Government Operations Committee on March 1st, 2007

[Thomas Mueller]

There are regions where, for example, for some of the early LEED buildings, it cost 6% to 8% more. They were relatively small. The payback then was 10 years, but with just the slide in energy prices they were paid back in five or six years. There are a lot of variables that play into that, but what we found is that the payback periods, actually, are quite reasonable over all.

The bigger the building is, the easier time you have of it, obviously.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Yes, it certainly sounds as though the payback is worth the initial investment in virtually every case.

[Thomas Mueller]

Absolutely.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

You've never had someone declined because of too long a payback period, if you're well under 10 years or so?

[Thomas Mueller]

Yes. It's a smart investment.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

On page 12 you mention in the last paragraph that the “design knowledge, construction practices and technologies readily exist across Canada to achieve this 50% reduction”.

[Thomas Mueller]

Yes.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

How long would it take to accomplish that goal, and do we have the workforce to accomplish it? It's fine to have the technology there, but it seems to me it would take a huge workforce to accomplish a goal like that.

[Thomas Mueller]

I think it would, but particularly when it comes to energy, we have a lot of experience in Canada already. This has been going on for a long time. Just in terms of the retrofit of buildings, the energy performance contract has been around a long time.

And it includes not just putting in better windows. We're looking at a more holistic approach that can range from growth consumption and having a better envelope and better windows and better lighting that is readily available to just how you operate the building: you are smarter in operating the building; you also may be bringing in some renewable energy. It's a number of strategies that would get you to the target, not just one. Several strategies would get you there.

Even in the short period of time that we have existed, we have close to 3,000 LEED-accredited professionals now in this country whom we have trained and accredited. On top of that, there are virtually thousands of people who have taken our workshop: professional engineers, architects, landscape architects, cost consultants, contractors. It is really quite pervasive. We have made a very good dent in the industry.

That is not to say that we don't still have to build capacity in the industry. There is no doubt about that.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I think you may have partially answered this question relating to uptake. You point out that the federal government has roughly 5% of their buildings—

[Thomas Mueller]

Yes.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

And then, in your graph on page 22, it's clear that local government is at almost 20%.

[Thomas Mueller]

Yes.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Is it primarily because of smaller geographic areas to focus on? Do you think that's the primary reason you have greater uptake at the local level?

[Thomas Mueller]

I think so. The local governments, just like the federal government, were among the first ones out of the gate. They saw that there was a great opportunity locally to demonstrate sustainability on the ground and that there are operating savings. It's a kind of win-win for them, and I think it's similar for the federal government as well.

But I think the local governments have more control of what's happening. That's what I was saying. You are a much larger organization that spans from coast to coast, so obviously it takes longer to change the procedures and the policies you have, and so on. I think at the local level you just have more control on how the change happens.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

It seems to me that would create an argument for the federal government—our level—to put more incentive, more initiative, more weight behind the fact that we want to be leaders in terms of the image we present to all Canadians that this should be a priority for all of us.

[Thomas Mueller]

Yes.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

In relation to the third-party assessment teams that you have—that's an interesting concept—how do you choose them? Are they in there for a couple of years? Are they all industry leaders?

[Thomas Mueller]

Basically, it is done through a request for proposal process, and the teams are selected based on the expertise they have in green design. They are made up sometimes out of two or three firms that have experts who have experience in green building design and construction.

They are selected on very specific criteria. Right now we have five assessment teams across the country. So, for example, if you have a building in British Columbia that's being submitted for certification, we'll give the documentation to a team in Quebec so that there's really no interference in terms of interest. Really, we only manage the process. We sometimes arbitrate around credits, but it's really they who make the recommendation, and it's really through third-party certification. And the LEED system is quite rigorous.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Do I have any more time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Another minute.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Here's just one question, then, for Ms. Cross. Does the federal government pay an enrollment fee to be part of your system, or is it simply based on a cost per certified building?

[Deb Cross]

It's a cost per building.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

And you gave some figures before as an example. Is it per square foot?

[Deb Cross]

Yes, per square foot.