News

You are here:Home > News > News
Cleantech Daylighting Using Smart Glass: A Survey of LEED? Accredited Professionals Part 1
Published: 2015-6-23 0:23:39

5 RESEARCH STUDY
5.1 Methodology
During January 2008, an offer to participate in an online
market research study was presented to a study population
of 10,407 United States Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Accredited Professionals
whose practice area is architecture. LEED is a program
administered by the U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC). Among other activities, the USGBC rates
buildings along various sustainability criteria and accredits
professionals working in functions related to the design and
operation of buildings. By February, 1,510 usable surveys
were completed, yielding an overall response rate of 14.5%
and a margin of error of +/- 2.5% (α=0.05). To mitigate any
effects of non-response bias, surveys were weighted by the
region of the country in which the respondent is located
such that the weighted regional distribution in the sample
reflects that of the population at large.
5.2 Profile of Respondents
Of those surveyed, 90.6% are employed by an
architectural, design or engineering firm, 50.7% are
licensed architects and 84.1% have worked on at least one
sustainable design project in the past year. Almost one-third
(32.2%) report having evaluated, recommended or specified
solar power in the past year. In terms of the type of work in
which they are involved, 94.6% and 54.3% report working
with commercial and residential projects, respectively.
5.3 Sustainable Architectural Design
The professionals surveyed have a very optimistic
outlook regarding sustainable architectural design. When
asked to share their expectation of how the proportion of
U.S. architectural design work that involves sustainability
will change over the next five years, 73.6% said they expect
it to increase greatly while 25.4% expect it to increase
somewhat. Again looking ahead over the next five years,
levels of agreement with various statements regarding
sustainability and clean technology also signal the
likelihood of strong growth in several areas related to clean
technology. Data for the items with the highest levels of
agreement are summarized in Table 1.
The architecture professionals exhibit a variety of
viewpoints regarding sustainable architectural design.
These items reflect attention to both economic and noneconomic
outcomes. When asked to choose the three items
from a set of nine they consider most when evaluating the
sustainability of buildings, the items most often named are
energy consumption, occupant health or well-being, and life
cycle/lifetime costs. Table 2 summarizes these results.
Items named least frequently are not shown and include

Table 1: Sustainable design over the next 5 years.

Table 2: Importance of items to sustainability of buildings

Using the full set of nine items associated with the

sustainability of buildings as inputs, a hierarchical cluster
analysis of the sample was conducted based on a betweengroups
clustering method and squared Euclidian distance
for intervals. Two primary segments were identified. The
larger of the two accounts for 47.2% of the sample and, for
purposes of this paper, is labeled Impassioned Altruists.
The second segment, Economic Pragmatists, represents
23.0% of the sample, while the balance of the architecture
professionals surveyed are dispersed through several small
clusters. There are substantial differences in the values of
Impassioned Altruists and Economic Pragmatists, and to
the degree that one type is more influential than another on
a particular project, choices of what, if any, clean
technologies will be used may vary. While consideration of
energy consumption is a point of commonality among both
groups, Impassioned Altruists are more likely to consider
occupant health and well-being, waste and pollution, and
community impact. Economic Pragmatists downplay the
aforementioned items, and instead value first or upfront
costs, life cycle or lifetime costs, and payback period or
return on investment.
5.4 Smart Glass and Daylighting
Of the professionals surveyed, 73.8% report having
evaluated, recommended or specified architectural glazings
in the past year. Respondents were shown a list of twelve
items that pertain to glazing for architectural projects and
asked to identify the three most important items to them.



The leading item was energy efficiency (cited by 81.1% of
those surveyed), followed by daylighting (73.1%),
aesthetics (32.9%), shading (22.1%) and view preservation
(21.4%). Just over three-quarters (75.6%) claimed they
were aware of smart glass before participating in the study.
Interest appears strong for this relatively new category of
glazings, with 10.4% and 2.4% of the sample saying
they’ve evaluated, recommended or specified smart glass
for commercial and residential projects, respectively. When
asked whether they would recommend or specify smart
glass for a project if costs were reasonable and the smart
glass met performance requirements, 87.6% said they
would be highly likely or somewhat likely to do so. Like
that for energy consumption, interest in smart glass is an
area of common perspective among the distinct segments of
those surveyed, with 87.8% of the Impassioned Altruists
and 86.1% of the Economic Pragmatists saying they would
be likely to recommend or specify smart glass for a project.
These essentially equivalent interests in smart glass suggest
that it offers architecture professionals and building owners
value on both economic and non-economic levels.
Respondents were given twelve performance attributes
and asked to choose the three most desirable to clients
interested in integrating smart glass into an architectural
daylighting system. Table 3 summarizes citation levels for
the top five attributes.
Table 3: Desirability of smart glass performance attributes
with regard to daylighting
Item
%
Naming Item
Energy efficient operation of the smart
glass panel
28.6%
Solar heat gain control that varies with
the tint level of the smart glass
26.5%
Elimination of the need for window
treatments and coverings
24.3%
Ability to change the light transmission
of the glazing quickly
18.7%
Integration with building intelligence
systems
16.7%
Finally, respondents were asked to assume that the
incremental costs of smart glass in daylighting are
reasonable and then to assess the expected return on
investment of smart glass-based daylighting systems when
compared to other products or systems used to support
sustainability objectives. If costs are reasonable, 39.8%
expect better returns when compared to other products or
systems. Almost three-quarters (73.1%) expect returns that
are equivalent or better. Similar to earlier findings, the
multi-dimensional benefits of smart glass results in
essentially equivalent expectations of return on investment
for both Impassioned Altruists and Economic Pragmatists.

6 CONCLUSION
Clean technology is poised to propel sustainability to
new levels. Such meaningful gains are needed in this period
of rising energy costs and growing environmental concerns.
When part of a daylighting strategy, smart glass can help
the architectural community achieve its sustainability goals
by reducing electricity consumption used to power interior
lighting, lowering cooling costs and improving the health
and well-being of occupants. As adoption of smart glass
accelerates and prices decline, it is likely the category will
move from one being used by early adopters to one being
sought after by the mainstream. En route to that time, a
growing number of smart glass users will embrace its
benefits while investors enjoy its growing returns.
REFERENCES
[1] Cleantech Network, LLC, “Cleantech Defined,”
Retrieved from www.cleantechnetwork.com on
December 6, 2007.
[2] Ernst & Young LLP, “Rising Energy Costs,
Efficiency Will Drive Cleantech Activity, Ernst &
Young Survey Shows,” PR Newswire, November
15, 2007.
[3] Dow Jones VentureSource, “Driven by U.S.
Enthusiasm, Global VC Investment in Clean
Technologies Jumps 43% to $3 billion,” PR
Newswire, February 29, 2008.
[4] Lux Research Inc., “’Clean Technology’ Takes Off
With $48 Billion in 2006 Funding, But Energy
Tech Bubble Looms,” April 30, 2007.
[5] United Nations World Commission on Environment
and Development, “Our Common Future,” Oxford
University Press, New York, 1987.
[6] USGBC Research Committee, “A National Green
Building Research Agenda,” U.S. Green Building
Council, November 2007 (Revised February 2008).
[7] International Energy Agency, Energy Conservation
in Buildings and Community Systems Programme,
“Daylight in Buildings: A Source Book on
Daylighting Systems and Components,” Report of
IEA SHC Task 21 / ECBCS Annex, July 29, 2000.
[8] J. Loveland, “Daylight By Design: Studies From
the Betterbricks Daylighting Lab in Seattle
Illustrate How Daylight Can Be Integrated Into Site
And Building Design,” Lighting Design +
Application, October 2003.
[9] G.M. Sottile, “2007 Study of United States LEED
Accredited Professionals on the Subject of Smart
Glass,” 50th Annual Technical Conference
Proceedings of the Society of Vacuum Coaters,
2007, pp.32-35.
[10] The Freedonia Group, “Advanced Flat Glass to
2010,” 2006.



Back
Previous:2008 Study of Architecture Professionals on the Subject of S...
Next:Cleantech Daylighting Using Smart Glass: A Survey of LEED? A...
Copyright @ Guangzhou Hui Material Technology Co., Ltd. E-mail:info@gzhhmt.com
Address: Guangzhou Science City Kefeng Road 31 - South China New Materials Innovation Park Phone: +86-20-62315688 Fax: +86-20-62315680