Canadian Green Building Strategies

A frequent point of debate is the relationship between Green Building and Sustainable Development (SD). We take the view that SD is most applicable at the urban or societal level, since it includes issues of social equity and broad issues of economics, in addition to concerns about ecosystems and human health. We find it difficult to apply these broader societal issues to buildings in a practical way. Instead, many building researchers and designers find it more meaningful to develop models of building performance that is consistent with SD at the societal level. In short, Green Building helps to support a broader Sustainable Development agenda. Conference Topic: 1. Renewable Energy and Environment Conscious Building Design If Sustainable Development goals are to be truly reached, we could argue that buildings should consume no energy, water or materials, and should produce no emissions, noise or waste over their lifespans. While this is an interesting concept, it is likely that we will have to work towards more modest goals during the next 20 years. Even at a more realistic level, there is global interest in improving the performance of buildings. Governments want to reduce the use of scarce resources and airborne emissions, owners want to reduce operating costs, and developers are finding that customers are demanding higher quality and performance. Although the achievement of this goal in different countries will require varied strategies, it is certain that all will have to make substantial improvements in the methods used to design, construct and operate buildings. This will require interventions by governments, but it will also require that designers adopt a different way of working. The building industry is very different from other sectors with substantial environmental impacts. The performance of automobiles, for example, can be improved by working with relatively few manufacturers, but the construction industry consists of thousands of organization, ranging from very small to very large, and staffed by individuals whose levels of skills and training vary from very basic to quite advanced. Buildings are also longlived compared to other products, and have to conform to local cultural and climatic conditions in addition to meeting functional requirements. All of this implies that initiatives for performance improvement must be addressed on a broad front. This paper will confine itself to the range of initiatives that look promising in the large buildings sector (excluding small houses) and within market economies. In addition, the discussion will be focused on measures that apply primarily to the design and construction stages, for both new and renovated buildings. All the approaches discussed are based on Canadian experience, but their basic strategies are of broader interest. 1. OPTIONS IN IMPROVING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE Any discussion of building performance must recognize that designers carry out instructions provided by their clients. Thus, an appropriate focus is to consider ways through which clients might be induced to require their designers t o strive for a higher level of performance. The range of mechanisms available include regulations and standards, enabling measures, incentives and market change mechanisms. Standards and Regulations can be very effective if well enforced, but they usually define a minimally acceptable level of performance and are therefore normally insufficient to lead the industry towards very high levels of performance. Canada has much recent experience in this area due to the development and introduction of equipment efficiency standards and the Model National Energy Code for Buildings (MNECB) [1]. Standards for equipment have been in place for several years, and are complemented by an equipment labeling program called EnerGuide , which provides information about the energy performance of the item under normal usage conditions. The EnerGuide program is about to be supplemented by the adoption of the Energy Star program (originally from USEPA), which identifies the top-performing equipment in each category. The design of the MNECB regulatory package for buildings is sophisticated, since it allows for both default minima and a simulation path for compliance, and also takes into account energy costs and incremental construction costs within a life-cycle cost formula. Studies have shown that the NECB is approximately congruent with current good practice but, despite this, only a few jurisdictions in Canada have adopted it because of industry resistance. The difficulty of implementation reflects a peculiarly North American context, where regulations have traditionally confined themselves to issues of life safety and health. Any extension of the regulatory sphere is therefore considered by the North American industry to have validity only if measures reflect a strong consensus on a minimum level of action. This, combined with very low energy prices over the last decade, have made it difficult to build a consensus for strong action in the area of energy. Nevertheless, the MNECB is gradually taking root, but at a level of performance which is relatively unchallenging. What may be called enabling measures , such as the development of guidance documents, design tools, and training programs, are also necessary components of a green building strategy. Such measures tend to be used by those in the industry who are already convinced of the need for high performance, and so they tend to have limited penetration, but some recent developments in design process support tools show promise (discussed later in this paper). Demonstration projects fill a very important part in convincing the relatively conservative construction industry that modern processes and technologies can bring benefits. Where demonstrations fail, this is possibly even more useful, although there is a tendency to sweep such findings under the carpet. The C-2000 Program is currently the only available national demonstration program in North America. Financial incentives are of interest, since a financial inducement is likely to be effective in an environment where financial return is a primary objective. One example is a program called Commercial Buildings Incentive Program, or CBIP. For buildings passing the threshold of 25% improvement over MNECB requirements, this program provides incentives of two times the projected energy costs savings of the building, up to a maximum of $60,000 CAD. More than 300 projects are now enrolled in the program and it is well received by the industry. For all the success of CBIP, however, the fact remains that to extend the program to , say, 25% of the new building production would not be feasible because of the total costs involved. Another national Canadian program uses financial support at a more strategic level. The Energy Innovators Initiative was launched in 1992, and is intended to influence eight strategic sectors in the industry by providing financial support to large organizations that own very large buildings or a large number of similar buildings. The program engages corporations at the CEO level through an agreement that provides support for the development of a corporate-wide energy efficiency strategy, and also pays for part of the cost specific performance improvements in a pilot building that can be replicated in other similar buildings later. This approach is a very effective way of changing the industry, since the targeted major organizations have considerable influence in their own sector. Over the past three years, about $ 9.2 million CAD was provided to 52 organizations, resulting in an aggregate CO2 reduction of 175 kt per year. The Federal Buildings Initiative (FBI) applies the principle of energy performance contracting to buildings owned by the Federal government. In the performance contracting approach, specialized energy companies estimate the energy that may be saved in existing buildings through the upgrading of lighting, the building envelope, equipment and other energy-consuming elements. The contractor finances the work and is repaid through savings in energy costs. The FBI program uses the approach in government buildings, and has been operational since 1991. The current program emphasis is on the reduction of energy consumption, and on the use of "green" energy sources. Some 70 contracts are in place, covering about 6,500 buildings that yield an annual energy cost saving of about CAD $26 million. The question remaining is what measure(s) might be implemented in addition to the existing repertoire of programs, that would move all or most of the industry players to reach significantly higher performance levels, and in a broader range of performance issues than just energy. In the field of commercial building, developers and owners are very sensitive to market signals, and if measures could be developed to affect market demand in the right direction, they would certainly pay close attention. The first part of a solution is to convince actors on the demand side (investors and tenants) of the advantages and need for improved energy performance and reduced emissions. This will be an on-going matter of information and education, which will not be dealt with here. The second part of a market demand solution is relevant, however. The fact is that even those investors and tenants who are already convinced about the need for high performance, do not generally possess the knowledge to define their needs in a clear way. In fact, even building professionals disagree on the exact meaning of performance, so it is not surprising that nonspecialists are in an even worse position. It is clear that we need to develop mechanisms, to allow users to differentiate between buildings of varying performance levels. In other words, if an investor or tenant wants to buy or rent a high-performance building, then we must give him a way of identifying which buildings meet his needs. Methods and software (which we refer to as "tools") for performance assessment and labelling can fill this need. 2. A CLOSER VIEW OF TWO PROGRAMS The commercial buildings industry is driven almost exclusively by considerations of capital cost and return on investments. This fact, combined with the very low cost of energy during the 1990's, make it difficult to move the industry towards very high levels of energy performance. Two programs from Natural Resources Canada have previously been mentioned as being of relevance. Highlights of each include: Table 1: Overview of Characteristics of C-2000 and CBIP