Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank members of this committee for inviting us today to present our views on energy efficiency.
My name is Charles Tanguay, and I am the communications officer for the Union des consommateurs, a federation of consumers' associations with its head office in Quebec. I am accompanied by Marc-Olivier Moisan-Plante, my colleague who is an economist. His specific area of interest is energy efficiency issues. He is currently conducting a study on ecoenergy labelling for homes. I think the topic will be of interest to you and we can tell you about it. The Union des consommateurs is a federation. It includes 10 local consumers' associations, the ACEFs, as well as the Association des consommateurs pour la qualité dans la construction, an association specifically dedicated to residential home renovation and construction.
Our interest in energy efficiency issues is not new. We participate in the work of the Régie de l'énergie du Québec, and our member associations deliver a special energy efficiency program called “Éconologis” which targets low-income households. The program is funded by the Quebec Agence de l'efficacité énergétique and by energy distributors and through visits to low-income family households, makes it possible to do small insulation work projects, to provide advice and to reduce energy bills in these homes.
We believe that everything about energy efficiency is good. It reduces energy costs for consumers and mitigates the increase in costs associated with ever-increasing energy demands. We know that producing additional quantities of electricity costs considerably more today than the average of existing facilities. So it is much more cost-effective, for energy suppliers and society in general, to use negawatts, in other words to reduce consumption rather than increasing production capacity. It is also a matter of reducing greenhouse gases. We hope that Canada will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, there are economic arguments in favour of energy efficiency. We have seen very strong job creation in the sector. Money invested in it creates considerably more jobs than in other sectors. It is the economy of the future; it is a way to make our economy more efficient and to do more with less energy. It is good for consumers, but also for society in general. We would like to see the government do everything it can, take more action in terms of energy efficiency.
Bear in mind that many of the benefits of energy efficiency are not accounted for, nor are they only economic. For example, in the area of housing, the comfort of occupants can clearly be improved. We can improve air quality in homes, and as a result, the health of occupants. An energy-efficient home is generally better built, and that means it will last longer, and will require less maintenance. Many of these advantages are not accounted for, but they exist. As regards low-income households, the energy costs they will not have to pay will enable them to buy more food and to send their children to school. It is important to calculate not only the economic advantages, but all of the advantages associated with energy efficiency programs.
In Quebec, the Régie de l'énergie approves the programs of various energy providers. The cost of the programs is integrated into the base rate; in other words, it is part of the rates paid for energy. That means that all energy consumers in Canada pay for the various energy efficiency programs.
So when a program is subsidized by the government, all Canadian taxpayers pay for it. It is therefore very important for benefits to be fairly distributed. Ideally, all citizens should be able to benefit from the program.
Yet we realize that there are specific problems in reaching out to low-income households, when it comes to energy efficiency programs. In an evaluation—I believe that ecoENERGY's predecessor was evaluated—we found that the segment representing the poorest 40% of the population had benefited from only 3% of these program's benefits. In other words, the poorer you are, the less you benefit from energy efficiency programs. But the poorest people are the ones who need these energy efficiency programs the most. In fact, in many cases, they live in lower quality homes, which are poorly insulated, and they do not have the means to buy high-efficiency appliances. So poverty is making the energy bill more difficult to bear.
In addition, there are a host of difficulties associated with being a tenant. In many cases, the owner does not pay the heating bill for tenants. So there is no economic incentive for the owner to improve the energy efficiency of the rental unit.
That leads me to an anecdote on work conducted on energy efficiency. But this time it deals with automobiles. We have provided you with a copy of a research report published just over a year ago on energy efficiency labelling of automobiles in Canada. In the report, we recommend that Natural Resources Canada undertake a review of the enerGuide label for automobiles. We examined labelling models used throughout the world for automobiles.
This is an aside, but you will see that there are links to housing.
Our labels for automobiles in Canada could be improved and could above all be more visible. The current problem is that half of the time, the fuel consumption label for vehicles is located inside the car's glove compartment or in the dealership's showroom. So it is not very visible.
While conducting this research, we also examined studies which analyzed consumer behaviour when deciding to purchase a vehicle. We know that consumers are very irrational. When buying a car, criteria are based on emotions; consumers are concerned with the look of the car, with the power of the engine. While there is more and more talk about the energy efficiency side, when it comes time to buying the car, consumers are not translating these concerns into action. So we looked at how to make consumers more concerned with the issue, so that energy efficiency is part of the main decision-making criteria.
In reality, the same problem can apply to homes. When someone looks for a home, they start by looking at a neighbourhood, then they fall in love with the house because it has a renovated kitchen or bathroom. These criteria are more emotional, and less rational, and they win out over criteria for energy efficiency.
I will conclude quickly.
Our research report on automobiles advocates the adoption of new labelling which is more visible, as well as incentive programs to purchase vehicles which emphasize energy efficiency.
We can see the same thing in housing. My colleague is wrapping up a research program on ecoENERGY labelling for homes. As part of his work, he has analyzed experiments that have been conducted throughout the world, in Denmark, in the United Kingdom, in Oregon. We are looking at the relevance of making labelling mandatory during a real estate transaction, or when renting an apartment or selling a home.
We are also doing an overview of incentive programs which reinforce labelling. We feel the Department of Natural Resources plays a very important role. Evaluations of the various programs clearly show economic benefits, but as I was saying, there are a host of other benefits that are not measured. Often, grants like ecoENERGY ones are the incentives consumers need to take concrete action in doing renovations. Moreover, they often invest more than the value of the grant. And that is very beneficial.
Programs involving visits by experts and standardized diagnostic procedures for energy efficiency take several years to be fine-tuned. We believe ecoENERGY developed important expertise in the diagnostic of buildings' energy efficiency and it would be important to conserve that expertise, especially if the government foresees ecoenergy labelling for homes, as recommended in our report. This must of course complement provincial programs. I believe that the Department of Natural Resources program has been matched by the provinces. When there are two incentives, the programs are more attractive. I also think that links with the CMHC can be explored to improve, for example, interest rate reductions and also to target low-income households.
It is important to be concerned with adapting programs specifically in homes where there is too little energy efficiency. If we do not do that, energy costs will be higher and will result in renovations. And if they are not well-monitored, they may not be well done and that will be detrimental not only for energy and energy savings, but also perhaps for the health of the occupants of Canadian buildings.
Our research report will be available early on in the summer and we will gladly share it with you. In the meantime, my colleague will be able to answer your questions. Thank you very much for inviting us to appear today.