As explained in our previous blog, an Energy Information Systems (EIS) implementation must be tightly coupled with an effective energy management strategy to be successful. The goal of this blog is to establish a framework to help evaluate Energy Information Systems in light of five essential criteria, Delivery Model, Platform Integration, Analysis Potential, User Interface and Implementation Process.
Delivery Model and Platform Integration will help us get acquainted with Energy Information Systems’ infrastructure requirements. Analysis Potential and User Interface will take us through an in-depth exploration of essential features that make these platforms ideal for continuous improvement processes. For this reason, we’ll evaluate these two criteria with four concepts integral to the continuous improvement methodology, measure, compare, evaluate and act. And lastly, we share three important steps in the Implementation Process.
“Where is the EIS’ software going to reside?”
The proliferation of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) applications in the ever-growing field of cloud computing is undeniable today, and it is no different when it comes to energy management solutions. Today, as enhanced security, performance, and scalability become the norm, SaaS solutions are favoured over on-premise deployments – where the software and hardware are housed within the end-clients’ data centre. Among the advantages of cloud solutions, as compared to on-premise, are reduced implementation times, lower upfront costs, and continuous updates and product enhancements.
However, when there is a need for on-premise deployments mandated by institutional or corporate policies, vendors may offer to host their cloud software within those enterprises’ private servers. Note that in such hybrid deployments – unlike SaaS – server maintenance, availability, data backup, security, upgrades, etc. are invariably not the responsibility of the solution provider. These and other differences, as well as possible limitations, must be clearly understood while considering all deployment options. Regardless of the chosen delivery model, make sure vendors provide essential information about their infrastructure, third-party web services, and data policies before checking this item off.
“How will the EIS integrate with the existing building management system?”
Whether your organization has a Building Automation System (BAS) running an open or closed communications protocol, a network of energy metering devices existing as a stand-alone system, a historical archiver of time-value samples, multiple IoT (Internet of Things) devices communicating to the cloud, or any combination of the above, integrating disparate data sources is of utmost importance as it determines the EIS’ visibility on how energy is used in a building. Moreover, while considering an EIS solution, organizations must assess future additions and planned upgrades to their energy management system to ensure the chosen solution has the required integration potential.
To this end, vendors make available either data acquisition devices for field installation, equipped with a variety of open and proprietary control protocols, or deploy server-side software connectors to interface directly with databases and end devices. Once these data collectors are in place, historical data in the form of trend logs and/or real-time data from energy meters, sensors and control devices are delivered and stored within the EIS infrastructure. In addition to building data, and subject to how the platform will be utilized, enquire about its capability of acquiring external data such as weather, utility pricing and demand response directives.
Also related to platform integration is virtual metering, the ability to perform data transformation using data from sensors monitoring processes such as temperature, pressure and flow, as well as data from status indicators, amperage readings, and speed and position feedback. Further explanation on how virtual meters work, along with examples and benefits, are found in this blog. But for now, it is important to know that EIS with such capability might help overcome the lack of energy meters and similar physical instrumentation.
“Which features does the EIS offer to analyze energy usage?”
Once organizations have aligned their strategic goals with the desired outcomes expected from an EIS deployment, they would be in a position to adequately evaluate the software’s feature requirements. Measure and compare, two related terms – given that one goal of measuring is the ability to compare – are introduced here to help assess the analysis potential of any given EIS platform. While the former answers the question, “what needs to be monitored?” the latter answers the question, “what needs to be analyzed?”
Measure focuses on resource monitoring, either consumption (i.e. how much a resource is being used), demand (i.e. how fast a resource is being used), or both. Compare focuses on outcomes – baseline comparison with energy modelling techniques such as regression analysis, performance comparison and savings determination with cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis, load profiling, and peak load analysis, among others. Comparing current year’s consumption with the previous year, or comparing load profiles between weekdays and weekends, are just two examples of analysis potential. Answering these questions should provide the required context to evaluate additional criteria such as meter data sources: whole-building-level metering, sub-metering, system-level metering and virtual metering, additional data sources: weather data, utility pricing and demand response, as well as data granularity requirements: annual, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly and sub-hourly intervals.
“How effective is the EIS in engaging users, driving action and generating results?”
Similar to the previous evaluation criteria, two related terms, evaluate and act, will help assess the user interface requirements of an EIS platform. Evaluate answers the question, “how are analysis results organized?”, and act answers the question, “how are actionable results visualized?” As shown in Figure 2, evaluate focuses on meter data aggregation based on whether the EIS will monitor one building, multiple buildings in one portfolio, or multiple portfolios of multiple buildings.
On the other hand, act focuses on outcomes, including resource accounting, a requirement to keep track of multiple resources such as electricity, gas, water, thermal and others; data normalization or benchmarking, the ability to present energy per square metre/square foot or per occupant; interactive navigation, the ability to roll-up to view aggregated data and drill-down to view breakdown data; and flexible reporting, a requirement to visualize different date ranges as well as portfolio, building, systems and meter groups. Answering these questions should prove valuable in determining whether or not the software is user-friendly, actionable, and conducive to user engagement as these are critical in the technology adoption process.
“How, and by whom, will the EIS be configured?”
Appoint a Champion
Designating an individual tasked to lead the initiative to deploy an Energy Information System is presumably the best place to start. This leader or go-to person would champion the vision to see the facility and energy management teams become analytic-driven. As previously stated, an EIS platform is only beneficial when there is sustained user engagement and not just sporadic interaction with it once the initial deployment is complete. A champion would need to be committed to this continuous process.
Assemble a Team
A successful implementation requires a team effort. From IT professionals that will open the required ports or give access to the Building Automation System or energy metering repository for the data to flow into the EIS’ data storage infrastructure, to the building experts with extensive knowledge of every system and piece of equipment in the facility – and more importantly, the label, acronym or nomenclature used for identification purposes. And from the energy manager familiar with baseline determination techniques to the implementation engineer asked to learn the capabilities of the chosen EIS to configure the platform following best practices guidelines. It is the responsibility of the designated champion to assemble a team that can tackle the various challenges during the implementation process.
Achieve Results
Make sure to inquire about the technical support that is available from the service provider, online and in-person training opportunities, and additional services that may be offered such as assisting in the deployment process, providing implementation tips based on similar configurations elsewhere, and contributing valuable insights on becoming analytic-driven. Well-established EIS providers are there to see every organization achieve results, starting from a well-thought-out implementation plan.
Is your organization ready to use the evaluation criteria explained herein to select an Energy Information System? If the answer is yes, give your local CopperTree Analytics representative a call, or schedule a product demonstration here.
Written By:
CopperTree Analytics
More By This Author
