Evidence of meeting #8 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was buildings.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Good afternoon, everyone.
Mr. Cullen has a point of order before we get started today with the business of the committee.
Mr. Cullen.
3:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you, Chair, and my apologies to the guests. This will be very brief.
Committee members will know that this point of order is on a very important occurrence that happened just this past weekend, Saturday night, in which one of my communities was announced as “Hockeyville”, and we have—
3:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
—an understanding between myself and one of the honourable members across the way—
3:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
3:30 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
—so I've got both the home jersey and the away for him to choose from. In fact, Terrace is Hockeyville, and I think Conservative blue might be appropriate.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Well, if this hadn't been the Canadian game we're talking about, I would have pointed out that it isn't a point of order, but go ahead.
3:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Hear, hear!
3:30 p.m.
An hon. member
This could be a Kodak moment.
3:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just on a real point of order, last week when the witnesses left from our previous session—and they did a great job—I happened to speak to them on the way out. I asked a question about any examples they had of small communities that had proven experience in these technologies and energy systems, and they said yes. So I would like the clerk of the committee to contact the folks from BC Hydro. I told the witnesses I would ask the clerk to contact them to see if they could provide that information to the committee. They said they'd be happy to do that. So if it's the will of the committee, I would appreciate it if we could get that information.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Is it agreed that this information be requested and supplied to the committee?
3:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Agreed. Okay. We'll go ahead and do that.
Now we'll start with the business of the day, which is a continuation of our study on the contribution of integrated approaches for providing energy services in Canadian communities. We have our witnesses back from our last meeting. Unfortunately, votes interfered. They shouldn't this time.
From the Canada Green Building Council, we have Thomas Mueller, president and chief executive officer. From the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, we have Eamonn Horan-Lunney, manager, intergovernmental relations, and Andrew Cowan, senior manager, knowledge management unit. Shannon Watt, I believe, will be here very soon, and she is an analyst in policy and research.
We'll start directly with the presentations. There is some information being circulated, so we'll start in the order of the groups on the agenda, which is with the Canada Green Building Council, Thomas Mueller, for up to 10 minutes.
3:30 p.m.
Thomas Mueller President and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Green Building Council
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, for inviting me to speak to you about green buildings and integrated community energy systems. There's a tremendous opportunity that we have here in Canada to improve energy efficiency through green buildings and community development.
If you look at the handout on the tonnes of carbon per person in selected cities in North America and Europe, you will notice that many cities in Canada rank significantly higher than cities in Europe. The main difference here is that European cities tend to have a more compact urban form and have more energy efficient buildings. Also, district energy systems are quite widespread in European cities to make more efficient delivery of energy to buildings possible.
On the next slide, you can see that the American Institute of Architects first identified about three years ago that buildings are a significant solution for climate change. Since then, there have been studies by the national round table and by Natural Resources Canada that have established that just the operation of buildings generates between 30% and 35% of the greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. That is equivalent to transportation and it's also equivalent to industry.
The technology to reduce energy use in buildings exists and so does the know-how. Really, this is readily available across Canada. The application of it is just a matter of costs looked at over the life cycle of a building. Buildings, of course, last a very long time, for decades and sometimes hundreds of years, but there are significant institutional and market barriers as well, which the Canada Green Building Council, over the last six years since it was first created, has started to overcome.
In the appendix of the handout, I provided some information on the Canada Green Building Council. I don't want to go into great detail on who is in the council, but needless to say, the council is a coalition of leaders in the building and development industry in Canada. It represents a cross-section of the industry. It's a non-profit organization and has grown significantly over the last six years.
We currently have over 2,000 member organizations in the council. One of the significant things is that we represent a cross-section of the industry, not one particular industry sector. The reason for this is that we think it will help us achieve our goals in reducing environmental impacts of buildings through better performance.
We currently have almost 1,200 projects registered in Canada. That's about 130 million square feet of buildings under our LEED rating system. LEED stands for leadership in energy and environmental design. Included is the Government of Canada. Public Works has adopted the system for its new buildings. We have projects in every province and territory of the country. As well, we have members across the country.
I want to show you just quickly a few examples of buildings that have achieved a high rating in energy efficiency. There's the Gulf Island Park Reserve. It's a Parks Canada building, which was the first platinum-certified building in Canada. It uses only one-quarter of the energy of a similar type of conventional building. It reduces 32 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year from the building.
The next building is the Verdant, in Burnaby, B.C. It's an affordable housing project that aspires to be a LEED gold-certified project. Again, through a geothermal energy system, the building has achieved a high level of energy efficiency. It's 60% better than a conventional multi-unit family housing project. The additional cost of the system—and there are additional costs—was repaid from the energy savings that accrued through the system. There's really no net increase to the occupants of the building to have a system like that.
Finally, the Vento, in Calgary, is the first mixed-use project in Canada. It achieved LEED platinum status. It's a developer-driven project, and again, there is a very high level of energy efficiency, driven by and achieved within the market context of selling a market-based project in the Calgary market. When you ask the developer what it costs, he says it costs him as much as he can put in and still sell it in the marketplace and be competitive with his competitors. But you can see that in the market context this is quite possible.
The cost increases are relatively small. They're anywhere from zero to a LEED gold-level building at perhaps 3% and 4%. We also have LEED gold buildings that have cost less. They were cheaper and then they had the energy savings over the life of the buildings.
Definitely for buildings we need to look at the life cycle benefits.
We are at the beginning of this transformation in the marketplace, and the costs are continuing to come down for these types of buildings as the technology becomes more available and the know-how becomes more widespread.
If you go to the next slide, this shows the comparative energy consumption in a number of buildings, which one of our leading architects has put together. You can see over the past few years—at the left being 100%, the reference building—how energy efficiency in building design has come down to about 40%.
Already the next generation of buildings is under development in Canada, and one example is the Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability at the University of British Columbia. This is a carbon neutral building in both construction and operation, which is currently being constructed. Carbon neutrality in construction is achieved by making a building out of wood. Wood sequesters carbon, and in this case, 600 tonnes of carbon are being sequestered by using wood in the project, versus 525 tonnes being emitted, just during the construction. So it's a net saving of 75 tonnes.
The building uses waste energy from another building next door, so it doesn't have to bring in any gas or anything to heat the building, just electricity. And the building is so efficient that it actually gives heat back to the other building, so there's again a net zero carbon balance for the project. So it is estimated to be 45 tonnes net negative on the carbon side per year.
These are the types of buildings we are seeing emerge now. They are consistent with international developments. But we also have to realize that by just focusing on buildings alone, we will not realize the full benefits of the built environment to make improvements in energy, water efficiency, waste water, or waste. You really need to move from buildings to communities, and communities with integrated systems, including integrated energy systems.
In the market scan—this was done under the national climate change process—you can see the costs and impacts of various strategies in the built environment to reduce carbon emissions. So on the vertical line is the carbon effectiveness. On the horizontal line is the carbon impact. You can see land use planning has a very low cost, has a negative cost actually, and also has a considerable impact.
But when you move over to the right-hand side, you see district energy has a huge impact, but it also requires some investment. The benefits of these investments will be accrued over the life of the development, and they contain significant environmental and economic benefits over the life of the system.
Under the LEED system, we have developed a guide to capitalize on district systems they're currently using in the industry and have used at projects. We are also working on a new LEED rating system for neighbourhood developments that allows us to integrate land use, infrastructure, and buildings in a coherent system for community certification. I can tell you that the system will come into the marketplace by 2010, and we have never seen so much interest from cities and communities wanting to use a system like that.
We already have 23 pilot projects in Canada that have been completed across the country with much success. The rating system—and I could easily give a long presentation just on the rating system as well—also addresses energy efficiency in buildings, district energy generation and cooling, on-site energy generation, and renewable energy. So it's a system that addresses land use infrastructure and building performance, including energy efficiency.
We expect that when “LEED for Neighbourhood Development” is launched by 2010, it will be a dominant system in Canada, guiding community development, including the development of integrated systems.
I chose to finish off my presentation by giving you a quick example of one project in British Columbia called Dockside Green. It's a developer-driven project, where about 5,000 residents are expected to live. It's just across the harbour from Victoria. It's a fully integrated community that is off the grid in terms of waste water treatment, in terms of water, and also in terms of energy. The only thing it really brings in is electricity. The buildings and the development target carbon neutral development. All buildings are supposed to be LEED platinum certified, and they committed to pay the City of Victoria a $1 million penalty if they don't achieve that goal.
The first phase of that project was certified by us last summer. It did in fact achieve the highest platinum rating in the world. As I will show you, it is working towards carbon neutrality once the project is fully built. Phase one and phase two have been completed, and the cost increases, according to Vancity, which is financing the project, are between 2% to 5%, a relatively small increase for a significant investment in infrastructure.
The wood waste energy system is using biomass—wood waste, essentially, some from the pine beetle lumber—but it can use any wood source. It uses a technology that gasifies the wood chip, and the gasification generates heat that's being used to heat the project. But it doesn't generate any emissions, because the wood chip is not burned. The heat comes from the gasification process.
These are some of the new technologies that are now available. As I understand it from BC Hydro, there are currently 15 other projects looking at using this technology in communities across British Columbia in a district heating setting.
The project is also more efficient because it's a local generation of energy, so energy doesn't have to be brought over long distances. There are energy losses the further away you are. In fact, the excess heat from that project is currently subject to negotiations to sell some of the heat to the Delta Hotel that's adjacent to it.
These are local solutions that use a local energy source with very low emissions. There is a chart on reaching carbon neutrality. Again, there's the reference building. Just in building design this project has seen 58% better energy efficiency in the buildings than the conventional multi-family building. As well, 21% comes from the renewable heat generation; that is, by using wood chips and gasification. The remaining 21% is covered through buying green power certificates from BC Hydro, from low-carbon generation of power in British Columbia, which takes this project to a carbon-neutral position.
So it has already been accomplished in British Columbia. The system is sized so that the buildings, as you can see, use less energy and it is sized to also not produce high energy demand. It costs a lot of money to build for over-capacity. This is right-targeted and -sized for the project.
If a development-driven project—and it's the first one, and phases one and two have been sold in the market—in Victoria can achieve that level of energy efficiency through a district system, through a renewable source of energy, it is a template for other communities as well. It is being used in other communities in British Columbia, which is certainly a testimony that this is working well.
In closing, I wanted to say that integrated energy systems are possible, that more research and more investment is needed to better define what the environmental benefits are, to identify the costs and the life cycle benefits of those systems, to properly design the systems along principles and seek appropriate solutions. You can't just take each system and plug it into communities. There has to be work done looking at how these systems work in different settings with different fuel sources, and as a first step, looking at what the benefits from these type of developments actually are. They need to be quantified more clearly throughout Canada.
Thank you very much for your time.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Mueller.
We now have the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Giving the presentation is Eamonn Horan-Lunney.
Go ahead, please, for up to 10 minutes.
3:45 p.m.
Eamonn Horan-Lunney Manager, Intergovernmental Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to apologize, I left my French notes at my office.
On behalf of Mayor Jean Perrault, president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, I wish to thank the committee for this opportunity to speak about how federal and municipal governments can work together to better the lives of Canadians across this country.
I am joined today by Andrew Cowan, the Green Municipal Fund's senior manager. Unfortunately, Shannon Watt is in Saskatchewan today, meeting with the municipalities there about how we can work closely with them.
FCM has been the national voice for municipalities since 1901. We believe that Canada's quality of life and economic growth depend on healthy cities and communities in each one of your ridings. To track new talent and investments, improve productivity, and protect our environment, Canada must have strong and secure foundations at the local level. This is all the more important during these challenging economic times.
One area in which federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments can all work together is the area of integrated energy systems. Municipal, provincial, and federal governments must work together to create the regulatory conditions that foster innovation, promote new opportunities, and prepare the Canadian economy for the new era of energy and economic opportunities and of limitations in the future.
Across Canada, municipalities, many with limited financial resources, are actively working with local businesses, community organizations, and developers to create and implement integrated energy-based projects.
The ideal approach to meet and achieve energy sustainability in municipalities would involve building and using energy from multiple locally available, non-depletable sources, so that the overall energy supply is the aggregate of multiple low-impact sources. We also have to implement urban design and development approaches that support the intensification and thereby facilitate more efficient and affordable energy infrastructure options. We also must reduce or eliminate demand through various technical and management-based practices.
To support these initiatives, FCM and the federal government are working together through the FCM Green Municipal Fund. The GMF provides below-market loans and grants, as well as education and training services to support municipal initiatives and improve air, water, and soil quality and protect our climate.
Grants are available for sustainable community plans, feasibility studies, and field tasks. Funding is allocated in five sectors in municipal activity: brownfields, energy, transportation, waste, and water. To ensure the greatest possible impact, GMF partners with federal departments, agencies, provincial governments, the private sector, and NGOs to facilitate uptake of integrated energy planning and infrastructure projects.
Some of the types of integrated energy projects supported by GMF include integrated community energy planning, district heating, run-of-the-river hydroelectric generation, waste heat recovery and reuse, green building construction and retrofit, the use of solar and wind, and landfill gas capture and power generation.
Since inception, GMF has approved over 66 energy capital projects and has been involved in many more across this country. Examples of these projects can be found in communities all across the country, including the District of West Hants, Nova Scotia ; la Ville d'Otterburn, Québec; the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, Alberta; and the City of Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. From coast to coast to coast we're working with municipalities and the federal government to make this happen.
The technology and knowledge being developed in these communities are used by Canadians to design new equipment and develop new construction techniques that can be exported from your communities across Canada and around the world. These projects can be the birth of new jobs, new business, and even new industries right here at home.
A $1 million investment into alternative energy infrastructure projects can result in 10 person-years of employment, but there is the added value of future economic potential through improvement of local skills and industry capacity of the Canadian labour force.
FCM has many examples from every region of Canada of local projects creating locally based solutions that have created new intellectual know-how that can be the basis of new companies and jobs. Andrew can talk a little about that later on, during the questions and answers.
Replicating that innovation and opportunity—that success—across Canada could be the beginning of new industries. We can export Canadian knowledge, Canadian designs, Canadian technology, and Canadian-made solutions around the world. Because the research and development is happening here in Canadian communities, big and small, we'll create new jobs for the years to come.
In each of your ridings, I'm sure there are examples of individual Canadians, companies, and communities taking steps to find new ways to effectively integrate energy systems when designing new projects, or looking for operating cost savings when retrofitting existing infrastructure.
Today the federal government has an opportunity to effectively show leadership and get involved in promoting energy integration over the next two years through the Building Canada plan and the Budget 2009 infrastructure stimulus spending.
These are some examples. On a case-by-case basis many local integrated energy systems could be strong candidates for the new P3 public-private partnership office that is part of the Building Canada plan. Or the $1 billion community adjustment fund could offer funding for local solutions to create jobs and find new and innovative revenue sources for small communities hard hit by the economic downturn in certain industries. The $2 billion for colleges and university infrastructure offers a prime opportunity to promote integrated energy systems within these institutions across Canada and possibly build centres of excellence for research and knowledge-sharing.
Municipalities are moving forward, but more must be done. We need to work together with all stakeholders to develop the policies, support the research, and encourage the new technology. With the financial support of the federal government, FCM's Green Municipal Fund is ensuring that some of these many projects proposed each year receive funding, but there are many more who would like to participate.
Through partnerships like this we can realize the potential opportunity before us. Municipal governments are ready to work with the federal government in the promotion and implementation of new policies and programs that encourage the creation of community-specific integrated energy systems that take advantage of this opportunity to build the Canadian infrastructure we need to succeed in the years ahead.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you very much.
We'll now go to the first round of questioning, which is up to seven minutes.
We'll start with Mr. Regan.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses for coming today.
Of course, I have to begin by congratulating Mr. Horan-Lunney for noting the example of West Hants, the county I was born in, and the next-door riding of Kings--Hants, where my colleague Scott Brison is the MP. It was interesting to note that the places like West Hants and others you listed are leading the way in showing places like poor Toronto how it should be done. I'm sure colleagues on the other side and elsewhere can appreciate that.
I'm going to start with a question for the Green Building Council.
In relation to a building like the Verdant in Burnaby and others you pointed out in your presentation, when there's an additional cost of 3% to 4%, as I think you indicated, how many years does it take before that gets paid off in terms of the savings you get in a building of that sort?
3:55 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Green Building Council
It depends on the energy prices in any given year, but typically it's between three and four years, sometimes five years. With a geothermal system, for example, like the Verdant, the cost just for the system itself is a little higher. But usually, to keep the costs down for the occupants so they don't have to pay any additional costs, it could be around 10 to 15 years, but then after that your heat is essentially free. During that time you don't pay any more because it's paid from the energy savings.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
You say after that your heat is free because you're using geothermal, for example.
3:55 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Green Building Council
Yes. Essentially you have to pay for maintenance of a system like that, and there's a small heat pump that needs to be operated by gas, but it's not even close to the amount of energy you'd need if you heated with gas, electricity, or by any other source.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
To the extent that some of these buildings are using wood as part of the construction material, what does that do in terms of their life expectancy?