I muttered first, so I guess I'm up.
Good question on what you were referring to as the life-cycle energy use and life-cycle impact of buildings. CMHC has done studies of life-cycle impacts, environmental impacts, of highly energy-efficient buildings. We did them on our 10 EQuilibrium housing projects that I mentioned previously.
We are aware that there are significant impacts between the time you extract materials and put them in a home, and there are the life-cycle costs associated with trading out furnaces or the other things that were mentioned during the meeting. However, over the life cycle of a building, the operating costs and the energy impacts typically swamp the amount of energy and impact that go into the building materials.
It's not to say that we should ignore them, but it is to say that I think the codes currently are appropriately focused on operating costs and lowering operating costs. As we move toward 2030 with a pan-Canadian framework and with co-operation between the federal and the provincial-territorial governments on advancing the code toward net-zero-ready projects, we're going to have more and more room to look back and catch this other life-cycle element.
In my view, the current code focus is a good one. That's not to lose track of the life-cycle materials—we should continue to focus on that—but there's a lot of work to do on operating costs, first in existing buildings and then new buildings.
I don't know if any of the other panellists have other views on that.