Ready for the BSI

I want to get back to buildings soon. Smart grids are engaging, but I think our goals for the future will be met by buildings.

For months, all my writing has been about smart grids. More particularly, for November, it has all been about smart grid standards.

As I write this, the essential market interfaces of the grid are in review. A common communication of schedule and interval, suitable for sharing schedules between grid and enterprise and building and finance finished public review last Tuesday. We have nearly 80 comments to settle, but soon we will be ready to discuss using ws-calendar not only in smart grids, but in buildings.

Energy Market Information (EMIX), the critical description of energy product and price has two more weeks for public review. Energy prices always have a schedule, and EMIX uses WS-Calendar. EMIX supports demand response, but more importantly, full participation of buildings in all energy markets. EMIX is in review until the 17^th.

Energy Interop was released for public review last Saturday. EI (as we call it) defines the essential e-commerce framework for interactions between grids and aggregators and utilities and, yes, buildings. EI is locked for review until December 27.

Now, I am reeling from a week at Grid-Interop, at which I have spoken 5 times, sat In two meetings of the Smart Grid Architectural Committee, and practiced politics (difficult for me) in numerous other meetings. In October and November I put three of the four market interfaces of the smart grid out for public review. Light, loose, market oriented, interfaces that transfer incentives for participation to the buildings. Now I am longing to talk of buildings again.

Today, at Grid-Interop, the focus shifted to buildings as microgrids, each responsible for managing energy use, generation conversion, storage, and, only as a last resort, market operations to make up the difference. This is what I wanted to accomplish when I got started on Smart Energy. No grid control, which would strangle in-building innovation. Maximum grid incentives, all delivered to a single energy services interface (ESI), the locus of market bidding for the building.

Now I turn back to the building, Now I want to think of the Building Systems Interface (BSI), the abstract interface to building systems. Some of it is building services as in BAS, abstracted with system metadata, and associated with the space it supports, the space that the tenants recognize. Some of it is simple appliances, and the way the communicate in homes. Some of it is the live or plug load, perhaps discover able, perhaps mappable to space using PLie.

So what are the essential building services? There is energy management, accessible for low integration re-hosting in the clouds, There is performance contracting, also in the clouds. There is energy auditing, which must be based upon the zero integration costs (because the metadata is already in the BSI). Energy auditing? Well what if we call it a live LEED rating, or perhaps 3^rd party verification of the performance of the performance contractors… BIFER (BI for emergency responders) may even come from that mix.

There is an enterprise service, that links between the occupants and their activities and the BAS and its performance. It communicates to support business activities while using the common schedule communications developed for smart grids. It is aware of the market conditions and deals made with the grid though the ESI. It knows whether the volatile energy of the renewables-based grid is scarce or abundant. It can report back to the enterprise how and where energy is being used right now.

This needs some standards to fly, to be cheap enough to let these cloud-based services flourish. PLie needs to be advanced to a standard. oBIX trends for energy management must be accessible form self-metering systems and from switch panels, and be able to support the NAESB Energy Usage Information standards. There must be a light-weight BIM, my vote is for GBXML, able to act as the spatial lens through which to view energy use.

I want to define the BSI…

But now, rest, and sleep.

Continuous programming for Smart Energy Buildings

Best practices in high performance buildings recommend continuous commissioning. Keeping building systems at peak performance requires knowing what high performance looks like, and how that performance changes over time. But performance requirements change over time. Policy based system management requires that we know the purpose of each room. We need continuous programming for buildings.

Building programming is the name of the pre-design conversations about what an owner expects to get out of a building. Designers ferret out each purpose. The design team and the owners establish clear expectations of the expected performance for each function. Some praxis defines the energy performance expectations for each space as well. This one time activity is complete before serious design begins.

This program should guide the initial commissioning requirements. Does this space support the ventilation requires of a dining area within it energy budget. Does another space meet its energy budget while supporting high-end retail? Does the ventilation support maintaining alert cubicle workers throughout a long day? These considerations can support policy based building system management.

There are two barriers to developing systems to support this model. There is no standard for passing the original program information to the commissioning process. Programs change.

It is quite common at Universities to spend 100 grand to renovate a brand new building. During the years between programming and construction, some purpose changes, some new program started, and 4 offices are now a classroom. The break area is now a data center. The back lab is now a reception space for the new academic discipline; it now has an exterior door. In commercial buildings, each new tenant may have new requirements. Things change

Even without renovations, the building program changes, and with it, the performance requirements. The squash court becomes a spinning class, supporting many sweating exercisers rather than two. The conference room becomes a break room, and adds a refrigerator and microwave. The new break room must be better ventilated, to avoid tormenting the work force with the smell of microwave popcorn. These changes create new program requirements that should in turn update the energy performance requirements.

To meet their promise, LEED buildings need to be commissioned against their designed performance, the design that was built on the original programming. To maintain that performance, this commissioning should be continuous and automated. To keep that commissioning meaningful, it its targets should be updated as the buildings program requirements change. And that requires continuous programming.

Building Codes for the Smart Grid Ready Home

Companies were looking to put standards into production at the Smart Grid Interoperability Panel (SGIP) Face to Face meeting in St Louis this week. The most interesting new question I heard was “Where are the model home building codes to support smart energy?” I don’t think there are any.

Smart grid-ready homes must go beyond smart thermostats. LEED and other models design for energy efficiency but do not manage actual use. Smart energy demands that homes respond to changing energy prices and changing requirements of their occupants. No existing code plans for new patterns of electrical use, ones that may change the wiring requirements of the home. Today’s codes do not plan for rapid changes of technology in the future.

Energy efficient design means little without monitoring. Tomorrow’s smart homes must monitor their actual energy use; they must know if they are delivering the performance promised. They should measure live or plug energy load just as they measure energy for the installed systems and sections of the house. Without the means to measure and verify energy use, efficient designs are not ready for smart energy.

In the home, the highest energy efficiency may actually hinder some interactions with smart grids. Smart energy supplies will be intermittent, in price if not in availability. Smart grid-ready homes must be able to store energy during abundance for use during scarcity. Storage will never be as efficient as instant use, so smart energy homes will be less than perfectly efficient.

Some energy based services achieve their effect right away; lights come on almost instantly. Some services require time; air conditioning and humidity control may require hours to show their effects. The most efficient systems have run constantly with just enough capacity; they do not have the excess capacity to respond on demand.

Smart grid-ready homes must anticipate their occupants’ needs, even as the price of energy changes over time. Smart energy homes must learn the schedules of their inhabitants and make plans to provide services at the right times while buying energy in response to markets.

Smart energy must support distributed energy generation and storage, both today and tomorrow. Smart grid-ready home designs will have places to site energy generation and storage systems. Home circuit panels must accept multiple energy inputs. These systems must be able to connect and disconnect, enabling the home owner to upgrade as new technologies come on the market. The smart grid ready home must be able to disconnect automatically from the grid, both for safety and to avoid power quality problems to and from the neighborhood distribution.

Distributed energy changes the wiring requirements for the home. Today’s wiring is undersized for its load, designed provide rated power for only a few minutes at a time. Energy storage and electric cars will require full power for hours at a time, causing cables to fail early. Internal wires to support, say, a 50 amp services for such uses must be larger than those for a 50 amp service today. Even the cable supplying the house must be larger to support the stresses of continuous outside, lest it to fail early.

Most energy use in our homes is, or could be, supported by Direct Current (DC). Traditional power coming from the grid is Alternating Current (AC). Batteries and many forms of distributed generation produce DC. Energy is lost when power is converted DC to AC for local distribution just as it is when converting AC to DC for point use. (This is what your wall-warts do.) Internal DC distribution and DC plug standards may be part of building codes for smart-grid ready homes.

Building a new smart grid ready neighborhood of smart grid ready homes requires care, attention, creativity, new technology, and planning for a steady stream of technology changes in the future. It probably starts with BIM-based construction to establish a known baseline building performance and capabilities. It will require standards for energy information exchange that are only now nearing completion. Each home will be filled with sensors to inform the systems of today, openly accessible to share with tomorrow’s systems that today we do not know. Each home must interact with the computers, PDAs, and smart phones that run the lives of its inhabitants. Above all, each home must be designed to allow for constant and regular upgrades.

We don’t have those building codes yet.

Smart Buildings & Smart Energy: the Integration Challenge

Last week, twenty of us gathered in DC for a two-day charrette on the standards needed to apply BIM to the problems of dynamic energy management. The work-shop, entitled “Smart Buildings, Smart Energy”, was put on by the Corps of Engineers Research Lab (CERL) at the National Institute for Building Science (NIBS). The meeting was a fascinating, and occasionally heated conversation that brought together academic and government researchers, building system practitioners from industry leading companies, and participants in standards committees from ASHRAE to OASIS. It was a fascinating meeting, filled with bright, deeply focused individuals who as a group had not yet recognized the profound changes in their goals required by smart energy.

The challenge of smart energy to buildings is dynamic change. The goal of smart buildings has always been superior performance—usually defined as energy efficiency. Energy from external sources will all become dynamic and intermittent. Some will be available under rapidly changing prices. The most efficient system may not be the one that is most able to respond to these changing conditions. Perhaps the goal of smart buildings is to defend its occupants from the degraded conditions of the smart grid. The game is changing.

The use of Building Information Models (BIM) is only now becoming common enough to change business processes. BIM lets us design buildings the way we design cars and planes, with full simulation and testing before the contractor turns over the first shovel full of dirt. BIM furthermore provides the contractor with accurate materials requirements and each trade with accurate measurements. With better knowledge and a dramatic reduction in re-work, the cost of construction can come way down while the quality goes up.

Most of the cost of a building is incurred in operations, during the long period between construction and demolition. For the last five years, led by NASA and CERL, there has been a project to define how to hand over information from design and construction for use in operations. The Construction Operations Building Information Exchange (COBIE) defines how to hand over information from the BIM to maintenance and operations.

The information in COBIE seems almost trivial—unless you don’t have it. COBIE defines a standard exchange for equipment information including spare parts lists and preventive maintenance schedules. COBIE exchanges are defined as a series of simple spreadsheets, which can be generated from BIM or filled in by hand. A growing number of maintenance management systems are now able to import COBIE directly into their databases. Whether or not a building was built using BIM, whether a building is old or new, the owner can request COBIE formatted information for handover from the builder, commissioning agent, or seller.

Francois Grobler gathered us together to discuss how to extend COBIE to reduce the cost of building system integration. Building systems are classically islands of automation, communicating only with a single proprietary console. The cost and time required for integration is a barrier both to better integration, and to system upgrades. Occult system tags and poor documentation prevent the timely value-based upgrades that drive innovation in the IT world.

This last point is critical of we are ever to get to a highly innovative green-tech. Cost-based upgrades look to historical cost and to growing maintenance problems to decide when to upgrade. Systems are not replaced until they fail or have been completely depreciated. As IT merged with telecommunications, we moved to value-based upgrades. Lap-tops and PDAs are upgraded when they give the sales force a competitive edge. Work-stations are upgraded to increase engineering productivity. This dynamic has driven these worlds to innovate to drive shorter sales and replacement cycles. The difference is the one between the old black hand-set we used to lease from the phone company, often for decades, and the new market of cell-phones and the latest functions.

A key component of this new COBIE will be control system tags and metadata. Today, a retro-commissioning agent spends the first days or even on site in low-value discovery of this information from blue prints and the current control system. Only after this work is complete, can the more high-value and useful work begin. When a project such as completed, those working notes are thrown away, or stored where they see no further use. A standard for the exchange of this information would reduce the costs of each commissioning and perhaps stimulate a market for third party discovery tools.

Space is the most important class of metadata. People in buildings inhabit and interact with spaces. Building systems affect those spaces, and secure those spaces, but the relation between systems and space is often occult. BIM can provide the mapping, but we don’t need all the BIM for that. We need something small and lightweight, describes the three dimensional space, but leaves out the details that add complexity.

The most significant use of BIM will be in buildings that built without using BIM. Most buildings next year are not new; most new buildings next year will be built without using BIM. Even if we were to imagine that in five years, all buildings will be built using BIM, most buildings still would not have a full BIM, with an intelligent structure, for a very long time. Fortunately, we do not need a full BIM to describe the space in buildings, and to provide a light framework integrating system information with that space.

Retro-BIM is the work for taking one of today’s buildings and creating a BIM for a portion, usually during a renovation. These BIMs tend to be descriptive, and lack the full engineering detail that would come with design through BIM. There is a growing set of tools and practices to cost effectively create a three-dimensional BIM during a renovation. Retro-BIM can provide as good a foundation for a light integration framework as can a full design BIM.

Green Building XML (GBXML) was designed to provide a “good enough” description of building space and building systems to support energy models that are “good enough”. GBXML is based on the IFC data models that underlie design BIM. Because GBXML already includes information on space and systems in a light-weight model, GBXML would need only a little extension to map system tags and related system metadata to space. Retro-BIM datasets, design to map to the IFCs, should be able to expose information as GBXML with little trouble.

The new challenge of smart energy is dynamic decision-making. Volatile energy availability and energy prices will make the grid  an unpredictable supplier. The availability of on-site energy sources, both generation and storage, enable self-reliance. Smart energy will require energy use decisions on a minute by minute basis. Buildings must be able to accept the complexity of new systems and new technologies without bearing the additional cost of complex integrations. GBXML might be the shim between systems, space, and the people that occupy that space that lets us put it all together.