University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

How age, gender, and education impact our path toward carbon-neutrality

(USC Thesis Other)

How age, gender, and education impact our path toward carbon-neutrality

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content 1

How Age, Gender, and Education Impact Our Path Toward Carbon-Neutrality

By: Jerome Duluk
Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
Master of Arts - Economics
University of Southern California
August 2016

Abstract:

Are architects being taught enough to design for carbon-neutrality? Do architects apply
sustainable design in client meetings and proposals? What are the barriers stopping us from
creating carbon-neutral cities? To answer these questions, the authors sought to test architects
instead of buildings. A national survey was conducted to test practitioner’s frequency of use and
knowledge of energy reducing design strategies. We find that age, knowledge, performance
measurement, and location have the largest impact. Surprisingly, the authors find that gender
does not significantly impact how often an architect suggests sustainable designs to clients.

Keywords: Architecture, green building, LEED, sustainability, knowledge, performance
measurement,

2
Table of Contents

HOW AGE, GENDER, AND EDUCATION IMPACT OUR PATH TOWARD CARBON-NEUTRALITY 1
INTRODUCTION 3
METHODS 4
RESULTS 7
CONCLUSIONS 11
REFERENCES 14
APPENDIX 14

3

Introduction

As the 2030 Challenge deadline approaches, critics are questioning if global carbon-neutrality is
a feasible reality. But the question should not be whether we can build one carbon-neutral
building, as many individual buildings have reached this goal. Rather, the question should be
whether we will build a carbon-neutral society. What drives the built environment’s impact on
the world and climate change ultimately comes down to the knowledge of each architect, and his
or her willingness to push the limits of design. Furthermore, we cannot neglect the role clients
play in the design process. Both sides of the table need to agree that sustainability is now a
critical and necessary aspect of any building design.
So, what is the 2030 Challenge? Simply put,
the challenge is to have all new buildings,
developments, and major renovations be carbon-
neutral by the year 2030.
1
Accomplishing this goal
is no small task, but one that is necessary in order to
protect our natural environment and resources.
Specifically, Architecture 2030 originally published
the following details and progress requirements for all participating individuals, institutions, and
firms:

• All new buildings, developments and major renovations shall be designed to meet a fossil
fuel, GHG-emitting, energy consumption performance standard of 70% below the
regional (or country) average/median for that building type.
• At a minimum, an equal amount of existing building area shall be renovated annually to
meet a fossil fuel, GHG-emitting, energy consumption performance standard of 70% of
the regional (or country) average/median for that building type.
• The fossil fuel reduction standard for all new buildings and major renovations shall be
increased to:
• 80% in 2020
• 90% in 2025
• Carbon-neutral in 2030 (using no fossil fuel GHG emitting energy to operate)

1
Architecture 2030
4
Despite schools and firms touting use of sustainable building techniques since the 1970s,
there are still less than 1,000 net-zero energy buildings in the world today.
2
As emerging
professionals, this led the authors to form a few questions:

• What were architects taught in school that equipped them with the proper knowledge and
motivation to design for carbon-neutrality?
• What are architects taught in practice to continue increasing knowledge and innovation?
• What is preventing this knowledge from being implemented on a global scale?
• What are the gaps of knowledge within our field that could be explored to reach the goals
of the 2030 Challenge?

Instead of testing buildings for performance, the author tested the architects to explore
what factors are impacting how often he or she introduces sustainable design to clients. The
reasoning behind testing sustainable introductions is simple – if the designers are not proposing
sustainable strategies to clients, then no sustainable buildings will be built. This is not an
exploration of the RFP (request for proposal) process, or which kinds of projects are chosen by
large universities or governments, although future research in this area may help provide a more
complete picture of the incentive structure for architects and designers.
This paper strives to show where we, as a society, can focus our energy to find the low
hanging fruit from which we can make our society more “green” with the highest marginal
return. For example, if education is a main determinant of frequency of introducing
sustainability, then we must look at reforming the curriculum architects are taught from. In
contrast, if clients have the highest influence, then we need to begin motivating the average
person to press architects and engineers for sustainable designs.

Methods

With the aid of two architecture-specific researchers, the author created a detailed survey for this
study. Overall, the survey was designed to help gather data on all the possible areas that could
impact the implementation of sustainable design practices. Three sections were included:
demographics, sustainable implementation metrics, and a passive architecture strategy
knowledge test. The distributed survey was 32 questions (see Appendix I). Over 450 responses
were received, 350 of which were full, complete and usable surveys. Before distributing the

2
http://www.enob.info/en/net-zero-energy-buildings/map/
5
survey, it was reviewed by a set of third party experts not involved in this study or analysis. The
survey was primarily distributed through local American Institute of Architect (AIA) chapters, as
well as small and large firms across the country.
In 2014, an initial pilot study revealed some of the self-identified knowledge gaps in
architects, engineers, and designers. Although many knowledge categories show nearly 50% of
respondents understood the key principles in important green building categories, and put them
to use, a significant portion of individuals do not know what to do with the information, or are
having trouble convincing clients to choose the selected technique. It is especially interesting to
note the lack of knowledge in measurement and verification, as well as the significant road block
clients provide in implementing post-occupancy performance measurement programs.

Key survey questions and variables of interest include: frequency of sustainable design
introductions in client meetings, measuring building performance post-occupancy, most recent
degree received, gender, and location. Other controls, such as occupation, leadership role in the
firm, and resources used on a frequent basis, were also collected for all survey respondents.
Introducing sustainability is the key outcome of the model. Architects, engineers, and
designers were asked how often he or she introduces sustainability to clients in meetings, and
were given percent ranges. Relating back to the central theme of this research, if architects are
never or rarely introducing sustainable designs to clients, then any new buildings have a low
chance of being sustainable, let alone net-zero energy. In a survey performed by the American
Institute of Architects in 2014, 61% of projects left energy simulation and design up to an
engineer, and not the architect, who were responsible for the same tasks in only 8.3% of
6
projects.
3
Only six survey respondents (1.7%) never present sustainable designs to clients, which
is a good sign for the overall industry. It was surprising that the largest group, making up almost
40% of respondents, always introduced sustainable designs. The authors, however, do recognize
that there may be inherent response bias in this survey. If, indeed, a higher number of
sustainable-oriented individuals took the survey, our coefficients for variables, such as
measuring building performance, will have an upward bias.

How often do you introduce
sustainable designs to clients?
Number of
respondents Percent of total
Never 6 1.7%
Rarely (10-30%) 32 9.2%
Sometimes (30-60%) 61 17.5%
Very Often (60-90%) 111 31.8%
Always (90-100%) 139 39.8%
TOTAL 349 100%

Measuring building performance post-occupancy is a rising trend in all kinds of
sustainable architecture. Design firms, entrepreneurs, building managers, and building users all
have incentives to measure performance.
4
Benefits of performance measurement range from
cost-efficiency to the cognitive health of people using the building on a daily basis. New research
has shown that poor ventilation leading to carbon dioxide buildup and exposure to volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) negatively impact an individual’s critical thinking, crisis response,
multitasking, and organizational skills.
5
However, if the building’s performance is not measured
once people start using it, no one can be sure that the benefits touted by the designers and owners
are fully extended to the daily users. If a firm can consistently show that its buildings maintain
performance over extended periods of time, the benefits can be more easily transferred to cost-
benefit analysis for initial construction. If not, the cost of sustainable designs will likely
outweigh the potential benefits.
The survey asked respondents if their respective firms never, occasionally, usually, or
regularly measure building performance post-occupancy. Almost 32% of those surveyed never

3
Appelbaum, Alec. “AIA 2030 Commitment: 2014 Progress Report”, The American Institute of Architects,
Washington D.C., 2014, p. 15.
4
Isaac A. Meir , Yaakov Garb , Dixin Jiao & Alex Cicelsky (2009) Post-Occupancy Evaluation: An Inevitable
Step Toward Sustainability, Advances in Building Energy Research, 3:1, 189-219,
5
Joseph G. Allen, Piers MacNaughton, Usha Satish, Suresh Santanam, Jose Vallarino, and John D. Spengler
(2015) Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic
Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office
Environments, Environmental Health Perspectives; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510037
7
measure building performance post-occupancy, and 46% report measuring performance
occasionally (less than 50% of projects).

How often does your firm
measure building performance
post-occupancy?
Number of
respondents Percent of total
Never 111 31.2%
Occasionally (<50%) 160 45.9%
Sometimes (50-75%) 53 15.2%
Very Often (75-100%) 25 7.2%
TOTAL 349 100%

It is frequently argued that location of practice, and the regional regulations, have a high
impact on sustainable construction. Location data was gathered and used as a control variable in
regressions to account for different kinds of regulations. The largest group of respondents were
from the western United States, and the smallest were respondents outside of the United States,
with 117 and 22, respectively. Of those responding to the survey living outside of the U.S.,
countries included: China, India, UAE, Australia, and other areas of South East Asia that were
not specified.

Where do you
currently practice?
Number of
respondents Percent of total
United
States
West 117 33.5%
Midwest 82 23.5%
Northeast 65 18.6%
Southeast 34 9.7%
Southwest 29 8.3%
Other Location 22 6.3%
TOTAL 349 100%

Results

In order to show the specific effects of variables on frequency an architect is recommending
sustainable and passive designs to clients, an ordered logit regression is used, with each bucket
of the dependent variable corresponding to a specific level of sustainable introduction (e.g.
never, sometimes, always). The following regression estimation is used:
8
𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑆𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛
+
=𝛼+ 𝛽
1
𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟
+
+𝛽
5
𝐷𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒
+
+𝛽
8
𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
+
+
𝛽
=
𝐾𝑛𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑒𝑑𝑔𝑒
+
+ 𝛽
A
𝐶𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡
+
+ 𝛾𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑠
+
+ 𝜀
+

6

To show varying effects on architects, we will present three main regressions (See
Regression Results below). One of the biggest differences that can be seen is the inclusion of
‘clients’ on architects. This implies that the expectation, from the architect, that a client will ask
a question about sustainable designs impacts how often the architect will bring up passive design
strategies. Essentially, the architect would rather present the designs to the client rather than have
the client ask for designs and be unprepared in a meeting. This is an important distinction,
because from this regression we can see that clients have a tremendous impact on how often
architects are bringing up critical sustainable and passive designs. Individuals, or clients, may be
the key to changing our course toward a carbon-neutral society. Almost 5% of respondents
reported that their clients never ask bout sustainable design strategies in meetings.
The following tables are predicted probabilities given a change in one of the independent
variables. We will focus on changes in client behavior, performance measurement, and field-
specific knowledge. Gender was not a significant coefficient in any of the regressions run.

Note: Changes only occur in the dependent variable – all other variables
in the regression are held constant. The ∆ columns show the difference
in predicted probabilities. All data points are included.

6
Degree is categorized by the most recent completed degree by the respondent, where responses are
grouped by decade as such: Pre-1979, 1980-89, 1990-99, 2000-2009, and 2010-Present. MeasurePerform
was asked categorically, with Never, Sometimes, Usually, and Regularly as the possible responses, and
were regressed in that order.
9
Regression Results:

Basic Controlling for
Location
Impact of
working on a
NZE project
Clients that
never ask about
sustainable
design
All levels of
client
sustainable
questioning
Gender (Dummy) 0.243 0.206 0.283 0.246 0.130
1 = Female (0.219) (0.224) (0.235) (0.234) (0.237)
Degree 0.278 0.315 0.372 0.117 0.026
1980-89 (0.419) (0.427) (0.426) (0.427) (0.437)
Degree -0.471 -0.430 -0.428 -0.688 -0.885
1990-99 (0.384) (0.390) (0.389) (0.395) (0.413)*
Degree -0.680 -0.693 -0.630 -0.899 -0.912
2000-09 (0.370) (0.380) (0.385) (0.376)* (0.375)*
Degree -1.217 -1.176 -1.141 -1.412 -1.319
2010-Present (0.394)** (0.410)** (0.409)** (0.400)** (0.407)**
MeasurePerform 0.788 0.774 0.684 0.542 0.241
Occasionally (0.241)** (0.246)** (0.254)** (0.261)* (0.276)
MeasurePerform 1.637 1.620 1.455 1.335 0.492
Usually (0.353)** (0.368)** (0.389)** (0.399)** (0.430)
MeasurePerform 1.496 1.475 1.325 1.143 0.332
Regularly (0.418)** (0.432)** (0.446)** (0.460)* (0.472)
Knowledge 3.260 3.218 3.232 1.936 2.628
25-50% (1.151)** (1.234)** (1.229)** (1.625) (1.621)
Knowledge 4.226 4.159 4.129 2.758 3.358
51-75% (1.158)** (1.244)** (1.239)** (1.622) (1.613)*
Knowledge 4.525 4.508 4.449 3.051 3.607
76-100% (1.151)** (1.232)** (1.227)** (1.612) (1.612)*
West -0.804 -0.862 -0.785 -0.947
(0.489) (0.491) (0.508) (0.499)
Northeast -0.736 -0.726 -0.542 -0.543
(0.517) (0.516) (0.536) (0.534)
Southwest -0.641 -0.603 -0.524 -0.331
(0.608) (0.609) (0.611) (0.616)
Southeast -1.269 -1.298 -1.101 -1.088
(0.544)* (0.554)* (0.574) (0.596)
Midwest -1.262 -1.283 -1.160 -1.183
(0.506)* (0.506)* (0.524)* (0.521)*
Net-Zero Energy 0.512 0.459 0.149
Experience (0.287) (0.292) (0.294)
Client Never Asks -4.117
(Dummy) (0.835)**
Client 3.130
Rarely (0.884)**
Client 4.213
Sometimes (0.898)**
Client 4.853
Very Often (0.921)**
5.client 6.400
Always (1.040)**
N 349 349 349 349 349
10
First, in order to discuss the impact of client behavior, it is important to recognize the
dual causality in interacting with architects and designers. If an architect knows he or she is
going to receive questions on ideas to make a sustainable building, the expectation may cause the
architect to suggest designs upfront. Conversely, if clients know a designer has expertise in
LEED design, for instance, they may not ask many questions. Given this effect, the results still
show a strong, but not unexpected, conclusion. Moving an architect from a client base that
“Never” asks for sustainable design ideas to one that “Always” asks increases the probability of
the designer suggesting designs by over 80%. This effect also reduces the probability of “Never”
suggesting sustainable practices by almost 30%. Clients may have a stronger effect on designer
behavior than previously hypothesized.
Looking at whether or not firms measure building performance post-occupancy, we see a
smaller, but still very significant effect on sustainable design introductions. Again, looking at
firms that “Never” measure performance, if they began to “Sometimes” or “Always” measure
performance, the probability of architects and designers “Always” suggesting sustainable design
increases by 35% and 31%, respectively. This may not be a strictly linear relationship,
suggesting there are diminishing returns on architect behavior by increasing performance
measurement. It may only be necessary for firms to simply start measuring performance on
projects. It is not necessary for them to measure performance on all projects.
Increasing field-specific knowledge in sustainable design can also have a strong impact
on sustainable design conversations with clients. After all, how can an architect suggest a design
if he does not know about the subject matter? The average score on the quiz given to all
respondents was 52%, which is considered a “Medium” level of knowledge. There are many
specific areas of sustainable design architects and engineers can focus on, so there was little
expectation that many respondents would achieve perfect scores. In fact, only two respondents
scored a perfect 100%, and more than half scored below 66% (a failing grade in many schools).
Increasing knowledge from “Low” to “Medium” or “High” increases the probability of
“Always” suggesting sustainable designs by 39% and 48%, respectively. This is a larger impact
compared to increasing the frequency of building performance measurement post-occupancy. A
similar effect is seen on those architects that “Never” suggest sustainable designs, which is
reduced by 43% for both changes in knowledge level. So, not only are architects more likely to
11
increase the frequency with which designs are suggested, but those that are not practicing green
building with any regularity have a high likelihood of changing.
If we compare the revealed knowledge levels with those self-reported in our 2014 pilot
survey, we see a striking difference. Whereas only 5% of respondents reported they did not have
the knowledge sufficient to provide clients with sustainable designs, almost a quarter of quiz-
takers scored below 33%, and a sixth of respondents between 33% and 50%. Do architects think
they know enough about sustainable design, but, in fact, lack the knowledge necessary to give a
complete picture to clients of all possible design strategies? If so, this provides an interesting
opportunity for changes in education, both academic and professional.

2014 Survey – Do you have the knowledge? 2015 Survey – Actual Knowledge

Conclusions

Despite the positive trends in green building in the United States and across the globe,
there are key barriers preventing our society from moving to full sustainability, let alone net-zero
energy. Increasing oil and electricity prices are causing developers, occupants, and regulators to
rethink the needs and incentives of constructing sustainable, LEED-certified, or net-zero energy
buildings. The most important takeaways from our research is that there are concrete ways
individuals and firms can impact building trends.
First, if we look at clients, why aren’t they asking for sustainable designs in every single
meeting? Perhaps clients expect architects to propose all possible designs, and, when no green
building designs are suggested, they perceive them as not possible. However, adapting new
cutting-edge, as well as simple cost-effective, measures to reduce a building’s impact on the
environment is possible in almost any new construction or renovation project. Educating the
12
public to simply ask for green designs from design firms can have a large impact, and may be a
cost-effective measure to help push building trends toward the 2030 Challenge goals.
Second, an architect’s knowledge can be increased in any number of ways, and we have
shown that an increase in knowledge has a strong positive impact on the probability of
suggesting sustainable designs to clients more often. How do we achieve this goal? Universities
and graduate programs can adapt specific courses to the green revolution currently in progress.
Conferences often offer students discounted tickets so they can come learn about cutting-edge
products and research, as well as building tours and short classes where course-hours count
toward professional architecture licensing requirements. As previously mentioned, incentivizing
individuals to learn and apply sustainable design practices is critical. As a whole, we have a
wealth of knowledge on effective design and implementation strategies; however, the entire
population of knowledge-users does not have access to, or simply does not use the resources to
the full potential. For example, only 66% of survey respondents perform personal research, and
65% attend conferences (such as Greenbuild and Living Future). One increasing trend is the use
of office “lunch and learns”, where firms bring in experts or have employees present on new
research or a specific case study in order to teach other co-workers. Surprisingly, 6% of
respondents reported that they do not stay up to date at all.

Figure 2
How do you stay up to date on sustainable practices?

The most difficult area to effect change will be in building performance measurement
post-occupancy. The difficulty in this is that performance measurement is often billed into the
contract with the design and construction firms. Throughout an RFP process, submissions with
high budgets are often sacrificed to make the project more cost-effective – and performance
13
measurement can be easily removed in order to secure a contract when a client likes the
building’s design.
Corporate office buildings are problematic in that occupants do not realize the potential
benefits of paying higher rent in a LEED-certified or net-zero energy building. Research has
shown (Meir et al. 2011) that different stakeholders perceive costs and benefits of performance
measurement very differently. Government (and institutional) employees perceive a high value
of gaining data on sustainability, and can establish a “green city” label to attract businesses,
families, and make additional tax revenue. In contrast, occupants receive little benefit of
performance measurement. For example, a 50 to 100-person company in a tall office building
may not necessarily care that the ventilation system is performing at 95% efficiency and moving
twice the air through the indoor environment compared to a standard baseline building. A recent
study has shown that moving employees from a standard to LEED-platinum certified
environment can increase productivity by the equivalent of giving each employee a $5,000
raise.
7
Now, the manager has an incentive to make sure the building’s systems are running
properly, or else the additional rent is a waste of money. This is just one example of how a cost-
benefit analysis can impact how performance measurement can influence corporate efficiency. A
manager may want to ensure continued building functionality in order to fully internalize the
benefits of the building in which the company is based.

7
Allen et al. 2015
14
References

Joseph G. Allen, Piers MacNaughton, Usha Satish, Suresh Santanam, Jose Vallarino, and John D. Spengler
(2015) Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic
Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office
Environments, Environmental Health Perspectives

Appelbaum, Alec. “AIA 2030 Commitment: 2014 Progress Report”, The American Institute of Architects,
Washington D.C., 2014, p. 15.

Isaac A. Meir , Yaakov Garb , Dixin Jiao & Alex Cicelsky (2009) Post-Occupancy Evaluation: An Inevitable Step
Toward Sustainability, Advances in Building Energy Research, 3:1, 189-219

Appendix

The Survey (all questions are included below):

GENERAL QUESTIONS

1. Please select your primary profession.
a. Architect
b. Architectural Intern
c. Landscape Architect
d. Engineer
e. Contractor
f. Sustainability Consultant
g. None of the above
h. Other

2. Are you a (choose one)?
a. male
b. female
c. prefer not to specify

3. When did you receive your most recent degree?
a. before 1960s
b. 1960-1969
c. 1970-1979
d. 1980-1989
e. 1990-1999
f. 2000-2009
g. 2010 – present

4. Where do you currently practice
a. US – West (WA, OR, CA, NV, ID, UT, MT, WY, CO, AK, HI)
b. US – Southwest (AZ, NM, TX, OK)
c. US – Midwest (ND, SD, NE, KS, MN, IA, MO, WI, IL, IN, MI, OH)
d. US – Southeast (AR, LA, MS, AL, TN, KY, GA, FL, SC, NC, WV, VA)
e. US – Northeast (MD, DE, NJ, CT, RI, MA, NH, PA, NY, VT, ME, DC)
f. Europe
g. Canada
h. Mexico, Central + South America
15
i. Other

5. Are you in a position of leadership in your firm?
a. Yes
b. No

SELF-ASSESSMENT

6. How do you define sustainability?
a. Achieving ecological balance so as to not harm the environment
b. Achieving a net zero impact on the environment
c. Reducing and balancing environmental needs with technological improvements to reduce the impact
d. Meeting and exceeding the social, economic, and environmental needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
e. Supporting a defined level of economic productivity indefinitely

7. Do you feel you have the knowledge to design a sustainable building?
a. yes, I consider myself an expert
b. yes, mostly
c. yes, partially
d. yes, but barely
e. no

8. How often do your clients ask about sustainable design?
a. always (90-100%)
b. very often (60-90%)
c. sometimes (30-60%)
d. rarely (10-30%)
e. never

9. How often do you introduce sustainability to your clients?
a. always (90-100%)
b. very often (60-90%)
c. sometimes (30-60%)
d. rarely (10-30%)
e. never

10. Have you participated in the design of a Zero Net Energy building?
a. yes
b. no

SOLAR ORIENTATION + CONTROL

Test knowledge:
11. To efficiently control light and heat in a building, which strategy should be employed first?
a. Elongate the building east-west
b. Elongate the building north-south
c. Make the building equal in all orientations
d. Provide shading

12. Which passive shading strategy do you often design and recommend to clients?
16
a. Permanent shading devices (louvers, overhangs, etc.)
b. Deciduous vegetation that can shade a majority of the facade
c. Internal operable shades
d. We typically leave shading up to the client after the design is developed

13. What is a good rule of thumb for fixed angle photovoltaic panels (PV) on a south-facing roof to maximize
solar production in summer?
a. Angle is equal to the longitude multiplied by 0.85
b. Angle is equal to the latitude multiplied by 0.85
c. Angle is equal to the latitude minus 15 degrees
d. Angle is equal to the longitude minus 15 degrees
e. Angle is always fixed at 30 degrees

DAYLIGHTING

Knowledge Test:
14. Which of the following is considered a limitation of side lighting?
a. It is an orientation-dependent strategy
b. It often creates glare or inconsistent lighting levels
c. It is less effective at distributing light deep into a floor plate
d. all of the above

15. What is the most effective way to reduce glare?
a. Use polarized glass
b. Bring in natural light from two sides
c. Reduce the size of the window openings
d. Provide internal shading
e. Provide all occupants with sunglasses

16. Which surface should have the highest reflectance values to increase daylight distribution while minimizing
glare?
a. Floor
b. Walls
c. Ceiling
d. Desktops

NATURAL VENTILATION

Test knowledge:
17. Which natural ventilation strategy is typically most effective in hot, arid climates?
a. Cross Ventilation
b. Stack Ventilation
c. Evaporative Cooltowers
d. Cooling Towers

18. Which natural ventilation strategy is typically recommended when there is little airflow around the building?
a. Stack Ventilation
b. Night Ventilation of Mass
c. Cooling Towers
d. Cross Ventilation

17

19. What do you think is a comfortable indoor temperature?
a. 70F exactly
b. 68-72 F
c. 68-75 F
d. 66-78 F
e. 66-80 F

EFFICIENT ENVELOPES

Test knowledge:
20. What are the results of having a building with high infiltration and exfiltration rates?
a. Increased occupant comfort
b. High heat loss in winter, increasing building energy use
c. Smaller, more efficient mechanical systems
d. Continuous fresh air

21. Through what method is heat most easily lost in the average building?
a. convection
b. conduction
c. infiltration
d. radiation

22. What is the ideal window placement in a 10” wall assembly to minimize thermal bridging?
a. Exterior
b. Interior
c. Center of wall

Question implementation:

23. Do you typically design buildings to perform above your local code minimum r-values for assemblies?
a. yes, we design only high performance envelopes see how many people chose this answer, perhaps by
location
b. yes, slightly above the code
c. no, the code sets the standard

MEASUREMENT + VERIFICATION

Question implementation:
24. Does your firm measure building performance in any way post-occupancy?
a. yes, regularly (75-100% of projects)
b. yes, usually (50-75% of projects)
c. yes, occasionally (<50% of projects)
d. no, never

25. If you do measure building performance post-occupancy, what do you do with the information?
a. Assess performance, but do nothing to improve or disseminate knowledge gained
b. Assess performance, make a plan to correct issue
c. Assess performance, correct the issue, and store the information about project’s successes and failures
for future firm use
18
d. Assess performance, correct the issue, store the information, and distribute the information about
project’s successes and failures to the public realm through white papers, conferences, technical
research, websites, etc.

GENERAL KNOWLEDGE

26. What is the approximate cost difference for design and construction between a green building and standard
construction building?
a. There is no significant difference in cost
b. 1-5% increase
c. 5-10% increase
d. 10-20% increase
e. 20+% increase
27. What is the approximate cost difference for design and construction between a LEED and standard
construction building?
a. 1-5% increase
b. 5-10% increase
c. 10-20% increase
d. 20+% increase

28. What does LEED stand for?
a. Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design
b. Leaders in Electrical Equipment Design
c. Leadership in Environmental & Efficient Design
d. Leaders in Efficient Energy Design

PASSION + INITIATIVE
29. How do you stay up to date on sustainable practices? (select all that apply)
a. Conferences
b. Firm-hosted Lunch and Learns
c. Blogs
d. Newsletters
e. Personal Research
f. Conversations with Co-Workers
g. Conversations with Colleagues in the field
h. Webinars
i. Public Forums
j. I don’t stay up to date

30. How often do you connect with others about sustainable practices outside your company?
a. Daily
b. Once a week
c. Once a month
d. Multiple times a year
e. Once a year
f. Never

31. What is a big problem in your field you would like to solve?
User Fill-In

32. What do you think is needed to implement sustainable practices industry wide?
User Fill-In

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Are architects being taught enough to design for carbon-neutrality? Do architects apply sustainable design in client meetings and proposals? What are the barriers stopping us from creating carbon-neutral cities? To answer these questions, the authors sought to test architects instead of buildings. A national survey was conducted to test practitioner’s frequency of use and knowledge of energy reducing design strategies. We find that age, knowledge, performance measurement, and location have the largest impact. Surprisingly, the authors find that gender does not significantly impact how often an architect suggests sustainable designs to clients.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Regulation and rights reallocation: how private car license plate auction policy in Shanghai affects travelers’ welfare

PDF

The role of age, mood, and time- perspective on the interpretation of emotionally ambiguous information

PDF

Impacts of indoor environmental quality on occupants environmental comfort: a post occupancy evaluation study

PDF

Digital pollution: social media's carbon footprint

PDF

Carbon accounting tool (CAT) in BIM: an embodied carbon plug-in for revit

PDF

Essays on applied microeconomics

PDF

Internal prosperity and external alienation: compounding effects of village elections in rural China

PDF

Are there hidden costs associated with teacher layoffs? The impact of job insecurity on teacher effectiveness in the Los Angeles Unified School District

PDF

The impact of agglomeration policy on CO₂ emissions: an empirical study using China’s manufacturing data

PDF

Sexual economics: an econometric study of a university Greek system

PDF

Structural design tool for performative building elements: a semi-automated Grasshopper plugin for design decision support of complex trusses

PDF

Essays in political economy and mechanism design

PDF

Greywater systems in urban environments

PDF

A proposal for building envelope retrofit on the Bonaventure Hotel: a case study examining energy and carbon

PDF

"Watts per person" paradigm to design net zero energy buildings: examining technology interventions and integrating occupant feedback to reduce plug loads in a commercial building

PDF

Real-time simulation-based feedback on carbon impacts for user-engaged temperature management

PDF

Towards validating therapists’ in-session behaviors of cultural competence

PDF

A parametric study of the thermal performance of green roofs in different climates through energy modeling

PDF

Essays on urban and real estate economics

PDF

Selection and impacts of early life events on later life outcomes

Asset Metadata

Creator Duluk, Jerome (author)

Core Title How age, gender, and education impact our path toward carbon-neutrality

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Economics

Publication Date 08/11/2016

Defense Date 08/11/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Architecture,Education,green building,Knowledge,LEED,OAI-PMH Harvest,performance measurement,sustainability

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kahn, Matthew (committee chair), Narag, Ratika (committee member), Nugent, Jeffrey (committee member)

Creator Email duluk@usc.edu,jerryduluk@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-640057

Unique identifier UC11305594

Identifier etd-DulukJerom-4772.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-640057 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-DulukJerom-4772-0.pdf

Dmrecord 640057

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Duluk, Jerome

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA