Traditionally, when someone buys a house, they receive a card from their realtor that says, “Thanks for your business,” and a gift basket with some thoughtful housewarming gifts.  Now, thanks to new zoning codes in Lancaster, California, new homebuyers will also receive a brand-new solar photovoltaic (PV) system (though “receive” is probably a misnomer, as the cost of the system is presumably built into the home price).

Lancaster changed its zoning code in March 2013 to require a 1.0 to 1.5 kW PV system for every new home built on lots larger than 7,000 square feet or 1.5 kW systems for rural homes up to 100,000 square feet.  Builders will also have the option of building distributed systems for new developments.  For example, a builder could install a single 20 kW system for a 20-home development.  (Note that Sebastopol became the second California city to enact a solar requirement for new homes in May.)

Lancaster is the first city in the United States to require PV systems for new residential construction.  This regulation marks a significant win for solar companies, the renewable energy industry, and the state of California.  The advantages for the PV industry are obvious: the regulation will drive the market as new homes are built, creating revenue and jobs.  Widespread installations will also improve installation techniques and develop a base of skilled installers.  For California, this change will help relieve an already stressed electric grid that funnels power from the northwest to southern California (Lancaster is about 65 miles north of Los Angeles).

National Impact

Extrapolating numbers across the United States paints an even more ambitious picture.  The National Association of Home Builders forecasts that 647,000 new homes will be built (or at least started) nationwide in 2013.  Imagine that each of these homes comes with a 1.0 kW PV system installed; by the end of 2013, we would have a new 647 MW power plant distributed across the country.  It’s not quite that simple, but the point is this: a seemingly innocuous zoning change like Lancaster’s could have a tremendous impact once it scales across the country.

Furthermore, this would mean more good news for a growing North American PV market.  Navigant Research’s report, Distributed Solar Energy Generation, forecasts that 220 GW of distributed solar PV will be installed worldwide from 2013 to 2018, representing $540.3 billion in revenue, but the majority of that growth will come from Europe.  Extrapolating again, adding 647 MW of PV capacity each year in the United States would increase distributed PV capacity by approximately 15% to 20%.

Builders Object

Of course, there are numerous hurdles standing in the way of widespread adoption of anything similar to Lancaster’s zoning laws, and not everyone is applauding this move.  While there has been relatively little opposition from Lancaster residents, the homebuilders clearly object to the new codes.  Specifically, they feel that this change puts their product at a disadvantage when compared to the resale market.  Regardless, it will be interesting to see if other cities follow suit, making the new regulation a boon for the PV industry, or if Lancaster and Sebastopol prove exceptions in an already growing market.

The building automation world was rocked last week by the news that Google’s Wharf 7 building in Australia was hacked.  The building management system (BMS), built on the Tridium Niagara AX platform (Honeywell acquired Tridium in 2005), was compromised by security researchers Billy Rios and Terry McCorkle, who used a backdoor to access the system and gain access to the building automation system (BAS) – and all the equipment it controls – as well as the other systems running on the same network.

This is not the first time an Internet-connected BAS or BMS has been hacked.  History buffs may remember that when the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was hacked in 2011, they discovered that a thermostat in a Chamber of Commerce-owned property was communicating with a computer in China.  However, this is certainly the most high-profile breach of a building’s automation system to date, and it emphasizes the fact that, as the industry grows and embraces the Internet’s capabilities, it must also embrace the Internet’s challenges.

Chaos Scenario

The threats are very real.  In this case, the hack was orchestrated for demonstration purposes, so there was no real risk involved.  But think about the individual systems controlled by a BAS/BMS: fire and life safety, security, elevators, etc.  It’s not a far leap to consider worst-case scenarios where fire suppressant systems are de-activated or unwarranted persons are allowed into sensitive areas of secure buildings.  Chaos could be induced if control of the BAS/BMS landed in the wrong hands.

Everyone involved in the building automation industry should be working to improve BMS security.  The magnitude is huge – Navigant Research forecasts that the market for building energy management systems will grow to nearly $6 billion by 2020.  Rios and McCorkle claimed they found 25,000 active Tridium systems online, and with customers like ABB, Boeing, Changi Airport, and James Cook University Hospital, the scale of the risk is enormous.

Lynxspring – a leading provider of building automation and control solutions – recently announced a partnership with Netop to develop a cyber security solution for BAS/BMS.  The attention around this week’s event reminded me of a great article by Lynxspring’s Marc Petock on the subject of cyber security for building automation, in which he declared, “Gone are the days of security through obscurity.”  Now it’s time for all stakeholders in the industry to come together to protect its customers, their assets, and most importantly, the people within these buildings.

After record 2012 temperatures, another sweltering summer looms in the southeastern United States.  And the region lags behind other parts of the United States in efficiency policies and gains.   Two recent reports that focus on energy efficiency efforts across the country offer different opinions as to why this is, but the causes may be more related than they first seem.

The first is an American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) study, Trusted Partners: Everyday Energy Efficiency Across the South, that focuses on four southern states: Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana.  Researchers found that while consumers are interested in efficiency, they don’t necessarily want government-backed mandates pushing for efficiency.  The combination of strong resistance to government intervention and slow regional economic growth has led to a dearth of effective energy policies in these states.  While the researchers offer a number of recommendations, ultimately it’s about understanding the population and using trusted institutions to drive behavior change.  There are many hurdles to increasing energy efficiency in the South, but changing behaviors and attitudes is the first step toward reducing consumption.

The second study, by CO2 Scorecard, comes with slightly more divisive results.  The most eye-popping statistic from their research was that traditional Republican – or ”red” – states use 55% more energy per capita than “blue” (or Democratic) states.  Researchers for this study claim they examined all possible variables, and the results consistently showed a strong correlation between voting habits and energy use.

We All Benefit

Given the weight of each report’s results, it’s worth examining them further.  The four states in the ACEEE study are traditional red states; according to ACEEE’s 2012 State Energy Policy Scorecard, all scored poorly (Georgia was highest at 33^rd and Mississippi came in dead last).  ACEEE’s study also found that Southerners are interested in efficiency.  But since energy prices are lower in the South than in other parts of the United States, incentives to use less are weaker.  Southern states also lack capital to pay for energy efficiency measures – at both the state and consumer level.

So how do you convince money-strapped consumers, utilities, and governments – in states that traditionally view government activism with suspicion – to spend time and money building up efficiency infrastructure?  I tend to agree with ACEEE’s findings that public education is the key to reaching these states.  Rather than a dirty, government-mandated word, efficiency can be presented as a commonsense approach that benefits everyone in the community and leads to cost savings – which can compound into more savings when scaled up.  Starting slow and gaining the trust of the people will open doors in the energy-hungry Sunbelt.

Having moved the clocks forward for Daylight Saving Time (DST), I thought it would be interesting to revisit the energy impact of DST.  I expected to find a plethora of data extolling the virtues of DST.  Instead I found a mish-mash of data and opinions.

DST was first adopted in the United States during World Wars I and II, but it wasn’t until the energy crisis days of the 1970s before it was widely adopted across the country.  A 1975 study by the U.S. Department of Transportation investigated the energy impact of DST and found that it reduced the country’s energy use by 1% each day.  A more recent 2008 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) study found that extending DST to the second Sunday in March through the first Sunday in November reduced electricity use by 0.5% each day during the added DST weeks.

I also found some state-specific studies, most notably this 2007 California Energy Commission study that found starting DST early in California had no significant energy impact and this 2006 National Bureau of Economic Research study from Indiana that found DST actually increased energy use for Indiana residents by 1% to 4%.

Looking at other countries’ research produces even more conflicting information on the subject.  With so much contradictory information, isn’t it time we re-evaluated this practice as a country?

Wake Up

It’s questionable to use a 40-year old study as the validation for any practice.  Energy-use profiles have certainly changed from the 1970s to today.  One of the biggest changes is the increased use of air-conditioning across the country.  Sure enough, the 2008 DOE study said that Southern states saw the least impact from the DST extension, likely due to air-conditioning.  Undoubtedly, other factors like increased appliance penetration and plug loads have changed how we use energy compared to 40 years ago.

By no means am I saying we should abandon DST.  However, as DST also comes with a lot of headaches (and at least one night of interrupted sleep), we should really have a better grasp of why we’re doing it.  It’s been over 40 years since we had a thorough, nationwide study on the impact of DST.  For a country whose government is going through a budget crisis, we owe it to ourselves to know if a practice first started in 1918 is still delivering value.