Using Artificial Intelligence (and a Little Scolding) to Reduce Energy Use
Image:
By Andrew Price
Turn your thermostat down, Dave. A new program in England looks at your energy use and then offers you suggestions on how to reduce it to save money (and emissions).
Houses and other dwellings account for nearly a third of all the energy used in the United Kingdom (in the U.S. it's a bit lower). That takes a toll on the climate and on people's wallets. What's worse is that much of that energy is wasted because residents don't see an immediate connection between the thermostat, for example, and the utility bill.
Nigel Goddard, a professor at the University of Edinburgh's School of Informatics, is trying to solve that problem using cutting-edge techniques from a branch of artificial intelligence called "machine learning."
In the multi-year IDEAL project, launching in 2013, Goddard and his colleagues will outfit hundreds of British homes with relatively inexpensive sensors that monitor temperature, humidity, and light levels, as well as gas and electricity use, and wirelessly report their readings every minute. Using machine learning techniques, Goddard and his team will be able to analyze that noisy data to infer what people are actually doing--cooking or taking a shower, for example.
Then they'll use another cutting-edge technology--natural language synthesis--to generate automatic text messages that give people feedback about their energy use. A text message might read, "Last week you spent £10 on hot water for showers, if you reduced your average shower time from 15 minutes to 12 minutes you could save £100 per year." Over time, they can tweak the kinds of messages they send to make them as effective as possible.
How much energy will people end up saving with this kind of feedback? Goddard expects the results to vary based on a home's income level, among other factors, but says that "in the best groups I would estimate 20%, possibly a bit more--but its a wild guess."
The money saved with an energy reduction of 20% could pay for the roughly $800 sensor set within as little as two or three years. And that's what makes this project so interesting. If it works, it could scale quickly. "It could be offered by utilities or energy service companies, perhaps they install the kit for free and take a percentage of savings," says Goddard.
I, for one, welcome our new energy-conscious robot overlords.
Copyright 2013 by Fast Company. Reprinted with permission.
See what we're tweeting about
6 Comments
Add CommentThis seems like it would only be worthwhile in low-IQ households who couldn't afford it anyway. Some people simply prefer 15 minute showers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfrom the initial statement that households use only about a third of energy, what may be overlooked here is the huge subsidies that effectively allow industry - different topic but by analogy, in my region my household pays over $2 a kilolitre for water, yet I understand Coca-Cola pays something like $1 for the equivalent of an Olympic sized swimming pool or 2.5 MILLION litres - in other words I pay about 5000 times what they pay - for the same water.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf they then sell that water for $1 a litre bottle, after paying 0.00004 cents a litre, their profit on the water is 250000 times or 2500%
My suggestion for reducing my water bills - charge Coca-Cola - oh - say 1000 times as much for water, and that may help reduce struggling householders bills.
By analogy - electricity similarly.
oops - too many zeroes - not 250000 but 25000 times, and profit should similarly I think be 25000% (too early in the morning)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisand soon after the studies this will be required in all residence. If you think it's a silly idea that they would require it in a home, how many bells and ringers go off in your car. Everything makes a noise from door open and key in ignition to seatbelt warnings and etc. They are already making refrigerators that make noise if you have the door open to long. Big government once again believes it's citizens are to stupid to control their own lives.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe thing is people like taking 15 minute showers. They like being able to wear their t-shirts inside in the middle of winter. Would they pay for this if they knew what it costs? It's a wild guess. They certainly are willing to pay for expensive fast food, expensive coffee, expensive soda, and even drinking water.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@ultimobo, I'd like to see a source for that. There are various reasons you may have to pay more than they do. The economies of scale, sending the water to one location rather than five thousand individual households, might have something to do with it. The cost of water is mainly for the maintenance and construction of the piping rather than the water itself, which most cities get for free.
People are too stupid drafter....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this