The Fear of Science: a Study of Science Anxiety and the Learning Capabilities of Adult College Students

One of the most challenging things a professor of science in a college setting deals with is the apprehension of students toward the very idea of science and scientists. This feeling of science anxiety does not appear to be limited by nation or culture and is often spread across all ages of students. The concept of “science is hard” is widespread and constant for many students entering a science course. This is quickly becoming a critical issue in education during a time in our world when we need to increase the numbers of well-qualified scientists. In a world where technological and scientific advancement is critical for modern life, having students who fear the very basis of modern living undermines their ability to work in the world as a whole. In an effort to understand and circumvent science anxiety, this research utilized interviews and qualitative analysis in order to determine how students dealt with science anxiety, and how it affected their learning. As a qualitative study, this research focused more on the attitudes of the students toward science than the achievement in terms of grades. This research focused on science anxiety and how it affected adult learning at the college level

Optimizing Energy Savings from Direct-DC in U.S. Residential Buildings

An increasing number of energy efficient appliances operate on direct current (DC) internally, offering the potential to use DC from renewable energy systems directly and avoiding the losses inherent in converting power to alternating current (AC) and back. This paper investigates that potential for net-metered residences with on-site photovoltaics (PV) by modeling the net power draw of the ‘direct-DC house’ with respect to today’s typical configuration, assuming identical DC-internal loads. Power draws were modeled for houses in 14 U.S. cities, using hourly, simulated PV-system output and residential loads. The latter were adjusted to reflect a 33% load reduction, representative of the most efficient DC-internal technology, based on an analysis of 32 electricity end-uses. The model tested the effect of climate, electric vehicle (EV) loads, electricity storage, and load shifting on electricity savings; a sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine how future changes in the efficiencies of power system components might affect savings potential. Based on this work, we estimate that net-metered PV residences could save 5% of their total electricity load for houses without storage and 14% for houses with storage. Based on residential PV penetration projections for year 2035 obtained from the National Energy Modeling System (2.7% for the reference case and 11.2% for the extended policy case), direct-DC could save the nation 10 trillion Btu (without storage) or 40 trillion Btu (with storage). Shifting the cooling load by two hours earlier in the day (pre-cooling) has negligible benefits for energy savings. Direct-DC provides no energy savings benefits for EV charging, to the extent that charging occurs at night. However, if charging occurred during the day, for example with employees charging while at work, the benefits would be large. Direct-DC energy savings are sensitive to power system and appliance conversion efficiencies but are not significantly influenced by climate. While direct-DC for residential applications will most likely arise as a spin-off of developments in the commercial sector—because of lower barriers to market entry and larger energy benefits resulting from the higher coincidence between load and insolation—this paper demonstrates that there are substantial benefits in the residential sector as well. Among residential applications, space cooling derives the largest energy savings from being delivered by a direct-DC system. It is the largest load for the average residence on a national basis and is particularly so in high-load regions. It is also the load with highest solar coincidence

Optimizing Energy Savings from Direct-DC in U.S. Residential Buildings

An increasing number of energy efficient appliances operate on direct current (DC) internally, offering the potential to use DC from renewable energy systems directly and avoiding the losses inherent in converting power to alternating current (AC) and back. This paper investigates that potential for net-metered residences with on-site photovoltaics (PV) by modeling the net power draw of the ‘direct-DC house’ with respect to today’s typical configuration, assuming identical DC-internal loads. Power draws were modeled for houses in 14 U.S. cities, using hourly, simulated PV-system output and residential loads. The latter were adjusted to reflect a 33% load reduction, representative of the most efficient DC-internal technology, based on an analysis of 32 electricity end-uses. The model tested the effect of climate, electric vehicle (EV) loads, electricity storage, and load shifting on electricity savings; a sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine how future changes in the efficiencies of power system components might affect savings potential. Based on this work, we estimate that net-metered PV residences could save 5% of their total electricity load for houses without storage and 14% for houses with storage. Based on residential PV penetration projections for year 2035 obtained from the National Energy Modeling System (2.7% for the reference case and 11.2% for the extended policy case), direct-DC could save the nation 10 trillion Btu (without storage) or 40 trillion Btu (with storage). Shifting the cooling load by two hours earlier in the day (pre-cooling) has negligible benefits for energy savings. Direct-DC provides no energy savings benefits for EV charging, to the extent that charging occurs at night. However, if charging occurred during the day, for example with employees charging while at work, the benefits would be large. Direct-DC energy savings are sensitive to power system and appliance conversion efficiencies but are not significantly influenced by climate. While direct-DC for residential applications will most likely arise as a spin-off of developments in the commercial sector—because of lower barriers to market entry and larger energy benefits resulting from the higher coincidence between load and insolation—this paper demonstrates that there are substantial benefits in the residential sector as well. Among residential applications, space cooling derives the largest energy savings from being delivered by a direct-DC system. It is the largest load for the average residence on a national basis and is particularly so in high-load regions. It is also the load with highest solar coincidence

Energy substitution, technical change and rebound effects

This paper investigates the relationships between energy efficiency improvements by producers, the ease of substitution between energy and other inputs and the size of the resulting “rebound effects”. Fundamentally, easier substitution leads to larger rebounds. Focusing upon conceptual and methodological issues, the paper highlights the challenges of estimating and modeling rebound effects with the help of production and cost functions and questions the robustness of the evidence base in this area. It argues that the multiple definitions of “elasticities of substitution” are a source of confusion, the most commonly estimated elasticity is of little practical value, the empirical literature is contradictory, prone to bias and difficult to use and there are only tenuous links between this literature and the assumptions used within energy-economic models. While “energy-augmenting technical change” provides the natural choice of independent variable for an estimate of rebound effects, most empirical studies do not estimate this form of technical change, many modeling studies do not simulate it and others simulate it in such a way as to underestimate rebound effects. As a result, the paper argues that current econometric and modeling studies do not provide reliable guidance on the magnitude of rebound effects in different industrial sectors

Why do homeowners renovate energy efficiently?:Contrasting perspectives and implications for policy

This paper contrasts two perspectives on energy efficient home renovations from applied behavioural research on energy efficiency and from sociological research on homes and domestic life. Applied behavioural research characterises drivers and barriers to cost-effective renovations, and identifies personal and contextual influences on homeowners' renovation decisions. Research findings inform policies to promote energy efficiency by removing barriers or strengthening decision influences. Sociological research on domestic life points to limitations in this understanding of renovation decision making that emphasises houses but not homes, energy efficiency but not home improvements, the one-off but not the everyday, and renovations but not renovating. The paper proposes a situated approach in response to this critique. A situated approach retains a focus on renovation decision making, but conceptualises decisions as processes that emerge from the conditions of everyday domestic life and are subject to different levels of influence. This situated approach is tractable for energy efficiency policy while recognising the ultimate influences that explain why homeowners decide to renovate

Estimating a threshold price for CO2 emissions of buildings to improve their energy performance level. Case study of a new Spanish home

Energy consumption in homes produces CO2. In many countries, building regulations are being set to enable energy efficiency performance levels to be issued. In Spain, there is a regulated procedure to certify the energy performance of buildings according to their CO2 emissions. Consequently, some software tools have been design to simulate buildings and to obtain their energy consumption and CO2 emissions. In this paper the investment, maintenance and energy consumption costs are calculated for different energy performance levels and for various climatic zones, in a single-family home. According to the results, more energy efficient buildings imply higher construction and maintenance costs, which are not compensated by lower energy costs. Therefore, under current conditions, economic criteria do not support the improvement of the energy efficiency of a dwelling. Among the possible measures to promote energy efficiency, a price on CO2 emissions is to be suggested, including the social cost in the analysis. For this purpose, the cost-optimal methodology is used. In different scenarios for the discount rate y energy prices, various prices for CO2 are obtained, depending on the climatic zone and energy performance level.Ruá Aguilar, MJ.; Guadalajara Olmeda, MN. (2015). Estimating a threshold price for CO2 emissions of buildings to improve their energy performance level. Case study of a new Spanish home. Energy Efficiency. 8(2):183-203. doi:10.1007/s12053-014-9286-2S18320382AICIA. (2009). Escala de calificación energética. Edificios de nueva construcción. Madrid: Instituto para la Diversificación y Ahorro de la Energía, Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio.Al-Homoud, M. S. (2005). Performance characteristics and practical applications of common building thermal insulation materials. Building and Environment, 40(3), 353–360.Amecke, H. (2012). The impact of energy performances certificates: a survey of German home owners. Energy Policy, 46, 4–14.Andaloro, A., Salomone, R., Ioppolo, G., & Andaloro, L. (2010). Energy certification of buildings: a comparative analysis of progress towards implementation in European countries. Energy Policy, 38(10), 5840–5866.Annunziata, E., Frey, M., & Rizzi, F. (2013). Towards nearly zero-energy buildings: the state-of-art of national regulations in Europe. Energy, 57, 125–133. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2012.11.049 .Audenaert, A., De Boeck, L., & Roelants, K. (2010). Economic analysis of the profitability of energy-saving architectural measures for the achievement of the EPBD-standard. Energy, 35(7), 2965–2971.Bertrán, A. (2009). Las mediciones en las obras adaptadas al CTE (4th ed.). Granada: Editorial Jorge Loring S.I.Brathal, D., & Langemo, M. (2004). Facilities management: a guide for total workplace design and management. Grand Forks: Knight Printing.Brown, D. W. (1996). Facility maintenance: the manager’s practical guide and handbook. New York: AMACOM American Management Association. New York, NY 10019.Concerted Action EPBD (2008). Implementation of the energy performance of buildings directive. Country reports 2008. Brussels: Directorate General for Energy and Transport, European Commission (available at www.epbd.ca.eu and www.buildup.eu ).Concerted Action EPBD (2011). Implementing the energy performance of buildings directive. Country reports 2011. Brussels: European Union (available at www.epbd.ca.eu and www.buildup.eu ).Davies, H., & Wyatt, D. (2004). Appropriate use or method for durability and service life prediction. Building Research and Information, 32(6), 552–553.Dresner, S., & Ekins, P. (2006). Economic instruments to improve UK home energy efficiency without negative social impacts. Fiscal Studies, 27(1), 47–74.Drury, C. (2008). Management and cost accounting, 7th ed. London.Eurostat European Comission, Instituto de Diversificación y Ahorro de Energía (IDAE), Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo (2011). Proyecto SECH-SPAHOUSEC. Análisis del consumo energético del sector residencial en España. Informe Final. Madrid.Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI (Germany) (2012). Financing the energy efficient transformation of the building sector in the EU. Lessons from the ODYSSEE-MURE project.Garrido, N., Almecija, J. C., Folch, C., Martínez, I. (2011). Certificación energética de edificios. Grupo de Estudios de Energía para la Sostenibilidad (CEES). Cátedra Unesco Sostenibilidad, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. (Available at: upcommons.upc.edu/e-prints/bitstream/2117/11820/1/GAS Natural_090406.pdf).Gómez, J. M., & Esteban, M. A. (2010). Sostenibilidad en la edificación. Comparación de dos tipologías constructivas. Rendimiento de los recursos. Ingeniería de Edificación Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. (Available at: upcommons.upc.edu/pfc/bitstream/2099.1/…/1/PFG_Completo.pdf).Gram-Hanssen, K., Bartiaux, F., Michael Jensen, O., & Cantaert, M. (2007). Do homeowners use energy labels? A comparison between Denmark and Belgium. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2879–2888.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1991a). Manual de uso y conservación de la vivienda. COAAT Principado de Asturias. Simancas Ediciones S.A. Valladolid.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991b). Manteniment de l’edifici. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991c). Manteniment instal.lacions. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1991d). Manteniment urbanització. Fitxes (1st ed.). Badalona: Gràfiques Pacífic.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1994). L’actualitat i el cost del manteniment en edificis d’habitatge. Guia pràctic (1st ed.). Barcelona: Gama S.L. Servicios editoriales.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC). (1996). Ús i manteniment de l’habitatge. Quadern de l’usuari (1st ed.). Zaragoza: Gràfiques Cometa.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1997). La vivienda: Manual de uso y mantenimient, COAAT de Cantabria. 1ª ed.Institut de Tecnologia de la Construcció de Catalunya (ITEC) (1999). La vivienda: Manual de uso y mantenimiento, COAAT Principado de Asturias. 2ª ed. Simancas Edicionas S.A. Valladolid.Instituto de Diversificación y Ahorro de Energía (IDAE), Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio (MITYC) (2010). Guía Técnica: Condiciones climáticas exteriores de proyecto, (available at: http://www.minetur.gob.es/energia/desarrollo/eficienciaenergetica/rite/reconocidos/reconocidos/condicionesclimaticas.pdf ).Instituto Eduardo Torroja de Ciencias de la Construcción (IETCC) (2010). Catálogo de Elementos Constructivos del Código Técnico, versión CAT-EC-v06.3-MARZO10. Madrid.Jáber-López, J. T., Valencia-Salazar, I., Peñalvo-López, E., Álvarez-Bel, C., Rivera-López, R., Merino-Hernández, E. (2011). Are energy certification tools for buildings effective? A Spanish case study, Proceedings of the 2011 3rd International Youth Conference on Energetics. Leiria, July 7–9.Johnstone, I. M. (2001a). Energy and mass flows of housing: a model and example. Building and Environment, 36, 27–41.Johnstone, I. M. (2001b). Energy and mass flows of housing: estimating mortality. Building and Environment, 36, 43–51.Kaiser, H. H. (2001). The facilities audit. A process for improving facilities conditions. Arlington: Kirby Lithographic. APPA. The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers.Kjaerbye, V. H. (2008). Does energy label on residential housing cause energy savings? AKF, Danish Institute of Governmental Research.La Roche, P. (2010). Calculating green house emissions for houses: analysis of the performance of several carbon counting tools in different climates. Informes de la Construcción, 62(517), 61–80.Larsen, B. M., & Nebakken, R. (1997). Norwegian emissions of CO2 1987–1994. Environmental and Resource Economics, 9, 275–290.Laustsen, J. (2008). Energy efficiency requirements in building codes, energy efficiency policies for new buildings. Paris: International Energy Agency information paper.Linares, P., & Labandeira, X. (2010). Energy efficiency: economics and policy. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24(3), 573–592.Liska, R. W. (2000). Means facilities maintenance standards. Kingston: R.S. Means Company, Inc. Construction Publishers & Consultants.Majcen, D., Itard, H., & Visscher, H. (2013). Theoretical vs. actual energy consumption of labelled dwellings in the Netherlands: discrepancies and policy implications. Energy Policy, 54, 125–136.Mercader, M. P., Olivares, M., & Ramírez de Arellano, A. (2012). Modelo de cuantificación del consumo energético en edificación. Informes de la Construcción, 62(308), 567–582.Ministry of Development of Spain. Directorate for Architecture, Housing and Planning. Report on cost optimal calculations and comparison with the current and future energy performance requirements of buildings in Spain. Version 1.1, 7th June 2013.Pérez-Lombard, L., Ortiz, J., & González, R. (2009). A review of benmarching, rating and labelling concepts within the framework of building energy certification schemes. Energy and Buildings, 41(3), 272–278.Piper, J. E. (1995). Handbook of facility management: tools and techniques, formulas and tables. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Inc.Popescu, D., Bienert, S., Schützenhofer, C., & Boazu, R. (2012). Impact of energy efficiency measures on the economic value of buildings. Applied Energy, 89(1), 454–463.Ramírez de Arellano, A. (2004). Presupuestación de obras. 3ª ed. Universidad de Sevilla. Secretariado de Publicaciones. Colección Manuales Universitarios, 37.Rodríguez-González, A. B., Vinagre-Díaz, J. J., Caañamo, A. J., & Wilby, M. R. (2011). Energy and buildings, 43(4), 980–987.Ruá, M. J., & Guadalajara, N. (2013). Application of compromise programming to a semi-detached housing development in order to balance economic and environmental criteria. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64, 459–468.Ruá, M. J., & Guadalajara, N. (2014). Using the building energy rating software for mathematically modelling operation costs in a simulated home. International Journal of Computer Mathematics. doi: 10.1080/00207160.2014.892588 .Ruá, M. J., & López-Mesa, B. (2012). Certificación energética de edificios en España y sus implicaciones económicas. Informes de la Construcción, 64(527), 307–318.Rudbeck, C. (2002). Service life of building envelope components: making it operational in economical assessment. Construction and Building Materials, 16(2), 83–89.Ruiz, M. C., & Romero, E. (2011). Energy saving in the conventional design of a Spanish house using thermal simulation. Energy and Building, 43(11), 3226–3235.Sanstad, A. H., Blumstein, C., & Stoff, S. E. (1995). How high are option values in energy-efficiency investments? Energy Policy, 23(9), 739–743.Sumner, J., Bird, L., Smith, H. (2009). Carbon taxes: a review of experience and policy design consideration. Technical Report NREL/TP-6A2-47312. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. US Department of Energy.Tuominen, P., Forsström, J., & Honkatukia, J. (2013). Economic effects of energy efficiency improvements in the Finnish building stock. Energy Policy, 52, 181–189.Ucar, A., & Balo, F. (2009). Effect of fuel type on the optimum thickness of selected insulation materials for the four different climatic regions of Turkey. Applied Energy, 86(5), 730–736.Universidad Politécnica De Madrid. Departamento de Construcción y Vías Rurales (2009). Evaluación de los costes constructivos y consumos energéticos derivados de la calificación energética de viviendas. Precost&E. Fase1.Uzsilaityte, L., & Martinaitis, V. (2010). Search for optimal solution of public building renovation in terms of life cycle. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 18(2), 102–110.Verbruggen, A. (2012). Financial appraisal of efficiency investments: why the good may be the worst enemy of the best. Energy Efficiency, 5, 571–582

Methodologies for Assessment of Building's Energy Efficiency and Conservation: A Policy-Maker View

Recent global peer-review reports have concluded on importance of buildings in tacking the energy security and climate change challenges. To integrate the buildings energy efficiency into the policy agenda, significant research efforts have been recently done. More specifically, the public domain provides a bulk of literature on the application of buildings-related efficiency technologies and behavioural patterns, barriers to penetration of these practices, policies to overcome these barriers. From the policy-making perspective it is useful to understand how far our understanding of building energy efficiency goes and the approaches and methodologies are behind such assessment