be advanced to the Finalists round. We ask you to also summarize the changes that you made in the comment section of the Evaluation tab.

At the revision deadline listed below, your proposal will be locked and considered in final form. The Judges will undergo another round of evaluation to ensure that Semi-Finalist proposals have addressed the feedback given, and select which proposals will continue to the Finalists round. Finalists are eligible for the contest’s Judges Choice award, as well as for public voting to select the contest’s Popular Choice award.

Thank you for your great work and again, congratulations!



2015 Climate CoLab Judges

Comment 1:

The crowd sourcing part of this proposal is interesting but it would be helpful to have additional reference material to support this concept. It is unclear how crowd sourcing would be an effective method of energy conservation measure identification.

Comment 2:
Energy disclosure is a very important topic, and issues associated with broader adoption and greater effectiveness are important and interesting. This proposal doesn't address the body very large and active initiatives, as well as the dedicated staff and research in city, state, and NGOs, and as such this isn't adding to considerations underway in the Boston Energy Disclosure Ordinance Program (BERDO), Massachusetts state benchmarking and disclosure initiatives, City of New York Greener Greater Buildings Program, Institute of Market Transformation (IMT) 10 city program on disclosure, European building labeling initiatives, etc. What is potentially important is the real time aspect. The standard requirement is annual - so very specific ideas related to real time, including how the real time aspect would be used by the public, and where and how it would be displayed, and what the application of the data would be in a crowdsourced environment, is potentially novel but not developed. I hope they will expand their idea. Also, its great that the authors are working to have the city of Somerville, MA become active and perhaps lead creatively in this program. When the opportunity of pursing this allows them to discover and describe a unique and novel technique to make such programs effective, I hope they will reapply.

0comments
Share conversation: Share via:
No comments have been posted.