Dynamic Glass

I’m pretty sure there’s an existing thread (at least one) in the forum on dynamic glass with detailed feedback regarding value versus cost. I remember seeing some great feedback from the group. You could use the search tool for “dynamic” or “electrochromic” and it would probably come up quickly. One thing that’s more immediately relevant or timely to add: View Glass just filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy two weeks ago, so that’s just a helpful reminder that as we advocate for innovative products (as we should), we need to be mindful that extended warranties are only available from companies still in business. (Side note: I was looking at Rivian as a potential to switch my personal car to an EV, but not only could I not afford it, I have also heard recently that they’re having liquidity issues as well. It’s a tough world out there for a startup sometimes! I would hate to have a car from a manufacturer that went out business! Just as I’m sure a building owner would hate to have a technology-dependent façade system from a manufacturer that went out of business.) Steven Burke Senior Director, Sustainability D | +1 (617) 654 0691 C | +1 (617) 581 3644 suffolk.com From: Dave Hubka

Oof! Sometimes you can see why the building industry tends to be so risk averse.... In case it's helpful, Brent here at BG did a great piece on dynamic glazing a couple years ago called Is Using Smart Glass Smart? Nadav also hosted a webinar on the topic with panelists Lisa Heschong, Dan Weissman, and Brendon Levitt.

I’ll be curious to see what happens to View. Coincidentally I heard yesterday that View is reverting from public back to private ownership as of 2 weeks back. Not sure if/how that factors into the bankruptcy filing, but the person I talked with didn’t sound like she was terrified about the long term outlook. I’ve always wanted dynamic glass to be better than it is, so hopefully they can figure it out… Jeremy Shiman, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Associate, Project Architect Pronouns: he/him/his WRNS STUDIO San Francisco | Honolulu | New York | Seattle 212.405.2441 D | 26 Broadway #808 | New York, NY 10004 www.wrnsstudio.com WRNS Studio has been named a Fast Company 2024 World’s Most Innovative Company From: Dav

There isn't a lot I can add that wasn't already covered in Brent's excellent review.  On a project about 6 years ago, when I considered both products, I preferred the (greyish) tint and the transition speed of Halio to View (blue tint), but at the time we were considering specifying it, there were huge issues with lead time for Halio, so we ended up going with a low-E IGUs. 
My personal design bias is that smart glass is better used (in limited quantities?) where traditional glare protection is hard to install, and you want less finicky, cleaner details. Or avoid overlap between potentially incompatible systems. We used it in a skylight retrofit for a K-5 building once and it was really the only elegant solution to that problem. 

looks like it's curtains for view glass! and curtains for their clients too! nyuk nyuk nyuk! ;)

Hi All - we did a deep dive study on egc for a new building in NYC a couple of years ago.  The floor plan was about 15,000 sqft, with mostly south, west, and north facing facades (the east was mostly up against another existing buidling).   We did a deep dive energy analysis using the glass mfgr's tint state schedules, which are designed to minimze glare and improve comfort.  The tint schedule is not optimized for energy performance, and when we approached them about modifing the sequence to more optimize energy, they pushed back on the basis that they did not want to compromise comfort. The results of the model were: 1. The peak cooling load of the building was reduced by ~10% because the high tint was keeping solar energy out of the building, driving down peak loads. 2. The corresponding annual cooling loads were reduced by ~ 5%. 3. The peak electrical demand of the buildng decreased by ~5% because of the reduction in cooling load. 4. The peak heating load was unchanged.  The buildng's heating load was peaking in early morning as ventilation systems are turned on.  This time-of-day does not align with peak solar energy, so the peak loads did not change.   5. The annual heating load increased by ~10%, because the tint is blocking solar energy which would have been beneficial to the building by offsetting heating demand.  In cold seasons, we want to "bring in" as much energy from the sun as possible, and the tint was blocking receipt of that energy.   This was a surprising finding and is one of the significant drawbacks associated with automatic tint states which are misaligned with energy/carbon goals. 6.  Overall, when you put it all together, it was about a ~.5% decrease in annual energy use. The project did not move forward with ECG. -Chris Colasanti JB&B  

We have used it (Sage Glass) on a net-zero project and were considering it for another a few years back. The operational benefits are certainly there if net-zero is an absoulte but I can't recall the cost benefit/payback for that product. My memory is that it's something that can help lower energy use annually, but didn't quite make sense long term. Where it didn't justify was in embodied carbon. At the time, it was like a 5x increase in GWP over a triple pane IGU. The performance delta didn't justify the signifcant carbon investment for the project. They published a new EPD that shows lower impacts, but reductions from the previous EPD are in Module D; they're buying offsets. The product life is also lower than a traditional IGU. My personal thoughts lean toward it being a crutch for a well designed/shaded lower window to wall facade. Though it is super cool... There are other insulating and light filtering products like Solera with lower upfront impact. Also eyeing vacuum insulated glass innovation for super high performance. 

HI Dave, We had an institutional client that was approached by a dynamic glass company (one who is not going bankrupt) to use their glass as an energy saving measure. They were fairly aggressive to the point that the client paid for us to study it. We pulled together all the research we could find (thank you BuildingGreen et al) and from that jumping off point embarked in a month long study with a consultant. We presented our findings to the client, and convinced them the product was really only useful in liminal spaces where people are passing through, and not spending any time working. Main points were: · It didn’t have much of an effect on reducing thermal heat gain · It did not cut out glare and shades would still be needed · It messes with peoples circardian rhythm We have now shared this research w/ other institutional clients who have asked this question about using the glass. We are seeing a pattern of this particular company doing a work around, they know they are not getting spec’d by architects, so they are going straight to the facilities teams and heavily marketing to them. I am working on getting permission to share our studies, at least as a presentation to the green commons- since we learned so much from you all to give us a good start on the research. Happy to go into more detail if you want to give me a call Dave. Kristen Kristen Fritsch AIA LEED AP BD+C WELL AP Senior Associate Sustainability Coordinator ELKUS MANFREDI ARCHITECTS [tel] 617.695.7954 [email] kfritsch@elkus-manfredi.com From:

Hi all, I want to echo what William said - we just did a deep dive into the embodied carbon impact for one of our projects, and according to the EPDs listed on EC3 electrochromic glass is 5-10 times higher embodied carbon for a comparable "traditional" IGU.  On a large building this can make a huge difference - in the same ballpark as the amount of carbon you save by going from steel to mass timber.  I have serious doubts the relatively small operational carbon savings will ever offset the increase in embodied carbon.  Hopefully the manufacturers can find a way to reduce the embodied carbon, without just buying offsets!

Hi, Kristen, and Dave, We should find a time for a discussion – we are embarking on a new project that is incorporating it s – we found that our modeling did not show significant savings but I can say from our project we worked on years ago with one company, the comfort benefits are dramatic – I had chalked that up to a weakness of modeling software to accurately demonstrate radiant effects (based on a SDL presentation a number of years ago at Islandwood by one of the SDL-ers). Would be very interested in learning more about your study if you can share more! JW Jonathan Weiss, AIA, LEED Fellow, WELL AP, Fitwel (he/him) | Director of Sustainability | Jacobs | People & Places Solutions M:+1.215.620.7322 | jonathan.weiss@jacobs.com From:

We had an identical experience to what Kristen described, with the electrochromic glass product rep going straight to our instituional client with a hard sell on their miracle product.  That end-run sales pitch resulted in the team spending having to spend far more design time/fees on dynamic glass considerations than was warranted for the limited areas where dynamic glazing provided benefit.  We're frankly less likely to specify that manufacturer in the future as a result of their high-pressure, design-team-fees-eating sales model. On a more positive note, we used thermochromic glass as a value engineering alternative to sunscreens at south-facing lobbies for a residence hall project, proposed by the CM, and were pretty satisfied with the results (BG article: https://www.buildinggreen.com/product-review/glare-overheating-dim-sun-thermochromic-glazing).  Jim Nicolow, FAIA Principal & Director of Sustainability, LEED Fellow, LFA D: 808 379 3465 | C: 404 226 8435 LordAeckSargent.com

One other thought about some of these products is that for large areas of glass, their flatness isn't the same. One of our commercial clients took the bait of the hard sell for View glass and the difference in flattness is noticiable. 
I think this product makes sense for glazing replacements for existing buildings or perhaps in hot climates where solar heat gain is always  a problem. 
- Alison Nash

Another thought to keep in mind with electrochromic glazing is the total carbon impact. Electrochromic glazing has about 6-7 times the embodied carbon of traditional glass, so it has to make a big operational carbon impact to overcome that initial carbon deficit. Additionally, we have an older project that used it (maybe 10 years ago) and there was a decent number of failures of the glass’ ability to tint. We have heard that the newer iterations of electrochromic glazing has less of those failures, but it’s worth understanding if you are looking at it for a project.. We were told that many of the electrochromic glazing manufactures are trying to become installers to control the quality of the installation which I guess is the reason for some of the failures, but there is resistance from CMs. Andrea Love, FAIA, LEED Fellow Principal | Director of Building Science she/her alove@payette.com 617-895-1025 (O) / 773-573-2335 (M) PAYETTE Fro

Dave, I'm a little late to this thread, but wanted to share a link to a white paper I co-authored in 2020 on specifying electrochromic glass. This is based on a case study for a 60k install in the midwest that is now built using View. I would echo many of the sentiments that I've seen in this thread: The first cost is tough to swallow for most clients, the manufacturers operate very differently. Guiding the client through that process and how to value some of the parameters that likely get lost in the chaos most of the time is a fair amount of effort. I'd also say that a lot has happened since we wrote this paper and presented at facade tectonics, as some have brought up around View's legal issues, and I believe Halio has found a better glass partner in the last year or so (when we wrote this paper, they were partnered with a minor player out of japan, and didn't have a ton of installs). Have a read, and feel free to reach out if you have questions. SPECIFYING ELECTROCHROMIC GLASS_STUDIOS Architecture.pdf - Google Drive Justin Glover, AIA LEED AP 415.260.8443 On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 11:56, Andrea Love wrote:

Justin, the link did not come through for me. Heather Holdridge Associate Partner LAKE|FLATO ARCHITECTS 311 Third Street San Antonio,Texas78215 p 210.679.2312 ********************

Thank you Heather. In case others also had issues and are interested: Direct link below: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oxRp_4JWrmoh6-k8Np_6ahZdEhx63-HB/view Also linked through this project page if you scroll down a bit. Applied Underwriters Corporate Campus and Interiors - Omaha, NE (studios.com) and directly from the conference (albeit behind a log in wall): Specifying Electrochromic Glass | Facade Tectonics Institute _//_- On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 12:27, Heather Holdridge wrote: