 Good afternoon and welcome to today's energy seminar. Sorry, we're starting a bit late. We had some interesting technical difficulties. So I need to do a quick introduction, which is even harder to do for our illustrious speaker today. He is the Amy Levins co-founder and chairman Emeritus of Emerging Solutions, co-founder and chairman emeritus of Rocky Mountain Energy. So I'll be brief. But Emery has in my mind been known probably for 40 years or more as Mr. Energy Efficiency. Ever since he wrote his path-breaking book called Soft Energy Path, where he revolutionized the way that people think about large-scale energy systems, namely that they could better be configured as small-scale energy systems, he's actually won an incredible number of awards, prizes, medals, 12 honorary doctorates, the right livelihood alternative Nobel Prize, the German government has awarded him the officer's cross of the order with first-class honor. So rather than take up even more time reading pieces of his vita, I'll now introduce the one and only Emery Levins to talk to us today about integrative design for radical energy efficiency. Emery, take it away. Thank you very much for coming today. I would like to remind you about how to design whole systems for radical energy efficiency or other resource efficiency. This practice applies orthodox engineering principles, but it asks different design questions in a different order to get different answers. Next term, Holmes and I will be teaching the details in our fifth Stanford course on extreme energy efficiency. Around 1975, U.S. government and industry all said that the energy needed to make a dollar of GDP could never drop. A year later, I heretically suggested it could drop 72% in 50 years. So far, it's dropped 59% in 44 years. Yet just the innovations already added by 2010 can save another threefold twice what I originally thought at a third the real cost. And today, even that heresy looks conservative because optimizing buildings, vehicles, equipment, and factories as whole systems, not as piles of parts, can often make very big energy savings costs less than small or no savings, turning diminishing returns into increasing returns. Now, economic geologists know that the minerals economically extractable reserves are only a small part of the resource base, but can expand with innovation. Similarly, reserves of conventional energy efficiency, like the bright green zone in these mineral resource definitions, are severalfold smaller than the full efficiency resource exploitable by integrative design. Yet, ore bodies are finite and depletable concentrations of atoms, while energy efficiency resources are infinitely expandable assemblages of ideas, depleting only stupidity, a very abundant resource. And that's documented in this free paper with an ifty four minute video abstract. It's evidence across all sectors shows that unlike oil or copper, most new energy efficiency reserves cost less than current production, because they come not from adding more or fancier widgets, but from using fewer and simpler widgets, more artfully chosen combined time and sequence. So how do we do this magic? Well, one of my early mentors, the inventor, Edwin Land said, don't undertake a project unless it is manifestly important and nearly impossible. And he also said people who seem to have had a new idea have often just stopped having an old idea. Asian tradition similarly urges us to seek original mind, beginner's mind, child mind, opening ourselves to new ideas by shedding all assumptions and preconceptions. That's the first and hardest step in the method of systematic integrative design. So with beginner's mind never having built a house and therefore not knowing what was impossible. In 1982, I did the conceptual and energy design of this owner builder house where my wife Judy and I lived near Aspen, a 2,200 meters elevation. After our temperatures here used to dip as low as minus 44 Celsius with up to 39 days of continuous mid with a cloud. But our house does no combustion. That's so 20th century. Super insulation, ventilation, heat recovery, and super windows that insulate like 16 or even 22 sheets of glass would look like two and cost less than three, make it 99% passive solar heated, 1% active solar. Efficiency added less construction costs than eliminating the heating system subtracted, saving also about 90% of electricity, 99% of water heating energy, half the water all paid back in 10 months. Now the central atrium seen here in a February snow storm has produced so far 77 passive solar banana crops. Without needing to look like this, our house helped inspire several hundred thousand European passive buildings that likewise have no heating and roughly normal construction costs. An analogous approach works fine in Bangkok. Nearly everyone on earth lives in climates between Bangkok's and mine. Integrative design gives many benefits from each expenditure. So this white arch at the top of the upper middle photo has 12 functions, but it has only one cost. Well, the sequence of integrative design is rather straightforward. You start with the desired service and optimize the whole system, not just parts. And in particular, shrink the supply side like mechanical systems and use the save capital cost to buy the efficiency that does the shrinkage. You start at the end where you're delivering the service. I'll elaborate on that in a minute. You reward the designers for what they save, not for what they spend, and you do the right steps in the right order at the right time. So to keep people comfortable, for example, in hot places. First, cool the people, not the building, which has no comfort sensation. As in these hyperchairs at RMIs Basalt Office, they keep you comfortable in air temperatures up to about 30 Celsius with 3.6 Watts of silent little muffin fans. Then you expand the range of conditions in which people feel comfortable. For example, good ceiling fans expand the summer comfort range by about five to seven Kelvin. Then you minimize unwanted heat gains within or into the space and then apply passive cooling and then active but non-refrigerative cooling. And next would come super-refficient refrigerative cooling like the EngVox triple-deficiency but cheaper Singapore HVAC. And next, if needed, would come cool storage and controls. But actually we never get as far down the list as refrigerative cooling to save 90 to 100 percent of cooling energy with better comfort, better uptime, lower whole system capital costs, even in the most severe climates. Most practitioners pursue these options in reverse order, worst buys first. These methods are also improving. So our integrative design to retrofit the Empire State Building saved 38 percent of its energy, later 43 percent with a three-year payback. And then three years later our cost-effective Denver retrofit saved 70 percent and made this half-century old federal complex more efficient than what was then the best new U.S. office which in turn is only a third as efficient as RMI's Passive Net Positive No Mechanicals office. And now there's a Bavarian building using two-fifths less energy than ours. But these technologies all existed over a decade ago. What mainly improved is not so much technology as design the way we choose and combine technology. So our Empire State Building retrofit for example remanufactured all 6,514 windows on site into super windows that pass light with block heat plus better lights, office equipment, and so on. And together these cut the maximum cooling load by a third. Then renovating smaller chillers instead of adding bigger chillers saved 17 million dollars of capital costs paying for most of the other improvements and cutting the payback to three years or less than one year if we counted non-energy benefits to the owner or the tenants. A major energy service company had also offered a three-year payback but with disintegrated design yielding only one sixth the savings we got. Similarly in six muggy Indian cities one and a half million square meters of integratively designed offices use 80% less energy than the Indian norm with 10 or 20% lower construction costs yet superior comfort and satisfaction. Clear free lighting as you see on the right in that big floor plate is delivered throughout by contract if workers complain of glare and demand lines the architect doesn't get paid. IPCC reported six years ago that for diverse building types and climates the best European new buildings on the left and retrofit buildings on the right are saving up to at least 90% of the energy without higher cost per unit of saved energy. Economic modelers might fit a rising curve to the costs on the left but I prefer data to theory and the vertical cost scatter there simply shows the business opportunity to conform inferior projects to the best practices in the low cost projects. Timing also matters when retrofitting a big glass office tower super windows plus efficient lights and equipment can shrink mechanical loads and systems by four-fold more than paying up front for the efficiencies that rank them. So a four-fold efficiency gain in this old Chicago office building could pay back in about negative five months that is it cheaper than the regular 20-year renovation that saves nothing if you coordinate that deep retrofit with the routine renewal needed anyway of the curtain wall facade. Deep retrofits of all our big buildings are going to take decades so let's write time them to make the savings much bigger and cheaper. In industry which uses half the world's energy and electricity the same methods apply for example Paul Westbrook and I co-led the redesign of Texas Instruments new semiconductor wafer fab to use 40% less energy with 30% or $230 million lower capital cost so it was built in Texas not China. Its system efficiencies eliminated one of the two utility floors and it has inspired cutting company-wide chip making energy intensity by 62% so far water 56% greenhouse gases 57% very profitably. Now Armai's next wafer fab design showed how to save about two-thirds of its energy use and half its capital cost while replacing all 22,000 tons of chillers with any of three natural cooling methods that can yield over 100 units of cooling per unit of electricity. Across diverse industrial sectors our 50-odd billion dollars worth of retrofit designs typically found 30 to 60% energy savings paying back in a few years and in new factories about 40 to 90 plus percent savings with generally lower capital cost. That's far better than the ground retro maybe it's orange on your screen retrofit zone that most energy service companies deliver shown in the upper left corner of the left graph. Our better results come from rethinking industrial processes and redesigning basic elements like pump and fan and motor systems. For example in both buildings in industry better pipe and duct design can save about 80 or 90 percent of the friction 97 in one case in my house. If everybody did this it could save about two-fifths of the world's electricity or half the coal fired electricity typically typically paying back in less than a year in industrial retrofits and instantly in new builds. Such radical savings require two changes in design mentality design process. First we specify big pipes and small pumps not small pipes and big pumps. You know friction in a pipe falls is nearly the fifth power of diameter so how fat should the pipe be to optimize the friction? Well the engineering textbooks say to make the pipe just as fat as will repay its extra cost over the years from the safe pumping energy. That's seemed logical but it's wrong because it leaves out the capital cost of the pumping equipment. A pumping systems pump motor inverters electricals all have to be big enough to overcome the friction so their size and roughly their capital cost will fall as nearly the fifth power of pipe diameter. Yet the capital cost of the fatter pipe rises is only about the second power of diameter so when we optimize the pipe as a component we pessimize the system. Instead optimizing the entire system at once yields batch pipes and tiny pumping equipment so the total capital cost goes down. The second shift in design is even simpler and thus harder. We lay out the pipes first then the equipment. Traditionally of course you put the tank spoilers and so on in convenient or arbitrary places and then you call in the pipe fitter to connect point A to point B but by then A and B are far apart other stuff got in between there at the wrong height they face the wrong way and by the time the pipe snakes its way across the space all neatly dressed at right angles like they teach us in trade school it has about three to six times the friction that it would have had with a straight shot. The pipe fitters like this you're paying them by the hour they mark up the extra pipes and fittings they don't pay for your bigger pumping system or your bigger electric bill but for you as owner it's smarter to make pipes fat short and straight than skinny long and crooked. So low friction pipes make the blue pump toward the right so tiny that it looks like a decimal point error. Notice also it's raised up to meet the pipe rather than conventionally dipping the pipe down to the floor to meet the pump and then back up again. Likewise the 10 chillers that are normally in a neat row get staggered to eliminate the pipe elbows yet such rearrangement of designers metal furniture remains largely unnoticed and unpracticed because it's not a technology it's a design method and few people yet think of design as a scaling vector so this is not yet in any climate model government study industry forecast or standard engineering textbook. Now if a 10-pole pumping saving sounds incredible consider that your heart is now pumping blood about 10 times as efficiently as a typical industrial pumping system you know if you're roughly 100,000 kilometers of fractal blood vessels had the design and friction of standard industrial piping you would need a heart bigger than your body very inconvenient but in fact your third of a kilogram one and a half watt heart suffices because your blood follows nature's standard design laminar vortex blow that's a whole other conversation about the other main design revolution which is biomimicry but even without such tricks in the Oakland Museum our treasured colleague and longtime Stanford lecturer Peter Rumsey retrofitted an efficient piping layout that cut the pumping energy by three fourths with a two or three month payback and eliminated 15 pumps that will never again waste energy and maintenance costs. Repiping another pumping loop and adding variable frequency drive doubled the flow and saved 85 percent of the energy Peter just asked the pipe fitters to lay out the supply pipes as if they were drains. Here's how most big buildings pipe cooling tower water back to the condenser but if we lay it out instead as Peter does everything gets better the only obstacle is force of habit we should bend minds not pipes what do such savings mean for the pumps and fans that use half the torque of the motors that use over half the world's electricity well from the fuel burned at the power plant to the end use many successive losses compound so only a tenth of the energy in the fuel comes out the pipe as flow but now turn those compounding losses around backwards from right to left they become compounding savings every unit of flow or friction you save in the pipe saves 10 units of fuel cost emissions and global weirding at the power plant and as you go back upstream the components get smaller and cheaper reducing the total capital cost so always start your savings downstream start at the end with intent with purpose and then your design logic flows back upstream in the opposite direction to the energy flow now let's apply this logic to big old data centers two-thirds of the fuel fit into the power plant is lost in the plant and grid half the meter electricity is then lost in the cooling system and the under-derruptible power supplies together about half the total capital cost of the facility before getting to the servers half the server energy doesn't reach the chips because it's lost in inefficient usually very underloaded power supplies and then lots of fans to take heat that largely shouldn't be there off the motherboard into the room so we can do dumb things with it the next problem is severe underutilization of computing resources partly through inefficient virtualization so the resulting energy flow is about to vanish that's magnified before it does next comes bloatware running many unnecessary threads and processes and making simple tasks very complex because compute cycles were cheaper than programmers attention and somebody else paid for the energy downstream of all that you may even have an efficient business processes so in all a few hundred thousandths of the original fuel energy actually delivers customer value where should we start fixing this downstream first write elegantly terse code optimally compiled with the goal that every compute cycle is a needed and wanted one i had assumed that this would save an order of magnitude in compute cycles but recent tests suggest it's two orders of magnitude and the shift to mobile devices makes this valuable because efficient code stretches battery life then at least quadruple the server efficiency now even more and the servers will need far less cooling and power supply both of which can be done in smarter ways we'd even save half the utility losses by using fuel cell tri-generation cheaper than the uninterruptible power supply it displaces now multiply these savings from downstream to upstream and you get at least two orders of magnitude energy savings in the actual project with which we made this diagram in 2009 the client rejected most of our recommendations so we were only able to triple efficiency at the same capital cost but our partner eds said that had they all been adopted we'd have saved about 95 percent of the energy and half the capital cost the same design logic works for vehicles automobiles propulsion or powertrain loses four-fifths of the fuel energy before it even reaches the wheels but our savings should start at the wheels here's why just a fifth of the modern car's fuel energy reaches the wheels and moves the car of that attractive load nearly half heats the air that the car pushes aside most of the rest heats the tires and roads so only the last six percent or so of the fuel energy accelerates the car and then heats the brakes when you stop but 1920s to the master accelerating is the heavy steel car so just a 20th of that six percent or about 0.3 percent of the fuel energy ultimately moves the driver not very gratifying after one of the third centuries of devoted engineering effort moreover both acceleration and rolling resistance depend on mass which thus causes most of the attractive load now reducing losses in the powertrain is harder than reducing attractive load there's a lot more has been done on it and it's less rewarding because saving one unit of energy in the powertrain saves just one unit of fuel in the tank but saving one unit of energy at the wheels avoids four or five more units lost in getting that energy to the wheels leveraging five or six total units of energy saved at the tank thus we should first reduce attractive load then improve the powertrain which shrinks for the same acceleration saving more weight and also saving capital cost to help pay for the light weighting I began to think safe ultra lighting might become affordable when I met Dave Tagard at the Lockheed Martin Skunkworks he led the design of a 95 carbon advanced tactical fighter airframe that was one third lighter but two thirds cheaper that was too radical so Dave quit and 20 years ago I hired and lead the virtual design with two tier one auto engineering firms of something I'd invented nine years earlier an ultralight carbon fiber electrified hypercar like this four to six fold more efficient mid-size SUV in 2007 Toyota designed this 70% lighter one X they called it carbon fiber plug-in hybrid in 2013 this profitable quadruple efficiency carbon fiber electric car came to market more on that in a moment and even aluminum fleet vans like this plug-in hybrid we developed and road tested in 2009 could save a fifth of us light duty vehicle fuel profitably with no subsidy and carbon fiber autos could save more oil than Saudi Arabia lifts yet with radically simplified manufacturing they can be made at normal cost how do we know that well because BMW did it seven years ago with this carbon fiber electric car that I've driven for the past four years this I3 reportedly made money from the first unit off the assembly line Sandy Monroe the normally understated dean of automotive costing called it the most significant vehicle since the Model T and the most advanced vehicle on the planet validating our 1990s claims its carbon fiber is paid for by the batteries that its lightness saves and fewer batteries mean faster recharging its integrative design decompounds mass snowballs weight savings far more than usually assume its manufacturing is radically frugal it confirms the elimination of conventional body and paint shops and it's much better for workers and overlooked synergies between ultralight materials and electric traction quadruple its efficiency without compromise and with many driver advantages now there's there's a policy lesson here this I chart plots the marginal sticker price of autos on the vertical axis and their rated fuel efficiency on the horizontal axis so the official technology by technology analytic method underlying us and global efficiency policies yielded the these aqua national research council 2001 high and low supply curves of potential us light truck and car efficiency about 15 years ahead then their dark blue 2015 updates catching up with some previously rejected independent analyses but those forecasts were embarrassingly and rapidly overtaken by actual market platforms like hondas vx toyota's prius hybrid bmw's i3 electric vehicle by major automakers aluminum gasoline virtual design with rmi by portia engineering's high strength steel virtual design and our estimate for its hybrid variant my team adapted our 2004 base vehicles based on our 2000 suv design to yield typical light truck and car values and up in orange at the top you see an rmi spinoff's road tested aluminum commercial fleet fans earlier now these are these 15 empirical data points show the traditional component-based analysis misses the entire right hand two-thirds of the design space analyzing efficiency by the part not by the car makes efficiency look several fold too small and costly but integrative hold vehicle design can at least triple predicted fuel savings and at lower cost making cafe standards far more conservative and electrification cheaper and faster than was thought such magic requires as bacon said some new methods here are three first organized designers differently our hypercar suv's basic design used not a thousand plus engineers but seven all around the same table collectively responsible for dauntingly ambitious hold vehicle requirements each engineer was responsible also for one major vehicle system or function but for those we deliberately wrote no requirements because we didn't want him to make his problem into her problem we wanted to make the whole team design a highly integrated vehicle together two engineers were not comfortable without their very own requirements so we replaced them in the first week or two then it went great toyota asked us how we did it we told them an outcome there came there 70% lighter one x second to make a car half to two-thirds lighter you must go repeatedly around the design spiral or design cycle first you make the auto light and slippery to cut its tractor blow at least by half permitting smaller and more advanced powertrain and smaller lighter chassis components less suspension to hold it up less brakes to stop it at least more packaging space for comfort and more crush space for safety next you keep going around the spiral making components smaller as their structural load shrink because the less weight you have the less weight you need many big parts then disappear a good series hybrid can eliminate let's see transmission clutch flywheel drive shaft u joints axles differential starter alternator each of those saves even more mass and at first the special materials and powertrain and design may raise manufacturing costs but after more turns around the circle more nasty compounding you need so little carbon fiber and powertrain and manufacturing the advanced composite structures can get so much simpler that those two savings pay for the carbon fiber making the ultralighting roughly free as bmw proved third such novel design processes flow from revolutionary design mentality dave tagger learned that the scope works to design in the future not in the past so when the Soviet shot down francis gary powers youtube spy plane in 1960 kelly johnson did not say i'm going to design a slightly better you too he said in paraphrase i want to own the skies for decades so we'll design a blackbird i don't know how but we'll figure out they did it took about 13 months because johnson understood that such an airplane was impossible within the conventional design context he knew the design is like a rubber band you try if you try to stretch it too far from the conventional design space you encounter more and more resistance and eventually it breaks but if you jump to the new design space you aspire to you can stretch the rubber band back to fit technologies not yet ripe and then as they mature the rubber band relaxes to where you want to be better design and technology keep expanding opportunities even in heavy vehicles we've known for over a decade how to make trucks three or four times more efficient airplanes three to five times more efficient before electrification now tesla's semi truck 40 sleeker lighter weight to offset its batteries roughly triples efficiency among over a hundred aviation startups this long-range air taxi revealed in august both one sixth of a business jet's operating cost one eighth its fuel use ideal for electrification and set to blow up aviation's business models we could even make vehicle structures like airframes two orders of magnitude lighter still huh well mit's center for bits and atoms and nasa tested last year a 4.3 meter test structure 59 times less dense than a typical aircraft wing with the strength and toughness of bulk elastomers but the gossamer density of aerogel eliminating movable flight surfaces the whole shape adapts passively and continuously to real-time flight conditions like a bird's wing so thousands of such identical and isotropic molded polymer cells can be assembled by swarms of programmed robots or rat students whichever cheaper into an airplane of any shape opening revolutionary prospects for light weighting and aerodynamics and cost reduction this has been prototyped as a car for toyota as an airplane for airbus it can make a vacuum balloon needing no helium so light enough would evacuate it to be buoyant in the atmosphere without crushing and lift two dozen times the payload of a jumbo jet these lattice structures are made of common engineering plastics and if you instead you made them with carbon fiber you could improve performance in order of magnitude or two orders of magnitude with carbon nanotubes which you can now make biometrically so integrative design has immense potential and yet it's not normally recognized taught delivered expected or rewarded observing vehicles and factories and buildings in over 70 countries in 50 years i see the same design errors repeated everywhere because they're widespread they're in our textbooks and our classrooms so i'm hatching a plot for to put it in my impolitely the nonviolent overthrow of bad engineering teaching disintegrated design condemns our descendants to perpetual retrofits of inefficient stuff not a worthy legacy to help us be good ancestors i'm seeking fellow students teachers and practitioners to collaborate on making integrative design shift rapidly from rare to common i would like to help retread in practice design professionals and the trades people like pipe fitters sheet metal workers mechanical contractors who informally design many systems to help improve design software to allow and coach integrative design to find iconic CEOs to apply this work in their firms and spread the word to their peers as jack welch did in six sigma so in a spring term seminar in the summer term practicum we'll test about 14 known scaling vectors seek more see what works and start scaling now us electric end use efficiency can quadruple by 2050 at an average cost a tenth of retail price even without much integrative design or more with it integrative design can also help us use electricity timely by flexible loads flexible watts such demand response can take many forms it is rapidly becoming available and attractive even to small and unsophisticated customers it's about a three-fold bigger resource than had been thought it's an important way therefore to solve photovoltaics challenge of fading at the end of the day just as people get home and turn stuff on requiring other resources to ramp up steeply as in these evolving california loan profiles creating the so-called duck curve in texas they call it the dead armadillo curve but that problem is probably fixable at a profit you see in the 2050 texas grid that steep ramp towards the right imagenta disappears if we combine electric vehicles home plug loads residential commercial domestic hot water plus heating and cooling controls and together these can conveniently and inconspicuously cut the 2050 summer daily loan range nearly in half save a fourth of non-renewable capacity make renewable energy a third more valuable and pay back in about five months that granular demand response portfolio adding up to the red curve plus other demand side solutions can create system scale impacts more efficient buildings like california's make this easier helping rebalance your grid sooner and demand response is just one of nine carbon free grid flexibility resources that a whole system strategy can compete and combine i hope these examples will encourage you to rethink why us and use efficiency is only about a seventh what it could be how better design and beginner's mind can help close that gap and how we can scale up to make integrative design as common as grass then the global energy transformation can move at the pace and the cost of design and software not of infrastructure and can be not constrained by the inertia of incumbents but sped by the ambition of insurgents like many of you thank you all for your good work and your kind attention thank you amary as always that was a tour de force and a brilliant quick introduction to radical design thinking and it's probably just what we need at this point in time as you well know at this point i'd like to ask dr homes homo to join amary for a fireside chat and question session homes is the founder of clean energy works it is devoted a decade of work at the intersection of equity and inclusion with policy and technology deployment and is slowly catching up to amary there's only one four international awards for breakthrough climate solutions including work endorsed by the global innovation lab for climate finance that i can't resist reporting also that homes is a 2004 illustrious alumni of the emet interdisciplinary program and environmental resources here in stanford and except for a kind of dubious nefarious dissertation advisor she's done quite well with that i believe she was the first person admitted to the e i for a phd program who actually graduated from it so good match to follow up now with some of amary's ideas and comments it's probably the only person i know who can actually keep up with amary their thoughts can keep up with amary's moderate so homes take it away professor wine thank you former assistant secretary of energy andy karsner has just unexpectedly dropped in and sat down next to me all right we like that is he heading back to washington everybody wants that first of all thank you thank you so much and i i do agree with your phrasing tour de force um even though we had a late start on the seminar i do want to acknowledge that amary made up time uh with his pacing and that gives us a chance to address some of the questions that have come in please be active and engaged in the q and a box already i see nearly a dozen questions that have come in from the participants and at the top of the hour there'll be a students only section so please uh if you're a student and qualified to stay with us for that we'll have more time then i want to acknowledge that amary and stanford now have in this academic year an uncommon opportunity for engagement we have in the fall quarter the course applied hope whole systems thinking in for energy solutions it's being taught now in winter quarter a course on extreme energy efficiency that has a more practitioners approach to these design methods and then i'd like to invite you amary to speak to us about how you see these methods and practices being skillfully adopted into the students from the five different schools that are already enrolled in your courses now uh so that stanford itself becomes part of the process of teaching sound engineering for and with integrative design methods well that's that's why i'm so delighted to be returning to stanford and uh doing these courses in seminar especially with with you uh thank you for your brilliant edits by the way on the deck people just saw uh and uh i i think as we progress through the extreme energy efficiency your uh uh course in winter term which does a deep dive into how you actually practice uh and implement energy efficiency at this level uh and into the uh spring term work on what are the scaling vectors uh and diving into each of those and then in the summer practical seeking to actually start testing them i i think we will find out a lot better what needs to be done by whom where the leverage points are and uh i i can't wait to to get stanford students faculty everybody that wants to play engaged in that i'm a b lovin such stanford dot edu welcome aboard this this could be quite an adventure well no doubt i'd like to invite you to speak not only to the teaching that you're doing at stanford which is the extraordinary opportunity i mentioned earlier but the scaling vectors for integrative design that can take the design thinking it's not uncommon for me to see q and a like some that we see here more than a dozen questions now sort of expressing uh even though this talk was advertised as uh going to be presenting the the astonishing opportunities for deeper and cheaper energy efficiency and profitable climate protection we knew that that was going to be part of your talk but it seems to have escaped the mainstream thus far what do you see as the vectors for scaling integrative design and how might some of those vectors be explored through the research that remains ahead well i'll give you a very simple example that actually would speak to one of the great strengths of the stanford community it the leading vendor of design software computer design software uh has i believe not yet fixed it to enable non-orthogonal pipe layout like the diagonals you saw the diagram you saw was actually not out of a cad program it was hand drawn using a drawing program because the cad programs assume neat right angles because they're easy to draw huh we're not drawing them anymore that's the whole point so that ought to be a toggleable feature you can actually get it i believe with third party add-ins but i think a little further talk with that bender and its competitors if necessary uh should get this fixed pretty quickly and then of course it would be wise to build integrative design coaching into the software to say you know to display real-time things like the uh the tons of pooling required for this building and the associated investment and then the program would say to you have you thought about super windows and tuning them to different elevations and passive latent heat exchangers and all this other cool stuff and here's what each of them would do for you it's about time our software did that for us and uh i i think if we get the right tools the task gets a lot easier then of course we need to also to work with the uh the plumbers the sheet metal workers the the great trades that don't have this yet in their excellent education programs and should and with leading companies i was just talking to one of the top chemical companies in the world they are really really good at saving heat but like most chemical companies they don't pay much attention to pumps and motors and that stuff because that's that design is delegated to junior engineers uh who basically copy the old drawings it's called infectious repetitis and they were quite astounded by what you can do with pipe layout so we're looking for an opportunity to experiment with the plant they're moving and do before and after measurements that could drive uh cultural and process change in that company and i hope the industry terrific i'm i'm very pleased and privileged to be involved in helping teach the classes that you lead as an adjunct professor with the civil and environmental engineering department now i can see firsthand how the students enrolled at stanford are riveted and challenged by the rearrangement of mental furniture that you've offered everyone who's with us today in the questions and answers box that's coming in i can see also a hunger for this type of engagement for mid-career professionals people who are in business schools and even corporate executives who may have previously been boutique clients for uh you know the institute's business practice but now with the great unleashing of integrative design as a discipline and a methodology folks are interested in knowing how you see the possibility for engagement and possibly an opportunity for them to engage you in the expansion of that landscape of practicing radical energy efficiency gains through integrative design well i think the opportunities are almost unlimited and we're at an early stage of defining what and where they are but the combination of of technical depth breadth and entrepreneurship at stanford i think is a wonderful ecosystem to inject this into and i don't know where it's going to lead but i can't wait to find out i'm sure i'm gonna learn a lot too professor why we're at 50 minutes past the hour and i'm obliged to respect the time boundaries on our seminar with two caveats one is that both emory and i will be on this line we're staying on this line and we'll be here with the students chat that starts at the top of the hour and in the interim 10 minutes we are happy to continue to engage all the 20 or so people who still have unanswered questions in the chat box we are not deterred please continue to enter your ideas and your inquiries because with your name especially with your full name we may be able to follow up with you to engage directly on your line of inquiry two things on my side you can use up most of the 10 minutes we do that all the time particularly when we get a late start two is we will have a transcript of the chat box that we can send you to you immediately after yeah thanks because i'd like to respond to anybody we don't get to sure absolutely i'm sure i can read the as homes have said the passion and intensity behind a lot of the questions i'm very glad to hear you're willing to do that so homes do you want to go a couple more rounds anyway just so we don't have totally unsatisfied peak demand we don't want any depthers i'll have i'll happily do that we're adding more questions faster we can dispatch with them but that's the point this energy seminar is giving the stanford community an open opportunity to engage an adjunct professor that we haven't had the privilege of hosting on campus since 2007 and for the adjunct professor role that emory has now it's such an asset and a resource we want to continue to take today's energy and and propel it forward i'm going to choose tom cavitt's question out of the q&a and and here's why tom is asking can you help us californians but i'm going to say it's not limited to california apply integrative design to allow us to electrify our homes and cars without having to indulge the perceived necessity to upsize our common existing 100 amp or 24 kilowatt home electrical panels everywhere we go uh and i think that that may lead into a related question of how californians imagine a modern grid that can provide robust and resilient performance even during a decade of climate disruption forecast by the use of public safety power shutoffs throughout especially the wooded areas of the state a man know this is something you've given some thought what would you have to say for tom yeah uh well let me give a quick example on on the increase of home electric capacity i have a swiss stove across the kitchen here uh that california energy commission recently measured and found it was two and a half to four times more efficient than an induction cooktop uh and i think it's superior in all other respects uh it um that and and it has poor resistive hubs but special pots and there's there's some magic in very sophisticatedly simple design of the pots which are normally neglected the hubs the power electronics the software the sensors it's a system uh and each hub only runs by itself not with more than one so the load is very low and if you combine that with a super efficient oven uh you could run the whole thing on a standard 30 amp 117 volt circuit therefore if you were converting a gas house a gas cooking water heating space heating to efficient all electric you wouldn't need to upgrade to 240 volt socket and you could save a lot of money that way uh so i'm hoping california authorities will pursue that new york's also very interested uh but this of course gets right to your your second question i have not had a power failure in this house for over 25 years with one exception when a cell in the battery failed uh and the reason is that my solar system is set up to work with or without the grid that's called a resilient hookup we had to do a workaround with two sets of inverters but now there's a uh internet or actually a national industry consensus standard iEEE 1547 and that lets you let you do the same thing with a single inverter any modern inverter typically has that capability if your utility allows you to activate it which many do not and the standard keeps it safe for the line workers uh so if the grid fails the inverter will isolate from the grid keep on running your loads without interruption and if you have some batteries it'll do so at night as well and then uh in the morning it'll start recharging the battery again i have 65 kilowatt hours of storage and that's enough for indefinite autonomy uh everybody should be like that as we build these distributed energy systems we should build resilience from the bottom up it should be the default design not something you have to argue with your utility about and conduct extensive engineering studies to justify uh and that and also we should do the same thing at things like gas stations the recovery from super storms is stretched out by a week or two when the gas stations can't pump fuel for first responders or gensets or anybody uh because they rely on the grid and because their submerged pump is hardwired to the point of sale terminal and mixed in with all the other convenience store wiring but for i would guess around ten thousand dollars uh you could untangle the wiring and put in just for the pumps uh a small solar and battery rig so you wouldn't have this unnecessary and stupid coupling uh a couple vulnerability between the electric and the liquid fuel systems and then we'd have much faster recoveries but i think on the fire clearly where we need to be headed and where the market will take us if allowed to is diverse distributed renewable resiliently hooked up electric supplies uh and not relying on frail wire strung through the woods that is the design challenge of our time right now and i think it's possible right i want to note that i'm seeing in the chat box we're now over 30 30 in korea some have been answered some enough i want to acknowledge this there is a refrain in our q and a strain to the some people are not able to see all of the questions coming through i won't be able to solve that in the next 90 seconds i will commit that we will try to respond to everyone that we receive here and i'm seeing a strong concurrence across people who are asking how can we make the insights of today's address available to people who are beyond the palm trees so to speak and even beyond their undergraduate careers mid-career professionals folks who are in multiple disciplines uh and even multiple different educational institutes i take that very seriously and i don't want and want to invite um as many people who can take courses at stanford to think about participating in the winter quarter course where probably two thirds of the questions i see now will be actually part of this the source of study um and also to consider what we might be able to do through stanford's online courses and even those that flow through to edx which is a broad platform with worldwide access uh and encouragement and engagement with us on that project is something that's most welcome now for a silicon valley audience i i want to leave you uh with a a question that comes from someone who says i'm an electrical engineer here how can we leverage the low cost low power consumption silicon valley technology to embed computing control and machine intelligence into any and all aspects of the energy pipeline from the power plant to homes this is luke sameron the reason why i chose this of all of the questions is i think it actually captures the expanse of intellect and expertise in the stanford community just in thinking about the intersection between hardware and software and systems from end to end and some other questioners have even talked about the integration and intersection between human systems and culture change systems along with technology systems so amary with the dimensions of the craft of integrative design being the landscape in which it applies laid bare how would you advise luke on how we can leverage the technologies from end to end wow well i would go for it i would do efficiency first that makes everything a lot easier you know amal facas group at berkeley lab has a 27 watt household uh that's very cheap half normal cost to run on low voltage dc and uh you can actually do that without an inverter if everything is 2448 volts dc to start with the controls get really interesting but you know you may not need them everywhere because there may not be much load left to control if you really do efficiency right i'm thinking for example of darpa's power starved electronics work which let frownhofer a couple of years ago make a cell phone that has the never needs recharging not because it's solar but because it's powered by the energy in your voice when you talk to it wow wow when you get to that level of efficiency in a lot of functions everything changes of course at the other extreme you have heavy loads aluminum smelters and the like and those runoff big hydro and that's more like the traditional grid and in between there's everything else but i think the supply is getting rapidly distributed we can now do two to an half cent a kilowatt hour photovoltaics uh integratively designed without subsidy by the way to feed directly into your distribution system without using transmission well 98 99 of power failures originate in the grid so central stations can never be resilient because they depend on the grid to get the power to you and therefore the more distributed we get the more interesting it is to make flexible loads and share power locally and right not just mini grids but micro grids nana grids pika grids uh your own laptop has all of this stuff it has power supply power use power management storage all in one place and i expect before long it'll be solar powered too from the light in the room uh so your your your kind of expertise is essential i would just implore you to be extremely careful to deploy it securely you don't want all these devices to turn into a bot army uh and uh i think a lot of internet connected devices are being put out there with little or no attention to the security of the whole society we need to fix that before it gets completely away from us thank you with that said i think we have to shut shut down now so sincere thanks to amry and homes for your passion enthusiasm and many deep insights into design as our superpower in affecting the major energy sin system transitions we so desperately need thanks once again and i'm sure the students are excited to talk to you in the post the post the uh post game uh locker room which i just received an invitation to sign into a different web address correct yeah that's it yes sir yeah that's that's the drill yeah just a couple of and okay thanks again it was wonderful to be continued thanks everybody indeed till we meet again