The interests of a tenant do not always align with the landlord’s interests, whether they relate to renting an apartment month-to-month or leasing a big box store under a 10-year agreement. While a court of a law decides an unfortunate share of such disagreement topics, this discrepancy of interests has lead to complexity and frustration in the world of energy efficiency upgrades. This problem is commonly referred to as split incentives (or landlord/tenant dilemma), because “commercial office buildings involve a variety of market actors, and often the cost and benefits of energy efficiency are split between owners and tenants.”[1] At At the heart of this issue is the question: Who pays for the work and who benefits from it?

Building commissioning continues to prove to be a cost-effective measure, especially as the individual technologies that are tested evolve and the interoperability of equipment becomes increasingly complex. (For this article, building commissioning is defined as the methodical analysis of the performance of a building’s energy-consuming systems.) Building owners often cite the high price tag for commissioning as their main objection. However, the median normalized cost of “$0.30/ft2 for existing buildings and $1.16/ft2 for new construction cost),”[1] according to a 2009 study by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories, is quickly offset by energy and maintenance savings that result. This same study reported a “16% median whole-building energy savings in existing buildings and 13% in new construction, with payback times of 1.1 years and 4.2 years, respectively.”[2]

Microgrids appear to be a bottom-up market-driven phenomenon that is gaining penetration and market share based on decisions by facility operators and real estate developers, without additional government incentives or regulatory intervention.

The voltage/var problems associated with serving urban areas that import large shares of power during peak load hours have slowly been gaining recognition by the international electric power community. Affected urban areas have often been geographically distant; hence, they may not have been aware of similar problems faced by other areas and thought their situation was unique. There is a clear need for broader awareness of this voltage/var issue and possible solutions.

I recently was invited to give a talk at an industry conference on the topic, “Cyber Security — Reality or Myth.” I was somewhat surprised at the topic, especially in light of some of the highly publicized recent attacks such as Stuxnet, Duqu, Aurora, and Anonymous, to name just a few. What could have provoked such a topic? A major concern is the cost of cyber security, including resources, corporate damage control, regulators reaction, safety, and the impact on business plans for smart grid and substation automation. So, where does this end? I’m not sure there is a good answer to that question.