 I think by your being here and all of us, we understand that buildings are important and we don't take them for granted. But I think a lot of people do and we want to help change that. Buildings are so much a part of our lives, obviously. Some say we spend, EPA actually says we spend about 90% of our time in buildings. They use 40% of our energy use or we use 40% of the energy use by operating buildings. That's just building operation, that's not for the materials. And they affect so much of our lives, health, comfort. And so we have a wonderful panel today and I'm so grateful for all of them being here to talk about the solutions. And the Building Technologies Office in the U.S. Department of Energy is really our greatest resource for researching, developing building technologies and sort of how to put them together and helping builders and designers use best practices and teach them how to use some of the new advanced materials. Because buildings are more complicated than a very complicated 3D puzzle. And so it's a critical, critical part of our economy, the building sector. So thank you again for being here. My name is Ellen Vaughn and I focus on buildings for the Environmental and Energy Study Institute. So I'm delighted to introduce our panel and I want to get started right on that. Our first speaker is Roland Risser. And Mr. Risser is the Director of the Building Technologies Office in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the Department of Energy, DOE. And he directs the work to help create a self-sustaining market for building energy efficiency. I think that's a very critical statement because buildings are, because this is a huge part of our economy. BTO is focused on achieving a 50% reduction on energy use in buildings by optimizing all of those energy-saving opportunities. Prior to DOE, Roland served as the Director of Customer Energy Efficiency for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, PG&E in California, where he directed its energy efficiency and demand response programs. And he managed building and appliance codes and standards work. And he did a lot of things at PG&E that I probably won't get into them all. He holds a Bachelor of Science from the University of California at Irvine, a Master of Science from Cal Poly State University, and is a graduate of the Haas School of Business Executive Program at UC Berkeley. So please help me welcome Roland Risser. Thank you. Can you hear me? So I'm going to click in here. Hopefully this works. Where am I going? Now maybe it'll work. Okay, so I want to start out with the ERE mission for the part of DOE, and you can see the mission up on this slide. I think one of the things that, on the bottom of this slide, that's important to understand is we are looking at how to also break down the barriers to the market entry. And you'll hear as we talk about this particular topic area that they are quite immense in the building sector. Ellen mentioned the goal. 50% goal is a very big goal. We actually believe it is achievable. I set this goal in 2010 when I first started on the program. It was based upon an analytical framework of the opportunity in this space. Now I have to point out it was based upon a budget, which was significantly larger than I have today. And so I've taken out the date at which I will achieve this goal, because of course it depends on how you drive forward on all of the technology solutions you're trying to do. The goal is still there and we're still working toward it. Let me say one more thing about this. Buildings. We're talking about residential buildings. We're talking about commercial buildings. We're talking about new construction. We're talking about retrofits. We're talking about five climate zones. We're talking about construction types that are masonry, wood, metal frame, etc. We're talking about commercial building type sectors like retail, wholesale, religious service buildings, hospitals. So you understand the diversity of government buildings. You understand the diversity of the types of buildings you have to deal with. And now let's layer on the technologies. We're looking at electric and gas technologies. We're looking at technologies for HVAC, for lighting, for envelope. And then we're looking at things like data centers and we're looking at food service. So all that is a whole lot of technologies. If I was working on solar, I'd have one or two technologies and all the buildings are the same as far as the technology. All you just have is different attachments. So I'm just trying to make sure you appreciate the diversity of what's required to be successful. Okay, I've created a little, I call it an ecosystem for BTO, which is how do the pieces fit together? You innovate on the technology front. You figure out how to get into the market at speed and scale. And when you do so, you have an opportunity to create minimum performance standards for cost-effective solutions. I think that's really important to understand. It has to be cost-effective. Budgets. If you go back to 2012, it was 2204, 178, 172, bad trend. You can see the current proposal. We all, none of us know what budgets are going to be. But our budget proposal is based upon this set of numbers. And you'll, I can break it down for you. There's a slide later on, but there's a plus-up in the emerging technologies, residential, and on the code side. So we'll hear about those in a minute. Now, this slide talks about funding opportunities. One of the things I've been really trying to push is how do I get the market to bring better ideas in that I can advance, often using laboratory expertise to get it done faster and using some of their particular expertise and testing, and then get it back into the market. I'm going to talk about these in more detail, but I'm giving you an overview of what the areas are. So now let's drive the innovation side. So for 2016, the topics on the left are the topics of one of our funding opportunities. Now you might say, wait a minute, you mentioned a whole bunch of other topics. What about those? The way I've done it is I've broken it into three chunks, and every year I do one of those groups, and then the next year I do the next group, and the third year I do the next group, and then by the fourth year I'm back to the first group, and that allows me to fund for multiple years of research and then keep all of the technology areas moving. Okay, I want to give you a couple examples. What worked? Okay, it's not about, here's what we're going to do. Here's what we did. So this is a technology, it's refrigeration. Refrigeration is on 24-7, 365 days a year. It's like in grocery stores. You don't want to go and have it heat up in the night when you're not there. It's cooling all the time. We've got a technology we help develop with this company and Oak Ridge that is 25% more efficient than anything else on the market, and 75%, 78% fewer greenhouse gas emissions. They're now selling these into the market. It was just finished in 2014, so that's pretty quick. They're getting them back into the market. Dow, another company, we work with them on sprayable sealant. The problem with sealants is they can put some on, or you cock them on, or you put some sort of material on, and there's often a gap. So this was a way to get at places where they're really hard to seal. It's a much better sealant. We just finished this in 2014, and now we're trying to, again, move that into the market, showing the opportunity for lower cost, lower risk options for builders. Okay, now this one. These are two big, high opportunity areas. The top one is non-vapor compression. You probably may or may not know what that is, but most refrigeration today uses a compressor to compress a cooling fluid that compresses it down, and then it relieves the pressure, and it's a cooling cycle that it goes through for like your refrigerator or your air conditioner. So what about a cooling solution that never uses a compressor and doesn't have any of the global warming potential cooling fluids that are in your refrigerator or your air conditioner? You know that if that gets out into the atmosphere, that's a big problem for global warming. Well, we have done some work on some of these. We've got two solutions that are currently being built for sale. We've proven them out. Two major companies, one of them GE, and they are really, really interesting. So what we want to do is go out after more of this. We'd like to see U.S. competitiveness in this particular area, because we believe this is the future. It's going to change the design of your refrigerator. Think about a refrigerator you can't hear. Think about an air conditioner you can't hear. I know mine drives me crazy. It's outside the family room window. But that's where we think this is heading and we like to make some direct investments in that space. The second one has to do with the building envelope. Biggest challenge for buildings is it either keeps out what you want in or keeps in what you want out. So how can you create a membrane or an envelope that allows you to get rid of the things you don't want and let in the things you want? A perfect example is you want heat in the winter and you don't want it in the summer. So there's some solutions in that space. We'd like to invest in more of those. Lighting. Lighting is a huge opportunity for us. I use this example because our lighting program has had consistent funding and we've consistently driven efficiency in this space. I like to say there's a little bit of Dewey investment in almost every major product, lighting product, LED product on the market. If you go back to FY13, our goal was 111 lumens per dollar. We hit 115, I'm sorry, in 13. In 14 it was 128, we hit 150. Now in 15 we're trying to hit 160. So we're getting these goals. If you get more light for the same amount of money, it's more efficient. And these are better quality light as well. So let's look at what that did. So deployment, if you look over the last six years or so, you can see we've gone from about less than 400,000 LEDs to 34 million LEDs. And that's, you can see the slope of the price coming down and the slope of the sales going up. The bad news is we're only at 4%. We're only at 4% of the market. But look at what top line there is the smartphone. Smartphone is one of the fastest market evolution technologies ever. It's at 7%. LEDs is at 4%. That is pretty darn good. Look at CFLs. It's less than 0.1% over six years. That shows you what LEDs are doing. But if we're at 4% of the market, think of what opportunities we have for huge savings going forward if we can get solutions at the right price in more applications. Okay, now let's go on. Our solid-state lighting proposal for 16 is 21 million in the solid-state lighting program. We actually are going to spend closer to 26 million on solid-state lighting. If you look at the bottom, the 4.8 difference, what we did is we said, why should we spend money in the solid-state lighting technology program on deployment when we have a mechanism in the deployment program to take those technologies and move them into the market? In a minute, I'll show you how successful that was. Accelerate to scale. So here's the example. So we took solid-state lighting and we said, you know what, this technology is pretty good for certain applications. Parking lots is a perfect example. We put together a set of specifications, technical specifications for parking lot lights with those companies with millions of square feet of parking lots. They agreed to the spec. We went to the manufacturers and they said, this is what we want to buy. Guess what? If the manufacturers have a single spec, their costs are lower. Their prices are lower. Prices went down. They started buying volume. Prices went down again. They went into greater volumes. We've sold 480 million square feet of parking lot lighting on our goal to be at 500 million by March. I think we're going to get there. It's 10 million annual savings. You can see how, because we were using an existing deployment structure, this is how government can help markets really move at scale. Next technology is successful is modeling. So modeling, if you go back 10 years, you're going to say who uses our DOH2 or in that case Energy Plus? Universities and national apps. And I said, where's the market? Why isn't the market using it? Well, they said it's slow. It's clunky. It's not very user friendly. And by the way, it's written in Fortran. I did my master's thesis in Fortran. That is like ancient. And we had to pay all these Fortran programmers to do the updates. That's silly. We've converted it to C++. We've sped up the processing. We've put in a user interface that's easy for anyone to use. We now have 20,000 users of these models. Train, Carrier, Autodesk, it's built into their solution sets. I have NR Canada who now is using it instead of what they were using before because they said yours is better. We'd like to use your solution. So this example of how you transform the market. Next one is small and medium commercial building. The hardest market to go after because you've got a dry cleaners. You've got a hairdresser. You have a nail salon. They're just a plethora of different businesses. There's no energy manager there. The owner is the salesperson, the marketing person, and the energy manager. So you've got to make it really simple for them. You've got to make it work easily. So we've got a focused effort on trying to get at solutions that are scalable in this space, and that's one of the foes we have here. Now the one thing I would say is, you might say how do you do that or what would that look like? We funded one last year. It's with equal partners from Florida. They basically are designing prepackaged retrofit solutions for specific markets in specific climate zones for specific store types. And that way you can just scale it across all of those store types. That's the kind of solution that works for them because if you walk in and try to do something custom, they can't afford to listen to you or buy it. Okay, next is a home project. These are just examples. This is attic insulation that came out of the Building America program. We have 42 really cool innovations. This is one of them. And you might say, who cares about attic insulation? The HUD code, the R factor is 22. That's the insulation factor. If you look at Energy Star Homes, it's 30 to 38. This delivered 44 to 54. It's a simple solution that they came up with. Now they just have to scale it, but it works very well. Next is our Sorbillian America FOA for this next round. What we did is we were funding maybe 30 or 40 different technologies out of this program in the past. We focused on three big wins. You can't move 34 things. Find three big wins. So the big wins are right here listed on there. If we can solve those for different building types and climate zones, you have made a huge inroad for both new construction and residential retrofit area. And I think Jay is going to tell us if he agrees with that in a minute. Okay, here's one of the challenges I had with our residential program. We focused on whole house retrofits. Okay, that's the most cost-effective thing you can do is to retrofit your entire home. How many people do that? Or shall I say, how many people will do it twice? It's not a fun thing if you've ever done it. Very few people can afford to do that home all at once. So what they do is they go in and they put in new windows and new insulation, and then when they get a little more money, they go in and they put a new HVAC system, and then when they get a little more money they have to structure our program to align with how people buy this service and deliver the service. So we're completely changing our thinking. We're calling it staged upgrades, and we have a plan on how to get into the market at scale in this area. Okay, the last part of our program is our standards program. This is in statute. There's a climate action plan goal that you can't get there without this program. It's how we're delivering on the administration's goal. And by the way, it's legally required when we didn't do this some time ago. We got taken to court and told, you must do it. We get taken to court when we do it as well, but it's just the way of the business. Okay, next slide is, okay, this mentions the climate action plan goal of three billion metric tons. We're now at 2.2. The number I like is the $480 billion. I'm about money. I want to save people money. That's what's driving me. Of course, I want the climate protection to come with it, but I want to do it at a lower cost to the U.S. consumer. This next slide has to do with codes. The main point here is, if I go out and I say, if you, Arizona, or you, Louisiana, want to get higher compliance with your commercial building codes, I have no way to tell them what it's worth, what they can do, and what savings they can get. I have no way to tell them that. There's nothing quantitative out there anywhere to do that. I've started on the residential side. I'm on a three-year plan to do it. The funding is in place. We're doing it in seven states right now on the residential side. I'm going to do the same thing on the commercial side. So if someone wants to make an investment, let's say it's a utility incentive program, they know if they do X, they can get this kind of benefit. And there's a quantifiable methodology that they will be able to follow. So that's the purpose of that follow-up. This shows an example of that ecosystem I told you. I mentioned lighting in our research there. That rolled into that lighting campaign where we have almost 500 million square feet installed, which now has promoted an ASHRAE 90.1, which is the commercial code, code update, which again would be a voluntary option that people can do in order to meet that code. This shows how that cycle really works. Okay, smart buildings. This is a different topic, one that I think is growing in interest across the country and it's the last thing I'm going to mention. What am I talking about here? Well, if you look at a building, it has embedded infrastructure that is only used for the thing it was bought for and not for other things it might do. In a few cases, utilities have demand response programs where they shut something down and give a benefit back to the consumer. There's a huge amount of benefit in that equipment that is not being realized. Part of the reasons it's not being realized is there's no way to quantify it in a standardized way. We're changing that. So what are we doing? One, we're creating a characterization framework for how you would characterize a piece of equipment for the value proposition you can provide back to the utility or to another building. To standardize it, anybody who builds a piece of equipment or sells a piece of equipment or buys a piece of equipment knows what they're buying. That yellow label you see on your refrigerator or on your dishwasher, that's based upon DOE data that the FTC puts on that equipment. I'm just thinking of a similar way where you can characterize that equipment and know what it can do for you. That allows someone to make a choice. I could buy this piece of equipment and someone who's marketing to them can say, one, with better controls on it, you can actually sell back to the utility. This is their tariff scheme and you can make an extra $1,000 a year credit on your bill. Now why would the utility do that? The utility likes it because they have a big problem. Their big problem is they have to manage the peak on the system and they have another problem which is growing amount of intermittent renewable generation. Those create costs to the utility. They've proven that if you can use equipment already in place in your building and you have the right sensors and controls, you can reduce the cost to utility and reduce the cost to the consumer. That's what we're after and that's what we're trying to do. It's primarily created an interoperability platform. I can give you examples of where we've done that. We've got multiple commercial enterprises now working with us on this and it's in place in about seven utilities in pilots in the Pacific Northwest. The last slide is just the summary budget slide for EERE. You can see our summary numbers on there and thank you very much. Thank you so much for that great overview and each one of those items could probably, we could go on and on, right? I would love to do that actually but that was terrific to see all those important programs and it really is so much for the budget. It's a bargain, right? Thank you again. With that overview of the BTO program, the different programs under it and looking at the budget, the FY16 budget, we're now going to move to Jay Murdock with Owens Corning who will provide an industry perspective and in this case working with DOE and helping the building industry make better buildings. Jay is director of government relations, government and public affairs, sorry, for Owens Corning. After attending architecture school, he worked in commercial construction and was a residential builder and remodeler so he's been there. He knows the real deal. He also worked for the Building Owners and Managers Association, the Federal U.S. Access Board and the National Association of Home Builders on the Americans with Disabilities Act, Fair Housing, Building Codes and Policy and I am so glad Jay could join us today. Please help me welcome Jay Murdock. Thank you. I don't have any slides for my presentation. I just want to try to paint a picture and I'm going to focus mostly on residential, new construction. I think what I touch here on residential side correlates to the commercial sector as well. I am a recovering home builder. I had a nice head of air before I went to the home building and one thing that I come back to to tell someone about is that when you go into residential remodeling you need a course on marriage counseling because you are in awkward situations and you've got to navigate your mind field. That also applies to any work that you're holding that these guys deal with every day. It's varied interests, varied relationships, varied levels of emotion in fact that you're dealing with. So I want to try to paint a picture around what my friends in the home building industry face all the time and that has to do with I want to paint a picture of what they deal with so you can imagine a home builder creating a little pie chart in the head around what they have to do to get this building out. They have to acquire the land to find financing for that and to get approvals from state and local governments. They have to come up with a design that will actually appeal to the buyer two years in advance. They have labor issues and they have design issues. So in that pie chart of priorities for the builder monetized, building codes in a very thin little line in that whole pie chart. Not to diminish the value building codes for the deal of life safety and fire safety. But even within that thin line, the energy code has kind of been working in that whole scheme. We're all pretty much probably advocates for energy efficiency here at SMI, so I don't want to send a long message out, but I need to keep in context what's in the lens of which for the home builder. So that's the 820 goal for the home builder. So we had a great recession and really decided the home builder was a little bit earlier 2006, 2007 the wheel started falling off of a new instruction housing line. What happens in that situation is that all the intellectual capital with smarts that had grown organically in a home builder's business went away because you had to cut people or you went out of business. So that the intellectual capital that you had grown up over the 2000s and 1990s basically went away. So that was just the home builder and the supervisor on the field. That applies to all their trades. That framing contractor I had to basically get out of my net when I was taking my trim car for purpose for all the mistakes that my foundation guy did wrong and my framing contractor did wrong. So in that whole situation for the framing contractor a good framing contractor will do know how to do fire blocking and draft stockings that's been in the clothes forever. That's going to do things like reduce air flow through the house. Your plumbers and I mean some of them are built to your friends and my HVAC contractors would come through the house with their saws out and blow huge holes through my rafters and everything like that. Then I would then have to fill to make sure that there was no air flow in the house. So all that that capital of smart people left the marketplace and the builder kind of worked out in say 2010 starting to come back while that break recession was happening we had a couple things going on with the codes, not just the energy code we had an increase in the level of stringency in the codes starting from the 2006 code for an early going to the 2009 edition of the ICC codes 2012 and 2015 now when I was building houses this is the model energy code I used an earlier version of the one to say what and this was the cable one this is the residential code that I used to build my houses and this is the energy code that I used to file these fit in the glove department of my pickup truck so now today we have the 2015 International Residential Code compared to the cable one this is a post this is a far superior code to this other code but you can see a level of complexity that whole builder's got to deal with and remember that fact chart where Billy was fit in the scheme of priorities and this is the 2015 actually I'm not I just need to create awareness about what the builder fits so they woke up in 2010 had lost other talent and had it designed for the energy efficient and they've got these new colors and they're trying to rebuild their whole intellectual cabinet also their old plans that they had in the drawer for a couple of years that they pulled out of the drawer and put it also up in their old specifications and try to go ahead and build the subdivision now that they've collected for a couple of years now they have to redesign all their plans to figure out not only for energy but sprinklers so for the context for the hope that they're backpedaling it feels a little bit overwhelmed as they're coming out from this very recession so there's a tie in here both to the Building America program which is a huge huge resource for all of us and also the code compliance effort that Billy's taking that I prefer to call it Code Education and Awareness type of program we'll get to those things later I need to give you that picture the filters were backpedaling a little bit feeling overwhelmed and they're looking around looking for someone to help provide the resource to them the Building America program I served on some of the period you committed many years ago where the Building America partners would come up with great ideas on how to do an unvented act not a very sexy cool shiny cool thing to do and it doesn't grab people's attention on solar where some of these cool presentations but they're critically how to do appropriately designed HVAC equipment to unvented addicts and crawl spaces designed wall systems that are forgiving and kind of greedy that are smart wall systems that's all important for them so for the home builder the Building America program is a third party trusted by here's why I'm a building product manufacturer I probably have some peers in the room who are fully bothered with their manufacturers and watching that video I'm again the property home builder a manufacturer came to me and said hey I've got this new product it's really great you should use it in your home builders have two things in their head that are running times that are cost-popular and a risk calculator what's my risk so I as a manufacturer sometimes run into that subconscious thinking of the home builder and sometimes there's not a lot of trust because maybe they've been had an incredible situation in the fire technology I looked at the Building America program selfishly as I could bring this third party trusted advisor in and they can be the facilitator in the home builder and try to desegregate this technology or system or multiple technologies how to make all these things work together in a house and make sure there's no defects or issues that's how why I'm here so we had this offer between we built this very very risk-averse and kind of had that I don't trust so many product manufacturers also what the Building America program does is so what I would have some time with my building houses some of them come by and drop a piece of literature off of me and say hey this is how you do it and they were gone and I didn't find them again so what the Building America team did was they'll take that literature and actually hold hands with the home builder not only their framers and all their different trades and walk their trades to how to integrate this system into the building products so it forced the product manufacturer to step back and look at the product that seems appropriate look at their installation requirements and it forced that building product manufacturer to rethink their practices take a little bit of the risk and anxiety of moving from their practice that their father did and their grandfather did and move to something different so move on the ground is really for having a webinar and having a literature on the website doesn't cut it you have to have moves on the ground also we also have in that organically that happens in a whole process unintended consequences is that the Building America team say you know this is how you might want to frame your wall this is how you might want to do water so these other hands will be better because they come out of the Building America program and actually for larger builders there's fear and movement from one spec to another so once they find to the specification or practice then they can bring it into the mainstream into their portfolio and make sure that it's a good fit for the certain clients so in terms of scaling we really need to get the scale so it does look good putting the technology in a few little case study on the website and two builders you've got to find a way for multiple builders to use and all the designs really have to be planet zones specific applications that's a whole lot of challenges so that's the Building America team and the safety net kind of risk mitigation for what I see in Building America I'm going to switch now to a kind of full compliance effort that I think is kind of heroic that the DOE is going in that direction because many years ago I used to look at things like to build a practice, get the building practice paid up from any free research center I would then analyze what product I was shipping into a marketplace by channel, by web marketplace and that's called skew analysis and I can see that building practice is here code might be here and I'm just shipping it a product into the marketplace I probably shouldn't be shipping it into the marketplace which tells me I have an opportunity to education awareness to the marketplace to educate builders what kind of product they should be using coincidentally I ran into my friends at that age of age, the industry and the windmill industry and we had the same mission not to say that builders are intentionally and willingly I can still go back to that picture I talked about earlier on the scheme of things that are on your list poses a minor issue but in most part all houses are generally very, very safe and well built today it's a good thing to go into the context of our existing housing staff today's houses are really good superiors superior to the house I live in right now but the thing that we have to learn and I think DOE has learned and evolved from the coat of compliance we can have an eye-catcher coat of compliance because that's a relationship destroyer so going back to my ideas remodeling, working both with co-ed officials and spouses and families trying to get to this jujitsu to get everybody from the same outcome will remain friends and build relationships so education awareness from coaching and mentoring that can happen as it can change on the ground not only to builders but to building departments because building departments building co-ed officials kind of have to thank this job to be fair to my building co-ed official friends the home builders are looking for their plans get approvals right away hurry up, hurry up, hurry up some city official is then calling them saying where is that approval self-division plan and then they're out in the field having to cover so many jobs with limited resources really considering that doing a good job on job sites as best they can sometimes they're not even allowed to do building inspections because they don't have any approval to do that a large majority of jurisdictions in this country do not do plan review for the energy code that's your first line of defense when you go to build, get a permit there's no plan review for energy code and there's no field inspection but this kind of runs exactly like that so that's why the utility from co-development is pretty good where we are in coach right now some would argue that we're beyond best practice beyond minimum standards of care and best practice for friends at home and now it's time to kind of hop up and go towards what I call the fiction to the forecast what all the energy codes are delivering because they're not that's really called bad news and some of my friends and the energy business community I gotta pull back the curve and save that section so education awareness and I think what happens in this process is I walk myself trying to get the marketplace corrected and stepping on bunch of landmines and making mistakes through that process you gain a lot of humility as I think the Department of Energy is going to gain a lot of humility with respect to what works and doesn't work in the codes although if you don't know about what the tax market place and you also get a lot of relationships on the way really really important network fabric connections between the building departments co-officials and state agencies finally we're going to get compliance gains that are I think are very very very significant and we'll actually get back to realizing what we should have seen in the codes for many years so I think the journey on code compliance is at least a decade long we've got some market places that are very very sophisticated with a practice we've got some that are just a little bit longer before we can go and that's okay because that'll be market places we need I'm going to close by talking again bracketing Michael's story around the building America program being about risk a version that mitigates the risk of home builder because there's a lot of product there's a lot of impact mitigation out there and builders are risk averse and they have a good reason to make it so it's our job to make their job transition to better building practices much much better the building America program is the safety net for the builders it gives them a little bit of safe harbor to make incremental moves to work better building practices and it's a huge relationship that leads to on the code education side and the energy advocacy area need to have a better understanding and appreciation of what's on the building going back to that pie chart of what they are there to and finding ways to be better partners and helping builders educate themselves and meet the code and finally we're going to learn a lot about what works and doesn't work and maybe we'll see some enhancements to the codes in the future as opposed to maybe increases maybe there'll be more flexibility so that's been my journey as a builder as a designer as a building product manufacturer who was entrusted when I got to the job site and a member of a peer review committee for the building America team and then participating in some home builders on the HBD technologies and these are really really important programs to fund and it is critically important because we've gone from this big bug to a really big bug and when we have that that's just an opportunity for a lot of risk and builders and home builders and guess what, the energy code is going to get blamed if there are failures so with our insurance policy for the American program go ahead and make sure the builders don't have those problems but that's it Thank you Jay and I should mention I don't think I did before that we I'll give you guys an opportunity to ask questions at the end of all our session, all our speakers for those of us in the policy world we need to stay in touch with reality with the boots on the ground because it is what's happening when I talk about building policy or the building industry I like to sort of look at it as this continuum of innovation and people are at different places and we have the ecosystem that Roland showed all those things are helping along the way with R&D the training and education the best practices moving into the market financing is a huge issue public education and there are the codes that are the legal minimum and they have a prescription path or a prescriptive path that's what you should do and they also have a performance path so those learning those best practices helps build they see the goal and they can use their judgment and their smarts and work with their partners to reach that goal and so that is I would just like to say a benefit of voluntary standards and some of the programs that we're seeing on net zero energy green building rating system that helps builders and designers go through the code and keep pushing the envelope and DOE helps with that as well so thank you Jay for that so much so we've heard the DOE overview of the programs industry's perspective and now I'm delighted to introduce our congressional representative Adam Rosenberg Adam is the Democratic staff member for the Energy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology which he joined in 2013 and Dr. Rosenberg holds a B.S. in Applied and Engineering Physics from Cornell University and a Ph.D. in Plasma Physics from Princeton and I can't pronounce the next couple of lines on what he studied so I won't go there but while an undergraduate he also completed internships at the National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and he was a AAAS congressional fellow on the Democratic staff of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee he has worked on for that committee the Department of Commerce Advanced Technology Program and then worked with DOE as manager of the Office of Science Fusion Energy Sciences Program and he also prior to this position served as deputy director for Technology Strategy in the office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for operational energy plans and programs and coordinated with DOE and on deployment of advanced energy technologies for military applications and I think we all know the critical sort of mission critical functions that energy plays so Adam thank you so much for being here and I'll hand it over to you I think the word you're looking for is magneto hydrodynamics which has an awful lot to do with building technologies yeah that's the funny thing about being a congressional staff member is you can have a technical expertise or some slice of it and be considered an expert in all of science and all of technology so here I am so our committee the Committee on Science, Space and Technology has jurisdiction over all unclassified energy research development demonstration and commercialization activities carried out by the Department of Energy we also have voluntary consensus based standards so we have an awful lot of the building technologies offices programs under our jurisdiction now as many of you probably know there hasn't been major legislation on energy efficiency that's actually made it all the way to a president's desk since the energy independence and security act of 2007 there were a number of significant provisions in there many of which moved through our committee including a commercial high performance green buildings program zero net energy commercial buildings initiative commercial high performance green federal buildings program so there's at this point it's now been over eight years and there's some I think pent up interest in not just energy efficiency or building technologies but across the board for perhaps a broad comprehensive energy bill we have now the same party in the majority of both the House and Senate it's not the one I work for but it still offers unique opportunities to pass major legislation and there is bipartisan and bicameral interest as many of you may be aware in the area of energy efficiency you have certainly the Shaheen Portman bill in the Senate that many are familiar with and here in the House I believe it's Mr. Welch and Mr. McKinley are working similar companion legislation but what you've also seen is given the nature of the Senate small bills don't seem to move the way they move here so you might expect a Welch McKinley bill to pass or say a narrower energy efficiency research and development bill could pass the House but it sounds like the way that all of these things are ultimately going to become law is through a major energy bill now I can't guarantee that something passes in this Congress but I think a lot of folks in the right positions are certainly going to try to make it happen now as for the current budget request I can certainly speak for my bosses that we are very supportive of the request for the building technologies office but there are obviously some challenges that have emerged year after year unfortunately as Roland pointed out the funding line appears to be going down when in our perspective it should be going in the opposite direction we had a hearing with the Secretary of Energy testifying about three weeks ago in our committee and what you saw was what I would characterize as kind of an unfair and unjustified comparison of total funding and growth for ERE versus say fossil energy and nuclear energy now we are very supportive of the fossil energy and nuclear energy budgets as well and we certainly support growth and research in those areas as well but there seem to be sort of a comparison to a the total budget line for ERE versus fossil energy now ERE funds as Roland showed in his chart about ten different renewable energy technologies several different major energy efficiency programs not just building technologies but advanced manufacturing FEMP and transportation as well and there's a whole lot of exciting research areas going on in the transportation sector so Secretary Moniz really pointed out that the ERE budget is more like three budgets it doesn't really make sense to just say ERE gets this level why isn't fossil energy getting that same level even beyond that you get the arguments on picking winners and losers which we fundamentally reject when you're talking about research funding we don't think that argument makes sense that's the government should not be picking winners and losers in which technologies get more funding well we don't fund perpetual motion machines we don't fund we should not necessarily be putting money towards technologies that the private sector is going to carry out on its own the unique role of the government is to look at opportunity areas that the private sector is not picking up or will not be picking up very quickly to meet national needs whether they be economic or environmental or energy security needs for that matter so if you looked at the opening statements or some of the questions from some members in the hearing with secretary monies these points on picking winners and losers and while renewable energy and granted we're talking about energy efficiency here which they weren't thinking on quite as much but I'll get to that in a second renewable energy only makes up a few percent of our power power consumption whereas fossil nuclear will make up the vast majority why aren't we putting more research into those incumbent technologies which kind of is a intellectual disconnect from my perspective anyway and it's something that we're going to fight to have meaningful meaningful investments in energy efficiency as well as renewable energy furthermore when you actually talk to counterparts at the staff level or or some folks in the senate there seems to be an understanding or more of an appreciation more of a bipartisan appreciation as I laid out before on energy efficiency investments there's less of an appreciation by some of my counterparts for renewable energy investments but we can agree to disagree on that but nevertheless a line of attack we often hear is on the whole ERE request and something often not distinguishing between those individual components is going to be problematic as we move forward both in the FY 2016 appropriations process as well as a development of meaningful legislation that hopefully makes it into an energy bill so there are opportunities there seems to be from some of the more thinking members the less knee jerk folks an appreciation for energy efficiency investments made by the federal government but you're still going to have to fight the stupid every single day so with that cherry note I would just like to say given that there are there may well be these opportunities that present themselves in this congress we certainly on the Democratic staff of the House Science, Space and Tech Committee welcome any good ideas that anyone in this room has or anyone on this panel have for meaningful, helpful legislation in the energy efficiency area thank you I appreciate that very much and I want to just mention one thing before I open it up for questions and that is interesting and sad and definitely a concern to hear how and I think it's an educational process to show that many of these programs not just the programs in building technologies that work together but in EERE the stuff that's going on in solar is going to be helping the folks in buildings create these net zero energy buildings that that produces much energy on site from renewable resources as they use in a year so they're net zero that's at least one simple definition but so just with that it's all part of this it's all critical so I do want to invite your questions and I think we have some wonderful resources here and so we can help look at the budget and if you have questions this question my name is Kevin Foley and my question is directed to Roland I'm with a company called Seeker Corporation and I'm in charge of the federal marketing of their commercial roofs and have worked with your office not necessarily you for years since the Energy Star program developed and I was looking at your slide I don't know what number it is here but it says benefits FOA hopefully you're 60 technologies of energy savings targets and you still list commercial roofs of like a 0.12 quad can you tell me is there any continuing research going on with the commercial roofs and then as a follow up question to that if you could expand on the research you're doing about you're showing Dow making like air sealers it look like thank you. So the benefit FOA which I showed you the slide on the spend there's a piece of that which does allow funding for roofs so when we put all the topics on that what we did is we've got something called a prioritization tool we took about 600 technologies that are potentially used in residential and commercial buildings and we went and we got all the data we could find on them on there the technology, technical potential the market potential and that's all on this massive database that we use to inform how we set our goals so obviously roofs are one place where a lot of energy leaves a building and as is the foundation on the walls and the windows but for the envelope so what we're saying in this particular FOA which has obviously it's 16 we're going to define what goals we want we're going to describe what sort of things we want and then we're going to evaluate proposals coming in from the market to fund because that's I mean that's the whole point is we don't have all the best ideas we're trying to reach out and say who's got some great ideas that will help us solve some of these. The project you mentioned with Dow was one that came out of one of these FOAs where we were looking at ceiling the issues for builders is they get somebody you know they can punch a hole through the exterior wall by there doing something they shouldn't have been maybe it was the plumber who knows what cable guy or it could be that the framing around that corner of the building around the window is so difficult that they can't seal it very well with whatever technology they're using so we said we want some simpler easier to apply solutions and there've been some spray on solutions in the past they haven't worked as well as we wanted this one's a water based solution it's a elastomer sprays on it'll fill a quarter inch gap up to a quarter inch gap and we've found that it's easy to apply once you know how to do it because that's part of the trick no one how to do it and so that's the kind of solutions we want them I mean it now goes to like the building America program for the exact thing that Jay was talking about when he was saying how do we make it easier for builders to apply it it also works for retrofitters as well it's residential and commercial where we're using it right now is we actually we have a project with China you probably know that the building industry in China hasn't had quite the same downturn that we have a very robust construction industry going on and so we decided this was a great technology to get to them early because they're building so many buildings and when you build a commercial building it lasts for 50 years so we actually put it into our research program between the US and China and Dao is actually testing it in commercial buildings so that we can see how it works in the Chinese market so we've got that's good for Dao in sales it's good for the global climate we're still trying to figure out what's the best way to get scale in the US so is that into your question great question there will be there's going to be multiple of them in 16 if we get funded we do so I bet you all read the Federal Register every day religiously right? good gosh it is the worst place to find out any information yet that's our required mechanism now what we do is we collect names of people who are interested in funding and we've got a database that's just what we keep we put it in the Federal Register that's what we have to do on our website of course I'm sure you go there every day but if you get on the list that's the solution because then you're guaranteed to get something I wish there was an easier way to tell people about this there really isn't I love an idea on how to do that other folks might be able to help us with getting that information out but we're pretty clear on up front we're telling you what we're interested in for FY16 the challenge I have and maybe Adam can tell me more about this the way the challenge I have is my goal because I've got a fiscal year that's different from a calendar year so my fiscal year starts October 1 my goal is to have these funding opportunities on the street October 1 or within a couple weeks so I have the maximum time to get that results select the winners get them funded and get them working which is bottom line is get them working challenge I have is if I don't have a budget by October 1 I then am in a different game so the game I'm in is a continuing resolution is usually where we are and with a continuing resolution my challenge is I can while the budget may be previous year budget with some 10% reduction my spend plan has to be the lower of the house or senate mark because if they were to end up getting a budget I can't have over spent so while my budget number may look bigger my effective number is very much smaller and so when I put my full is out I have to say I can't put this out I might not have enough money when there's a budget so it's a very strange mechanism so I'm sure Adam doesn't want to comment on that it's really the way it works I mean they have no other choice they don't know what their budget is going to be and I have no other choice I don't know what it's going to be either so I'm describing some of the constraints which limits our ability to be clear up front and then follow through with the delivery on the funding that we'd like to do is that help for 16 yes that list of like 6 there's 3 of them in I don't know the big the list I had on page it was like the page 6 on 6 there was there were 6 funding big funding areas 3 of them in emerging tech and one in commercial one in residential building America and one in codes for this education around codes then if you look on page 8 assuming you have the same deck there's the one of the 3 emerging tech funding opportunities has a list of technologies they were focused on and that has water heating, controls, air sealing which might be in the space we're talking about daylighting commercial this is a glasses model commercial roofs so that may be where you are so that's part of one of the 6 announcements and we will list within that one these are the technologies we're interested in this round and then in 17 would be a different set and 18 would be a different set does that help? Hello I'm Sheila Koopai with biomass thermal energy council and I have a question specifically for you Mr. Risser but I guess any of you guys can have input as well specifically addressing looking at thermal energy seeing as it seems about one third of our nation's energy and almost 40% in the northeast area where do you see specifically looking in DOE's perspective renewable heat fit into the BTO FY16 budget I know there was a lot of mentioning from each of you in regards to renewables however specifically looking at renewable heat like heating and cooling and my second for that question is who would in the industry who would want to talk to at DOE regarding renewable heating since much of the focus there is on other renewables I'll see if I can answer that there's a lot of levels to that question so first there's obviously an interest in thermal energy storage within the building as a component of particularly if you've got solar or some other renewable source of generation you want to store it somehow so we are looking at to what extent can the building become a thermal storage battery for energy that's one aspect it's not a big spend because we don't have a big budget and there's a lot of problems we're trying to solve here I think more to your point is sort of the HVAC world I'll give you the examples of what we're doing there so we've got heat pump technology which takes heat out of your clothes washer and puts it into your dryer and takes the waste heat out of your dryer and puts it into your water heater so it's really integrated systems because the point is otherwise each one of those dumps the heat at some point on that cycle so it involves changing the way the builder builds the home as part of the challenge because they've got to rethink that but we're first showing what is the potential benefits of that and there are some significant ones now there's another part of your question which is what type of heat exchanger are you using and the heat exchangers we use today are pretty old technology examples are what you've got in your car you drive down the road and air blows across a heat exchanger your air conditioner is almost the same except you're outside and you blow a fan and it blows across the pins those are not particularly exciting heat exchangers you've got one in the refrigerator again you put the coolant fluid out on the backside and you have exchange of air with the heated coolant fluid and then you do exchange so we've spent time on some totally new heat exchangers and I didn't get a chance to talk to you about these but some of these are revolutionary so one of them is you've got a physics background let's go back to the Navier-Stokes equations for heat exchange there's a component in that equation that says motion well in these cases these are static systems the heat exchange is a fin which doesn't move and just air blows across it well I should have brought one with me but there's a technology that we helped develop which is a rotor and the rotor has a series of fins on it and it sits on top of a heat source and why didn't we do this 40 years ago when you're developing spinning you have a gap between the heat source and the spinning object and that gap creates a thermal barrier which means you're not as efficient well the technology that's been developed has a one one thousandth of an inch gap which when it spins up it rises up like the hard drive on your computer spins about the same speed and the cooling so where's that being used it's now been licensed to six companies the problem is you license it to a company so it's like the building industry I've got these companies saying we love this, this is super cool we want to put it into our product what do you think that product life cycle is it's a long time because they have to completely redesign their products but they're doing it so I'm giving you examples of there's a new technology there's a new one we're trying to move forward which is a totally radical design for air conditioners we have it conceptually we believe it works we have not had the money to fund it at scale to sort of build it up so it could prove that out so we've got some really great new solutions on heat exchange one of the things we're trying to do in 15 is to start playing out a few of those I don't know what our budget is going to be in 16 but if we continue on that path we will continue developing novel innovative heat exchange opportunities that create greater opportunities for what you're describing long answer to a short question oh by the way that technology you can look it up if you google sandia cooler or sandia rotary heat exchanger I think it says cooler it'll show you what it is and you'll be amazed at what they've done sandia did it they came to us and said would you fund this and we said well this seems a little earlier stage than we usually fund we usually fund things closer to the market and we said well who'd you talk to and they said we talked to DARPA and they said it was too innovative for them they wouldn't think it would work so I said I'm all in and sure enough it's now I mean it's a huge success the team that built this it was one guy is now 15 people because it's got they've got so much interest and it's going to be different places I just need a point of clarification from Mr. Risser we leapt about 30% in terms of energy efficiency from the 2006 to the 2012 IECC was actually the co-author of that proposal with Ron Majette so what you're saying is either and I'm confused I'm confused about a lot of things in life but this in particular I'm confused about are you going after an additional 20% or are you going after an additional 50% and are you doing that through development or through education and compliance okay so this really was not a codes topic the codes that 30% what we believe is and that was in two steps so that the codes efficiency we believe I think Jay said it correctly we believe that what's out there is a good place for the code we don't believe the market is implementing it and so why push the envelope further until you help them get there so we're really trying to figure out how to make it lower risk easier to implement so we actually capture that 30% which we don't believe is actually happening it's just theoretical so now let's go to the 50% the 50% was based upon a couple things first technology development so remember when I started I said we use a prioritization methodology to figure this out we calculate it's not quite 50% it's about 46 or something based upon our investments in the technologies in our portfolio where we think it'll go by 2020 now my staff says 46 is not 50 and I say well 50 sounds better and it's just it sounds better doesn't it and I like to have a stretch because if you just tell them okay you've shown me exactly how you're going to get there it doesn't create as much creativity and innovation that I'd like to see in the thinking of this so the technologies are going to get us to the 50% of opportunity now let's talk about actual savings the way we get the majority of our savings is actually in standards and the standards reason that occurs is because when you set that level for standards you can't buy something less efficient and so the way that works and codes is different you have a lot of paths to get there you want flexibility and then there's a whole bunch of factors we could we could talk about it's not that it's not important but with standards it's absolute and it's got to be cost effective the example I'll give you is what I got to do is the commercial air conditioner was less efficient than the minimum standard for residential I said what's with that Walmart has 30 of them on every store and yet we've got why is it less efficient than you could buy for a home and they said well you could go after this but it'll take you probably 8-10 years to fix it and I said okay well I come from the market so I mean standards I know but I come from the market side I said let's approach this differently I went out and I figured out technology innovations in the commercial air conditioning space that could be aggregated into one new product we then vetted that with all the national labs that worked in the space came up with a set we brought in Macy's, Sears, Walmart Target, McDonald's all the folks that buy those commercial air conditioners on your roof they sat down and they said well we don't want to go to the bleeding edge we'll go something back because the cost will be more reasonable we picked a spot that was a reasonable place it's about 50% more efficient than anything they could buy they then went to the manufacturers and said this is what we want to buy if you build it at the right price one of the manufacturers one of the major ones on the list that I showed you earlier said this isn't going anywhere they don't want that two of the others said we're all in the market the third called me down to their headquarters and said holy cow we have a problem here how do we get back on the game the point being they're being sold today and right now the proposal for commercial air conditioner standards takes that into account which didn't take me 10 years because I've only been here 5 Stan Colby I'm with the sheet metal air conditioning contractors we have commercial industrial and public contractors working on this building and about every other one around a couple of things that are coming out in the energy bills that I'm kind of interested in your opinion one is benchmarking and the other is building energy performance contracting which both I think bring the kind of accountability into the process that really puts not only the systems and the technology that you're putting in buildings but really the installation all together what we see is rewarding winners and losers we reward losers and we reward losing adaptations and losing companies who put this technology in buildings don't connect it you have system lead it's phenomenal on high efficiency equipment the owner never gets the efficiency that he pays for and where it's benchmarking comes in I think a lot of owners are not even aware that they pay millions of dollars for and by having benchmarking you set the standard and then you tie your leasing program as the government to a certain number and then you say you guys can have anyone work on your buildings you want you can take full tax credits for implementing technology incorrectly just because you take the expense of the retrofit and you write it off whether it's done right or not but anyway the benchmarking seems to put accountability and performance contracting puts the contractor on the hook for did he do the project as prescribed and as promised and if he didn't then he has to pay you know the difference out of his own pocket so rather than make excuses for people who have complexity the code's thick maybe they didn't go study engineering maybe they didn't hire someone that could explain it to them why other companies have that it seems better to have a standard for the buildings operation and if a contractor meets that obviously he's in and if he doesn't then he wouldn't be preferred for future work but I was really curious about your view of benchmarking and what it can offer and performance contracting and what it can offer to save the government and also kind of reward the companies who do things right so performance contracting I think it's a huge opportunity and I think one of the things that needs to happen in that space is they need to expand what's possible for performance contracting right now there's some constraints that limit what you can do in that area and I can tell you from my from the federal standpoint because my best friend runs FEMP and let me tell you he struggles with that daily for federal facilities so I think they need to expand what can be done in that performance contracting space so it's okay for Escos to do more than they do today right now it's fairly constrained by the risk factor that is there benchmarking I'll come back to let me tell you a quick story that gets at what you said about performance I think this would be very informative so NREL put in a new research facility it's three buildings and you know there are ERE's lab and we said let's get a performance contract in place where the architecture engineering firm that got the job said are you kidding this contract we don't know how to how can we hold anybody accountable for anything so here's what they did first thing is they brought their expertise to the table and they helped them understand what they could do but the that was important but it wasn't important for round two it was only important for round one the important thing for round one was money it's money so what they said to the A&E firm they said if you deliver a building that meets this performance level we will double your fee now you might think oh holy whatever doubling your fee their fee is nothing compared to the price of the building it's a fraction it's just in the noise but for that company that was the big driver that was a huge driver because their fee is everything the rest is just cost well the first building they built they met the performance target it was the same price as building that building without that performance element and the way they did it was they put the exact same requirement on every single sub that worked on that project and the subs came in the one that did the data center said well you don't mean us they said you're part of the building we mean you the food service center said you don't mean us they said no if you're part of the building you're gonna do it too and they all said it never happened it did the second building was done at beat the performance expectation at a lower cost and the third one at an even lower cost so they actually drove down the cost after they got experience with it they got performance they were looking for and their subs and the A&E firm is now trying to do this on every job going forward because they got more money you asked about benchmarking I think benchmarking is really important I think it should be voluntary people get scared if they think it's mandatory I think right now the key is to give them information that allows them to make the right decisions for the right reasons and today we don't have common decision metrics for a building owner to even know how their building should perform or could perform so I think it has a huge value in managing managing and operating buildings I don't think anyone wants to say anything I think on Jay on the residential side similar issues we're looking for the commercial industry kind of lead on the whole benchmarking and conditioning but we're starting to see a little bit of hybrid of conditioning right now in the residential side with the introduction we'll get better market penetration at the home manager greater specifically on our house that's on the home for energy efficiency so it's less I think it's this in terms of energy efficiency and it's getting more precise now my experience in the energy efficiency retrofit of existing homes was around all this modeling and all this projected energy efficiency savings when really we need to get to the electric meter and the gas meter to pass the test of whether we're really saving money and going back to the residential side the national there's a research lab a home innovation lab that has a whole quality program and that's really getting into integration around getting best practices and their construction techniques and the big builders and some leading builders are integrating that into the whole mechanism and energy efficiency goes along for the life of that so we're going to get labeling on homes and we're going to be some voluntary and not legislative anytime soon because there are different interests but we have big builders want to show that their home is much better than the one I'm guiding because their competition is the house where I live at thank you all so much for being here and Stan thank you for that question performance is everything it's what we're talking about the challenges that we have in terms of energy use the savings we need to have the environmental issues we can have all the programs in the world but if it doesn't save energy at the end of the day we're not doing anything so I think it's huge Roland you mentioned decision metrics or Jay you just mentioned it I think that is critical people need to sort of know what's possible and then how to measure it we need metrics we need tools and we need to see this and so I think there's a lot of good work underway and we need to keep pushing on that I just wanted to mention that DOE has a great list of resources on the budget on energy.gov very very detailed information about building technologies office I think it's if you want to get into the weeds it's really good information and we also have some handouts on the budget and if you have any questions that you think of later shoot them our way send me an email if I can't answer it I'll be happy to find out for you and thanks again for being here and thank you so much to our wonderful panel appreciate you guys for being here