Whole Life Performance plus (WLP+)

Professor Rajat Gupta

Oxford Institute for Sustainable Development

Oxford Brookes University

rgupta@brookes.ac.uk

Project overview

• Project aims and details

• Market landscape

• Insights from literature review: existing evidence

• Meta-analysis Innovate UK non-domestic data set

• Work performance indicators

• Key findings and implications for WLP+

• Dissemination

Structure of presentation

Develop a software model and commercial service for optimising internal building conditions to improve productivity by at least 10%, reduce energy use by 30%, and improve occupant comfort and wellbeing.

Objectives are to:

• Empirically validate the link between IEQ and staff productivity

• Test the solution in a number of trial commercial buildings

• Develop a software-based supervisory control and reporting solution operating in a cloud environment

Project aim

• Innovate UK competition – Building whole-life performance

• Project value: £530,000 part funded by Innovate UK and EPSRC

• Project duration – 24 months from 1 Feb 2016

• Project lead – Low Carbon Maintenance Limited (LCMB)

• Academic lead: Oxford Brookes University

• Test bed will be commercial offices buildings provided by Argent, Emcor and Kings College

• BCO and CE to lead on industry exploitation and dissemination

Project details

Project details

Work

PackageDescription

WP1 Project management and reporting

WP2 Technical definition of project parameters

WP3 Baseline data capture

WP4 Deploy improvement interventions

WP5 Software development

WP6 Testing and validation

WP7 Dissemination and knowledge exchange

Market landscape

Market research

• Market research exercises conducted by LCMB to gain insight from leading industry figures on productivity and indoor environments.

• Review of Leesman Index which is a workplace effectiveness rating based on employee feedback of their environment.

• Market analysis on the commercial opportunities for WLP+ exploitation in the UK and Europe

Key findings from market research

• There is a lot of interest in productivity which is accompanied by health and wellbeing in discussions.

• There is less interest in indoor environments and a tendency to think about productivity in the context of generation Y employees engaged in flexible working patterns.

• Leesman reports productivity as a headline outcome, although productivity is only assessed from one question

• An assessment criteria has been developed to capture workplace productivity, workplace utilisation, work life balance and building energy costs.

• The final report will identify companies that may be interested in the WLP+ product or have existing expertise in workplace environment productivity

Existing evidence

Literature review

• To understand the standards and protocols that can be used to measure and influence occupant productivity in the workspace

• Review of existing studies

• Review of optimal IEQ parameters• Journal articles and conference proceedings on studies

conducted in office environments only

• Determine measures of productivity for business

• Determine monitoring requirements for WLP+

Optimal IEQ:CIBSE guidance

IEQ parameters Recommended limits (CIBSE Guide A, EN15251)

Air temperature

(mechanically ventilated office space)

Summer: 22 - 25°C

Winter: 21 - 23°C

Air temperature

(naturally ventilated spaces)

Depends on outdoor temperature: 5°C - 7°C comfort

band for 80-90% acceptability

Indoor relative humidity 40 - 70%

Air speedAbove 0.1m/s, temperature should be increased to

maintain thermal comfort

Ventilation rate 10 l/s per person

CO2 concentration 1500 ppm

Other office air pollutants (VOCs,

formaldehyde, odour from materials)

TVOC: < 0.2mg/m2h

Formaldehyde: < 0.05mg/m2h

Odour: dissatisfaction with odour below 15%

Noise (ambience levels) 35 – 45dBA

Lighting (maintained illuminance) 300 – 500 lux

Studies on environmental parameters and productivity

Study AuthorStudy location

Study type & sample size

Conditions monitored / Interventions

Findings: impact on productivity and cost

1 Allen et al(2015)

USA Intervention in climate chamber(24 subjects)

CO2 - 550ppm, 945ppm, 1400ppmVOC – low and high (increase by 0.5mg/m3)

21% decrease with 400ppm increase in CO2

13% decrease with 0.5mg/m3

increase in TVOCs

2 Park & Yoon(2011)

Korea Intervention in climate chamber(24 subjects)

Ventilation:5, 10, 20l/s/person

2.5 - 5% increase when ventilation is increased from 5 to 20l/s/person

3 Wittersehet al (2002)

Denmark Intervention in offices(30 subjects)

Temperature: 22°C, 26°C, 30°CNoise: 35dBA, 55dBA

3% decrease in 55dBA 55% more mistakes in 30°C

5 Fisk et al(2002), Federspielet al (2002)

USA Observational(3 months in a call centre)

Ventilation rate:CO2 as proxyTemperatureManagement

16% decrease at temp > 25.4°CLowest call handling time when indoor CO2 is up to 75ppm higher than outdoor CO2

6 Milton et al(2000)

USA Observational(40 buildings)

Ventilation:rated as moderate or high

Sick leave associated with moderate ventilation rate

7 Fisk et al(2012)

USA Theoretical study

Ventilation:8, 10, 15l/s/person

0.91% increase with 7l/s/person increase (8-15l/s/person)$38b annual saving 7l/s/person increase

Impact of IEQ on productivity

Addition

Text typing

Impact of ventilation rateImpact of temperature

Addition

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

22°C 30°C

Un

its

/ m

in

143.4

143.5

143.6

143.7

143.8

143.9

144.0

144.1

22°C 30°C

Ch

ara

cte

rs /

min

Text typing – more errors

found at 30°C

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

5 l/s/person 10 l/s/person 20 l/s/person

Co

un

t /

15

min

350

355

360

365

370

375

380

385

5 l/s/person 10 l/s/person 20 l/s/person

Ch

ara

cte

rs /

20

min

Cost implications

4.2

10.2

7.2

2.3

0.06

0.11

0.05

1.1

1.4

3.2

4.7

0.5-0.02 -0.04 -0.1

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Increase

ventilation rate

(to 10l/s/person)

Increase

ventilation rate

(15l/s/person)

Add economisers

to AC system

(to reduce energy cost)

Eliminate winter

overheating

(>23°C)

Reduce

dampness/mould

(through better

maintenance)

Av

era

ge

an

nu

al

ec

on

om

ic b

en

efi

ts (

$ b

illi

on

)

Improved work performance Improved health (reduced SBS symptoms) Avoided absence Energy cost/saving

Recommended

ventilation rate

Some energy cost

Energy saving offset

by installation cost

Meta-analysis of existing datasets

(Innovate UK BPE programme:

non-domestic buildings)

Non-domestic BPE study

• Innovate UK BPE programme 2010-2015

• Case study buildings (domestic and non-

domestic) designed to low energy

performance. 101 project out of which 47

non-domestic projects.

• Non-domestic buildings include education,

offices, public service and culture

• Meta-analysis in WLP+ included projects

where data on building performance were

available

• Focus on fabric performance, energy

consumption, environmental performance

and occupant feedback and satisfaction

BUS questionnaire

• Structured questionnaire to record

feedback from building users

• Enables benchmarking against 45 key

variables: environmental and control of

the environment and building and

working space related variables

• Variables rated on a 7-point scale

1 - unsatisfactory/uncomfortable/no

control

7 – satisfactory/comfortable/full control

• Perceived productivity rated:-40% to

+40%

Non-domestic BPE study:Office spaces (n=21)• 21 out of 47 projects were in

offices

• High level of insulation in the

buildings

• Floor area: 705 – 37,000m2

• BUS surveys conducted in all

buildings

• 45 – 5,250 occupants

• In 12 out of 21 projects,

perceived productivity

increased by an average of

4.9% and maximum of 10%

• Over 5000 occupants

• Personal controls for

lighting and HVAC

• 5% increase in perceived

productivity

• Excellent BREEAM rating

• Good daylighting and

natural ventilation using

BMS-controlled louvers

• 5% increase in perceived

productivity

• Ground source heat pump and

Solar PV systems Exemplary

for low carbon emissions

• 10% increase in perceived

productivity

Non-domestic BPE study:Office spaces (n=21)

VariablesCoefficient of

determination (r2)

Overall comfort 0.72

Air in summer : overall 0.51

Air in summer: fresh/stuffy (-)0.41

Overall lighting 0.50

Overall noise 0.23

Perceived health 0.61

Building design 0.53

Furniture provided 0.58

All r2 values are statistically significant: p<0.05

Air in summer: overall

1 – unsatisfactory 7 - satisfactory

Air in summer: fresh/stuffy

1 – fresh 7 – stuffy

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

(Pe

rce

ive

d)

Air in summer: Overall

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7P

rod

uct

ivit

y (P

erc

eiv

ed

)Air in summer: Fresh/stuffy

Work performance indicators

Measuring productivity

• Task performance metrics

• Total time from initiation to completion of discrete tasks

• Accuracy of task results

• Self assessment metrics

• Perceived productivity, health, wellbeing

• Perceived environment and control of environment

• Business oriented metrics

• Health cost, sick leave, accidents

• Overtime and accepting extra work or responsibilities

Key findings and

implications for WLP+

Key findings from existing evidence

• Intervention studies in climate chambers and real life offices have quantified the influence of IEQ on work place productivity and energy cost.

• From the review of intervention studies conducted, productivity can be increased by up to 16% with improvements in IEQ.

• From BUS assessments conducted in non-domestic BPE studies, there are positive correlations between perceived environment and control and increase in self-reported productivity.

• Other contextual factors such as building design and furniture are also important factors that have an effect on perceived productivity.

• Several factors are used to measure and monitor productivity in offices. These include task output (speed and accuracy), absence from work, perceived wellbeing at work.

Implications for WLP+

• Findings from market research show the evidence that IEQ can influence productivity would leverage funding for improvement works

• Findings from the literature review have highlighted the essential parameters to be monitored in this project:

• Environmental factors – IEQ

• Building characteristics and performance

• Demographics of occupants

• Performance indicators (for measuring productivity)

• Energy consumption data is essential in order to quantify energy costs/benefits of interventions

• Some measures of performance are organisation specific so site visits will be necessary in order to monitor relevant parameters

Dissemination to date

Poster presentation at UK Indoor Environmental Group (UKIEG) 2016 annual conference

Paper and oral presentation at International SEEDS conference 2016

Thank you