| 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 clusteranalysis 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. |
