"The startup will then use special meters to measure the energy savings from the project and log them on the WOZX blockchain. Any savings made will be distribut

"The startup will then use special meters to measure the energy savings from the project and log them on the WOZX blockchain. Any savings made will be distributed into the investor's profile as energy credits." I am curious about this part. There's at least two obstacles that needs to be overcome in some fashion for the post-retrofit energy accounting: 1. Accounting for transient, and dynamic phenomena. A simple example: You can swap your old lightbulbs for more energy-efficient ones, but what if the occupancy of a building doubles and everyone uses the lightbulbs twice as much, which makes the electricity bill increase. The more complex example, which makes all thermal-related accounting suspect would be that the weather is dynamic, which makes it difficult to compare to the ROI that is informed from energy simulation methods (which is used to compare between different potential options, and rarely used to compare to an actual, real building given the massive uncertainty associated with the former). One solution would be to build a simulation model that gets updated with actual weather, and updated occupancy (etc) numbers. Or you can, in theory account for uncertainty during the retrofit proposal and ensure there's some margin of error for unexpected changes. In both cases you can also normalize by some of the easier properties (i.e energy per person). However, the calculation of uncertainty leads to a second problem... 2. The high dimensionality of the energy models. There are so much features/inputs that inform an energy model, that you end up with an exponentially growing space of potential energy results. Not an impossible problem to solve, but again, not something that is traditionally tackled in the energy simulation community since comparing simulation results to actual results is not the objective of our models.