[Laurie Reynolds]

I ‘m very interested in a standardised DT for measuring sustainability in public buildings, particularly hospitals – which account for some 1% of the carbon emissions.

I’d like to include water, air quality and biodiversity in addition to energy as primary circular economy metrics.

[Laurie Reynolds]

On 20/10/2021 at 11:46, Deeyesbee said:

Thanks DW. Very interesting additions.   Am I right in thinking that you have identified two new blockers as follows:

1. Misalignment of public procurement methods (with what please? – see below) 

2. Lack of collaborative problem definition. Yes, although this is often easily resolved.

Thanks!

David

There are a number of examples of misalignment of public procurement and innovation projects

1)      SaaS business models pose problems for public sector CAPEX/OPEX financial budgeting

2)      Learning by ‘brilliant failure’ doesn’t sit comfortably in risk-averse cultures

3)      Procurement risk tends to favour tried & proven solutions and doesn’t promote the experimentation needed for successful innovation outcomes.

4)      Competitive tendering to obtain ‘best value’ makes innovation of new concepts and technology difficult.

5)      A view that new foreground IP and background IP used to develop the foreground should belong to the Purchaser.

6)      Data security and privacy concerns tend to be problematic in public-sector organisations. Cyber-security concerns often used as excuse for not engaging.

7)      Data quality often much worse than in equivalent industrial organisations, especially in asset intensive sectors where much of the asset infrastructure predates computer records.

😎      Lack of technical confidence necessary to judge the level of detail and compromise and relationship with risk. The ‘good enough for the problem we need to solve’ and ability to ‘start somewhere and see where it lleads’.

9)      Genuine systems complexity, especially in asset-centric organisations which lack the technical experience to take a Systems-thinking approach.

10)   Inadequate IT budgets and large desktop requirements which are not able to support modern browser technologies and security policies which exacerbate the problem.

 

 

[Laurie Reynolds]

On 29/09/2021 at 18:10, JoaoF said:

Readiness

‘Skills’ are a blocker when there is a lack of knowledge about new technologies, training for new roles required and clarity about how DTs are changing industry processes. 

‘Standardisation’ is a blocker when there is no framework and a lack of standards or standardised data structure.

‘Expertise’ is a blocker when the lack of it makes it difficult to know where to start and when DT advice or guidance sounds exclusive. 

I absloutely support the importance of interoperability standards but another important blocker is misalignment of public procurement methods and diffiiculty of arranging collaborative, risk sharing for problem definition and development.

[Laurie Reynolds]

I had same  problem as Dave Murray,  the PNG was too coarse resolution to read individual post-it notes.

The summaries are useful but it would be good to be able to read individual post-its under a specific toipic, e.g. Interoperability for example.

Can you also post a link to the Mural document please?

I’m sorry I missed the event but 

[Laurie Reynolds]

Ian,

An excellent piece of work, thanks for sharing. It will be very helpful to others such as myself trying to develop DT guidance and standards in parallel sectors – water in my case. I havent read the whole document yet – I have looked at diagrams mainly, so apologies if my comments are explained in the document body.

I was pleased to see regular reference to ontology and semantics and the way you’re managing both. Fig 2 is an excellent overview of the architecture, especially the separate identity of Asset Twins (AsT), Operational (OpT) and Organisational Twins (OrgT), this is a very helpful distinction, especially to my colleague trying to force BIM into the OpT space.

My question is regarding Sensors(IOT) and why they dont go through a similar schema/ontology layer as other data sources. Its clearly a new field (10yrs?) and standards are long overdue for comms protocols, semantic profiles of devices and especially device lifecycle management. The Table below Fig2 rightly identifes “the (low) marginal cost of sensors does not yet make it cost-effective to deploy them ubiquitously”. On the contrary, it’s the low marginal cost and high marginal value which enables them to be deplopyed ubiquously, if the right standards are in place to maintain lifecycle metadata! I have concluded that the oneM2M and ETSI standards are the most fully developed with global support and resources for further development and management. I have joined the CIM WG as domain expert for water and am working on datamodels extending the SAREF ontology. It would be great to engage similar UK expertise on highways. 

The table also refers to alignment of HE ontology with FDM, yet much of your ontology exists today. Have you done any work to map the FDM top-level ontology shortlist with HE model?

I like the recognition of important links to Corporate Knowledge sharing in polocy statements. Have you done any quantification of the business value derived from ontology development? I have a number of similar value of better quality of data questions and hope we might be able to setup a call to discuss.

[Laurie Reynolds]

4 minutes ago, AquamatiX said:

As part of research I’m doing in development of a Semantic Ontology for water systems, I came across an important international group working on blockchain for climate accounting. Hyperledger is coordianted by Linux Foundation and is Disributed Ledger Technology (DLT) which has published its first Ontology for climate accounting as a general ontology relevant to all 17 SDGs. They have recognised the important nexus between carbon and water and have factored the nexus into the current design. It has members drawn from around the world and a number of active WGs.

If anyone is interested, there are as always a number of ways to get more involved via https://www.hyperledger.org/

An example was given of applying accounting principles which justified cutting down trees to encourage growth of a spagnum bog because Spagnum is apparently 200 times more effiient at carbon capture and water retention than a wooded forest covering the same ground area and faster growing.

[Laurie Reynolds]

It may be a trivial point but it bothered me that the gears in the two DT slide 2 & 3 are loocked and cannot function.

Otherwise interesting opening talk but I expected it to be on zoom or some other interactive channel.

When is return date for INF feedback?