Apportioning energy consumption in the workplace: a review of issues in using metering data to motivate staff to save energy

Abstract

The UK government has set ambitious targets to reduce carbon emissions, and lowering energy demand within workplaces is important to help meet these. With the rollout of smart metres and the availability of more fine-grained energy monitoring equipment for the workplace, it is increasingly possible to disaggregate collective energy consumption and apportion this among building users. This article presents an interdisciplinary perspective on the rationale and feasibility of different approaches to apportionment to motivate staff to reduce energy consumption. Our review indicates greatest potential for energy saving when consumption is apportioned to small to medium-sized groups, rather than individuals or entire buildings, particularly when they represent existing communities to which staff members strongly identify. We highlight the complexity of technical, psychological, social and organisational factors that not only inspire, but also often confound, efforts to innovate in this area.

Adding Psychological Factor in the Model of Electricity Consumption in Office Building

“…Since energy saving awareness stereotype determine user's motivation level, in reverse changes in user motivation level will also change their stereotype. The flowchart in Figure 2 represents the logic of the algorithm which links the logic to its rationale in Table 3 based on [5]. The algorithm is triggered at the end of the month, a summary of user's total electricity consumption is presented together with information about the majority of other users' consumption.…”

“…Scientist believe if this approach is applied to home energy use it is an astonishingly reliable way to motivate people to make smarter decisions [1], [2], [4]. Bedwell [5] in his literature review indicates greatest potential for energy saving by changing user behavior. It is said that disaggregation of energy data and apportionment is valuable to leverage data for behavioural change and is concluded that setting clear specific goal within and coherent with company strategy is likely to be effective and more so if specific feedback on these goals are provided.…”

“… There are some evidences that not revealing exactly who has consumed what proportion of a resource may result in increased fear or guilt and lead to reduced consumption overall through compensating behaviour [20], [5].  However, the impact of this was found to be minor, and deliberate attempts to instil uncertainty may clash with more traditional organisational values of teamwork.…”

Beyond feedback: introducing the ‘engagement gap’ in organizational energy management

“…The 4Cs framework illuminates the presence and importance of multilevel influences, reflecting previous research that organizational change and innovation can occur from the top down (Gouldson & Sullivan, 2014), bottom up (Thomas, 1994), or middle out (Bedwell et al, 2014;Goulden & Spence, 2015;Parag & Janda, 2014). Moreover, such changes are likely to be more successful if the organization recognizes the need to integrate these levels through engagement (Christina, Waterson, Dainty, & Daniels, 2015).…”

Types of learning identified in reflective energy diaries of post-graduate students

“…The importance of smart meter installers as intermediaries in learning around energy efficiency has recently been recognised (Darby and Liddell 2015;Wade et al 2016Wade et al , 2017, as has the importance of personal contact from researchers and others engaging with users around energy efficiency measures in the home (Gupta and Barnfield 2017). Within the workplace, the relevance of social dimensions in negotiating energy use and learning may be even more important than in homes , reflecting social norms, group dynamics and a potential sense of community amongst employees (Bedwell et al 2014;Leygue et al 2014;Deline 2015;Dixon et al 2015).…”