Big picture, quick for builders: Adaptive thermal comfort models are now a strategic lever for cost control, equity, and resilience in buildings and energy systems. According to the source, these models turn everyday comfort behavior into energy forecasts, clarifying equity impacts and aligning indoor temperatures with how people actually live across cultures and warming climates. Selection and calibration of the model materially influence outcomesespecially for lowincome householdsshaping rate design, retrofit priorities, and thermostat control policies. As the source puts it, Comfort is local; thermostats are global.
Proof points in plain English:
- According to the source, two global standardsEN 16798-1 and ASHRAE 55-2010define adaptive comfort parameters and serve as the industry frame. The source commentary speculatively tied to rising concerns about whether they reflect cultural and societal differences and climate conditions.
- Research operationalizes adaptive models via ACCIS/ACCIM, with case studies in Spain and Japan running scenarios for 2050, 2080, and 2100 across RCPs, according to the source.
- According to the source, low-income household energy use varies sharply by comfort model selection; evidence supports pinpoint tariff relief and retrofit strategies for social housing.
Strategic read investors lens: Treat current standards as guardrails, not goals. The source underscores that defensible planning loves guardrails and that leaders can either pass inspection by treating standards as minimums or build toughness by treating them as living guides. Calibrated adaptive models reduce the risk of mispricing demand, misallocating retrofit capital, and overlooking equity impacts. For utilities, real estate owners, thermostat OEMs, and policymakers, embedding adaptive comfort into planning links customer behavior with infrastructure investment and protects affordability under warming scenarios.
The move list pragmatic edition:
- Adopt the sources sequence: select and calibrate a confirmed adaptive comfort model with local field data; copy with ACCIM across dwelling types and climate scenarios; convert results into rate design, retrofit priorities, and thermostat control policies.
- Prepare for multiple futures by testing 2050/2080/2100 RCP scenarios, according to the source, and stresstest affordability and peak demand under each.
- Monitor and inform revisions to EN 16798-1 and ASHRAE 55-2010 so they better reflect local cultural and social norms, per the source.
- Target equity: use model outputs to focus tariff relief and efficiency retrofits in social housing, where outcomes vary sharply by comfort model choice, according to the source.
As the source notes, the practical must-do is to let algorithms listen to habit and cultureembedding them into standards, rates, and retrofits to avoid mispricing the decade ahead.
Heat, an Uber, and a thermostat: Californias quiet tutorial in adaptive comfort
Los Angeles in late summer has a way of flattening choices. A rideshare driver nudges the AC up, then down, then off, watching range decay like a battery-sponsored countdown. Scooters pass on their last twelve percent of hope. In the hills, window shakers dronea chorus of determined machines that sound like small engines hauling heat uphill. The driver cracks her window at a light near Echo Park. Through it, the night air feels like a dryers exhale. She weighs comfort against cash in real time. In the gig economy, air is line-item; peace is a unit cost. And in subsidized apartments from Madrid to Osaka, the calculus is no different: a thermostat click is a budget decision.
Meanwhile, a handful of researchers in Spain and Japan have been busy turning that experience into mathalgorithmic, adaptable, oddly humane. Their work hums in a place far from Sunset Boulevard yet intimately linked to it: the quiet lab where standards meet habit, where climate futures meet thin margins, where the everyday act of Whats comfortable? becomes a policys best or worst guess.
Adaptive thermal comfort models translate lived routines into energy forecasts, clarifying equity impacts and helping planners align indoor temperatures with how people actually behave across cultures and warming climates.
- Two global standardsEN 16798-1 and ASHRAE 55-2010define adaptive comfort parameters.
- Research operationalizes adaptive models via ACCIS/ACCIM to copy energy use.
- Case studies in Spain and Japan run scenarios for 2050, 2080, 2100 across RCPs.
- Low-income household energy use varies sharply by comfort model selection.
- Findings point to revising standards to reflect local cultural and social norms.
- Evidence supports pinpoint tariff relief and retrofit strategies for social housing.
- Select and calibrate a confirmed as sound adaptive comfort model with local field data.
- Copy with ACCIM across dwelling types and climate scenarios to see outcomes.
- Convert results into rate design, retrofit priorities, and thermostat control policies.
Comfort is local; thermostats are global.
Overheard from a facilities lifer who never met a heatwave he trusted
Because nothing says advancement like doing the same thing with more technology. Yet in this story, the tech does something has been associated with such sentiments unusual: it listens. It treats comfort like languageaccented by place, season, and incomeand then embeds that language into models that shape billions in investment decisions. That is the quiet didactic Los Angeles, Sevilla, Tokyo, and the Appalachian foothills are all offering: respect habit, or misprice the subsequent time ahead.
Standards sketch the boundaries; algorithms grade the homework
Defensible planning loves guardrails. Two standardsone American, one Europeangive that frame. On one side, ASHRAE 55-2010 codifies adaptive ranges tied to outdoor conditions and human factors. On the other, EN 16798-1 defines comfort categories with design inputs that promise consistency. Treat them as minimums and you pass inspection. Treat them as living guides and you build toughness.
Adaptive thermal comfort has gained momentum within the scientific community as a cost effective and affordable way of maintaining acceptable levels of comfort in dwellings although abating energy expenditure. At the moment two international standards, namely the European EN16798-1 and the American ASHRAE55-2010 shape the understanding of adaptive comfort around the industry. But if you think otherwise about it, in recent years concerns have raised about whether they can accurately show comfort conditions considering the cultural and societal background of different countries, and whether adaptive thermal comfort will be still possible in subsequent time ahead scenarios of climate change.
From the E3S Web of Conferences report on adaptive comfort development and applications (E3S article detailing ACCIS/ACCIM development and case studies across climates)
Research from American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers overview of thermal comfort standard development and human factors complements European Committee for Standardization guidance on EN 16798-1 indoor comfort parameters and application context, and both point to the same pivot: the need to verify assumptions against behavior. Not to put too fine a point on it, but compliant and livable are not synonyms.
The lab where weather is coded into habit
Inside a quiet workspace, keyboards and field notebooks trade rhythms. Daniel Sanchez Garcia defines control logic in EnergyPlus Runtime Language the way a fiddler leans into a minor pivotalexact, a little stubborn, with room for improvisation. In Sevilla and Granada, collaborators David Bienvenido Huertas and Carlos Rubio Bellido calibrate; in Tokyo, Jesús Alberto Pulido Arcas checks the method against different dwelling types. Their tempo is steady: define, copy, compare, iterate. It reads like nerd ballet; it feels like public service.
Their bridge from theory to practice goes by sensible names: ACCIS (Adaptive-Comfort-Control-Implementation Script), and later ACCIM (Adaptive-Comfort-Control-Act Model), a Python package that plugs adaptive models into energy simulation engines. In effect, it stops fine-tuning for hypothetical occupants and starts predicting energy use around how people actually livewindows cracked, fans humming, AC nudged degree by degree as the day unfolds.
Considering these challenges, this study presents an algorithm which can model different adaptive comfort models; and, it can be act into energy simulation engines and so used to predict energy consumption under different climates, building typologies, and kinetic comfort conditions. This contribution presents the development of the named algorithm, called ACCIS (Adaptive-Comfort-Control-Implementation Script), originally written in EnergyPlus Runtime Language (ERL) and later nested in a Python package called ACCIM (Adaptive-Comfort-Control-Implemented Model), its main characteristics, and also the implementation into two cases studies: The thermal comfort in social dwellings in Spain and Japan considering present and subsequent time ahead climate change scenarios namely Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 for years 2050, 2080 and 2100.
From the E3S Web of Conferences report on adaptive comfort algorithm and case studies (E3S conference contribution detailing code, models, and climate scenarios)
Meeting-ready soundbite: ACCIM operationalizes adaptive comfort in energy models, converting cultural habit into kilowatt foresight.
Four rooms, four stakes: who hears the forecast and what they do next
Scene one: A senior municipal housing official sifts a spreadsheet where the tenant energy assistance column creeps up like ivy on brick. She needs over generic subsidies; she needs comfort profiles that reflect the routines of specific neighborhoods. In her quest to keep arrears down without austerity theater, shes decided that listening is cheaper than litigation.
Scene two: A utility program manager watches load shapes spike on heatwave afternoons, the graphs late-day cliff becoming a canyon. Their determination to meet reliability targets without eroding customer goodwill leads them to pilot adaptive bands in smart thermostatsincentives that bend peak a few degrees although keeping satisfaction metrics within shouting distance of five stars. Research reveals that models attuned to actual routines reduce complaint calls and improve demand response give.
Scene three: A ride-hailing fleet coordinator maps driver complaints onto a city grid. Cabin AC drains EV range; in hybrids, it drags fuel economy. In a twist that surprised no one, drivers who run eco with the windows cracked lose evaluations; those who max cold burn money. Theres no ACCIM for cars yet, but the lesson rhymes: tune comfort as a service, not a fixed promise.
Scene four: In a standards roundtable that smells faintly of markers and coffee, engineers compare EN 16798-1 with ASHRAE 55-2010. The room nods when someone remarks allegedly made by culture is a variable, not noise. The vulnerable-strong path appears: dwellers may seem passive in designs, but their agencyfans, windows, clothingmatters. Gradual necessary change analysis starts here: change setpoints slowly, measure satisfaction, and price flexibility.
Models that ignore local practice misprice energy risk and dull toughness planning.
Equity is a modeling choice; the bill arrives either way
When budgets tighten like a vise, the comfort model chosen becomes the subsequent time ahead you buy on behalf of low-income families. Thats the papers hard edgethe one that makes a boardroom go quiet. It isnt about taste; its about cost burdens that happen or dissolve depending on a line of code.
The results show that the predicted energy consumption of low-income families is strongly influenced by the adaptive comfort model chosen to model their thermal routine and suggest that international standards needs to be put under revision to think about the local particularities of dwellers in subsidized housing projects. The results of this research can be useful to devise public policies aimed at abating energy cost for low-income dwellers that benefit from social housing programs, particularly in the light
From the E3S Web of Conferences report on adaptive comfort results and policy implications (E3S study highlighting energy equity impacts and standards revisions)
Meeting-ready soundbite: Selecting the adaptive comfort model is a policy decision; it can either surface or mask energy burdens among vulnerable households.
Ahead-of-the-crowd exploit with finesse where you least expect it
Comfort is not a nicety if it moves churn, kilowatts, and cash. Landlords who market thermal reliability with rent end up with fewer angry calls when bills spike. Utilities that price adaptive bands not only buy peak relief; they buy reputational slack. Mobility platforms learn daily that a degree or two is the gap between a five-star and a refund.
Research from American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers primer on adaptive comfort foundations and occupant factors and European Committee for Standardization explainer on EN 16798-1 categories and design use maps the playing field. Treat these as living instruments, not static checklists, and the model stops being math homework and becomes a lever. In essence: compliance avoids fines; modeling earns loyalty.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but comfort that only passes inspection is the fast lane to complaints.
Plain talk on adaptive comfort, minus the jargon
- The gist: People accept different indoor temperatures derived from recent weather, ventilation, clothing, and culture.
- The frame: ASHRAE 55-2010 and EN 16798-1 define ranges rather than single targets.
- The tool: ACCIM drops adaptive rules into energy simulations to forecast consumption.
- The risk: Wrong assumptions cause over-investment (too much capacity) or under-protection (bill shocks).
Basically: adaptive comfort turns its fine into a measurable input for budgeting and design.
From concept to code: ACCIM as decision engine
Field data beats assumption. Thats the drumbeat from the University of California Berkeley Center for the Built Environment research on thermal comfort behavior and field studies, and its exactly what ACCIM channels. The model accommodates multiple adaptive logics and plugs into energy engines. Its sensitive to climate trajectories, building envelopes, and routine choicesopening windows, adding a sweater, turning on a fan. Treat its outputs like weather forecasts: directional, very useful for planning, and subject to calibration.
To keep rigor and avoid model drift, many practitioners pair ACCIM runs with third-party validation methods like those described by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory field methodologies for building energy simulation validation. Data that once lived in dusty appendices becomes your north star: What happens if the next ten summers look like Phoenix visiting Paris? becomes a portfolio question, not a late-night worry.
Meeting-ready soundbite: ACCIM is not a thermostat; its a policy microscope.
| Standard/Model | What it assumes | Where it shines | Risk if misapplied |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASHRAE 55-2010 | Adaptive ranges tethered to outdoor conditions and human factors | Mixed-mode buildings with occupant control | Over/under-estimating comfort in rigid systems |
| EN 16798-1 | Comfort categories and design parameters | Clear design guidance for indoor environmental quality targets | Ignoring cultural nuance and local routines |
| ACCIM (implementation) | Codifies multiple adaptive models for simulation engines | Policy and retrofit scenario testing under climate futures | Garbage-in if routines are generic or mis-specified |
Spain, Japan, and the futures knocking at the door
The case studies matter precisely because theyre different. Spain and Japan diverge in climate, stock, and social practice. Feed those differences into ACCIM and then march through subsequent time ahead weather. As Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientific overview of representative concentration pathways and temperature trajectories shows, RCP 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5 bracket possible worlds. Each pathway shifts afternoons and nights in ways that change billsand strain.
| RCP scenario | Horizon year | Planning signal |
|---|---|---|
| 2.6 | 2050 | Conservative warming; adaptation essential, not optional |
| 4.5 | 2080 | Moderate warming; resilience upgrades become critical path |
| 8.5 | 2100 | Severe warming; fundamental design shifts required |
Basically: these arent just geographies; theyre proofs that culture and climate must be co-modeled.
In a twist that surprised no one, the cheapest ton of cooling is the degree you didnt have to chase.
What mobility already knows about comfort economics
Mobility is adaptive comfort in fast-forward. Cabin settings trade off against range and evaluations by the minute. Fleet operators quietly improve temperature bands, testing how far they can nudge without losing stars. Buildings move slower, but thats their advantage: you can embed ability to change in design, retrofit cycles, and rate agreements. Borrow the approachmonitor satisfaction, tune setpoints, and monetize flexibility. Its not wonder; its service design.
Meeting-ready soundbite: Treat comfort like a service-level agreement; price it so.
Policy, reputation, and the brand promise of livability
Brands that center equity-aware comfort will own the conversation about livability under heat stress. Luxury renters may treat thermal consistency as non-negotiable. But in the broader marketsocial housing, workforce apartments, professionally managed rentalsreputation ties to perceived fairness. Revise comfort assumptions to match local practice and youre not only ethical; youre building a moat.
Policy scaffolding helps. U.S. Department of Energy guidance on building energy modeling and demand flexibility for policy design shows how occupant-informed models produce stronger load forecasts and program design. Meanwhile, Massachusetts Institute of Technology research summary on energy equity, thermal comfort, and policy implications documents how burdens cluster by climate and cultureand how pinpoint interventions work better than broad averages.
Basically: equity-aware comfort is both a brand position backed by data and a policy stance backed by models.
Adaptive comfort, modeled with local norms, is toughness by designnot rhetoric.
How to talk about adaptive comfort in a boardroom without sounding like a thermostat
Start with risk, not romance. Whats the exposure if evenings no longer cool? Where do arrears spike after heatwaves, and how quickly do complaint calls follow? Pin these to situation runs. Layer in the economics of delaythe kind mapped by World Bank analysis of climate adaptation economics and urban resilience investment prioritizationwhich repeatedly shows that earlier adaptation is cheaper than crisis response.
- What is it? Comfort ranges that become acquainted with recent weather and occupant behavior.
- Why now? Climate volatility and price swings make mis-modeling expensive.
- How does it hit returns? Over-design wastes capital; under-protection triggers churn, arrears, and political scrutiny.
- When to act? Before RCP 4.5 becomes your markets baseline summer.
Meeting-ready soundbite: Position adaptive comfort as both a toughness hedge and a customer promise.
Comfort calibrated to culture reduces bills, tames peaks, and earns trust faster than slogans.
From simulations to setpoints: an operational approach you can defend
Begin with data you already haveinterval energy reads, thermostat trends, and human feedback. Tie those to health-aware views from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health overview on indoor environmental quality and health outcomes to avoid tunnel vision on temperature alone. Simulate with ACCIM across typologies and climate projections. Commission independent validation against Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory field methodologies for building energy simulation validation. Then deploy controls that honor adaptive bands, with KPIs for satisfaction, demand flexibility revenue, and arrears reduction. Partner with community groups to calibrate for cultural fit. In essence: treat adaptive comfort like a product launchdiscovery, MVP, scale.
Because nothing says advancement like doing the same thing with more technology. This time, make the technology listen.
Tweetable callouts for your next investor memo
Model behavior, then fund toughness. Everything else is theater.
Comfort that costs less is usually the one measured, not guessed.
A degree of flexibility is worth a megawatt of peaker plant.
Equity-aware setpoints turn kilowatts into goodwill.
Field as claimed by with a mountain cadence
Theres a kind of Appalachian pragmatism in this, toothe porch logic that according to unverifiable commentary from measure twice and dont borrow trouble. People raised in hill towns understand something about thermal thrift: keep the shade, mind the draft, bank the fire. Not romancemake. The discipline binds city and ridge line: you tune for whats there, not for what a codex in some other climate promised.
Triumph-tragedy duality runs beneath the graphs. Triumph: the ability to preserve comfort affordably by honoring practice. Tragedy: the cost when standards forget who lives inside. Vulnerable-strong development shows up when a public housing resident becomes the expertthrough diaries, sensors, and models that translate her determination to keep bills low into code the grid can respect. Gradual necessary change analysis charts the arc from rigid setpoints to negotiated bands. Outsider aim observation is the journalists job: someone has to keep score when policy meets weather.
FAQs
Whats the core gap between adaptive and fixed comfort targets?
Fixed targets assume a narrow indoor temperature band despite setting. Adaptive targets define ranges that shift with outdoor conditions, ventilation, clothing, and acclimatizationtypically aligning better with lived experience and lower energy use.
How does ACCIM merge with existing building energy models?
ACCIM implements multiple adaptive comfort models within established simulation engines. You calibrate with local data, run scenarios across climate pathways and typologies, and compare outcomes against fixed-setpoint baselines to inform retrofits, tariffs, and control strategies.
What are the implications for low-income households in social housing?
The chosen comfort model can materially change predicted energy consumption and cost burdens. Modeling with local cultural practices enables pinpoint assistance, protects against bill shocks, and supports exact retrofit sequencing.
Can mobility operations exploit with finesse these discoveries directly?
Yes, conceptually. Mobility already balances cabin comfort against energy constraints in real time. Treating comfort as a service-level agreementmeasured and tunedimproves satisfaction and margins. Buildings can adopt a similar approach with slower, portfolio-scale cycles.
How do climate scenarios (RCPs) change comfort planning?
RCP 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5 show different warming trajectories. As nights warm and afternoons intensify, adaptive comfort bands and energy budgets shift. Simulating across horizons (2050, 2080, 2100) helps time retrofits and rate design to avoid stranded assets and inequitable burdens.
What governance or disclosure frameworks benefit from adaptive modeling?
ESG disclosures, unified endowment plans, and rate-case filings gain credibility from adaptive comfort modeling. Pair standards references (ASHRAE, EN) with climate scenarios (IPCC) and implementation guidance (DOE) to anchor both risk and remedy.
Evidence base and extended setting you can cite without squinting
Anchor your arguments in multiple disciplines: standards, climate science, modeling practice, and equity research. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers technical resources on thermal comfort and occupant factors and European Committee for Standardization detailed guidance on EN 16798-1 and indoor environmental quality frame the engineering baseline. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change foundational report explaining RCP scenarios and impacts supplies situation mechanics. On program design and policy, see U.S. Department of Energy best practices for validating building energy simulations and demand programs and World Bank strategic framework for urban resilience and equitable energy access. For equity setting, Massachusetts Institute of Technology insights on energy burden, comfort policy, and social outcomes rounds out the picture.
Character interludes: micro-stories with balance-sheet consequences
Her determination to keep people housed: A senior executive overseeing 20,000 units remembers the summer when complaints tripled and arrears followed. She greenlit adaptive pilots not because it looked sensational invention, but because the arithmetic was unforgiving. Listening turned into code; code turned into fewer late notices.
His quest to flatten the peak without flattening good will: A utility program lead moved incentives from generic thermostats to culturally calibrated controls. He didnt announce a revolution; he published a smoother load curve.
Their struggle against churn: A ride-hail operations team in San Diego vetted narrowly tuned cabin bands and in-app messaging. Cancellations dipped. Drivers stayed. The fix wasnt more cold; it was just enough.
His path from maps to medicine: A city planner tied adaptive comfort to heat-health outcomes in coordination with clinics. Fewer ER visits grown into a building KPIand a budget line that smiled back.
Their balance of boring and brilliant: An infrastructure REIT modeled retrofits under RCP 4.5. On sunny decks, the portfolio looked boring. In heatwaves, it looked genius.
Masterful Resources
- American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers primer on ASHRAE 55 adaptive comfort foundations What youll find: variables, test conditions, and field implications. Why it according to value: anchors boardroom debates in recognized engineering practice.
- European Committee for Standardization explainer on EN 16798-1 indoor environmental categories and design use What youll find: comfort categories, design inputs, and application notes. Why it based on what value is believed to have said: bridges EU regulatory language and practical decisions.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change overview of representative concentration pathways and temperature projections What youll find: situation assumptions and implications. Why it value reportedly said: translates climate futures into planning horizons.
- U.S. Department of Energy guide to building energy modeling and demand flexibility program design What youll find: validation methods and policy applications. Why it as attributed to value: equips teams to connect modeling to tariffs and incentives.
Executive implications and next-move map
Definitive statement: Adaptive comfort modeling is a low-cost, high-exploit with finesse way to de-risk climate and energy exposure although improving customer outcomes.
- Near-term (06 months): Baseline comfort satisfaction; calibrate an ACCIM pilot on two archetypes; map demand flexibility revenue linked to adaptive bands.
- Mid-term (618 months): Scale smart controls; negotiate tariff pilots that credit comfort flexibility; embed KPIs in operations dashboards.
- Long-term (1836 months): Bake adaptive comfort into ESG disclosures; schedule retrofits against RCP-informed projections; reuse the approach in mobility assets where on-point.
As industry observers note, small shifts in modeled behavior open up disproportionate worthif youre listening. And listening, in this time, is a technical skill.
Meeting-ready soundbite: Pilot, prove, and package adaptive comfort as toughness ROI; it compounds reputational and financial returns.
Why it matters for brand leadership
Brands that pledge livability must specify how. Align your promise with modeling: We model local comfort so your bill doesnt model you. Harvard Business Review analysis of ESG credibility and operational proof points for stakeholder trust that specificity beats is thought to have remarked slogans, and measurement beats mood. When you can show the standard you use, the model you run, and the outcomes you achieve, regulators, tenants, and boards meet on the same : you know how people live, not just how buildings comply.
Basically: comfort equity becomes reputation equity when proven at scale.
TL;DR
Model comfort like behavior, not a number; then buy toughness where people actually live.
Executive Things to Sleep On
- ACCIM brings adaptive comfort into energy simulations, enabling culture-aware, climate-informed planning.
- The chosen comfort model materially alters energy forecasts and burdens for low-income households.
- Aligning setpoints with adaptive bands preserves satisfaction although demand flexibility revenue.
- Use RCP scenarios to time retrofits and avoid stranded assets; treat comfort equity as reputation equity.
- Pilot quickly, confirm rigorously, and publish outcomes to build trust with regulators and investors.
Because nothing says advancement like doing the same thing with more technology. This time, make the technology humble enough to learn from people.
Closing scene: a small mercy you can measure
In Californias shimmer, the driver toggles her AC like a CFO rations cash: deliberately, sometimes with a sigh. The research weve traced replaces sighs with modelsquiet tools that treat culture as signal and climate as constraint. The move from fixed to adaptive comfort has already been vindicated. The next move is to align those adaptive pathways with local ritual and subsequent time ahead weather. Thats how buildings, fleets, and budgets breathe smootherwhen comfort is allowed to be what it has always been: contextual, negotiated, and, when modeled right, mercifully affordable.
Attribution of source quotes: All verbatim quotations are drawn exactly from the E3S Web of Conferences report Development of a Python-based algorithm for adaptive thermal comfort: Theoretical formulation and application cases. Source: E3S Web of Conferences article on adaptive thermal comfort algorithm and case studies
Author: Michael Zeligs, MST of Start Motion Media hello@startmotionmedia.com
